# eyeTV on a Mac



## B33K34 (Feb 9, 2003)

Has anyone used eyeTV? My PC using a Nebual DigiTV card (it's my kitchen system) has died. It looks like a failed Mobo in my Shuttle case so i'm thinking of eBaying the parts and buying a Mac Mini

Any advice?


----------



## davisa (Feb 19, 2002)

I use a Miglia TVMini with EyeTV software on my Mac.

It is a DTT (Freeview) USB receiver just like the Elgato one and is excellent.

However, the software, while good, is certainly not up to TiVo standards. I also find the interface a missed opportunity - although others rave about it - perhaps that's just a case of knowing how it should be done 

I have a friend who uses his Mac Mini as his main (only) freebox box and this works well. Particularly with a bit of software like Remote Buddy (under £10) which allow much more cleaver use of the Apple remote, or the use of other remotes such as the Wii controller via bluetooth!

Converting your programmes to DVD or DiVx/H264 is a breeze, although fairly time consuming and the editing facilities for removing adverts etc is good.

Anything particular you wish to know?


----------



## B33K34 (Feb 9, 2003)

No interest in archiving stuff - this is simply for watching live and timeshifting. Questions:

- does it deal with DTT radio 
- how are recordings set (search by name or via epg)
- does it support series link (the Nebula software on the Pc does now)
- is it practical to record to a NAS across a wired network

Any other things i'm really going to miss coming from a PC to a mac? (there will still be a windows laptop in the house). Practicalities of a mixed mac/windows environment?


----------



## Anndra (Oct 12, 2004)

DTT radio - not well in my experience, but I haven't really cared enough to investigate it further.
Recordings - Both, sort of. There is a standard 'Spotlight' like search box that narrows down the EPG, that's the only 'search by name' feature.
Series links - No
Network Recording - Dunno, but it does have Gigabit ethernet as standard, which should help if you have a network that can take advantage of it. Mine records to a 5400rpm external HD, if that helps answer the question.

As a side note, I am looking to upgrade my Mini, but the whole line is due an overhaul, as they are getting on for a year old. No substantial rumours beyond that, but I'm going to wait. They could build in more 'AppleTV-like' functionality.

There is a drawback with a mix of PCs and Macs, you'll begin to hate the PC...

There are a lot of MacForums with some friendly people on who can answer your questions. Mac folk tend to be community minded.


----------



## davisa (Feb 19, 2002)

Dtt radio works just fine, including the EPG. You can put radio stations in your own category to separate them from TV.

No series link, but a simple 'repeated' recording function.

The EPG is OK but nowhere near configurable enough. For example, you cannot specify how many hours to display at any one time. If you stretch out the EPG window you still see the same amount of info - really stupid on a 24" widescreen!

I don't want to make this a Mac Vs PC thread - but certainly for me, the Mac is the right choice. I would never use a PC unless absolutely necessary. They certainly aren't perfect, but I do find I can get on with doing stuff without being frustrated all the time, like I was with a PC.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

A recent Gadget Show on C5 gave a fairly accurate summing-up (for a change).

They basically said that Macs are for people who want to do just a select few things with little effort and without needing to learn much or to make many decisions, whereas PCs are more suitable for those who know what they want to do, want to do a lot of it and in depth, and are prepared to make the effort to learn how to do it properly.

Having had significant experience with both OSs (and above all with many *users* of both OSs) I would say this is very fair comment indeed.

To which I would add that Apple products generally cost much more to buy and use than other brands do, and this is very noticeable in computers.


----------



## B33K34 (Feb 9, 2003)

I think that's probably an accurate description. However, this is a net, music, TV machine rather than a general purpose computer - the appliance approach of Apple suits perfectly. I no longer agree on the pricing (buy and *use*?) - certainly it used to be true but look at the price of an Macbook vs a *quality* laptop like an IBM/Lenovo or a Mac Mini against a small quiet pc and there no longer seems to be a difference. In fact I started looking at the mini because equivalent PC's look *more* expensive.

Add ons are another matter - the 20" Apple Cinema display supposedly uses the same panel as Dell's 20" widescreen but retails at over £500 vs less than £250 for the Dell!


----------



## Anndra (Oct 12, 2004)

frogster said:


> A recent Gadget Show on C5 gave a fairly accurate summing-up (for a change).
> 
> They basically said that Macs are for people who want to do just a select few things with little effort and without needing to learn much or to make many decisions, whereas PCs are more suitable for those who know what they want to do, want to do a lot of it and in depth, and are prepared to make the effort to learn how to do it properly.
> 
> Having had significant experience with both OSs (and above all with many *users* of both OSs) I would say this is very fair comment indeed.


If it's not too much of a problem, could you patronise us a little more please?


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

Anndra said:


> If it's not too much of a problem, could you patronise us a little more please?


Any time. No trouble at all.


----------



## blindlemon (May 12, 2002)

Anndra said:


> If it's not too much of a problem, could you patronise us a little more please?


Actually, he was insulting you, not patronising you


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

B33K34 said:


> I think that's probably an accurate description. However, this is a net, music, TV machine rather than a general purpose computer - the appliance approach of Apple suits perfectly. I no longer agree on the pricing (buy and *use*?)


By "use" I was referring to the cost of the things that you may need/want to buy after the initial purchase. Things like software, replacement parts, upgrades, peripherals. All of which are cheaper and/or more readily available for PCs than for Macs.

As far as the Mac Mini is concerned, I expect that it does its basic function well enough. However, I also expect that there is a long list of file types/codecs that it can't play (I've never seen a Mac yet that could open all the files a PC can), not to mention the webpages and streaming media services that won't work properly on a Mac.

If so, this would conform with the Gadget Show description.


----------



## PaulWilkinsUK (Mar 20, 2006)

Don't knock it 'til ya try it...

For me, I sit at work all day a*sing about with PC's and Mainframes and quite frankly the last thing I want to do when I get home is wrestle with the darn machines.
codecs? drivers? Don't need to worry about all that kind of cr*p anymore.
I have a 2.66Ghz MacPro and it processes all of my TiVo files quite nicely, in good time. 
Am I happy with it, you bet ya. Would I go back to Windoze Eggs Pea? No I wouldnt.

But its up to you...one mans meat is another mans shoe leather


----------



## Anndra (Oct 12, 2004)

In case anybody needs them,

http://perian.org/ - A quicktime component for AVI, FLV, 3ivX, DivX, Flash Screen Video, MS-MPEG4, Sorenson H.263, Truemotion VP6, and Xvid. AVI support for: AAC, AC3 Audio using A52Codec, H.264, MPEG4, and VBR MP3.

http://www.flip4mac.com/ - A quicktime component for WMV, supplied by Microsoft.

http://www.videolan.org/vlc/ - VLC an independant cross-platform app that plays just about anything.


----------



## Anndra (Oct 12, 2004)

davisa said:


> Dtt radio works just fine, including the EPG. You can put radio stations in your own category to separate them from TV.


Oh yeah, so it does. 



davisa said:


> I don't want to make this a Mac Vs PC thread...


Whoops.


----------



## PaulWilkinsUK (Mar 20, 2006)

Anndra said:


> In case anybody needs them,
> 
> http://perian.org/ - A quicktime component for AVI, FLV, 3ivX, DivX, Flash Screen Video, MS-MPEG4, Sorenson H.263, Truemotion VP6, and Xvid. AVI support for: AAC, AC3 Audio using A52Codec, H.264, MPEG4, and VBR MP3.
> 
> ...


Hey Anndra - thats awesome - thank you for these ...


----------



## B33K34 (Feb 9, 2003)

I suppose the final nail in the mac vs PC argument is that a mac mini will run XP as well and i don't think i can find a better, cheaper, small pc.


----------



## healeydave (Jun 4, 2003)

Well just to add my 2 penneth.

I have worked with PC's since they first came out. Yeah when IBM was pretty much all you could buy and storage was 1 x floppy disk and thats when floppy disks were indeed floppy. Before the first IBM PC we were working with the old 8" floppys for those that only remember the 5 1/4" that things like the BBC computer etc used.

I've worked in IT for significant periods of time for several companies dominated by PC's & Windows, before networks (like we all have in our homes now) even existed.

I have always known the MAC's are generally a more reliable & much slicker piece of kit but I've always had PC's because I've been involved in projects and hobbies that have required stuff that requires me to dabble with hanging hardware off ports & messing around with DOS based utilities etc.

Anyway, all thats changed now, I realised that the majority of the time these days I spend just using a handful of applications and the Internet so when my laptop was slowing down to snails pace and needed a change I'd try a MACBook.

I was in Florida in an Apple store and came within a whisker of buying there and then but managed to resist. I did however end up buying one when I got back home and I have to say its one of the best computers I have ever bought. I actually enjoy using a computer again and trust me all you youngsters that are still in love with PC's & Windows because its all you know, after 26 years the gloss really does wear off!!

I admit I am using Microsoft Office on the MAC, but that more because I have spent god knows how many years working with Office and have a lot of documents in Office format so it just makes sense but the using the Mac is a visual pleasure and I feel I'm getting much more value from a productivity point of view.

The PC based laptop stayed on the table next to me for the first week of receiving the MAC because I expected I would need to turn to if from time to time whilst familiarising myself with the Mac but I can honestly say I didn't touch it once!

I had to search the net for various utilities each time I need to do something specific like for example getting back in communication with my friends required a search for an msn client. I found an excellent one before I realised that you could get MSN Messenger for th Mac but Messenger wasn't as good as the one I found so stuck with the alternative!

I found that when I did need to get a piece of software, not only was it easy to find but most of it was free and you didn't need to downloads loads of similar packages before you could find one you could work with. Perhaps I was lucky, but I found web publishing package called Nvu which just works for me a treat. The ftp client I found was first was rather amusingly called Cyberduck and again its simple, efficient & works not need to look any further.

The GUI is well just stunningly uncluttered and easy. It really is a revelation.

For the first week of owning a Mac you find yourself having to figure out how to do the same thing you would have done Windows and when you do figure it out it always seems to be a simpler task and you expected it to be harder.

As daft as it sounds, you use it with a grin and feel like your in some sort of private club that's taken you years to get in 

I know theres loads of stuff the Mac probably can't do as good as a PC but the stuff you spend the majority of time doing (if you not a spotty kid using a several hundred pound piece of kit to play games and you use a PC for the stuff it was originally intended for, a work horse & productivity tool), the Mac is quite simply and improvement over the PC concept. I feel I've wasted a good few years defending the PC myself and am now liberated 

Okay so it was a bit more than two pennith worth, sorry but that should tell you something. Ask yourself this, have you ever been frustrated telling someone why Tivo just works well at doing what it does and it fall on deaf ears? Thats what its like trying to tell people how good a Mac is, they often think your trying to con them or something like your on the Apple payroll hehehe.


----------



## healeydave (Jun 4, 2003)

Damn, I just clicked "Post Quick Reply" and didn't realise how much I'd written because of that small edit window you type into. 

I've probably wasted my time trying to offer friendly advice because no-ones gonna ready that huge message


----------



## scgf (Oct 24, 2000)

Oh yes they are!! Some excellent points there.

I was having a conversation only today along similar lines with a colleague who is young enough to have grown up in the Windows era. You do have a different perception when you can appreciate that Windows is just one OS of several and that some mighty fine OSes exist or have existed. I was a big fan of IBM's OS/2 which was always so much better than Windows. I was very unhappy when IBM discontinued it. I moved to Linux and then to Mac OS X because of its Unix underpinnings. My flirtations with the various Windows versions were always unhappy and frustrating. MS have no idea about the human interface.

I too work with PCs and just love it when I can use a Mac. A breath of fresh air. I am slowly getting one or two Macs into my school (I am an ICT Coordinator) and only yesterday took delivery of a beautiful 24" iMac. Very simple to get it to work within a Windows 2003 network too. Just put Windows XP on it this afternoon so if needed it can be just another Windows client.


----------



## ColinYounger (Aug 9, 2006)

This is reminding me of the 'Why TiVo is so great' conversations I've had over the last week with some luddites.


----------



## ColinYounger (Aug 9, 2006)

healeydave said:


> no-ones gonna ready that huge message


Whoops! My reply seems to be in that vain. 

Sorry Dave - I did really read it all. It's just when you post your message you suddenly see some extra text in the previous message that you missed. <gulp>


----------



## PaulWilkinsUK (Mar 20, 2006)

Like Dave, I too started out in this 'game' in the early years with CP/M on Z80 processors (yes, before IBM DOS and the like). I'm too old and tired for all the 'faff' that comes with Windoze. Give me something that 'just works' and the Mac does just that.
(Supps on his cocoa and rocks back and forth in a creaking rocking chair)


----------



## healeydave (Jun 4, 2003)

I'm all for fair comparisons and the main reason why Mac's are so good is the hardware is controlled, you haven't got an open design as such with every man and his dog making PC main boards, cobbling together graphics engines from one vendor, I/O from another source and embedding it all into a box and hoping it all works well together. So its easy to see why Mac's are reliable in the main, but whilst this might be an un-fair advantage, its another thing to realize and embrace / take advantage of 

I bought an Ideq (shuttle type pc) a few years ago, lovely design (as pc's go) but I've never been able to get the thing running reliably and I have nothing foreign plugged into it (e.g on the I/O bus) so it should work as its all as the manufacturer intended. It stays on all the time in the office but it rarely used and I always know if its not blue screened for a few days it going to shortly. I have to have hardware acceleration turned off to get it this reliable. If I h/w acceleration is turned on, it will probably blue screen before Windows has finished settling the desktop after logging in! 
I have had the whole PC replaced once, have re-installed the o/s and downloaded all the drivers there were for all the different components before the manufacturer finished and moved on to a different design. Quite frankly where as the Mac is the best computer I have ever purchased in in over 26 years, the Ideq is positively the worst and the only reason I still have it is I can't bring myself to throw it away yet and would not try and sell it, it would be unfair to pass on such rubbish to anyone else!


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

healeydave said:


> If I h/w acceleration is turned on, it will probably blue screen before Windows has finished settling the desktop after logging in!


My PC runs all day, every day and hasn't blue screened once in more than a year.

I suspect that your video card drivers are old or faulty. That's probably all there is to it. Don't blame the PC or Windows: change the drivers or perhaps even change the video card (and then just remember how easy and cheap it is to do that on a Windows PC, and how much choice you have, compared to a Mac).

Spend the same amount on a PC as you would spend on a Mac and you will get a better, faster machine that can do more, is more flexible, has more software (free and pay) and hardware available for it, and is every bit as reliable if not more so. (You may even get a pretty case, but who in his right mind would give a monkey's about that? Not me.)

And you will also get free Windows updates for the next 8 years. Unlike Apple who will want you to buy a new full-priced OS every 24 months.



> I realised that the majority of the time these days I spend just using a handful of applications and the Internet


And there we are back at the original premise: Macs are fine for those who don't want to do much with them. And I would be the first to agree. Macs are ideally suited for amateurs and those who buy designer products or who change their car every time a new model is released, and Macs are resolutely marketed towards those people.

However I couldn't even do 1% of my job with a Mac due to their intrinsic limitations (unless I installed XP on it: and what would be the point of buying a Mac to do that? I don't need or want a pretty case and I certainly don't want to pay for one, and I would still have to spend even more money to buy the two-button mouse that doesn't come with a Mac).

I just want to know that as much of the purchase price as possible goes into the parts contained into the thing I buy, and that the thing I buy will do anything that I could possibly ask of it, with a maximum of flexibility and a minimum of restrictions. That just doesn't happen with any Apple product.


----------



## PaulWilkinsUK (Mar 20, 2006)

frogster said:


> However I couldn't even do 1% of my job with a Mac due to their intrinsic limitations


Such as...?

(this is gonna run and run... best mention the word *TiVo* to keep on topic...)


----------



## scgf (Oct 24, 2000)

frogster said:


> Macs are fine for those who don't want to do much with them. And I would be the first to agree. Macs are ideally suited for amateurs and those who buy designer products or who change their car every time a new model is released, and Macs are resolutely marketed towards those people.


OMG! I do so much with my Macs - more than I have ever managed to do with Windows. We use Windows at work but our Mac has bailed us out on more than one occasion with its ability to work with hard drives formatted with a plethora of file systems. The underlying Unix is way more powerful than anything Windows offers and means that Macs can run most apps designed for Unix. If an app isn't available to run on FreeBSD (the underlying Unix in Mac OS X) or X11 (the Unix windowing system which runs natively on Macs) then it can be compiled from the source code very easily. One way or another you can do practically anything that can be done on a computer on a Mac.

Amateurs? The BBC are using Macs and Apple's Final Cut software to author their HD output. Publishing houses use Macs to create the magazines and books we see on the high street. Average guys like me use Macs to create stunning DVDs with professional menus right out of the box. I could go on and on and on . . .

Just one more thing (hehe) - I use a video conversion tool on my iMac (Visual Hub) which converts from practically any video format to any other. It only costs a few quid too. If I drag a bunch of files over, my Mac can use other Macs on my home network to share the load between them (if they are not being used heavily, of course) to get the job done faster. Things like this are quite normal for Mac users.

I have only mentioned a few things. I do know that Windows-using colleagues are always very impressed with the sheer power of Mac OS X and incredulous at what it can do.

'My PC is fine' is the call of the Windows techie. Techies have enough ability to keep Windows machines ticking along. I am an ICT Coordinator in a school and day in day out I hear pupils and staff saying how their computer has a virus, or has some other problem and they don't know what to do because it won't boot up any more. usually their parents end up buying a new computer. Staff Windows laptops are an absolute nightmare.

Do you kow that if a Mac has a major problem you can connect it to another Mac with a firewire cable and the hard drive on the non-operational Mac will appear mounted on the desktop of the working machine? An absolute life-saver.

Frogster, what experience do you have of using Macs? If it was pre-OS X then you might be pleasantly surprised at what macs are like now.

I'm going to stop there even though I could write so much more. This is a TiVo forum, after all ;-)


----------



## ColinYounger (Aug 9, 2006)

Now - if this was a proper OS thread war thread, we'd have Mac fanboys and MS fanboys attacking each other's private areas. Then there would be a *nix aficionado jumping in saying that 'Unbutu' or 'Red Hat' or whatever was better.

My contribution to this thread is to be Bi. 

Use Virtual Machine technology. Use what's best for a job.


----------



## PaulWilkinsUK (Mar 20, 2006)

ColinYounger said:


> Now - if this was a proper OS thread war thread, we'd have Mac fanboys and MS fanboys attacking each other's private areas. Then there would be a *nix aficionado jumping in saying that 'Unbutu' or 'Red Hat' or whatever was better.
> 
> My contribution to this thread is to be Bi.
> 
> Use Virtual Machine technology. Use what's best for a job.


Ooooh Colin... you aren't stiring are you  You know what happens when you do that HAHAHAHA


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

What I can't do with a Mac is what I do most of the day, most days: Visual Basic programming. So that ends that story.

Windows viruses? Install a decent (free) antivirus, update it daily and you will probably never be bothered by them. I never have been. And I can't remember the last time I saw a PC running XP with a virus. Spyware "helpers" for IE are another matter, though free protection from these is available and, of course, you can always use another browser.

