Microsoft v/s Apple

[ganeshran]

Ganesh' date=' I don't see how you are making this a Linux versus Mac OS argument? You do know that Mac OS is Unix underneath the graphical interface, right? In fact, you can directly work on a Unix shell on a Mac machine if you want.[/quote'] Outy, the discussion started with the user experience of a Mac owner vs a PC owner. Since stability and security were described as something a Mac user experiences over PC, I countered that this is not the case. People who buy Macs dont pay for the additional security and stability. Is Darwin much more stable and secure than Windows XP? Yes it is. Is it more stable than Win7 - yes, but slightly. Is Darwin more stable and secure than Linux - No its not. The difference is less but it is there nonetheless. My point is that the differentiating factor between a Mac and PC is the slightly better usability and the better build quality of the machine - something that is a given when you pay the massive cost difference.

[The Outsider]

^ From a basic OS viewpoint there is no difference between Linux and Mac OS unless you consider Linux and UNIX to be different.

[Crookbond]

Lol at the arguments by Mac fans. The fact is even you own Mac, you still need to use PCs if you really want to use the power of computers fully. Windows still is very irreplaceable and MACs can certainly be replaced easily. Afterall, I can get 2 better PCs (more functions as well) at the same cost as a MAC.

Absolutely - no one can replace the powerful virus ecosystem on a Windows machine. :giggle:

[Crookbond]

Ganesh' date=' I don't see how you are making this a Linux versus Mac OS argument? You do know that Mac OS is Unix underneath the graphical interface, right? In fact, you can directly work on a Unix shell on a Mac machine if you want.[/quote'] THIS - I have refrained from saying these words throughout the thread and wanted to see the Najafgarh arguments (for the sake of it) people come up with. More control and other non-sense. I don't just understand where is the NO CONTROL over a Mac. I have full control on my Mac - I can install Windows as well as Linux (but only a fool would do so for reasons you have pointed out).

[ganeshran]

^Ganesh why u have to ue Linux when MS is so good :P

Its just a more practical operating system and far more suitable for my daily usage. The way Linux installs and manages its software and updates, its very difficult to adapt to another OS after that. But giving up Windows is simply not an option. My entire work happens on Windows - the IDE, the databases and the web server. Some of my favorite games are on Windows too. I need both.

[Crookbond]

^ From a basic OS viewpoint there is no difference between Linux and Mac OS unless you consider Linux and UNIX to be different.

Outy - Do you think the Trackpad is a good enough differentiating factor too?

[ganeshran]

^ From a basic OS viewpoint there is no difference between Linux and Mac OS unless you consider Linux and UNIX to be different.

There is a difference. Mac viruses dont impact Linux. Linux kernel patches are not applicable to Darwin. Darwin is based on BSD, while Linux is not AFAIK. They belong to the same NIX family but the update path and codebase is different. The speed with which Linux patches vulnerabilities cannot be matched by Mac or Windows for that matter.

[The Outsider]

BTW, the software issue was a problem around 5-8 years back or something but over the last few years I can't think of any occasion where I absolutely needed to do something and could not find a software for the application for a Mac. And some of the software for Mac is absolutely stunning. For example, Aperture - this thing is 10 times better than Photo Shop. Or Final Cut Pro - you can do pretty much anything on a video using it. Office has a Mac version if you really want to use your Word and Power Point. You can program in pretty much any language you want. Not sure what software limitations of Mac are being referred to besides games, which I don't play anyways.

[Crookbond]

why u are running behind patent related issues...MS earns more from Android than it earns from WP7/7.5/8 :giggle:

Did anyone mention MS and "free competition" here? Europe's general court turns down bid from Microsoft to dismiss Ž£721m fine levied in 2008, but software giant wins Ž£32m discount In all, with two previous fines, the case has cost Microsoft a total of ?1.64bn. http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/jun/27/microsoft-loses-eu-antitrust-fine-appeal

[Crookbond]

BTW, the software issue was a problem around 5-8 years back or something but over the last few years I can't think of any occasion where I absolutely needed to do something and could not find a software for the application for a Mac. And some of the software for Mac is absolutely stunning. For example, Aperture - this thing is 10 times better than Photo Shop. Or Final Cut Pro - you can do pretty much anything on a video using it. Office has a Mac version if you really want to use your Word and Power Point. You can program in pretty much any language you want. Not sure what software limitations of Mac are being referred to besides games, which I don't play anyways.

There's an interesting story on Final Cut Pro. Steve Jobs