Reading hard drives formatted to other systems? I don't have to. Windows runs 90+% of the world's PCs. Why would I ever need to worry about the other few %? They are the odd ones out. Let *them* learn to read my files.
The only time I need to bother with other OSs is when my Tivo needs a new drive. And I have a boot CD for that job. Just out of curiosity, can you format, install and configure a new drive for a Tivo directly from OSX? That at least would be useful. Or do you have to run the boot CD also?

Installing apps written on other OSs? Why would I do that? All worthwhile apps (and nearly all pointless apps) have already been compiled for Windows anyway.

My PC can also convert any video format to any video format. Not that this is anything I need to do because my PC will just *play* any video format, without conversion. Any audio format too.

My experience with OSX (thankfully I have rarely had to deal with OS9 or earlier) is when I'm called out to help Mac users who are having problems. You might be surprised how often this happens (I'm not). I can fix them but I don't like them.

Yes, I do know about connecting two Macs via Firewire. I tried it once when installing a new iMac for someone. It didn't work very well as it transferred a whole lot of pointless stuff and left a lot of useful stuff behind which I had to transfer manually via the network (and who ever saw a more messy folder hierarchy than on OSX? User files everywhere. Apps everywhere. No organisation at all. Really ugly).
Also you have to actually have some Firewire cables and devices for Firewire to be useful, and I have neither. When was the last time anyone saw a Firewire product that wasn't made by Apple or Sony? In fact I can't remember seeing a Firewire product in a shop at all.

When I want to read a Windows hard drive on another Windows machine I just pull it out and insert it into a USB hard drive caddy. Takes about 2 minutes.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

ColinYounger said:


> Now - if this was a proper OS thread war thread, we'd have Mac fanboys and MS fanboys attacking each other's private areas.


Spoilsport!
I was just gearing up for that.



> Then there would be a *nix aficionado jumping in saying that 'Unbutu' or 'Red Hat' or whatever was better.


Ubuntu? Don't talk to me about Ubuntu.
At least OSX installs (on a machine made from parts from a very short list): I couldn't even get the Ubuntu Live CD to boot. Now there's *classy* rubbish.

Now if you'll all excuse me, I'll just go and wash my head at you.


----------



## scgf (Oct 24, 2000)

frogster said:


> Reading hard drives formatted to other systems? I don't have to. Windows runs 90+% of the world's PCs. Why would I ever need to worry about the other few %?


No, I didn't explain myself very well. We have needed to use the Mac to recover the odd PC drive which Windows was having problems seeing, without losing data.



frogster said:


> Installing apps written on other OSs?


FreeBSD and X11 are native on Macs. I was just pointing out that contrary to what you say you can do more on Macs than you suggested.



frogster said:


> My PC can also convert any video format to any video format. Not that this is anything I need to do because my PC will just *play* any video format, without conversion. Any audio format too.


I would certainly hope you could do that on a PC! So you have never had the need to convert, say, a DVD to an AVI? When I get a Real Video file the first thing i do is convert it to something else because I hate the Real Video format. What about ripping a DVD to a.mov file so that it can be re-edited and re-authrored? I've done that on a few occasions. A real life-saver for that wedding DVD where you no longer have the raw footage!



frogster said:


> Yes, I do know about connecting two Macs via Firewire. I tried it once when installing a new iMac for someone. It didn't work very well as it transferred a whole lot of pointless stuff and left a lot of useful stuff behind which I had to transfer manually via the network (and who ever saw a more messy folder hierarchy than on OSX? User files everywhere. Apps everywhere. No organisation at all. Really ugly).


It doesn't transfer anything - it merely mounts one drive on the desktop of another machine. You go in and salvage what you want. Very useful for machines where the drive isn't too accessible like some laptops, or maybe where the defective machine is under warranty and opening it up would not be wise.

Regarding file structure, you are on very dodgy ground. Each user on a Mac has a named user folder and that folder contains ALL personal documents, files and settings. To back up a user's files you simple backup that one named user folder. Very neat. I have always been amazed at where Windows puts a user's files. All over the place!

Applications go in the system applications folder and each executable application is actually a bundle which contains necessary files etc.. To the end user the app looks just like a single file.

When I log in to my Mac I have my personal folder, and in that folder there are sub-folders for documents, music, pictures, movies, library (for settings) and so on. How is this 'no organisation'?

I think at the end of the day it is a case of horses for courses. As long as you really know Macs and have used them for a reasonable period of time, I for one respect your opinion. I just know too many people who have been completely, vehemently anti Mac - until they have actually had to use one.


----------



## healeydave (Jun 4, 2003)

Okay I forgot the bets now, did I win?

Getting one of them to bite that is?

We got an "amateurs" to boot as well, I think that makes me the clear winner!!

And that was from someone that quotes as using a grahical gui programming interface "Visual Basic" made by microsoft for people to program by dragging and dropping pre-coded code because trying to code at the micro-processor level would actually entail fast and efficient usage of a computer capabilities which of-course we all know is not the microsoft code of practice 

Anyone remember the days when programmers on the old Amiga's would boast their capabilities by writing code to produce a huge amount of graphic objects moving on the screen with smooth movement. It would involve writing the code then spending 10 times as long fine tuning it to get it as efficient as possible. If they could'nt tweek it to the optimum, they would fail to get anywhere near a credible amount. 

Oh! the days, if only people were'nt so lazy these days using huge librarys to do jobs that no-ones actually checked to see if they're actually very efficient at all...


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

scgf said:


> So you have never had the need to convert, say, a DVD to an AVI?


I have, and a PC does it fine. There are umpteen programmes that will do this and most give you all sorts of encoding options that I suspect just aren't available on OSX.



> What about ripping a DVD to a.mov file so that it can be re-edited and re-authrored?


No, because my PC can edit vob files directly and then author them. Converting them is pointless.



> It doesn't transfer anything ...


It does if you connect a new Mac to a used one with a Fireware cable before booting (whilst holding down I-can't-remember-which-key).



> Applications go in the system applications folder and each executable application is actually a bundle which contains necessary files etc.. To the end user the app looks just like a single file.
> When I log in to my Mac I have my personal folder, and in that folder there are sub-folders for documents, music, pictures, movies, library (for settings) and so on. How is this 'no organisation'?


OSX puts data all over the shop. I-Photo puts stored photos God alone knows where. Apps are hidden so well that you don't even know what's installed until you wander through the hard drive and stumble across one. Oh, and that's how you start them too, unless you've already been there, done it and dragged them into the dock (if there is any space in the dock, that is) or unless you just want to clutter up your desktop with millions of icons.

Give me a "Start" button any day. All user-installed apps and most system apps are within one click of the "Start" buttton on Windows, and user documents that have been saved in the right place are within two clicks. It must be a good idea as even Linux copies it (if you can actually boot Linux, of course).

And don't let's forget the missing right-click, which in itself doubles the time it takes to do anything on a Mac.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

healeydave said:


> And that was from someone that quotes as using a grahical gui programming interface "Visual Basic" made by microsoft for people to program by dragging and dropping pre-coded code because trying to code at the micro-processor level would actually entail fast and efficient usage of a computer capabilities which of-course we all know is not the microsoft code of practice


Yes, and would take years instead of days to write. With VB I can code fast and efficiently and earn £75k a year producing programmes that work out of the box, install first time and do what the user wants.
I should worry about machine code.



> Anyone remember the days when programmers on the old Amiga's would boast their capabilities by writing code to produce a huge amount of graphic objects moving on the screen with smooth movement. It would involve writing the code then spending 10 times as long fine tuning it to get it as efficient as possible.


Amigas? No. But I did it on Ataris. And even then we borrowed previously written code.
VBI and pokes. That takes me back.

Why bother re-writing something that already works? I'd rather watch TV.


----------



## scgf (Oct 24, 2000)

frogster said:


> I have, and a PC does it fine. There are umpteen programmes that will do this and most give you all sorts of encoding options that I suspect just aren't available on OSX.


Of course you can do these things ona a PC. I'm merely responding to what you said about not being able to do much on a Mac!



frogster said:


> No, because my PC can edit vob files directly and then author them. Converting them is pointless.


Depends what you want to do. If you want the video in a form where it can be edited by your choice of app then pulling it off the DVD can be useful. The VOB editing tools I have seen on Windows are not exactly user friendly and the human interface is apallingly cryptic. I prefer to use something like iMovie which is a joy to use.



frogster said:


> It does if you connect a new Mac to a used one with a Fireware cable before booting (whilst holding down I-can't-remember-which-key).


This is if you opt to transfer settings from one machine to another at any point. It's not what i was referring to.



frogster said:


> OSX puts data all over the shop. I-Photo puts stored photos God alone knows where. Apps are hidden so well that you don't even know what's installed until you wander through the hard drive and stumble across one. Oh, and that's how you start them too, unless you've already been there, done it and dragged them into the dock (if there is any space in the dock, that is) or unless you just want to clutter up your desktop with millions of icons.


You are showing that you don't really have much experience of Macs. User applications are all inside the Applications folder. System apps are in a Unix file structure and you never need to go near these - they're a bit like the stuff Windows shoves into /Windows/System or System32.



frogster said:


> Give me a "Start" button any day. All user-installed apps and most system apps are within one click of the "Start" buttton on Windows, and user documents that have been saved in the right place are within two clicks. It must be a good idea as even Linux copies it (if you can actually boot Linux, of course).


Open any window and look down the left side. You will see a selection of folders you might regularly need to access. Drag one there if it's not already. If you like the Start menu paradigm then simply drag the Applications folder to the Dock. Right click it and you have something that looks just like the Windows Start menu. You can do this with any folder, including your documents folder. By default on the Mac you just click 'Go' at the top of the screen and you get a selection of folders you might like to visit. I see Home (for all my docs etc.), Applications (for all the apps you seem unable to find) and a couple of other folders.

I prefer to use a free app called Quicksilver - I just tap the 'Control' key and type a couple of letters from the name of the app, press enter, and it opens. To open Safari, for example, I hit 's' and press enter and there it is.

Do you know about Spotlight, a global search tool which comes with OS X and indexes every document (including contents), email, url, everything on your system? If I want to see documents containing the word 'assessment', for example, on my system, I just hit the apple key, then space bar and a small search window opens. I type in the word and I get a list of everything containing this word, nicely categorised according to file type. I can further refine the results according to date and the usual other parameters. I laughed out loud when I saw Vista's pale imitation.

What do you think of Mac smart folders, where you can have folders which are dynamically updated according to criteria you have set? I can create a folder which will become populated dynamically with files meeting search criteria I have set - take 'assessment' as an example. My smart folder will automatically become populated with any files containing the word assessment (in the title or contents). Not just with current files, but anything I create in the future. The files will be links (or shortucts) to the original files. All this is standard.



frogster said:


> And don't let's forget the missing right-click, which in itself doubles the time it takes to do anything on a Mac.


I think I'll rest my case here! Since when does the Mac not have a right mouse click? All my Macs do. OS X can easily use a standard multi-button mouse. Macs come with a multi-button mouse as stadard. You've always had that option in OS X!


----------



## davisa (Feb 19, 2002)

Oooh, Mac Vs PC thread 

Let me be totally honest about this - I absolutely detest Windows PCs with a vengeance and avoid them whenever possible. Speaking from experience, I honestly think that 90% (and you might be the exception so no flaming!) of people use Windows out of pure ignorance. Before OSX, I used RISC OS and only ever Windows for non-essential work, where I could afford the lack of software, features and productivity.

My current software project now stands at 97,543 lines of code, is mission critical to our company, is 100% written on Macs and runs on an Apple X-serve 

I use Macs for exactly the same reason as I own a TiVo, or drive a TVR. You have to try them to understand.

(gotta go... just transferred my TiVo'd recording of Doctor Who to my Mac, and now gotta convert it to Xvid...)


----------



## AMc (Mar 22, 2002)

I've used both and like neither - can I play?


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

scgf said:


> Open any window and look down the left side. You will see a selection of folders you might regularly need to access. Drag one there if it's not already. If you like the Start menu paradigm then simply drag the Applications folder to the Dock. Right click it and you have something that looks just like the Windows Start menu. You can do this with any folder, including your documents folder.


You've got to be kidding. I expect my OS to do that for me. I don't expect to have to do it myself.



> Macs come with a multi-button mouse as stadard.


Not any Mac I've ever seen (includes brand new i-Macs delivered direct from Apple in March 2007).


----------



## scgf (Oct 24, 2000)

All desktop Macs ship with a wired version of this mouse: http://www.apple.com/uk/mightymouse/ Look at the specs on Apple's iMac pages, bottom left. I've taken delivery of a 24" iMac for work only three days ago and that came with a Mighty Mouse. Even before Apple started shipping the Mighty Mouse you could always connect any old USB or wireless mouse and the OS could take advantage of the multi-button functions. I started using Mac when OS X was first introduced, some years ago now, and have always used multi-button mice. Can't stand the single button design!

It doesn't look like a multi button mouse because the top section is touch sensitive and traditional Mac users can use it like the old single button mouse if they prefer. It has a multi-directional scroll ball on the top, which can also be pressed for another action, and buttons either side. I use the Bluetooth versions with my iMac and MacBook Pro.

When you have connected the Mighty Mouse for the first time, you need to go into the mouse settings on the Mac to choose what buttons you want to use. By default the setup is for a single button design.


----------



## davisa (Feb 19, 2002)

frogster said:


> You've got to be kidding. I expect my OS to do that for me. I don't expect to have to do it myself.
> 
> Not any Mac I've ever seen (includes brand new i-Macs delivered direct from Apple in March 2007).


All new iMac's do come with a two button mouse - they just _look_ like a one button mouse


----------



## davisa (Feb 19, 2002)

AMc said:


> I've used both and like neither - can I play?


Definitely 

(although perhaps this thread is going a bit off topic.... and we're all far too sensible (and knowledgeable) on here for a decent rant like on most forums  )


----------



## PaulWilkinsUK (Mar 20, 2006)

davisa said:


> .... and we're all far too sensible (and knowledgeable) on here for a decent rant like on most forums  )


Nah...
Have you seen those Mac v. PC ads on Apples website.. what a hoot.. I like the 'upgrade' and 'security' ones the best.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

scgf said:


> When you have connected the Mighty Mouse for the first time, you need to go into the mouse settings on the Mac to choose what buttons you want to use. By default the setup is for a single button design.


Well, that really is intuitive, isn't it? I also appreciate the complete lack of any mention of this in the handbook. At least with a Windows mouse you can *see* that it has two buttons.

Nice that Apple have nearly caught up with the rest of the planet as far as mice go. And it only took them 13 years. Perhaps they"ll even fit scroll wheels within the next decade.

Twin-button mice, Intel-inside and capable of running Windows? If this carries on Macs may even be worth buying one day, if you want to spend a few hundred pounds on a fancy case.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

scgf said:


> Even before Apple started shipping the Mighty Mouse you could always connect any old USB or wireless mouse and the OS could take advantage of the multi-button functions.


That I've always known. Indeed I carry a twin-button USB mouse around with me (how sad is that?) just for use on laptops (I hate those touch pads) and Macs. Even with the second button, you don't get the same functionality with it from OSX that you do from Windows though.


----------



## davisa (Feb 19, 2002)

frogster said:


> Nice that Apple have nearly caught up with the rest of the planet as far as mice go. And it only took them 13 years. Perhaps they"ll even fit scroll wheels within the next decade.


The standard Apple mouse _does_ have a scroll wheel too  It can be locked for vertical or horizontal movement only, or full trackball movement.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

davisa said:


> The standard Apple mouse _does_ have a scroll wheel too


There is clearly something odd here.
The brand new G5 i-Mac I installed last month came with a corded mouse that appeared to only have one button (I'm a trusting soul and so I am prepared to believe that this was a concealed dual-button, even if yesterday was April 1).

However it certainly had no scroll wheel, lockable or otherwise.

The G4 i-Macs that I have seen (and they were still being sold new just 2 years ago) all came with a single-button mouse and no wheel. So at the earliest it still took Apple 10 years to catch up, mouse-wise.


----------



## davisa (Feb 19, 2002)

frogster said:


> There is clearly something odd here.
> The brand new G5 i-Mac I installed last month came with a corded mouse that appeared to only have one button (I'm a trusting soul and so I am prepared to believe that this was a concealed dual-button, even if yesterday was April 1).
> 
> However it certainly had no scroll wheel, lockable or otherwise.
> ...


The iMac range were the first Apples to go Intel, about a year ago - so any G4/G5 iMacs must be 'old' models. I'm not sure when the 'Mighty Mouse' became standard, but I think it was at the same time. Not denying Apple took their time though...


----------



## Anndra (Oct 12, 2004)

The first thing I'd recommend most people to do when they get any new computer is get a new mouse. At the risk of starting a mouse war too...

Shipping a one-button mouse with a new machine is a good idea. Those who know about computers know never to take it out of it's wrapping, those who don't aren't confused by the extra buttons. To illustrate: I sat my Mum down in front of a slideshow, and told her to click the mouse to see the next photo. Mistake. She didn't know which button to press, so she pressed al of them. My mouse has seven buttons.

I personally don't get on with the Mighty Mouse at all.

On the virus note, my Dad has my old iBook, and he couldn't access the internet for love nor money the other day. It turns out that my brother's Windows PC had been turned into a Zombie and was flooding the connection. Free good anti-virus software may be available, but how much training do you give the amateur before hand? Most of them will just buy Norton.

Oh, and if it hasn't already been mentioned, iPhoto stores the Photos in the 'Photos' folder.


----------



## katman (Jun 4, 2002)

Are the one button mice USB ?

If so, can they be connected to a PC and function as a "left button only" mouse ?

I ask because my 3 year old son is using the PC quite a lot but often right clicks and causes me to have to stop what I am doing and sort out the "strange box" that has appeared on screen.... assuming he tells me about it, sometimes he just happily click on the presented options with varying results !!!


----------



## Anndra (Oct 12, 2004)

Yes they are. I definately wouldn't recommend a Mighty Mouse in his case, an older Apple USB mouse off of ebay sounds like a better bet. You' probably also need a USB extension cable, as Mac Mice have short USB leads because they traditionally plug into the keyboard rather than the system box.


----------



## B33K34 (Feb 9, 2003)

Alternatively you could use the windows mouse properties control panel to turn all of the buttons to 'click'. Thinking about it I suspect you actually just want to swap the mouse over when your son uses the computer.

The mac laptops still only have a single button below the trackpad. However, i seem to remember that holding down the mouse button should give context sensitive menu as well as control-click.


----------



## scgf (Oct 24, 2000)

The new generation MacBook & MacBook Pros have an excellent trackpad. Put two fingers on the pad and move up or down and you scroll the active window. One finger operates the mouse cursor as normal. Two fingers on the pad and a single click is rquivalent to a right mouse click. Sounds way more complicated than it is to use. It soon becomes second nature.


----------



## PaulWilkinsUK (Mar 20, 2006)

scgf said:


> The new generation MacBook & MacBook Pros have an excellent trackpad. Put two fingers on the pad and move up or down and you scroll the active window. One finger operates the mouse cursor as normal. Two fingers on the pad and a single click is rquivalent to a right mouse click. Sounds way more complicated than it is to use. It soon becomes second nature.


Yeah, it's quite the dogs dangley bits.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

scgf said:


> an excellent trackpad.


Oxymoron.


----------



## scgf (Oct 24, 2000)

frogster said:


> Oxymoron.


I used to think so too. I always hated trackpads. I have a bluetooth mouse to use with laptops, but since getting first a MacBook then a MacBook Pro the mouse has hardly been out of the bag. It's having to use the awful trackpads on the black-plasticky-with-bits-sticking-out Windows laptops at school that frustrates me now. They seem to have a mind of their own and do all sorts of strange things when you try to do some very simple manoeuvres.


----------



## mikerr (Jun 2, 2005)

Heh, funny finding this thread on here.
I bought a mac mini on ebay earlier on tonight - that will be my first mac.

Lets see if I turn into a long haired mac hippy with a pony tail 

Wish me luck !


----------



## scgf (Oct 24, 2000)

mikerr said:


> Lets see if I turn into a long haired mac hippy with a pony tail


All in the past, Mate! Not like that at all now. It's the Windows Geekboys who have the beards and pony tails. Just go to any computer fair and they're out in their droves, buying large amounts of DVD-Rs. (What do they do with them?)

Seriously, though, enjoy your new Mac!


----------



## PaulWilkinsUK (Mar 20, 2006)

mikerr said:


> Heh, funny finding this thread on here.
> I bought a mac mini on ebay earlier on tonight - that will be my first mac.
> 
> Lets see if I turn into a long haired mac hippy with a pony tail
> ...


Hope you have more luck with your eBay purchase than Pete77 had with his ...


----------



## ColinYounger (Aug 9, 2006)

mikerr said:


> I bought a mac mini on ebay earlier on


Did it smell funny or have clunking noises?


----------



## PaulWilkinsUK (Mar 20, 2006)

ColinYounger said:


> Did it smell funny or have clunking noises?


Colin - you know you will get shot for that one !


----------



## B33K34 (Feb 9, 2003)

scgf said:


> I used to think so too. I always hated trackpads. It's having to use the awful trackpads on the black-plasticky-with-bits-sticking-out Windows laptops at school that frustrates me now. They seem to have a mind of their own and do all sorts of strange things when you try to do some very simple manoeuvres.


There are certainly different qualities of trackpad - the one on the old dell i had was dreadful. My 3 year old IBM laptop has both a good trackpad and a "cats tongue". I find i use the cats tongue a lot more and find it a lot better for fine adjustments (selecting text/graphics etc) than the trackpad.


----------



## Podgy Dad (Aug 18, 2002)

frogster said:


> What I can't do with a Mac is what I do most of the day, most days: Visual Basic programming. So that ends that story.
> 
> Windows viruses? Install a decent (free) antivirus, update it daily and you will probably never be bothered by them. I never have been. And I can't remember the last time I saw a PC running XP with a virus. Spyware "helpers" for IE are another matter, though free protection from these is available and, of course, you can always use another browser.
> 
> ...


Its quite simple really, Mac's can do 90% of the tasks PC's can do using only 10% of the effort.

You don't like Mac's because PC's are your comfort zone, people don't like what they don't know. Your comments on Apple's migration assistant simply serves to highlight your ignorance as it copies whatever you tell it to copy. I install Macs for a living and use the feature day in, day out.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

Podgy Dad said:


> Its quite simple really, Mac's can do 90% of the tasks PC's can do using only 10% of the effort.


Make that 50% of the tasks and 20% of the flexibility and you will be nearer the mark. Effort *is* flexibilty. The Mac users I see seem to have no reserves of either.



> You don't like Mac's because PC's are your comfort zone, people don't like what they don't know. Your comments on Apple's migration assistant simply serves to highlight your ignorance as it copies whatever you tell it to copy.


I don't expect to have to tell it to copy the basic user data. I expect a wizard/assistant to work this out for itself. The XP Files and Settings Wizard does.
What's the point of having a Wizard if you still have to tell it where to find all the individual things anyway? Simpler and quicker just to transfer then over the network, which is what I did.

In common with most Apple products, the Firewire automatic installation is a nice idea that doesn't actually work.



> I install Macs for a living and use the feature day in, day out.


I'm surprised there's so much demand for professional installers of an "intuitive" product with all these automatic features. I would have expected you to be on the dole.

I suppose that the need to replace a Mac every two or three years because the software and hardware are no longer supported by Apple does work in your favour. It certainly keeps Apple afloat. Without that little trick they would have gone down the tube years ago.


----------



## Podgy Dad (Aug 18, 2002)

frogster said:


> Make that 50% of the tasks and 20% of the flexibility and you will be nearer the mark. Effort *is* flexibilty. The Mac users I see seem to have no reserves of either.
> 
> I don't expect to have to tell it to copy the basic user data. I expect a wizard/assistant to work this out for itself. The XP Files and Settings Wizard does.
> What's the point of having a Wizard if you still have to tell it where to find all the individual things anyway? Simpler and quicker just to transfer then over the network, which is what I did..


You are talking rubbish, the only thing it doesn't copy by default are files on the top level of the HD. If you want it to you tick one box. Its quite simple, YOU did something wrong.



> In common with most Apple products, the Firewire automatic installation is a nice idea that doesn't actually work.


You're just plain wrong.



> I'm surprised there's so much demand for professional installers of an "intuitive" product with all these automatic features. I would have expected you to be on the dole.


I can understand your confusion, you are a techie. You like to tinker, you enjoy computers, hence you can't understand that most people can't be bothered. Their time is better spent doing the job they are paid to do, not setting up the new computer. You wouldn't expect an employee thats good at DIY to put the new toilet in would you?



> I suppose that the need to replace a Mac every two or three years because the software and hardware are no longer supported by Apple does work in your favour. It certainly keeps Apple afloat. Without that little trick they would have gone down the tube years ago.


Another poorly informed comment. Total cost of ownership on a Mac is far lower than with a PC as Mac users tend to keep their computers longer than their Windows using counterparts. I still have customers using 4-5 year old computers and they are running the very latest version of OS X. You keep a computer for as long as it is productive. Until recently I still had customers making money from their G3 Macs running OS 9 and Quark Xpress.

What techies like you seem to forget is just how tiresome and complicated PC's are. EVERYONE I know who has a PC battles with them, they curse them. EVERYONE I know who has a Mac regards their machine with affection and use it productively. Techies like you trot out the old arguments about price, and compatibility but the arguments just don't stand up anymore. PC's are very flexible but I live in a PC World and do lots of stuff with my Mac, I very rarely come across a task I can't do with a Mac. I suspect the vast majority of the PC buying public would come across such task even less often.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

Podgy Dad said:


> You are talking rubbish, ....You're just plain wrong.....Another poorly informed comment.


Ho hum.



> Total cost of ownership on a Mac is far lower than with a PC


Oh dear. Not that tired old chestnut. By any calculation you care to make this cannot be true. Macs cost more to buy. Much more to buy in fact. The software costs more. The parts (if you can find them) cost more. And because of the lack of competition peripherals and servicing also costs more. They are no more reliable than PCs.



> as Mac users tend to keep their computers longer than their Windows using counterparts.


That's not true either. Mac users are designer buyers. They buy things on a whim and ditch them when the case colour goes out of style. Also Macs just cost so much more to fix that most people would probably rather ditch them and buy a new one anyway than keep and repair. I know I would.



> I still have customers using 4-5 year old computers and they are running the very latest version of OS X.


For which they will have paid three times, as to keep up with OSX requires buying a complete new OS every two years. A nice money-spinner for Apple. 
I still have loads of people using XP (still fully supported and regularly updated for free by MS after 7 years, and still available new on new PCs), Win98SE (still supported by nearly all new software and hardware you can buy, and updated for free by MS for 9 years), Win98 1st edition and even Win95, on machines anything up to 12 years old. When any of those machines go wrong I can buy a suitable replacement part very cheaply in any shop and drivers are *always* available. 
I also have a few sorry souls with 4 year old Macs for which Apple no longer sell parts. Tell me about total cost of ownership again.



> EVERYONE I know who has a PC battles with them, they curse them. EVERYONE I know who has a Mac regards their machine with affection and use it productively.


You know some very odd people.


----------



## PaulWilkinsUK (Mar 20, 2006)

I consider myself to be a 'techie veteran' (due to push 41 next week folks). I've been there done it, bought the Win 1.0, 3.0, 3.1,95,98,ME,2000,XP T-shirt and after many many years of tinkering, faffing and generally a*sing around I decided to *try* something new. Popped off out, bought my first mac a few years back (the little angle-poise looking one). I was so so impressed with it and its operating system (sure it takes getting used to) . I have not looked back since, infact I have one windows machine in the corner (and thats just to host a Call Of Duty server!).
So, whilst we seeing the 'My mums fatter than your mum' arguement going on here the one thing I would say is "Don't knock it until you've tried it".

Have a nice day, Oh and the nice aluminium case of my 4 core mac pro is very nice thank you.


----------



## scgf (Oct 24, 2000)

PaulWilkinsUK said:


> I consider myself to be a 'techie veteran' (due to push 41 next week folks). I've been there done it, bought the Win 1.0, 3.0, 3.1,95,98,ME,2000,XP T-shirt


Hehe, me too - and I've just celebrated my 50th! For me, add NT, Linux, OS/2 and CPM to the list. I've used each pretty extensively so feel qualified to have an opinion. Frogster has made it clear he knows little about Macs from some of the quite laughable comments he makes. Furthermore he has a technical skillset to protect - he would lose his elevated status if everyone bought Macs.



PaulWilkinsUK said:


> bought my first mac a few years back (the little angle-poise looking one). I was so so impressed with it and its operating system (sure it takes getting used to). I have not looked back since, infact I have one windows machine in the corner (and thats just to host a Call Of Duty server!).


My first Mac was the angle-poise iMac too. I bought into OS X because of its Unix/NeXT heritage. It was obvious from my OS/2 & Windows 3.1 experience that MS wanted to get (buggy) code out of the door as quickly as posible and was not interested in quality of the human interface factor, so important to Apple.

I have a Windows machine in a spare room upstairs. I connect to it using Remote Desktop from my Mac on the very odd occasion - usually to check on the Anti Virus software. I really ought to put it out to pasture because there is nothing I could do on Windows that I couldn't do on a Mac. Now you can run Windows in a window on the Mac desktop it is effectively redundant. Mind you, I installed Windows on my Mac and have never needed to use it either!



PaulWilkinsUK said:


> So, whilst we seeing the 'My mums fatter than your mum' arguement going on here the one thing I would say is "Don't knock it until you've tried it".


Absolutely! Which is why I know of many people who were dead against Macs who have become Mac fanatics through actually using one.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

scgf said:


> Frogster has made it clear he knows little about Macs from some of the quite laughable comments he makes. Furthermore he has a technical skillset to protect - he would lose his elevated status if everyone bought Macs.


Oh dear. How silly.

I work with an OS that runs 90% of the personal ccomputers on the planet, and runs them well and cheaply. I can write applications that with no modifications at all will install automatically and run perfectly on all those machines, 100% guaranteed. These are speciific accounting and small business management packages that are vital to many, and the like of which millions of businesses and individuals rely on day in and day out. When did anyone ever see a Mac being used for something worthwhile like that?

On a Mac I could write an application that wouldn't run or install on anything, apart from another Mac, and only then with a bit of luck and a following wind. But once installed it would probably have a very pretty GUI, and might be of use to someone wanting to re-design their living-room wallpaper. And so it would be used by virtually no-one. And that assumes that a Mac user would actually do anything worthwhile enough on their machine that would merit buying any software for, which I doubt.
Do you really think that I need to worry? Do wake up.

Macs are a niche product at niche prices. As with mountain-climbing, does any non-climber care what it costs or how pointless or dangerous it is? No.
Mountain-climbers will rave about it though. All the way to bankruptcy, hospital, the grave and beyond.

My only interest in pointing out the huge numbers of faults Apple products have is in preventing the unwary from squandering their hard-earned cash on these expensive, ill-conceived, incompatible and largely unsupported devices.

They do have pretty cases though and I'm sure that this gives entire satisfaction to many.


----------



## Podgy Dad (Aug 18, 2002)

frogster said:


> Ho hum.
> 
> Oh dear. Not that tired old chestnut. By any calculation you care to make this cannot be true. Macs cost more to buy. Much more to buy in fact. The software costs more. The parts (if you can find them) cost more. And because of the lack of competition peripherals and servicing also costs more. They are no more reliable than PCs.


I think you will find the Mac's are competitively priced as long as you compare like for like, say with Sony. Yes I know you can go out and build a PC for buttons but most people don't build their PC's, they struggle with Ikea. Please don't mention Dell. From a software point of view they are more reliable. If I want a HD or DVD burner I can purchase them from any old parts supplier. As for software, I find that there are normally about 20 applications available for each task on a PC, some cheap, some expensive. Photoshop costs the same for the Mac as it does for the PC. Thing is, I don't need 20 applications for one task, I just need one. People like you just don't understand how your average man on the street struggles with their PC's. My girlfriend (also with a background in PC support) and I have in the past few months struggled with 3 family members PC's, all brand new and all have had a host of problems out of the box. Apple were right when they said PC stood for perpetually complicated.



> That's not true either. Mac users are designer buyers. They buy things on a whim and ditch them when the case colour goes out of style. Also Macs just cost so much more to fix that most people would probably rather ditch them and buy a new one anyway than keep and repair. I know I would.


What a stupid generalisation. A business buys a new computer when it needs one, not on a whim. Mac users do care about asthetics but its only part of the consideration, my customers certainly don't buy a new computer just because Apple design a new case, they are constrained by the same economic forces as the rest of us.



> For which they will have paid three times, as to keep up with OSX requires buying a complete new OS every two years. A nice money-spinner for Apple.
> I still have loads of people using XP (still fully supported and regularly updated for free by MS after 7 years, and still available new on new PCs), Win98SE (still supported by nearly all new software and hardware you can buy, and updated for free by MS for 9 years), Win98 1st edition and even Win95, on machines anything up to 12 years old. When any of those machines go wrong I can buy a suitable replacement part very cheaply in any shop and drivers are *always* available.
> I also have a few sorry souls with 4 year old Macs for which Apple no longer sell parts. Tell me about total cost of ownership again.


You don't have to buy a new OS every 2 years, the user has a choice. 10.4 will run just fine on a G3 iMac. Again, you buy the OS if the features are compelling enough, no need to upgrade if you don't want to. And lets face it, we'd be talking about Vista's replacement by now if MS hadn't been so incompetent. Apple rolled out 3 OS upgrades in the time it took MS to roll out one, and when it did arrive it looked like Redmond had run out of ideas and simply copied OS X. With Apple's latest version of OS X just around the corner, Vista is going to look so last year. I'm sure MS would love to be able to roll out a new OS every 2 years.

You know some very odd people.[/QUOTE]

I don't, I know normal people. People love technology that is friendly and easy to use. Thats why people love their Tivo's. Yes there are products out there with more bells and whistles but Tivo does the job with more style and simplicity. People who use Macs love them for the same reason. Tell me, why aren't you running MCE or Linux and SageTV?

I stand by my assertion that Mac's can do 90% of the tasks PC's can do, and they do it with a lot less fuss.


----------



## Podgy Dad (Aug 18, 2002)

frogster said:


> Oh dear. How silly.
> 
> I work with an OS that runs 90% of the personal ccomputers on the planet, and runs them well and cheaply. I can write applications that with no modifications at all will install automatically and run perfectly on all those machines, 100% guaranteed. These are speciific accounting and small business management packages that are vital to many, and the like of which millions of businesses and individuals rely on day in and day out. When did anyone ever see a Mac being used for something worthwhile like that?
> 
> ...


Lots of people write software for Mac's, if they didn't make any money from it, they wouldn't do it would they?



> Macs are a niche product at niche prices. As with mountain-climbing, does any non-climber care what it costs or how pointless or dangerous it is? No.
> Mountain-climbers will rave about it though. All the way to bankruptcy, hospital, the grave and beyond.
> 
> My only interest in pointing out the huge numbers of faults Apple products have is in preventing the unwary from squandering their hard-earned cash on these expensive, ill-conceived, incompatible and largely unsupported devices.


Yep, all mountain climbers are bankrupt and in hospital, you really do like your generalisations don't you  Mac's are a little more expensive than your bargain basement PC but you generally get what you pay for. You don't really know what you are talking about, there are various Mac users on this thread that use Mac's on a daily basis and don't run in to any of the issues you suggest are a problem. We are not all filthy rich mountain climbers who go out and buy something just because its pretty.



> They do have pretty cases though and I'm sure that this gives entire satisfaction to many.


An added bonus, PC manufactures can't even emulate that, they try but they just end up looking like a barry'd up Nova 

I think you will find Mac's are making quite a few inroads to enterprise of late. I have certainly noticed an increase in enquiries from such companies. Of course the IT departments are S**t scared of them and do everything in their power to disuade the powers that be from buying any. But when they do, they tie in with AD very nicely and run Office, access Exchange and generally play very nicely with the PC network. They now also have the choice of running Windows apps directly from the Mac desktop should they need to access that bespoke Windows app.


----------



## PaulWilkinsUK (Mar 20, 2006)

So... My ISP is offering me FREE Norton AV and all the other sh*t that Windoz Eggs Pea machines need to survive on the internet. 

Hmm thinks me, I'll have me some of that. I follow all the instructions to the letter, the OS crashes 3 times and now the effin' thing says "Insert Disk Labeled....", great this software!!

This is the whole reason why I switched to a Mac, I'm P*ssed off with 'Wizzards' that *uck up all of the time and crappy people who think they are programmers that cannot program defensively.

Pile Of Poo.

I've got a copy of SUSE Linux 10.0 on the shelf.... perhaps its time to banish Mr Gates from my home completely...


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

Podgy Dad said:


> I think you will find the Mac's are competitively priced as long as you compare like for like, say with Sony.


No, they aren't. I can buy an assembled PC from someone like Acer in any supermarket where I am for £270. It comes with everything but a screen (a 17in is under £120) and has more useful sockets than you can shake a stick at. It also comes with some basic word-processing and spreadsheet software. And it will work with any hardware I care to buy.

A comparable Mac would cost nearly double, would have fewer sockets, no useful software and would only work with some other hardware. Don't imagine that because Macs are expensive they contain expensive parts. They don't. Apple put cheap parts in expensive packages and sell them at a high price, and they always have done.



> You don't have to buy a new OS every 2 years, the user has a choice. 10.4 will run just fine on a G3 iMac. Again, you buy the OS if the features are compelling enough, no need to upgrade if you don't want to.


You're the one who mentioned running an up to date OS, not me. I just pointed out that Apple sells its bugfixes and service packs for the cost of a new OS, and they do it every couple of years.
Microsoft do this for free and any OS you buy from them will be supported for free for up to 9 years. And because the OS doesn't change every few months you can be sure that all your software and hardware will continue to work properly for many years, at no cost.



> Tell me, why aren't you running MCE or Linux and SageTV?


Because I don't need to. What on earth would I do with any of those?

My bog-standard WinXP PC already plays SD and HD video in any format known to man via the HDMI video card that I just bought and slotted in, and it also has full bit-perfect SPDIF digital sound pass-through. Just try and do that on a Mac.

And fancy that! This brings us right back on topic: Macs, EyeTV and the long list of incompatible file and codec types.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

PaulWilkinsUK said:


> My ISP is offering me FREE Norton AV ...


Just because a product is being given away for free doesn't make it any good. Norton is rubbish, but that isn't Windows' fault. You have a huge choice of free and pay software that you can install on your Windows machine or not as you wish. You chose a bad one. Throw it away and use a good free one like AVG.



> I've got a copy of SUSE Linux 10.0 on the shelf....


Exactly where it should stay, I think. MacOSX and soft/hardware incompatibility is one bad thing indeed, but Linux drivers are another giant can of worms altogether.


----------



## britcub (Jan 19, 2004)

frogster said:


> No, they aren't. I can buy an assembled PC from someone like Acer in any supermarket where I am for £270. It comes with everything but a screen (a 17in is under £120) and has more useful sockets than you can shake a stick at. It also comes with some basic word-processing and spreadsheet software. And it will work with any hardware I care to buy.


You are not comparing like with like - your cheap PC would certainly not have a dual core processor, a massively cut down celeron or sempron would be much more likely. And I'd hardly recommend Acer as a 'quality' brand...



frogster said:


> A comparable Mac would cost nearly double, would have fewer sockets, no useful software and would only work with some other hardware. Don't imagine that because Macs are expensive they contain expensive parts. They don't. Apple put cheap parts in expensive packages and sell them at a high price, and they always have done.


A 'comparable' Mac would cost £399 (nowhere near double), but would have a much better processor. It would have 4xUSB, 1x firewire, 1x ethernet, built in IR, wifi and bluetooth and 1x DVI - how many more sockets did you need? It would also come with the very useful iLife software package, and trials for iWork and Microsoft Office. If you decided you didn't want to buy these, the FREE to download NeoOffice or Open Office are just as good for most users, or you could use Google Docs and Spreadsheets online.

Until last week, my only experience of Macs was at college in 1991, where I grew to loathe them. However, I decided to open-mindedly try again and bought a Macbook last week. I have to say that apart from to transfer some files across, my PC has not even been switched on since.


----------



## Podgy Dad (Aug 18, 2002)

frogster said:


> No, they aren't. I can buy an assembled PC from someone like Acer in any supermarket where I am for £270. It comes with everything but a screen (a 17in is under £120) and has more useful sockets than you can shake a stick at. It also comes with some basic word-processing and spreadsheet software. And it will work with any hardware I care to buy.
> 
> A comparable Mac would cost nearly double, would have fewer sockets, no useful software and would only work with some other hardware. Don't imagine that because Macs are expensive they contain expensive parts. They don't. Apple put cheap parts in expensive packages and sell them at a high price, and they always have done.


Come now you're not really holding up Acer as a quality brand are you?

You can buy a Mac Mini for £349, I can add the same nasty cheap monitor as you too, of course I could always add an expensive quality one. Indeed, I'm typing this on my MacBook hooked up to a 24" Dell monitor. There are cheap PC's and expensive ones. Why not compare like for like. Lets compare Mac's with Sony's

Do you actually know what software comes with a Mac? What do most people do with their computers? They surf the web, write e-mail, work on Office documents, manage their music and photo libraries. I would say the vast majority of people I know fit in to that category. The only thing the Mac doesn't do well out of the box is work with Office documents. However you can download Neo Office for free and it will open and edit any Office document you want. As for music and photos, please dont try to argue that doing that stuff is easier on a PC, the iPhoto, iMovie, and iDVD applications are regarded as some of the best software around for those tasks. For example, people love the photobooks I produce from iPhoto, or the yearly DVD photo slideshows I produce for my parents of their grandchildren. My Mum now has a 5 year old iMac running the latest version of OS X and it does everything she wants it to.



> You're the one who mentioned running an up to date OS, not me. I just pointed out that Apple sells its bugfixes and service packs for the cost of a new OS, and they do it every couple of years.
> Microsoft do this for free and any OS you buy from them will be supported for free for up to 9 years. And because the OS doesn't change every few months you can be sure that all your software and hardware will continue to work properly for many years, at no cost.


Apple release free bug fixes on a continual basis, we are up to 10.4.9, full point releases add features. Apple, can't win can they with you? You are in effect criticising them for improving their product. Its not Apple's fault they can knock a reliable, secure OS out every couple of years and MS can't. I think 5 years is a reasonable amount of time to support an OS. However, as already stated, 10.3 (panther) still works perfectly well.

Because I don't need to. What on earth would I do with any of those?



> My bog-standard WinXP PC already plays SD and HD video in any format known to man via the HDMI video card that I just bought and slotted in, and it also has full bit-perfect SPDIF digital sound pass-through. Just try and do that on a Mac.
> 
> And fancy that! This brings us right back on topic: Macs, EyeTV and the long list of incompatible file and codec types.


Its called a Mac Mini mate, I have one running as a media centre, its tiny, is silent, connects to my 55" TV via HDMI and digital audio to my amp. It plays every file I can throw at it. It cost me £349 and is effortless to use and I bet it does it all far more elegantly than a Windows PC. The Apple remote is testament to Apple's ability to make something simple. The Windows media centre remote is a monstrosity and has more buttons than you can shake a stick at. Apple are masters at taking a task that is complicated and making it easy to use for the man on the street.

Tivo is better than Sky+, it is better for one simple reason, its easier to use. Mac's are less flexible than PC's but they are flexible enough. They are moderately more expensive than bargain basement PC's but on a par with other good brands.

Yes you can build a cheap PC or buy a poor quality one for buttons, but as with everything, you get what you pay for. I can buy a Kia for less than an Audi but why would I want to do that? At the end of the day, its about quality of experience, you can always do something cheaper if you become an expert in it, however most people don't want to spend time installing drivers, and fiddling with their AV software for an evening, they'd much rather be playing with their kids or having a beer down the pub with their mates. Good technology becomes transparent to the user, they don't have to fight with the tool before they even get to the task. If a tool is too complicated people end up not using it, like the Mum at my kids school who will no longer user her PC for any financial transactions after she got stung by a trojan. My Mac has been running without AV software for 7 years, I run a firewall but I've never seen anything in the logs that would worry me as a Mac user.

Mac's, they just work


----------



## Podgy Dad (Aug 18, 2002)

britcub said:


> You are not comparing like with like - your cheap PC would certainly not have a dual core processor, a massively cut down celeron or sempron would be much more likely. And I'd hardly recommend Acer as a 'quality' brand...
> 
> A 'comparable' Mac would cost £399 (nowhere near double), but would have a much better processor. It would have 4xUSB, 1x firewire, 1x ethernet, built in IR, wifi and bluetooth and 1x DVI - how many more sockets did you need? It would also come with the very useful iLife software package, and trials for iWork and Microsoft Office. If you decided you didn't want to buy these, the FREE to download NeoOffice or Open Office are just as good for most users, or you could use Google Docs and Spreadsheets online.
> 
> Until last week, my only experience of Macs was at college in 1991, where I grew to loathe them. However, I decided to open-mindedly try again and bought a Macbook last week. I have to say that apart from to transfer some files across, my PC has not even been switched on since.


Funny, I wrote my post without reading yours.

Great minds and all that


----------



## Podgy Dad (Aug 18, 2002)

frogster said:


> Just because a product is being given away for free doesn't make it any good. Norton is rubbish, but that isn't Windows' fault. You have a huge choice of free and pay software that you can install on your Windows machine or not as you wish. You chose a bad one. Throw it away and use a good free one like AVG.
> 
> Exactly where it should stay, I think. MacOSX and soft/hardware incompatibility is one bad thing indeed, but Linux drivers are another giant can of worms altogether.


Just what are these hardware and software incompatabilities that you keep rattling on about?

Girlfriends sister just bought a new PC with Vista installed. Didn't work with McAfee, didn't work with Orange Livebox.

If I go in to PC world today I can pick up any number of peripherals that will work with my Mac. People have a short memory, Apple released its first iMac without any of the old legacy serial ports or floppy drives. USB peripherals had been scarce up until this point, with the advent of the iMac they started to appear and within 12 months all PC's were coming with them as standard. People asked how people could survive without floppy disks, quite well it would seem. Good to see that PC manufactures are slowly coming round to the idea some 7 years later


----------



## healeydave (Jun 4, 2003)

britcub said:


> Until last week, my only experience of Macs was at college in 1991, where I grew to loathe them. However, I decided to open-mindedly try again and bought a Macbook last week. I have to say that apart from to transfer some files across, my PC has not even been switched on since.


The only thing I will say is if you don't have 2Gb of Ram in it I can thoroughly recommend you do so as soon as possible, the difference is amazing!
No supplier should sell Laptops (be they Mac or PC) with anything less than 1Gb RAM. My Macbook came with 512Mb but £72 later it now has 2Gb and it makes the world of difference!!


----------



## Podgy Dad (Aug 18, 2002)

healeydave said:


> The only thing I will say is if you don't have 2Gb of Ram in it I can thoroughly recommend you do so as soon as possible, the difference is amazing!
> No supplier should sell Laptops (be they Mac or PC) with anything less than 1Gb RAM. My Macbook came with 512Mb but £72 later it now has 2Gb and it makes the world of difference!!


Yep it will help, especially if you are using non universal binaries as Apple use something called Rosetta to run PPC code, and to be honest its very memory hungry


----------



## britcub (Jan 19, 2004)

healeydave said:


> The only thing I will say is if you don't have 2Gb of Ram in it I can thoroughly recommend you do so as soon as possible, the difference is amazing!
> No supplier should sell Laptops (be they Mac or PC) with anything less than 1Gb RAM. My Macbook came with 512Mb but £72 later it now has 2Gb and it makes the world of difference!!


I've got 1GB, which is fine for now, but I'll probably upgrade at some point in the future


----------



## Podgy Dad (Aug 18, 2002)

Has Frogster given up his futile argument?


----------



## PaulWilkinsUK (Mar 20, 2006)

Podgy Dad said:


> Has Frogster given up his futile argument?


He's just popped off to the shops to buy a mac


----------



## Podgy Dad (Aug 18, 2002)

PaulWilkinsUK said:


> He's just popped off to the shops to buy a mac


Either that or he's had a major system failure and he's just building himself a new PC


----------



## Anndra (Oct 12, 2004)

A *nix developer I work with has just bought himself a MacBook. His reason...? He couldn't find anything with the same features cheaper. Then he goes and shells out for the black version!


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

britcub said:


> You are not comparing like with like - your cheap PC would certainly not have a dual core processor, a massively cut down celeron or sempron would be much more likely. And I'd hardly recommend Acer as a 'quality' brand...


Acer are fine for the price. I've installed hundreds of them.

As for dual-core processors. Who needs one? I certainly don't. The price I quoted gets a hyperthreaded P4 running at 3Ghz. This is more than any user would ever need, unless they want to play games or process HD video.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

Podgy Dad said:


> Come now you're not really holding up Acer as a quality brand are you?


As mentioned above, there is nothing wrong with Acer. They make many of the parts used in machines assembled by well-known brands. In fact they probably make parts used in Intel-based Macs.



> Why not compare like for like. Lets compare Mac's with Sony's


Why? Sony PCs are not particularly good. They do have fancy cases though which is probably what makes you think that there is something special about them. You make the same mistake with Macs.



> Do you actually know what software comes with a Mac?


That's easy. Precious little. Apart from web browsers and email clients such as one would find in any OS, you get the totally pointless iLife. You certainly get nothing that I would describe as useful. You still get no proper burning software for example.



> What do most people do with their computers? They surf the web, write e-mail, work on Office documents, manage their music and photo libraries. I would say the vast majority of people I know fit in to that category.


We are back to my initial argument. The people you describe are amateurs with only the most limited use for a computer of any type. A Mac is perfectly suitable for them, though grossly overpriced.



> Apple release free bug fixes on a continual basis, we are up to 10.4.9, full point releases add features. Apple, can't win can they with you? You are in effect criticising them for improving their product. Its not Apple's fault they can knock a reliable, secure OS out every couple of years and MS can't.


This is the easiest thing in the world to do when the OS doesn't actually change. The pay upgrades released every two years by Apple are just bugfixes and minor enhancements. They are not new operating systems by any stretch of the imagination. And I don't see why I should have to pay for a new OS every two years when I'm not actually getting a new OS (nor do I need one). I'm still ordering new PCs with Windows XP and expect to be doing so for quite some time. I expect to be using it myself for several more years, all for the original purchase price of £50.



> Mac's, they just work


Just, as in barely?


----------



## PaulWilkinsUK (Mar 20, 2006)

Now come on "Froggy" you'll get a reputation for being a 'Sour Puss & Grumpy Face'.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

Podgy Dad said:


> Just what are these hardware and software incompatabilities that you keep rattling on about?


The inability to handle many AV codecs. The inability to run Windows software, unless you also install Windows in which case it isn't a Mac any more. The inability to work with many common items of hardware.



> Girlfriends sister just bought a new PC with Vista installed. Didn't work with McAfee,


Blame McAfee then. Like Norton, this is badly-written bloatware that you just don't need with Vista anyway.



> didn't work with Orange Livebox.


The Orange Livebox has an ethernet port with which Vista is 100% compatible. You need no software whatsoever to use any PC with a Livebox, unless you are determined to use the USB connection, which would be pointless and silly. At worst you might need to install drivers for a wifi dongle if your PC/laptop doesn't have built-in wifi, but you never need the Orange software as such.
(For what it's worth, you need no software to use a Livebox with OSX or Linux either.)



> If I go in to PC world today I can pick up any number of peripherals that will work with my Mac.


And you can also find many that won't. Also many items of software, both serious and games.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

PaulWilkinsUK said:


> Now come on "Froggy" you'll get a reputation for being a 'Sour Puss & Grumpy Face'.


Moi?


----------



## scgf (Oct 24, 2000)

frogster said:


> You still get no proper burning software for example.


You keep stating things that show you don't know what you're talking about! The ability to burn to a CD or DVD is built into Mac OS X. You can burn directly from iPhoto, iTunes, iDVD etc., or you can insert a CD/DVD, double-click on its icon on the desktop, drag files, folders, whatever into the window and click burn. What could be easier? The OS natively handles disk images too.


----------



## Podgy Dad (Aug 18, 2002)

frogster said:


> As mentioned above, there is nothing wrong with Acer. They make many of the parts used in machines assembled by well-known brands. In fact they probably make parts used in Intel-based Macs.


Well thats a matter of opinion Frogster, the difference in quality between an Acer laptop and an iBook is very tangible.



> Why? Sony PCs are not particularly good. They do have fancy cases though which is probably what makes you think that there is something special about them. You make the same mistake with Macs.


Well thats a matter of opinion, there is a reason for the difference in price between brands.



> That's easy. Precious little. Apart from web browsers and email clients such as one would find in any OS, you get the totally pointless iLife. You certainly get nothing that I would describe as useful. You still get no proper burning software for example.
> 
> We are back to my initial argument. The people you describe are amateurs with only the most limited use for a computer of any type. A Mac is perfectly suitable for them, though grossly overpriced.


You seem to be unable to grasp that the majority of computer users are amateurs, they are not computer nerds, not many of them use VB. I would suggest that the vast majority of people don't even know what Divx is. And this is the problem with 'experts' like you, you don't live in the real world when it comes to computers. However, I'm a computer professional, and I've never come across a task I have needed to do that my Mac can't, hence my original assertion that you can do 90% of tasks on a Mac, I would suggest its even higher than that.

As for being overpriced I think we have demonstrated that they are not. But just in case you haven't got the point, here's some comparissons. Prices are from insight.com

HP Compaq Business Notebook nc4400 - Core 2 Duo T7200 2 GHz - 12.1" TFT
2 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo processor
12.1 in TFT active matrix display, Microsoft Windows XP Professional
1.8 kg weight, 5.5 hour(s) battery life
Product Code: HPYA04YXR
Mfr Part #: RH571ET#ABU
£986 inc VAT

Toshiba Portégé M400-144
Intel® Core 2 Duo T5500 Processor 1.66GHz
512MB, 60GB HDD & DVD/RW Super Multi DL Drive
Microsoft® Windows® XP Tablet Edition & Wireless 802.11a/b/g LAN
12" SXGA+ TFT Display & Bluetooth
£1112.71

Dell XPS M1210
12.1" display
2.0GH Core2 Duo
120GB HD
Dual later DVD Burner
£899 inc VAT

MacBook 2.0GHz
2.0GHz Core 2 Duo
1GB RAM
80GB HD
Dual layer DVD burner
£879 inc VAT

Don't forget to factor in 3 years AV subscription in to all that lot. I know there are free versions out there, however lots of people still buy AV software.

So I think you will see that Mac's aren't grossly overpriced at all. If you really want to I can do a desktop comparisson also.

The defense rests 



> This is the easiest thing in the world to do when the OS doesn't actually change. The pay upgrades released every two years by Apple are just bugfixes and minor enhancements. They are not new operating systems by any stretch of the imagination. And I don't see why I should have to pay for a new OS every two years when I'm not actually getting a new OS (nor do I need one). I'm still ordering new PCs with Windows XP and expect to be doing so for quite some time. I expect to be using it myself for several more years, all for the original purchase price of £50.


Just because the look and feel doesn't change, don't mistake this for it not being a new OS. Apple's OS is very good, thats why they don't really change the fundemental way it looks and operates but they do add functionality. If you need that additional functionality, you buy the upgrade, if you don't, you don't. You are simply wrong that the upgrades are bug fixes, where is your evidence for this? If you really insist I will list the difference between, 10.3, 10.4 and 10.5. It would appear that if you buy Vista, all you are really getting is a poor copy of the OS X 10 UI with a lot of fixes in terms of making it more secure. What innovative features has Vista brought to the OS party that OS X hasn't had for the last 2 years? Oh and another thing, no serial number with OS X, no activation either.



> Just, as in barely?


No as in no messing about.

Its quite clear that you are not objective on this subject, you have deep seated opinions about Macs, I guess its because you see yourself as an 'expert' and you don't like computers that make things simple, as this makes you look much less of an expert.


----------



## Podgy Dad (Aug 18, 2002)

frogster said:


> Acer are fine for the price. I've installed hundreds of them.
> 
> As for dual-core processors. Who needs one? I certainly don't. The price I quoted gets a hyperthreaded P4 running at 3Ghz. This is more than any user would ever need, unless they want to play games or process HD video.


So you're not comparing like for like are you? You are comparing Apple's and oranges. There's a reason the Audit TT 3.2 V6 is more expensive than than the 1.8 turbo charged version.

How big is that heatsink on that 3GHz P4?


----------



## britcub (Jan 19, 2004)

frogster said:


> the totally pointless iLife





frogster said:


> The inability to handle many AV codecs.


If one of your main uses for a PC is for AV, how on earth can you say iLife is pointless? For the vast majority of computer users, iLife pretty much handles all their audio-visual needs.

My guess is you've never actually spent an hour with iLife, seeing exactly what it does do!


----------



## Podgy Dad (Aug 18, 2002)

britcub said:


> If one of your main uses for a PC is for AV, how on earth can you say iLife is pointless? For the vast majority of computer users, iLife pretty much handles all their audio-visual needs.
> 
> My guess is you've never actually spent an hour with iLife, seeing exactly what it does do!


Of course he hasn't, he doesn't have time for a life, what would he do with iLife? He's too busy programming silly  I can just see the DVD slideshow now, this is me programming, this is me building a PC, this is me installing graphics card drivers, all to the tune of Radiohead  He's not one of these silly amateurs you know, he uses his computer for grown up tasks :-D


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

Podgy Dad said:


> You seem to be unable to grasp that the majority of computer users are amateurs,


You need to make your mind up. If as you say most computer users are amateurs who do very little with their machines (and I agree totally with this and have done since the beginning) then what on earth do they need a high-spec model for?

Answer: they don't. Any bog-standard 2.xGhz Celeron with 120Gb drive and 1Mb RAM will do everything they need. I get these complete with a 17 monitor, speakers, keyboard, mouse etc.etc for £400. I can also get laptops with similar spec for the same price. So why spend more?

At the same time such a PC will also do just about anything that an intensive user might want to do, short of HD video editiing and playing the latest games.

The spec of my own machine isn't much better than that.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

Podgy Dad said:


> How big is that heatsink on that 3GHz P4?


Who cares, and why should they? As long as it works that's all there is to it.

(Actually the heatsink on my P4 isn't very big at all.)


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

britcub said:


> If one of your main uses for a PC is for AV, how on earth can you say iLife is pointless? For the vast majority of computer users, iLife pretty much handles all their audio-visual needs.


AV isn't my main use of a PC.

I fully agree that iLife (like all Apple products and software) is suitable for many people. This is because they require very little from either the machine or the software. Anyone wanting to put a machine to serious use should look elsewhere, especially away from Apple software.

This has been the crux of the entire thread all along and I thank you for confirming it.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

scgf said:


> You keep stating things that show you don't know what you're talking about! The ability to burn to a CD or DVD is built into Mac OS X. You can burn directly from iPhoto, iTunes, iDVD etc., or you can insert a CD/DVD, double-click on its icon on the desktop, drag files, folders, whatever into the window and click burn.


You get this in XP also, but it is not proper burning software. When you buy an assembled PC with a burner you get not only the built-in burning support of XP (similar to that of OSX) but you also normally get burning software that does other more complex tasks.


----------



## PaulWilkinsUK (Mar 20, 2006)

Hey Frogster have you seen these?

http://www.apple.com/uk/getamac/ads/

(Providing our course that you don't need install a new driver to view them...  )


----------



## Podgy Dad (Aug 18, 2002)

frogster said:


> You need to make your mind up. If as you say most computer users are amateurs who do very little with their machines (and I agree totally with this and have done since the beginning) then what on earth do they need a high-spec model for?
> 
> Answer: they don't. Any bog-standard 2.xGhz Celeron with 120Gb drive and 1Mb RAM will do everything they need. I get these complete with a 17 monitor, speakers, keyboard, mouse etc.etc for £400. I can also get laptops with similar spec for the same price. So why spend more?
> 
> ...


But people don't buy those machines do they? They go in to PC World and are told what to buy.

So what you actually meant to say was Apple products were over spec'd, not over priced. Your complaint appears to be that Apple don't really sell low end products. A Mac mini with a 3rd party 17" display can be had for around £499. A bit of a prmium over your bargain basement PC but not much, and one I feel is worth it.


----------



## Podgy Dad (Aug 18, 2002)

frogster said:


> AV isn't my main use of a PC.
> 
> I fully agree that iLife (like all Apple products and software) is suitable for many people. This is because they require very little from either the machine or the software. Anyone wanting to put a machine to serious use should look elsewhere, especially away from Apple software.
> 
> This has been the crux of the entire thread all along and I thank you for confirming it.


I've just recently setup a new business helping people reclaim their bank charges, everything is done on Macs. Its going to turn over about £2 Million a year. Is that a serious enough task?

We have a Mac OS X Server running on an old G4 (cost about £150) it runs IMAP, file services, VPN, webmail and our database. Its a complete fallacy that Macs can't be used for serious business tasks.

The great thing is though, when I do want to make a DVD slideshow, I can very easily, unlike on a PC.


----------



## Podgy Dad (Aug 18, 2002)

frogster said:


> You get this in XP also, but it is not proper burning software. When you buy an assembled PC with a burner you get not only the built-in burning support of XP (similar to that of OSX) but you also normally get burning software that does other more complex tasks.


Which most people need for what? I have Roxio Toast on my Mac, I've used it twice in 3 years.


----------



## katman (Jun 4, 2002)

Podgy Dad said:


> But people don't buy those machines do they? They go in to PC World and are told what to buy.


The adverts (Dell i think) on TV make me laugh......

What do you want your PC for ?

I want to watch movies

you will need a DVD burner then.

*WHY !!!!!*

You can watch DVDs without a DVD burner.... or do they really mean "I want to steal movies from illegal download sites."

This thread has become the classic PC vs MAC arguement and I dont think there will ever be a point at which people will agree. The two machines come from different backgounds but are now all but identical given a similar task and the appropriate software.

Early Macs had far superior Audio and Video capabilities with the graphics cards far exceeding what a "normal" PC was capable of so they were the machine of choice for "creative Types" eg Graphic designers etc, whereas PCs were traditionally used for word Processing and spreadsheets where 16 colours was an abundance of colour !!!

I remember at work we had both MACs and PCs in our presentation rooms (circa 1998) and the MACs definately performed better at multimedia presentations but then I also discovered that the MACs had 128Mb of RAM and the PCs were P100s with 32Mb

With the increase in capabilites of PCs I think that many of the traditional advantages of a MAC have been eliminated but people still remain loyal to what they have always used.

I have to admit that I havent really "used" a MAC and my Linux experience is also very limited. I have built several Linux machines but other than as a server and for email and web browsing havent really used them in anger.

My main reason for using a PC is that the software that I use the most simply isnt available for any platform other than a PC. Initially I never wanted a PC.

I started with a BBC Model B over 20 years ago and wanted to progress to an Archimedes as the PCB design software I was using on the BBC was available for the Archie and the cost of the machine AND software was less than just software for a PC.

That was before PC ownership really started to take off in the mid 90s and then I reluctantly had to get a PC to conform with what everyone else was using.

The whole "upgrade" thing really annoys me. I have just rebuilt my laptop using XP Pro instead of that god awful XP Home and at the same time went from Office 2000 to Office 2003 and I absolutely hate it. Everything has been "made pretty" which just takes up more screen area and adds nothing to the functionality and it currently wont let me access my address book GRRRRR.

I also think that the whole virus/Vulnerability thing being purely a Microsoft issue is mainly down to the fact that M$ are the dominant player and that if OSX or Linux were the dominant player there would be far more activity directed at "breaking" those operating systems.

What Microsoft have done is made PCs available to everyone. The downside of that is that people who shouldnt be let within a mile of a keyboard and mouse now have a PC. The upside is that due to the massive volumes of hardware now being manufactured the cost of harware has plummeted. Unfortunately it is Microsofts efforts in making PCs easy to use for non computer literate users that has created a lot of the vulerabilities now being exploited.


----------



## healeydave (Jun 4, 2003)

katman said:


> This thread has become the classic PC vs MAC arguement and I dont think there will ever be a point at which people will agree. The two machines come from different backgounds but are now all but identical given a similar task and the appropriate software.
> 
> ....cut to save space....


Katman, you need to get yourself a Mac.

What you said in the previous thread is very similar to my story with the exception that I DID like PC's.

I have become disillusioned with them.....
I'm fed up with too many 3rd party vendors trying to jump on the band wagon making peripherals that have little compatibility testing.

Whilst many use Microsoft software purely for its popularity, there are so many that hate the company, they thrive on writing viruses and get a kick out of exploiting its vulnerabilities.

If you read one of my messages earlier in this thread (and you would be forgiven for not as its got so long now), I have been using a Macbook for over a month now and I still love it, using a computer is a joy again rather than a chore. I can do everything I was doing on the PC only it does it slicker & faster.

I am currently only having to go back to the office PC to do the odd graphic manipulation. This is daft as the Macs built their reputation on graphics but I will explain before any PC users think they've scored one. I am useless at freehand drawing and years ago I forced myself to go through a few tutorials to use paintshop pro on the PC. I only know a few techniques but they see me through most of my requirements to this day. I'm sure once I get some free time I will be able to do the same things on a superior Mac package but until then its purely a speed thing.


----------



## scgf (Oct 24, 2000)

frogster said:


> I fully agree that iLife (like all Apple products and software) is suitable for many people. This is because they require very little from either the machine or the software. Anyone wanting to put a machine to serious use should look elsewhere, especially away from Apple software.


Like the BBC? Now I wonder where they should look . . .

"BBC Factual has confirmed plans to use the Panasonic AJ-HDX900 DVCPRO HD camcorder alongside Apple's industry leading professional video application in order to create all its high-definition shows, beginning in April 2007."

Pah! Amateurs!


----------



## katman (Jun 4, 2002)

healeydave said:


> Katman, you need to get yourself a Mac.


Funny you should say that, I was reading through the earlier posts in this thread and saw one saying that a MAC Mini could be had for £349



> What you said in the previous thread is very similar to my story with the exception that I DID like PC's.
> 
> I have become disillusioned with them.....
> I'm fed up with too many 3rd party vendors trying to jump on the band wagon making peripherals that have little compatibility testing.


Indeed, one of the earlier post mentioned that a Windows Application will ALWAYS install straight out of the box. Definately not true.

I have had to build a Windows 98 PC for my son to play games on because they wont run on XP unless I give a 3 year old an Administrator account which I am not prepared to do. Even as an administrator, 2 of them wont run unless I "Let windoze manage the swap file" because it complains that "there must be at least 3Mb of virtual Memory" on a machine with 512MB Ram and a fixed 2Gb swap file !!!

Even stuff from M$ themselves doesnt always work. I had an install of SQL2005 express go wrong the other day and it would not let me uninstall and insisted it had a database when it didnt 



> Whilst many use Microsoft software purely for its popularity, there are so many that hate the company, they thrive on writing viruses and get a kick out of exploiting its vulnerabilities.


Which is why i made the point that if one of the other players were the "big one" then there would be a concerted effort against them because there a just people like that 



> If you read one of my messages earlier in this thread (and you would be forgiven for not as its got so long now), I have been using a Macbook for over a month now and I still love it, using a computer is a joy again rather than a chore. I can do everything I was doing on the PC only it does it slicker & faster.


I think that was the one that made me want to try a MAC Mini 



> I am currently only having to go back to the office PC to do the odd graphic manipulation. This is daft as the Macs built their reputation on graphics but I will explain before any PC users think they've scored one. I am useless at freehand drawing and years ago I forced myself to go through a few tutorials to use paintshop pro on the PC. I only know a few techniques but they see me through most of my requirements to this day. I'm sure once I get some free time I will be able to do the same things on a superior Mac package but until then its purely a speed thing.


Funny you should say that.

I am quite good at using Paint Shop Pro 5 and can knock out all the images I need quite easily. I tried Paint Shop Pro 8 and after spending 20 minutes trying to overlay some text on an image I unistalled it. As I said earlier, I firmly believe the capabilities of the two families of machines to be equal given similar software. Is there a "simple" graphics package for the MAC ?


----------



## scgf (Oct 24, 2000)

You get iPhoto with every Mac - it can do a fair bit to enhance photos - have a look on Apple's web site http://www.apple.com/uk/ilife/iphoto/ and see for yourself.

You can, of course, get Photoshop for the Mac, and also Adobe Lightroom and the rather nice Aperture from Apple.

The best place to look for free and shareware type Mac software is http://www.versiontracker.com/macosx/

Just noticed Seashore, a free package based on Gimp. Looks rather like it would do exactly what you want: http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/25311


----------



## healeydave (Jun 4, 2003)

It is Paintshop Pro v5 that I use.

I only use it once in a blue moon and when I do its always in a hurry to tweak a graphic for a website, outline an object, cut out the background etc. I know every package is capable of doing it but I tried in the past with expensive pc packages and after half hour of trying to figure out how to get the tools to work, I just go back to paintshop pro 5.

In fact this PC product is the closest thing the PC has got to resemble the Macs simplicity I have become to love.

Your right, I (like most mac users) don't want the Mac to take over because the Mac community doesn't need or want all those PC freaks that have nothing better to do than write viruses and make exploitation software etc on this platform. Let them carry on with their ignorance to the Mac world I say and we'll carry on enjoying a trouble free environment 

Disclaimer: I'm not saying all PC users are freaks that like hacking in the traditional sense of the word. I'm just referring to the many loathsome PC nerds that do waste their life doing this.


----------



## mikerr (Jun 2, 2005)

Heh, PSP 5 is part of my standard PC setup too, along with office 97 (before the bloat set in).

As for the mac ads, they pander to 10 year old stereotypes, and are mostly inaccurate in every point they make. They put me off buying a mac TBH.

I bought a mac mini because it wasn't overpriced for the hardware (like most macs), 
doesn't lock you in to a monitor that will get old fast (like all-in-one imacs),
is silent (I don't mean quiet like some dells - I mean silent - quieter than a laptop) 
..and can run xp natively, to dual boot xp and OS X.


----------



## katman (Jun 4, 2002)

mikerr said:


> Heh, PSP 5 is part of my standard PC setup too, along with office 97 (before the bloat set in).


I was more than happy with Office 97 until I started receiving documents created in 2000 that I couldnt open. PC Bloat is by far the biggest problem 

I have a couple of old laptops which are perfectly useable machines with Windows 98 until you put antivirus software on them at which point they crawl. As you cant safely NOT have AntiVirus software with Win98 unless the machine never connects to the outside world they are effectively doorstops 

I havent tried any flavour of Linux on them because the Linux distributions I have tried (Mandrake and Unbuntu/Kunbntu) seem to desire the same amount of RAM as XP does which is beyond what these machines are physically capable of holding.

Even my current laptop, a 2 year old Dell Inspiron 1000 is already fitted with its maximum 512Mb RAM.


----------



## Podgy Dad (Aug 18, 2002)

katman said:


> Funny you should say that, I was reading through the earlier posts in this thread and saw one saying that a MAC Mini could be had for £349
> 
> Indeed, one of the earlier post mentioned that a Windows Application will ALWAYS install straight out of the box. Definately not true.
> 
> ...


Photoshop elements is a lite version of PhotoShop.


----------



## scgf (Oct 24, 2000)

At school I have replaced MS Office on our Windows machines with OpenOffice. It opens and saves MS Office files as well as the latest 2007 XML format. OpenOffice is completely free (http://www.openoffice.org) and looks loads better than MS Office. We have not found any compatibility problems with any of the MS Office apps.

A Mac version is available called NeoOffice.

Worth a look.


----------



## healeydave (Jun 4, 2003)

Does NeoOffice include an outlook client?

I have my own Exchange server which is not ready to retire yet and I need to be able to run rules which is the only legacy windows product I'm using on my mac at the moment (through max-office).

P.S.
I was browsing through the various widgets and if I ever get nostalgic about Windows, I found a widget that shows the Blue Screen of Death heheheh, yeah like I'll miss that!


----------



## scgf (Oct 24, 2000)

No, it doesn't have an Exchange client, just Writer (=Word), Calc (=Excel), Impress (=Powerpoint), Draw and a database app.


----------



## Podgy Dad (Aug 18, 2002)

healeydave said:


> Does NeoOffice include an outlook client?
> 
> I have my own Exchange server which is not ready to retire yet and I need to be able to run rules which is the only legacy windows product I'm using on my mac at the moment (through max-office).
> 
> ...


Apple Mail will talk to Exchange.


----------



## healeydave (Jun 4, 2003)

Yes, I was quite impressed how easy it was to get to may mail with the bundled apps, but I needed the Rules option that comes with outlook so had to install office just to get outlook.


----------



## mikerr (Jun 2, 2005)

You can do rules with outlook web access (OWA)in a browser too


----------



## healeydave (Jun 4, 2003)

Going back to what was said before regarding this PC/Mac battle. I feel sorry for anyone that has an Mac / Apple prejudices if it means they don't take Apple's re-invention of the mobile phone seriously!

Whatever your feelings, I think everyone will want an iPhone. If they can't put their prejudices aside quite frankly they will miss out on probably one of the best innovations in a long long time and probably for the foreseeable future too!

If you don't know anything about this product, do yourself a favor and watch the announcement below. Don't skip through it either, you will not grasp how good this product is without watching all of the footage!

http://stream.qtv.apple.com/events/jan/j47d52oo/m_sub8848125_650_ref.mov


----------



## Podgy Dad (Aug 18, 2002)

healeydave said:


> Going back to what was said before regarding this PC/Mac battle. I feel sorry for anyone that has an Mac / Apple prejudices if it means they don't take Apple's re-invention of the mobile phone seriously!
> 
> Whatever your feelings, I think everyone will want an iPhone. If they can't put their prejudices aside quite frankly they will miss out on probably one of the best innovations in a long long time and probably for the foreseeable future too!
> 
> ...


I think the iPod has gone a long way to breaking down the misconceptions and has caused a lot of average consumers to consider a Mac when buying a new computer. I believe the iPhone and indeed the Apple TV will further increase this awareness of Apple and their products, and help them make further market share gains.

Apple's stock gains this year speak for themselves.


----------



## healeydave (Jun 4, 2003)

Having decided that I am going to get an iPhone as soon as I can. I'll probably end up buying an American one just for the easy UI and put up with missing features rather than wait 

I've tried to keep contact lists in the past (on various devices) but they've always fragmented through different platforms and incompatibility etc. With this decision already made, I decided to start looking at getting a contact list together again. I managed within minutes to sync up my old Sony P900 with the Apple contact book through Bluetooth natively I might add without having to install any additional software. The Apply Sync even had a nice little metal embossed accurate picture of the Sony P900 during the process.

So I go in and start to edit the contacts. I decided to get graphics for the companies in my contact list (like Parcel Force for example), so it will look cool when I start using this in anger syncing up with the iPhone. (This is where I keep finding the little bits that make the Apple experience so good but you never can put your finger on them all later if you try to remember). I can just drag and drop images from the web onto the contact list to add most. Others, I need to crop maybe from flash headings etc. 

If I was going to do this in Windows, I would use the old Windows ALT & PASTE to capture the whole Window. Paste it into Paint Shop Pro, use the cut out tool to crop the logo, copy to clipboard, paste as new image, save new sized graphic, use app file browse function to get newly created image.

I run into trouble, the mac doesn't appear to have a "prnt scrn" key so I wonder if it has any screen capture facilities at all? A quick search on the web reveals that not only can you capture a screen, but you can target a portion in one go simply by holding down Command, CTRL, Shift & 4. I get a nice little target appear that I can size and crop the image I want all in one go. I then just go back to the contact list and do paste and presto, the company logos are in!!

I'm like a kid with a new toy, things like this shouldn't be under-estimated, I have found lots of things like this and you only discover how fun and easy a Mac is to use if you actually buy one and try to use it for yourself. The same experience cannot be discovered simply by having to support / use one from time to time. That experience will simply be always wondering how to do familiar things in a different way and be in a rush to get back to familiarity.


----------



## PaulWilkinsUK (Mar 20, 2006)

healeydave said:


> I run into trouble, the mac doesn't appear to have a "prnt scrn" key so I wonder if it has any screen capture facilities at all? A quick search on the web reveals that not only can you capture a screen, but you can target a portion in one go simply by holding down Command, CTRL, Shift & 4. I get a nice little target appear that I can size and crop the image I want all in one go. I then just go back to the contact list and do paste and presto, the company logos are in!!


Hells bells !!! I never knew you could do that... Thats ACE!!! 

Thanks HD


----------



## mikerr (Jun 2, 2005)

Typical mac owners getting excited about something available as a download for most OSes for decades. 

I could do that on my amiga in 1991 FFS


----------



## katman (Jun 4, 2002)

healeydave said:


> simply by holding down Command, CTRL, Shift & 4.


Before I got a PC, the action you describe above would have seemed terribly complicated to me as I was most definately a one finger typist and what you describe above requires the use of 4 fingers.

However, all is not lost and it appears that I have a skill for which I should be very grateful to Windows. I very quickly progessed from being a single key typist to a 3 or more finger typist. I knew that CTRL+ALT+DEL existed for a reason 

After the day I have had today I am more determined than ever to find a MAC dealer and have a play with a MAC.

I have been installing interactive whiteboards in schools. Two different brands and out of the 4 whiteboards I tried to get working I only succeeded with one 

Who was it who said Windows software would always install ????????????

Still, at least for the several hours spent trying to get them working my iPod was happily playing my favourite songs through the speakers 

The iPod is an "almost perfect" piece of kit. My only gripe being that it still basically revolves around the concept of people listening to "an album by a person" by which I mean that an album consists of 12-20 tracks by the same person therefore the number of albums and the number of artists are a managable size for browsing.

As an ex DJ my preference is for "songs" and all my albums are compilatons where each track is by a different artist. Hence out of 135 albums there are 1152 artists singing 2067 songs which makes selecting individual tracks a bit difficult to say the least but other than that I cant fault it. Suppose its my fault for being an awkward bugger !!!


----------



## healeydave (Jun 4, 2003)

mikerr said:


> Typical mac owners getting excited about something available as a download for most OSes for decades.
> 
> I could do that on my amiga in 1991 FFS


I think your missing the point, why would I want to download a 3rd party application to do a task thats built into the OS. Well a decent OS anyway


----------



## mikerr (Jun 2, 2005)

I had to download a 3rd party app (menumeters) to get a HDD light on my mac 

PCs come with that as standard in hardware


----------



## PaulWilkinsUK (Mar 20, 2006)

mikerr said:


> Typical mac owners getting excited about something available as a download for most OSes for decades.
> 
> I could do that on my amiga in 1991 FFS


To be honest, OS X comes with the 'Grab' utility that does the same thing (so no downloads of utilities required) I just didnt know it was already built into the operating system.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

Podgy Dad said:


> I've just recently setup a new business helping people reclaim their bank charges, everything is done on Macs. Its going to turn over about £2 Million a year. Is that a serious enough task?
> 
> We have a Mac OS X Server running on an old G4 (cost about £150) it runs IMAP, file services, VPN, webmail and our database. Its a complete fallacy that Macs can't be used for serious business tasks.


Clearly this company doesn't actually do any complex tasks on their machines. Which rather demonstrates my point.



> The great thing is though, when I do want to make a DVD slideshow, I can very easily, unlike on a PC.


Picasa does this for free. In fact Picasa does most if not all of what i-Photo does, for free.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

Podgy Dad said:


> Which most people need for what? I have Roxio Toast on my Mac, I've used it twice in 3 years.


Which again proves my point. You and most Mac users don't do anything complex with their machines.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

katman said:


> The whole "upgrade" thing really annoys me. I have just rebuilt my laptop using XP Pro instead of that god awful XP Home and at the same time went from Office 2000 to Office 2003 and I absolutely hate it. Everything has been "made pretty" which just takes up more screen area and adds nothing to the functionality and it currently wont let me access my address book GRRRRR.


Well, just don't try Office 2007 if you think 2003 is "prettied-up"!

Unfortunately the notion of "upgrading" is here to stay (and Apple are responsible for this much more than MS is: Apple design to a product-life of barely two years). Dumbed-down pretty interfaces are also here to stay, and again Apple can be thanked for that.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

scgf said:


> "BBC Factual has confirmed plans to use the Panasonic AJ-HDX900 DVCPRO HD camcorder alongside Apple's industry leading professional video application in order to create all its high-definition shows, beginning in April 2007."


A niche product for a niche market.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

katman said:


> Funny you should say that, I was reading through the earlier posts in this thread and saw one saying that a MAC Mini could be had for £349


£349 yes *but* also buy your own keyboard, mouse, screen, VGA adaptor, speakers, software, memory upgrade from the paltry amount supplied .....


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

katman said:


> I am quite good at using Paint Shop Pro 5 and can knock out all the images I need quite easily. I tried Paint Shop Pro 8 and after spending 20 minutes trying to overlay some text on an image I unistalled it.


PSP8 and above are significantly more complex products than PSP5 is. The also work in a very different way.

Personally I use PSP7 for day-to-day use and PSP11 for anything complex.

For photo management and display you may like to try Picasa, a free PC tool from Google. It doesn't do text overlays though.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

katman said:


> I was more than happy with Office 97 until I started receiving documents created in 2000 that I couldnt open.


Free convertors are available on the MS site for this.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

healeydave said:


> Going back to what was said before regarding this PC/Mac battle. I feel sorry for anyone that has an Mac / Apple prejudices if it means they don't take Apple's re-invention of the mobile phone seriously!
> 
> Whatever your feelings, I think everyone will want an iPhone.


Think again. Not only do I not want an iPhone, I don't want, need or own a mobile phone at all.

Just like email, nearly all mobile phone use is pointless waste. Just look around you in any public place and you will see some moron talking or texting or videoing nonsense to another moron via a mobile phone. Few of them have ever had a single intelligent thing to say in their lives.

"Yes dear. I'm in the supermarket by the baked beans." (He actually means that he is standing in the middle of the isle, effectively blocking the way for hundreds of other customers.) "There's a blue tin and a red tin. Which one do I get?"


----------



## healeydave (Jun 4, 2003)

Oh my god, I did have a little respect for some of your arguments relating to the mac / pc even though some of them were poorly argued / researched but trying to tell us that all mobile phones are a point less waste of time has just made your credibility fly out the window.

Why do you even bother with computers if your attitude to advancements in technology like the ability to have a phone on you where ever you go is deemed useless. I hope non of your family is never in an accident and need quick access to emergency services.

Don't even bother wasting your time replying, whilst I would never try to deny someones own opinion, I have absolutely no interest in anything you have to say in future, I already know it will be completely irrelevant to any rational conversation I might have with an intelligent person who is open to others peoples idea's & advice.


----------



## healeydave (Jun 4, 2003)

mikerr said:


> I had to download a 3rd party app (menumeters) to get a HDD light on my mac
> 
> PCs come with that as standard in hardware


What, that led that sits on the bottom of the drive that is normally hidden away deep inside a computers case.

Oh yes, every PC lover would need comfort of that led being extended to the front of the case so they can check if the PC is still operating/working. 

Tip: Tivo also runs on a robust operating system and I don't know anyone that feels the need to have the hard disk led brought to the front of a Tivo case


----------



## katman (Jun 4, 2002)

healeydave said:


> Tip: Tivo also runs on a robust operating system and I don't know anyone that feels the need to have the hard disk led brought to the front of a Tivo case


Would be very little point anyway because....

1. the hard drive is always running so it would just look like a power LED

2. its a Tivo.... so of course its working


----------



## verses (Nov 6, 2002)

frogster said:


> > The great thing is though, when I do want to make a DVD slideshow, I can very easily, unlike on a PC.
> 
> 
> Picasa does this for free. In fact Picasa does most if not all of what i-Photo does, for free.


Actually I was trying to do this with Picasa last night and couldn't. It would create a video file but it wouldn't create VOB files, and although I know how to convert avi/etc to VOB I was trying to do this for my Dad who wouldn't want to have to faff about with seperate programs each doing a different step of the job (I guess he'd also then have to use Nero to burn the final DVD). One application which makes a video from the photos, converts to DVD format and then burns it would be much more straight-forward.

Also, by default the video files it creates have a "panning effect" which I'd have liked to disable, but it didn't seem to be possible. If I've missed some features, please let me know, as this could be very useful, but as it stands I need to find an alternate method for my Dad's needs.

Cheers,

Ian


----------



## davisa (Feb 19, 2002)

frogster said:


> Think again. Not only do I not want an iPhone, I don't want, need or own a mobile phone at all.
> 
> Just like email, nearly all mobile phone use is pointless waste. Just look around you in any public place and you will see some moron talking or texting or videoing nonsense to another moron via a mobile phone. Few of them have ever had a single intelligent thing to say in their lives.


Look, I drive a TVR, I NEED a mobile with a quick-dial to the RAC with me at all times.


frogster said:


> "Yes dear. I'm in the supermarket by the baked beans." (He actually means that he is standing in the middle of the isle, effectively blocking the way for hundreds of other customers.) "There's a blue tin and a red tin. Which one do I get?"


You've obviously never met my wife. If I came back with the wrong tin I'd never hear the end of it. Again - I class that as essential use!


----------



## AMc (Mar 22, 2002)

verses - you can do that in Nero Vision Express which is part of the Nero Express cut down version. I would be very surprised if a full version of Nero didn't do the same in one of the many programs it installs.


----------



## yungee (Dec 29, 2002)

This thread takes the cake. A Mac Vs PC argument in a Tivo forum!

LOL!   :down:  

(Having trouble working out which is relevant!)


----------



## verses (Nov 6, 2002)

Thanks AMc, I'm not certain which version of Nero my dad has, I'll have to have a closer look when I next visit.

My version's quite old and gives a message telling me that it can't do it but that another version can.

Cheers,

Ian


----------



## britcub (Jan 19, 2004)

frogster said:


> Which again proves my point. You and most Mac users don't do anything complex with their machines.


You've completely lost it now... most home computer users (regardless of whether they own Macs or PCs) don't *want* to do anything complex. But if they do, Macs are more than capable, and usually change the task from a complex one to an easy one to accomplish.

But of course, if your mind is already completely closed to the idea that a Mac could be equivalent or better than a PC, you won't ever get it. I know this because for the last 15 years that was my mindset. It was only when I decided to try a Mac with an open mind that I found how great they are.



frogster said:


> Just like email, nearly all mobile phone use is pointless waste.


And therefore, internet forums (a minor extension to the concept of email) are also pointless?


----------



## Podgy Dad (Aug 18, 2002)

frogster said:


> Clearly this company doesn't actually do any complex tasks on their machines. Which rather demonstrates my point.
> 
> Picasa does this for free. In fact Picasa does most if not all of what i-Photo does, for free.


iPhoto comes free with every Mac. And as you have not spent any time using iPhoto, how do you know how it compares to iPhoto? Lets say for example I want to burn a DVD slideshow using pictures from my iPhoto library, all my iPhoto's and albums are available from within iDVD as well as all my music from iTunes. I'm not saying you can't do these things on a PC, its just more transparent and easier on a Mac.


----------



## Podgy Dad (Aug 18, 2002)

frogster said:


> Think again. Not only do I not want an iPhone, I don't want, need or own a mobile phone at all.
> 
> Just like email, nearly all mobile phone use is pointless waste. Just look around you in any public place and you will see some moron talking or texting or videoing nonsense to another moron via a mobile phone. Few of them have ever had a single intelligent thing to say in their lives.
> 
> "Yes dear. I'm in the supermarket by the baked beans." (He actually means that he is standing in the middle of the isle, effectively blocking the way for hundreds of other customers.) "There's a blue tin and a red tin. Which one do I get?"


What utter nonsense you talk. Yeah, conversing and interacting with friends and colleagues is completely pointless.


----------



## Podgy Dad (Aug 18, 2002)

frogster said:


> £349 yes *but* also buy your own keyboard, mouse, screen, VGA adaptor, speakers, software, memory upgrade from the paltry amount supplied .....


We are going around in circles now. Once you add those things its competitively prices against similarly spec'd PC products. We have already established there are no cheap Macs sporting old outdated technology.


----------



## Podgy Dad (Aug 18, 2002)

frogster said:


> Which again proves my point. You and most Mac users don't do anything complex with their machines.


What exactly are these complex tasks and who is using them? You would suggest that Apple bundle a piece of software to handle complex burning tasks that most people don't use? That would be a good use of an R&D budget wouldn't it. How about this, they spend their R&D budget designing software that most people will actually use. This is why software developers exist, to design applications for specific tasks, its absurd to expect the OS to do everything.


----------



## Podgy Dad (Aug 18, 2002)

frogster said:


> Clearly this company doesn't actually do any complex tasks on their machines. Which rather demonstrates my point.
> 
> Picasa does this for free. In fact Picasa does most if not all of what i-Photo does, for free.


You are an idiot, sorry, I don't call many people that but you really are. Most people don't perform complex tasks with their computers. What a stupid argument, because some complex tasks are done on PC they must be better? What about the human genome project, handled on Mac's, is that a complex enough task for you?


----------



## Podgy Dad (Aug 18, 2002)

frogster said:


> A niche product for a niche market.


Hang on, you're contradicting yourself. Complex tasks are niche tasks and yet you argue that Mac's are for amateurs (which is the majority).

You're right, most computer users are amateurs and should use a Mac not a PC. However, where we differ is that I believe Macs can also be used for complex tasks if needed to.

Its a bit old now but how about http://www.tcf.vt.edu/


----------



## britcub (Jan 19, 2004)

frogster said:


> Just like email, nearly all mobile phone use is pointless waste. Just look around you in any public place and you will see some moron talking or texting or videoing nonsense to another moron via a mobile phone. Few of them have ever had a single intelligent thing to say in their lives.


Just re-read this and my comments, as I thought I might have been a little harsh... As it happens, I haven't gone nearly far enough!

Are you really so arrogant as to believe that the 90%+ (at a conservative estimate) of the UK adult population who have a mobile phone are all idiots in comparison to yourself? You need to look up from your complex tasks a bit more often!


----------



## scgf (Oct 24, 2000)

PaulWilkinsUK said:


> To be honest, OS X comes with the 'Grab' utility that does the same thing (so no downloads of utilities required) I just didnt know it was already built into the operating system.


I don't like the multi-finger way of geting screen grab to work. I always use File/Grab from Apple's Preview utility. Didn't know about Grab! Thanks!

You can even do a screen grab from the command-line: 'screencapture -i ~/Desktop/filname.png'. This method enables you to get a screen capture from, say, a DVD you have playing - the other methods mentioned don't allow you to do this.

Are you aware of Apple's Services menu? In any app, go to the Apple menubar at the top of the screen and select the name of the app, then Services. These services are basically things you do with selected text and other items across all OS X apps. I installed a free services add-on from DevonThink called WordService (http://www.devonthink.com/download/index.html) once installed, you can do various things with text. My favourite use is when someone sends me an email which I want to use, but where the quoting is all over the place. Highlight the text, go to Mail/Services/Format/Remove Quotes. You can also reformat the text and do all manner of things with it.

Unfortunately there are a few apps which have been ported to OS X in a way which makes them not completely compatible - one popular example is FireFox - these apps don't work too well with Services.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

healeydave said:


> Oh my god, I did have a little respect for some of your arguments relating to the mac / pc even though some of them were poorly argued / researched but trying to tell us that all mobile phones are a point less waste of time has just made your credibility fly out the window.


No, I said *nearly* all mobile phone use is a waste. I stand by that 100%



> Don't even bother wasting your time replying, whilst I would never try to deny someones own opinion, I have absolutely no interest in anything you have to say in future,


Typical Mac user: Place fingers in ears. Make buzzing noise.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

verses said:


> Actually I was trying to do this with Picasa last night and couldn't. It would create a video file but it wouldn't create VOB files,


I'm pretty sure that it won't create VOB files, not that I've ever needed or wanted to do such a thing to make a slideshow. (To be perfectly honest I've never created a slideshow in my life and never expect to.)

However it should be possible to create a large CD slideshow and burn it to a DVD, and most DVD players should play the result.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

britcub said:


> You've completely lost it now... most home computer users (regardless of whether they own Macs or PCs) don't *want* to do anything complex. But if they do, Macs are more than capable, and usually change the task from a complex one to an easy one to accomplish.


I know that most PC users don't want to do anything worthwhile. I work with these people (and similar Mac users) every day of the year. But if one of them *did* get the urge to do something clever they would be better off trying to do it on a PC.



> And therefore, internet forums (a minor extension to the concept of email) are also pointless?


Indeed. 90% pointless waffle and chit-chat, 9% errors and just 1% useful information. But internet forums don't get in anyone's way. So no harm done.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

Podgy Dad said:


> iPhoto comes free with every Mac.


It does now. It didn't before.



> And as you have not spent any time using iPhoto, how do you know how it compares to iPhoto? Lets say for example I want to burn a DVD slideshow using pictures from my iPhoto library,


Sorry. As far as I'm concerned slideshows are a pointless frivolity. Just like joke emails.

I don't care how easy or hard it is to do them: they are still a pointless waste of time and effort.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

Podgy Dad said:


> What utter nonsense you talk. Yeah, conversing and interacting with friends and colleagues is completely pointless.


I use email (100% free of charge) for that.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

Podgy Dad said:


> Once you add those things its competitively prices against similarly spec'd PC products.


You are deluding yourself. 
Complete PC suitable for everyday use = £400. 
Incomplete part of the cheapest Mac, requiring at least £200 of extras = just under £400. 
You work it out.

Also you are apparently suffering from texter's finger. Or don't Macs have spell-checkers?


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

Podgy Dad said:


> You are an idiot, sorry, I don't call many people that but you really are. Most people don't perform complex tasks with their computers.


Which again brings me back to my initial comment about Macs.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

Podgy Dad said:


> Hang on, you're contradicting yourself. Complex tasks are niche tasks and yet you argue that Mac's are for amateurs (which is the majority).


Ah. So the BBC do their HD editing on a £379 MacMini, do they? Bringing their own keyboard and screen?
And they buy hundreds of thousands of them to do the task?

I don't think so.

HD editing: niche product, niche market. Also performed perfectly well on any recent Windows PC.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

britcub said:


> Are you really so arrogant as to believe that the 90%+ (at a conservative estimate) of the UK adult population who have a mobile phone are all idiots in comparison to yourself?


Not in comparison to anyone. Just idiots full stop. No need for comparisons.


----------



## Podgy Dad (Aug 18, 2002)

frogster said:


> I'm pretty sure that it won't create VOB files, not that I've ever needed or wanted to do such a thing to make a slideshow. (To be perfectly honest I've never created a slideshow in my life and never expect to.)
> 
> However it should be possible to create a large CD slideshow and burn it to a DVD, and most DVD players should play the result.


Of course you haven't, I didn't expect that you had for a moment


----------



## Podgy Dad (Aug 18, 2002)

frogster said:


> Ah. So the BBC do their HD editing on a £379 MacMini, do they? Bringing their own keyboard and screen?
> And they buy hundreds of thousands of them to do the task?
> 
> I don't think so.
> ...


Are you aware of XGrid? OS X comes with built in distributed computing tools, so yes you could build a render farm for Mini's with minimal cost. 3 Mini's gets you 6 cores for just over £1k, I'd say that was pretty good value.

You still haven't said what these complex tasks are that aren't niche.

You have lost the argument but can't bring yourself to admit it. What you have agreed with is that most computer users don't use their computers for complex tasks and that Mac's are perfect for them, if a little more expensive than similarly spec'd products. However, you have also agreed that Mac's are slightly over spec'd therefore capable of more complex tasks if required.


----------



## Podgy Dad (Aug 18, 2002)

frogster said:


> It does now. It didn't before.
> 
> Sorry. As far as I'm concerned slideshows are a pointless frivolity. Just like joke emails.
> 
> I don't care how easy or hard it is to do them: they are still a pointless waste of time and effort.


I'm sorry, making a yearly DVD of my kids for their grandparents is pointless? I think they would beg to differ. Its a completely easy and effective way of recording memories.


----------



## Podgy Dad (Aug 18, 2002)

frogster said:


> You are deluding yourself.
> Complete PC suitable for everyday use = £400.
> Incomplete part of the cheapest Mac, requiring at least £200 of extras = just under £400.
> You work it out.
> ...


I've done the comparison, did you miss it? I didn't say suitable, I said similarly spec'd.


----------



## britcub (Jan 19, 2004)

frogster said:


> I know that most PC users don't want to do anything worthwhile. I work with these people (and similar Mac users) every day of the year. But if one of them *did* get the urge to do something clever they would be better off trying to do it on a PC.


So that they could make it unnecessarily complex?


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

You have to laugh that frogster is a Visual Basic programmer, a language which most programmers regard as contemptuously as he does Macs - and ironically for almost exactly the same set of reasons!

Perhaps he's just over compensating!


----------



## PaulWilkinsUK (Mar 20, 2006)

Well a mac can run both OS X and Winderz Eggs Pea at the same time. So you can do all the good stuff in OS X and then switch to something really crap to remind you why you bought a mac in the first place.

And I suppose you can continue to use VB should one feel the need ...

(Having said that I was just installing Eggs Pea and what did I get..
"The Instruction at blah-blah-blah referenced memory at blar-de-blar, the memory could not be read. Click on OK to f*ck off and die."

What a crock of sh*t. Guess I'll have to call a geek to help out.


----------



## ColinYounger (Aug 9, 2006)

TCM2007 said:


> a Visual Basic programmer


I call oxymoron.


----------



## ColinYounger (Aug 9, 2006)

Tee hee!


----------



## B33K34 (Feb 9, 2003)

katman said:


> The iPod is an "almost perfect" piece of kit. My only gripe being that it still basically revolves around the concept of people listening to "an album by a person" by which I mean that an album consists of 12-20 tracks by the same person therefore the number of albums and the number of artists are a managable size for browsing.
> 
> As an ex DJ my preference is for "songs" and all my albums are compilatons where each track is by a different artist. Hence out of 135 albums there are 1152 artists singing 2067 songs which makes selecting individual tracks a bit difficult to say the least


This bugs my wife as well. I've a lot of compilations on my iPod so she'll be looking to play an album and find a single song. Also she doesn't know the names of a lot of albums so when browsing by Album is a bit lost. Not helped by my pod being a 1st gen device on which you can't assemble an on the fly playlist.

Some of this is quite easy to address - theres a 'compilation' checkbox in iTunes. There could be an option to ignore artists in compilations. Better would be to show artist name after the album name in 'albums' view.

The iPod interface is great though - i bought an iRiver 1gb flash player over a ipod nano because it took AAA batteries. The buttons are identical and effectively unlabelled (you can't see the moulded, black on black, labels when looking at the screen). You navigate by directory and filename rather than it reading the tags. It doesn't do on the fly playlists either (despite having masses of useless options and features that get in the way of doing what i do want to do - a-b repeat is only an accidental button press away). It lists the contents in the order they were added - copy the tracks into an album directory in the wrong order and it plays them in that order). I still like that it has a replaceable standard battery though.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

davisa said:


> Look, I drive a TVR, I NEED a mobile with a quick-dial to the RAC with me at all times.
> You've obviously never met my wife. If I came back with the wrong tin I'd never hear the end of it. Again - I class that as essential use!


I am prepared to accept, grudgingly, that for some people mobile deprivation would be tantamount to cruel and unusual punishment.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

Podgy Dad said:


> I'm sorry, making a yearly DVD of my kids for their grandparents is pointless?


It has a point for you alone. The other 6 billion humans on the planet would consider it pointless.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

Podgy Dad said:


> I've done the comparison, did you miss it? I didn't say suitable, I said similarly spec'd.


A PC of similar spec to a complete MacMini can be had for barely half the price.

I order them all the time for others.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

TCM2007 said:


> You have to laugh that frogster is a Visual Basic programmer, a language which most programmers regard as contemptuously as he does Macs - and ironically for almost exactly the same set of reasons!


There is nothing wrong with VB. It is perfectly suited for the type of apps I write.

Horses for courses.

I could write apps in machine code, but it would take me (or anyone) a month to do what I can do in a day in VB. And I doubt that anyone would pay me a month's salary to do it.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

PaulWilkinsUK said:


> Well a mac can run both OS X and Winderz Eggs Pea at the same time.


Not really. A Mac running XP isn"t a Mac: it's a PC with a fancy case.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

katman said:


> The iPod is an "almost perfect" piece of kit.


The "almost" being the screen that breaks on its own, the battery that has to be replaced by an Apple service centre at approximately the cost of a new iPod, the fact that an iPod is only compatible with iTunes, and that iTunes is deliberately incompatible with everything else?

The iPod is an almost perfect protectionist rip-off in true Apple style.


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

frogster said:


> There is nothing wrong with VB. It is perfectly suited for the type of apps I write.
> 
> Horses for courses.
> 
> I could write apps in machine code, but it would take me (or anyone) a month to do what I can do in a day in VB. And I doubt that anyone would pay me a month's salary to do it.


There is nothing wrong with the Mac. It is perfectly suited for the type of apps most people use

Horses for courses.

I could use Windows XP, but it would take me (or anyone) a month to do what I can do in a day on a Mac.


----------



## PaulWilkinsUK (Mar 20, 2006)

TCM2007 said:


> There is nothing wrong with the Mac. It is perfectly suited for the type of apps most people use
> 
> Horses for courses.
> 
> I could use Windows XP, but it would take me (or anyone) a month to do what I can do in a day on a Mac.


HEAR HEAR !!


----------



## davisa (Feb 19, 2002)

frogster said:


> The "almost" being the screen that breaks on its own, the battery that has to be replaced by an Apple service centre at approximately the cost of a new iPod, the fact that an iPod is only compatible with iTunes, and that iTunes is deliberately incompatible with everything else?
> 
> The iPod is an almost perfect protectionist rip-off in true Apple style.


Except that my generation 1 iPod is still going strong, including good battery life after 4+ years.

Also, the iPod can be used with much more than iTunes, although I cannot see why you'd want too - iTunes being the masterpiece it is.


----------



## Cainam (May 25, 2004)

And while were are completely off topic from a Tivo standpoint...!

I was considering getting a MacMini about 6 months or so ago, and I saw that while the rest of the Mac lineup had been upgraded to Core 2 Duo's, the MacMini was still on a Core Duo.

Not wanting to buy one only for the chip to be upgraded shortly after, I thought I would hold off for a bit in case it got upgraded.

But nothing yet! Anyone know anything about when/if the MacMini is going to be updated?

TIA


----------



## mikerr (Jun 2, 2005)

If you're brave you can upgrade it yourself - the chip is socketed - but the case is a bit fiddly to get apart due to it basically being a laptop without a screen.


----------



## PaulWilkinsUK (Mar 20, 2006)

Cainam said:


> ...I was considering getting a MacMini about 6 months or so ago, and I saw that while the rest of the Mac lineup had been upgraded to Core 2 Duo's, the MacMini was still on a Core Duo...


Might be a question of thermal dynamics? So little space inside those minis, perhaps the Core 2 Duos run a little hotter the their predecessors? Who knows?


----------



## Cainam (May 25, 2004)

Originally posted by mikerr:


> If you're brave you can upgrade it yourself - the chip is socketed - but the case is a bit fiddly to get apart due to it basically being a laptop without a screen.


 OK...but that would increase the cost of it by £150 (looking at overclocker.co.uk) plus invalidating the warranty...I think I will hang on for an official upgrade!


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

davisa said:


> Except that my generation 1 iPod is still going strong, including good battery life after 4+ years.


Strange then that so many people should have had expensive problems with their iPod batteries?



> Also, the iPod can be used with much more than iTunes, although I cannot see why you'd want too - iTunes being the masterpiece it is.


iTunes is one of the very worst pieces of protectionist rubbish that I have ever seen. Luckily the EU has Apple in their sights over this.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

TCM2007 said:


> There is nothing wrong with the Mac. It is perfectly suited for the type of apps most people use


I have agreed with this all along, though it is grossly overpriced and unsuitable for any serious use.



> I could use Windows XP, but it would take me (or anyone) a month to do what I can do in a day on a Mac.


This, of course, is nonsense.


----------



## britcub (Jan 19, 2004)

frogster said:


> iTunes is one of the very worst pieces of protectionist rubbish that I have ever seen. Luckily the EU has Apple in their sights over this.


You are clearly incapable of distinguishing iTunes the software from iTunes the website store.


----------



## PaulWilkinsUK (Mar 20, 2006)

frogster said:


> There is nothing wrong with VB. It is perfectly suited for the type of apps I write.
> 
> Horses for courses.
> 
> I could write apps in machine code, but it would take me (or anyone) a month to do what I can do in a day in VB. And I doubt that anyone would pay me a month's salary to do it.


So.. you could write apps for XP in machine code could you?? Do you mean entering the hexcode or using assembler? You can write rich-client apps with all the toolbars, all of the buttons etc in machine code? 
If you *can* churn out XP apps, just by using machine code (hex) then I bow down to you and worship the groud you work on. You are truely a god and a rival to the Great Gates himself. You are not paid nearly enough, let me fill in a DD and send money to your bank account.

I think you're spouting a load of bullsh*t.

I thought I'd sit back and see how amusing this thread was getting but when people start bullsh*tting about how *great* they are, then that really p*sses me off.


----------



## britcub (Jan 19, 2004)

PaulWilkinsUK said:


> I thought I'd sit back and see how amusing this thread was getting but when people start bullsh*tting about how *great* they are, then that really p*sses me off.


The only surprising thing about this thread is that Pete doesn't seem to have a view...

Has anyone ever seen Pete and Frogster in the same room?


----------



## davisa (Feb 19, 2002)

frogster said:


> Strange then that so many people should have had expensive problems with their iPod batteries?


Strange indeed, but I've never actually met anyone with a problem. I know several people with G1, G2 and iPod Mini's, all of which work well. I only know of one person who had a G3 which hard drive failed out of warranty, but that Apple swapped anyway.


frogster said:


> iTunes is one of the very worst pieces of protectionist rubbish that I have ever seen. Luckily the EU has Apple in their sights over this.


Eah? We talking about the same program? Plays MP2, MP3, WAV, AIFF, AAC... fine for me. Love the ease of use, stability and smart playlists with auto-iPod sync.

I'm _convinced_ Mac's are like TiVo (ooooooh, almost on thread there), you either 'get it', or you don't. The fact you can now run Windows too if you so choose (personally I don't, being a UNIX bod) is merely icing on the cake.

Love this thread though. Amazed it's been allowed to run for so long


----------



## PaulWilkinsUK (Mar 20, 2006)

davisa said:


> Love this thread though. Amazed it's been allowed to run for so long


Well the moderators know when something is right ....


----------



## Podgy Dad (Aug 18, 2002)

frogster said:


> Strange then that so many people should have had expensive problems with their iPod batteries?
> 
> Exactly how many people have had problems Frogster? You are short on facts big on hearsay.
> 
> iTunes is one of the very worst pieces of protectionist rubbish that I have ever seen. Luckily the EU has Apple in their sights over this.


You really do only give half the story don't you? Exactly how many Windows only music stores are there? How many non Apple music players? People have a choice and while I am anti DRM, that's hardly Apple's fault is it? Pricing and DRM are set by the labels, not Apple. The lock in to iTunes is not by design and wasn't Apple's choice, although the music companies have unwittingly helped Apple in this regard. Steve Jobs even blogged about the subject saying he would love to do away with DRM if only the labels would allow it.


----------



## Podgy Dad (Aug 18, 2002)

frogster said:


> It does now. It didn't before.
> 
> Sorry. As far as I'm concerned slideshows are a pointless frivolity. Just like joke emails.
> 
> I don't care how easy or hard it is to do them: they are still a pointless waste of time and effort.


iLife comes with every Mac and has done for as long as I can remember.

Just because you don't have a use for something doesn't make it pointless. You constantly display your arrogance by inferring that anything you don't have a use for is pointless.


----------



## Podgy Dad (Aug 18, 2002)

frogster said:


> You are deluding yourself.
> Complete PC suitable for everyday use = £400.
> Incomplete part of the cheapest Mac, requiring at least £200 of extras = just under £400.
> You work it out.
> ...


Please post specs, prices and links please. We are not talking about suitable, we are talking like for like comparison. I have alread said, Apple don't make a Mac that uses old technology to make a no frills Mac. I'm assuming this is because should the need the arise, they want every Mac to be able to perform 'complex' tasks. Also, show me a more suitable computer at a similar price to use as a media centre machine.


----------



## Podgy Dad (Aug 18, 2002)

frogster said:


> It has a point for you alone. The other 6 billion humans on the planet would consider it pointless.


Ah, the most arrogant comment yet, Frogster is able to speak on behalf of everyone on the planet. Your arguments are very lame and have no credibility.


----------



## Podgy Dad (Aug 18, 2002)

frogster said:


> The "almost" being the screen that breaks on its own, the battery that has to be replaced by an Apple service centre at approximately the cost of a new iPod, the fact that an iPod is only compatible with iTunes, and that iTunes is deliberately incompatible with everything else?
> 
> The iPod is an almost perfect protectionist rip-off in true Apple style.


A small percentage of screens cracked, less than 1%. Of course under the sales of goods act, a product has to last a reasonable amount of time, I would say 2 years is a reasonable amount of time for a portable music player. iTunes is deliberately incompatible because the record companies force DRM on those that sell digital music.


----------



## Podgy Dad (Aug 18, 2002)

Frogster has squarely lost this argument, everyone can see it apart from him. His tactic is to simply ignore the facts and continually spout his long held and ill founded prejudices.


----------



## B33K34 (Feb 9, 2003)

I'm waiting for the mac mini upgrade before buying - see http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/ where they seem to think it's well overdue. There are rumours that mac mini stocks are low at the moment which is, often, a sign that a new model is imminent.

Re cost, I can't work out where to get a small, good looking, windows PC for the same price as a mac mini which is the main reason i'm looking for one. A quick go at configuring a Shuttle XPC from www.ambros.co.uk and it looks like i'd be spending considerably more than a mac mini price (circa £600 for Core2 equipped with Vista). I'm just getting rid of an XPC which had various hardware problems (very fussy about memory - took 3 attempts to get it right despite it being specced by a system builder, very unreliable USB implementation) and was nowhere near a well built, small or quiet as a mac mini.

My 1G iPod battery life got poor but i did a replacement myself. Not trivial but equally it's possible to get someone else to do it for you at far less than the Apple price. I don't like the "non-replaceable" battery of the iPod but then i don't like the fact that the battery door falls off my iRiver every time i drop it and the battery door on my first Sony Walkman (c25 years ago, gulp) broke within the first year and was forevermore held on with gaffa tape.


----------



## Rob Nespor Bellis (Feb 17, 2001)

B33K34 said:


> Re cost, I can't work out where to get a small, good looking, windows PC for the same price as a mac mini which is the main reason i'm looking for one. A quick go at configuring a Shuttle XPC from www.ambros.co.uk and it looks like i'd be spending considerably more than a mac mini price (circa £600 for Core2 equipped with Vista).


Now that's just comparing like with like, we don't want to go ruining this thread with resaon do we? Nothing at all like comparing VB with a proper programming language 

Rgds,

R.


----------



## scgf (Oct 24, 2000)

Cainam said:


> I was considering getting a MacMini about 6 months or so ago, and I saw that while the rest of the Mac lineup had been upgraded to Core 2 Duo's, the MacMini was still on a Core Duo.
> 
> Not wanting to buy one only for the chip to be upgraded shortly after, I thought I would hold off for a bit in case it got upgraded.
> 
> But nothing yet! Anyone know anything about when/if the MacMini is going to be updated?


The Mac Mini has been dual core for a while now. have a look at http://www.apple.com/uk/macmini/


----------



## Podgy Dad (Aug 18, 2002)

scgf said:


> The Mac Mini has been dual core for a while now. have a look at http://www.apple.com/uk/macmini/


Yes but its not Core 2 Duo. Hopefully the next version will come with HD DVD/Blueray and Backrow. Having said that, the current processor can more than handle 1080p so it really doesn't need a speed boost.The Mac Mini is a superb media centre, with an ease of use WMCE can only dream about.

I have 2 Mac Minis, one for the kids and one as a media centre. They handle a myriad of functions from movie playback to home security.


----------



## scgf (Oct 24, 2000)

Oops! Sorry, a bit too hasty in replying there!

I have a dual core iMac and MacBook Pro and a Core 2 Duo at work. If I didn't know, there's no way I could tell the difference. In fact we also have a G4 1GHz eMac and there's not a huge difference with that either. At the end of the day it depends what you use them for. As always with Macs, quite old, lowly machines still perform perfectly acceptably - unlike older Windows machines which seem to slow to a crawl. If the eMac was a Windows box it would have been scrapped by now . . .


----------



## arturus (Feb 11, 2002)

PaulWilkinsUK said:


> Don't knock it 'til ya try it...
> 
> I have a 2.66Ghz MacPro and it processes all of my TiVo files quite nicely, in good time.


Just wondering what you used to convert the Tivo video - never managed to get it quite right at my end - always got sound sync problems!


----------



## PaulWilkinsUK (Mar 20, 2006)

arturus said:


> Just wondering what you used to convert the Tivo video - never managed to get it quite right at my end - always got sound sync problems!


<Shhhhh!> _TiVoTool 0.5.7_ </Shhhh>  
PM me for more details...


----------



## Podgy Dad (Aug 18, 2002)

Apple quarterly results out today, Mac sales up 36%! Looks like quite a lot of people disagree with Frogster  Of course he will dismiss all these people as shallow idiots ;-)

http://www.macworld.com/news/2007/04/25/profit/index.php?lsrc=mwrss


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

britcub said:


> You are clearly incapable of distinguishing iTunes the software from iTunes the website store.


There is no real difference. You can't buy from the website without the software and you can't buy with the software except from the website. And an iPod isn't much use without the iTunes software either.

You can't get much more protectionist than that.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

Podgy Dad said:


> iLife comes with every Mac and has done for as long as I can remember.


Your memory is limited to 4 years then.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

PaulWilkinsUK said:


> So.. you could write apps for XP in machine code could you?? Do you mean entering the hexcode or using assembler? You can write rich-client apps with all the toolbars, all of the buttons etc in machine code?
> If you *can* churn out XP apps, just by using machine code (hex) then I bow down to you and worship the groud you work on. You are truely a god and a rival to the Great Gates himself. You are not paid nearly enough, let me fill in a DD and send money to your bank account.
> 
> I think you're spouting a load of bullsh*t.
> ...


You must be kidding. Or are you just insane?


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

Podgy Dad said:


> Ah, the most arrogant comment yet, Frogster is able to speak on behalf of everyone on the planet.


Not at all. You assume that everyone on the planet is interested in your slide shows. I am merely pointing out how unlikely that is.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

Podgy Dad said:


> You really do only give half the story don't you? Exactly how many Windows only music stores are there? How many non Apple music players? People have a choice and while I am anti DRM, that's hardly Apple's fault is it? Pricing and DRM are set by the labels, not Apple.


Actually it is entirely Apple's fault. They set the iTunes prices, not the labels. They also choose to charge UK users more than those who live on the Continent.

Also if you buy any non-Apple MP3 player it will work on any Windows machine. You are not restricted to using one sort of player or one sort of software.


----------



## davisa (Feb 19, 2002)

frogster said:


> There is no real difference. You can't buy from the website without the software and you can't buy with the software except from the website. And an iPod isn't much use without the iTunes software either.
> 
> You can't get much more protectionist than that.


Err, afraid thats just not correct. As others have said, the iPod plays MP3, AAC, Protected AAC, Lossless, WAV, AIFF (and possibly others I can't remember off-hand) - only one of which is available from the iTunes Store. The iPod is very useable without the store - lets just have a quick peek at my library....3431 songs, of which 78 come from the iTunes Store.


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

frogster said:


> There is no real difference. You can't buy from the website without the software and you can't buy with the software except from the website. And an iPod isn't much use without the iTunes software either.


You can use iTunes without ever visiting the iTunes Music Store. It rips CDs and manages MP3s just fine.

You can use other software with an iPod, but it's unclear why you'd want to.


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

frogster said:


> Your memory is limited to 4 years then.


Longer than the average life of a home computer, so virtually all in-use Macs have iLife.


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

frogster said:


> Also if you buy any non-Apple MP3 player it will work on any Windows machine. You are not restricted to using one sort of player or one sort of software.


Not so. Windows-based music players are just as linked to particular stores depending on the DRM scheme they support. Sony players require you to use their software.

In fact the new Microsoft Zune won't work with stores which sell music in the Microsoft "standard" Plays For Sure scheme! At least Apple usually manages to be compatible with Apple products!


----------



## Podgy Dad (Aug 18, 2002)

frogster said:


> Your memory is limited to 4 years then.


Wrong Frogster.


----------



## Podgy Dad (Aug 18, 2002)

frogster said:


> Actually it is entirely Apple's fault. They set the iTunes prices, not the labels. They also choose to charge UK users more than those who live on the Continent.
> 
> Also if you buy any non-Apple MP3 player it will work on any Windows machine. You are not restricted to using one sort of player or one sort of software.


Actually the labels wanted Apple to sell them at a higher price. Apple make very little money on the music it sells. Guess what, my girlfriend just plugged her daughters £13 MP3 player from Argos in to her Mac and transfered the songs from iTunes to it, it worked just fine. So Frogster, once again you show how little you know.


----------



## Podgy Dad (Aug 18, 2002)

Frogster can't talk about Apple and be objective at the same time. He's the kind of guy who thinks he knows everything and will stick to his ill founded views regardless of any evidence to the contrary. His comments on iPod/iTunes further demonstrate how little he actually does know. He would rather buy a Zune than an iPod even though it has more restrictions on the files it will play, simply because he doesn't like Apple or their products.


----------



## PaulWilkinsUK (Mar 20, 2006)

frogster said:


> You must be kidding. Or are you just insane?


Well... you said you could write apps in machine code but it would take you a little bit longer... a touch of bravado perhaps?


----------



## britcub (Jan 19, 2004)

Perhaps frogster could tell us exactly which piece of software is supposedly better than iTunes for music management? Even if I wasn't using an iPod, I'd still be using iTunes.

FWIW I have exactly 2 tracks from the iTunes store, and I've only got those because they were free with a soft drink!


----------



## mikerr (Jun 2, 2005)

The point about ipod/itunes is that you can't move your mp3 collection wholesale by a copy and paste from a drive letter like just about every other mp3 player.

Some call that lock-in, others "integration".

I can program in x86 asm - I even did a 64k intro once, but there's no need nowadays, even for device drivers.

VB is fine for pumping out a quick prototype app in a day or week, work often does that - then downcodes to C/C++ for production.


----------



## ColinYounger (Aug 9, 2006)

Frogster,

The thread here is getting a little long for me to go back and check all your replies, but have you actually tried using a Mac? Just wondering as the arguments get increasingly petty and personal.

DISCLAIMER: I haven't. But my cousin-in-law has a mac notebook which I found very interesting.

All the evangelism here makes me intrigued to try and play with one just to see. It's that same kind curiosity that lead me to here and TiVo's.


----------



## scgf (Oct 24, 2000)

If you do, give it time - using a Mac is different, obviously, than using a PC.

This thread has shown that Macs can do things that Windows users think they can't simply because they don't know how. A good example frogster gave was that he likes the Windows Start menu and Macs don't do that. By simply dragging the Applications folder to the Dock, you get a Windows-style menu when you right click on the docked icon. you can do this with any folder, or even create a folder somewhere with links (shortcuts) to all sorts of things, and drag that to the dock. Mac OS X is very configurable.

Good news, folks - my school is moving into a brand new building in August and as ICT Coordinator I am on the comittee which has a big budget to provide the ICT infrastructure. I have argued for Apple Macs for the music department, but have had the rest of the comittee against me - they are heavily into Microsoft. On Friday I won the argument and next term the music department will have 20 iMacs with GarageBand. Wish I could have Macs all round, but Dell won the contract to supply hardware. They're Ok about supplying the 20 iMacs for music, but the whole school would be a different matter!


----------



## mikerr (Jun 2, 2005)

Having a whole school on Macs would disadvantage them for the real world IMO 

Like it or lump it, the world runs windows, swimming against the tide is not always a good thing.


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

Using real world operating systems in schools is overrated IMHO.

Someone leaving school at 18 this year would have been using Windows 3.1 in primary school; not sure how much use that would have been!

The stuff they need to know now is how to use the internet, and that's platform independent.


----------



## mikerr (Jun 2, 2005)

TCM2007 said:


> Someone leaving school at 18 this year would have been using Windows 3.1 in primary school;


That's a bizarre comment ?
They would be able to leave at 16/18 this year, and walk into a job using the same software as they use at school now.



> The stuff they need to know now is how to use the internet, and that's platform independent.


Many jobs can (and should) be done without internet access.

Giving all employees inet access accross the board often makes them spend all day on forums or emailing jokes back and forth


----------



## scgf (Oct 24, 2000)

mikerr said:


> Having a whole school on Macs would disadvantage them for the real world IMO


That depends on what you are teaching them. What a school should be doing is teaching concepts and transferrable skills, not how to use a particular piece of software.

We deliberately expose the kids to all sorts of apps - I choose to use OpenOffice, for example, for most of their word processing, spreadsheet and presentation work, while still letting them use MS Office on occasions. The intro lesson is year 7 goes along the lines of:

"OK, what does a word processor do. You've all used one at primary school . . . . All WPs do essentially the same thing, but the menus, icons etc. might be in different places and there might be a different way than you're used to to achieve something . . . . Go explore and report back."

I would have shown them a couple of examples on the interactive white board.

The kids handle it beautifully. They excitedly explore and come back with things that, on occasion, I wasn't aware of.

I watched one 12 year old pupil writing an evaluation on our Mac about some spreadsheet work he had been doing. The topic had a space theme. I was watching from a distance and saw him open up Photo Booth, select a distortion filter, make himself look like an alien with one eye, take the photo and drag it into his document. An impressive workflow. He has a PC at home, and has used Macs hardly at all.

Help them develop the right attitudes and this will help them enormously in 10 years time when they are in a workplace using very different applications and operating systems.

This is just one example. Go beyond the computer - it is only a tool, after all.

Staff, on the other hand have enormous issues when an icon, for example, isn't where it used to be! We have support staff helping less able pupils and the pupils show them what to do!


----------



## britcub (Jan 19, 2004)

All GCSE and A-level IT and Computing examinations are platform independent. As are the Year 9 SATs. It's a government requirement.

And frankly, in the "real world", the sorts of tasks being done on computers are in the main simple tasks where if you've used one word processor/spreadsheet, you've used them all.


----------



## britcub (Jan 19, 2004)

mikerr said:


> The point about ipod/itunes is that you can't move your mp3 collection wholesale by a copy and paste the a drive letter like just about every other mp3 player.
> 
> Some call that lock-in, others "integration".


OK, I agree. But I think this disadvantage is far outweighed by the advantages of iTunes.

BTW you can move your mp3 collection off your ipod without a great deal of difficulty.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

davisa said:


> Err, afraid thats just not correct. As others have said, the iPod plays MP3, AAC, Protected AAC, Lossless, WAV, AIFF (and possibly others I can't remember off-hand) - only one of which is available from the iTunes Store. The iPod is very useable without the store - lets just have a quick peek at my library....3431 songs, of which 78 come from the iTunes Store.


You didn't read what I wrote. Try again.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

TCM2007 said:


> You can use iTunes without ever visiting the iTunes Music Store.


I didn't say that you couldn't. Read what I wrote again.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

TCM2007 said:


> Longer than the average life of a home computer, so virtually all in-use Macs have iLife.


Of the 40 or 50 Mac users that I know, well under half of them have machines with iLife. The others are all using older machines (ie 4 years or more) which certainly do not have it. There is a whole load of other software they didn't come with either.

My own PC is 4 years old too, and I am in no hurry to replace it.


----------



## davisa (Feb 19, 2002)

frogster said:


> You didn't read what I wrote. Try again.


Tried again. Still don't see what you're getting at. Shall I go to the bottom of the class?


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

britcub said:


> Perhaps frogster could tell us exactly which piece of software is supposedly better than iTunes for music management? Even if I wasn't using an iPod, I'd still be using iTunes.


Windows Media Player 10 or 11, of course.

Will work with just about any USB MP3 player and doesn't care at all how many machines you want to move your own songs to and from.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

PaulWilkinsUK said:


> Well... you said you could write apps in machine code but it would take you a little bit longer... a touch of bravado perhaps?


No. All this is possible and it's just a matter of whether the time and effort are worth the end result. As I'm not mad I wouldn't choose to do it that way if I had an alternative.

I can (and do) write in C++ too when the need arises, but VB lets me do exactly what I and my customers need cheaply and effectively so obviously I stick with that.


----------



## britcub (Jan 19, 2004)

frogster said:


> Windows Media Player 10 or 11, of course.


Oh my god, I can't stop laughing! WMP better than iTunes! Frogster, I must admit, you're good as a wind-up merchant!


----------



## Anndra (Oct 12, 2004)

frogster said:


> ...and you can't buy with the software except from the website. And an iPod isn't much use without the iTunes software either.


iTunes software is free. You can't buy it at all.


----------



## B33K34 (Feb 9, 2003)

frogster said:


> Windows Media Player 10 or 11, of course.
> 
> Will work with just about any USB MP3 player and doesn't care at all how many machines you want to move your own songs to and from.


WMP does have one very good feature that iTunes lacks - the concept of a 'now playing' playlist and a way of getting back to it if you, or someone else, accidentally double clicks on something else. In iTunes I tend to click on a song to play it then think about what i want next then have to create a playlist and start building it.

My iRiver T30 has some kind of iTunes style integration with WMP that is really horrid to use, far less well implemented than ipod-itunes. I think i had to install some old or foreign firmware to it to get to appear as a drive but now that i have done i usually drag tunes from iTunes onto it so presumably it might work on a mac as well.


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

frogster said:


> Windows Media Player 10 or 11, of course.
> 
> Will work with just about any USB MP3 player and doesn't care at all how many machines you want to move your own songs to and from.


Of course it cares, if those songs are DRM protected. If they are MP3s it doesn't, but neither does iTunes.

And in use WMP is horrible compared to iTunes.


----------



## Podgy Dad (Aug 18, 2002)

frogster said:


> Not at all. You assume that everyone on the planet is interested in your slide shows. I am merely pointing out how unlikely that is.


They may not be interested in my slideshows, they may very well be interested in their own.


----------



## Podgy Dad (Aug 18, 2002)

frogster said:


> Of the 40 or 50 Mac users that I know, well under half of them have machines with iLife. The others are all using older machines (ie 4 years or more) which certainly do not have it. There is a whole load of other software they didn't come with either.
> 
> My own PC is 4 years old too, and I am in no hurry to replace it.


Frogster, all Mac's come with iLife and always have done since iLife was available. As for some of your Mac users not having it on, I have no idea why that is but they certainly shipped with it.


----------



## Podgy Dad (Aug 18, 2002)

frogster said:


> There is no real difference. You can't buy from the website without the software and you can't buy with the software except from the website. And an iPod isn't much use without the iTunes software either.
> 
> You can't get much more protectionist than that.


Its not like people don't have a choice. The market is flooded with MP3 players, the iPod is vastly outnumbered. People choose the iPod and iTunes because they are the best products on the market. If people don't like being locked in to iTunes/iPod they can always go and buy x brand MP3 player and use WMP.


----------



## davisa (Feb 19, 2002)

Anndra said:


> iTunes software is free. You can't buy it at all.


Absolutely nothing to do with the thread  , but hello from a TiVo user who lives not far from you, in Ruislip


----------



## healeydave (Jun 4, 2003)

97% of this thread has been nothing to do with it but its been such good fun, I'm tempted to go and find some other forums and plant a Mac vs PC seed


----------



## B33K34 (Feb 9, 2003)

I was just checking in this morning and realised i was rather proud of this thread. 

I can't actually remember anymore whether people said EyeTV was any good or not. (the lack of season passes is the biggest issue. suspect you have to set recordings via an epg rather than a text search as well - Nebula on the PC is getting more and more tivo-like now and it's good).

At the end of it however, as a committed PC owner (who did buy an early iMac and sold it within a month when i realise how many compatibility issues there were back then), this thread has confirmed my decision to try again - i'll be getting a mac mini as soon as they get a spec bump. I might not wait for Leopard on the basis that the current OS is stable and the new one is likely to have some early issues - waiting 6 months might be a good idea.


----------



## verses (Nov 6, 2002)

B33K34 said:


> this thread has confirmed my decision to try again - i'll be getting a mac mini as soon as they get a spec bump.


I've been thinking the same; even if you do decide that you're still not keen on the MacOS or it's compatibility, you can install/dual-boot it with XP as you'd be hard pushed to find a PC as small and quiet for the money  That's my plan anyway 

Cheers,

Ian


----------



## healeydave (Jun 4, 2003)

I think your right, if they're on the verge of releasing a higher spec piece of kit, wait for that but not the O/S unless that also just happens to be imminent at the time.
I heard they are holding off Leopard because of iPhone and thats supposed to be June in the US, so if you wait till the 4th Qtr 2007, you might be close enough to wait for both.

I heard of people holding off on a Macbook until Leopard but that was before it was delayed for the iPhone, so I wouldn't have thought they were still holding out now.


----------



## PaulWilkinsUK (Mar 20, 2006)

Don't worry chaps...
In my experience with Apple OS releases I've had no issues whatsoever. 10.3 to 10.4 was a breeze, I suspect 10.4 to 10.5 will be just as easy. See thats the nice thing about Apple all round, its polished, professional and well tested, even the packaging the stuff comes in has a feel of quality about it. 

I am now officially an IT Snob and I dont give a toss who says otherwise!!


----------



## Anndra (Oct 12, 2004)

PaulWilkinsUK said:


> Don't worry chaps...
> In my experience with Apple OS releases I've had no issues whatsoever. 10.3 to 10.4 was a breeze, I suspect 10.4 to 10.5 will be just as easy.


True, but you still have to pay more money, rather than getting it included with the computer!

And make sure you pay for one of the really expensive versions of 10.5, and not the 10.5 Home Lite Edition, 'cos... oh no hang on, that's a Windows problem.


----------



## Podgy Dad (Aug 18, 2002)

B33K34 said:


> I was just checking in this morning and realised i was rather proud of this thread.
> 
> I can't actually remember anymore whether people said EyeTV was any good or not. (the lack of season passes is the biggest issue. suspect you have to set recordings via an epg rather than a text search as well - Nebula on the PC is getting more and more tivo-like now and it's good).
> 
> At the end of it however, as a committed PC owner (who did buy an early iMac and sold it within a month when i realise how many compatibility issues there were back then), this thread has confirmed my decision to try again - i'll be getting a mac mini as soon as they get a spec bump. I might not wait for Leopard on the basis that the current OS is stable and the new one is likely to have some early issues - waiting 6 months might be a good idea.


Just out of interest, what compatability problems did you encounter on your old iMac?


----------



## B33K34 (Feb 9, 2003)

Podgy Dad said:


> Just out of interest, what compatability problems did you encounter on your old iMac?


This was probably 7 or 8 years ago pre-broadband with a 2nd gen iMac (coloured case CRT ). From memory:
- it was incompatible with masses of websites (including my bank). Supposedly not really an issue these days 
- was impossible to sync with my Palm. I shelled out for Palm's serial to usb converter but gave up trying to get it to work. Lots of sync solutions now seem available and Palm killed the quality of their sync with the PC (i've currently a windows smartphone as a pda that syncs perfectly with everything except notes but is completely unusable as a handheld - i'd love to have my old Tungsten T back)
- I was rather expecting the suite of software it arrived with to be able to open a Word document (this was before open source 'office' suites) so I was going to have to spend more cash to get software that could. 
- there was no way of using it with a GPS (i use them mountain biking)

My understanding is that nearly all of those have been dealt with, plus i'll still have a PC in the house for those that haven't (at the time the mac was the only computer), and can run XP on dual boot* anyway.

*Does this work for everything? Will my ALL software run on a dual boot mac as if it was a pc or are there still driver issues for stranger bits of hardware and problems with more unusual software?


----------



## mikerr (Jun 2, 2005)

Yes, dual boot XP is exactly the same speed and compatibility as a PC - its the same intel hardware after all.

I know its heresy, but I'm still running XP 90% of the time on my mac mini - the mini is good as a small silent PC in its own right, regardless of OS.


----------



## Anndra (Oct 12, 2004)

B33K34 said:


> it was incompatible with masses of websites (including my bank). Supposedly not really an issue these days


I've never really had a problem, except for some banks who restrict which browser you can use for security (  ) reasons. Spoofing the client usually works, just avoid banks like NatWest (whom I work for!) There are a whole bunch of browsers on the Mac, normally split on the rendering engines they use. Safari-type KHTML and Firefox-Mozilla are the most popular.



B33K34 said:


> was impossible to sync with my Palm.


After resisting for years, I shelled out for MarkSpace's Missing Sync for Palm. Although I hate spending the extra money for something that should be included in the box, so far it has been excellent.



B33K34 said:


> I was rather expecting the suite of software it arrived with to be able to open a Word document (this was before open source 'office' suites) so I was going to have to spend more cash to get software that could.


TextEdit comes with Mac OS X and will open most of the content and most of the formatting. That ability is part of the OS, so Pages and a lot of other Mac word processors have the same ability. The Open Source ones, as you state, are also available (Sun is now helping with OpenOffice for the Mac). But I was forced to go for ultimate compatability and buy Office itself. I went through my company and the Microsoft Home User Program, Office cost me £17. There is also the Student and Teacher edition for approx £100, or just Word for about the same.

Do both Windows XP and Vista come with this ability? I heard XP could access Word docs read-only, but Vista couldn't? Is that right?



B33K34 said:


> there was no way of using it with a GPS (i use them mountain biking)


I plugged my Garmin in through a USB/Serial converter and connected it to Route 66, but watching the train I was on move on the map is the limit of what I have acheived.


----------

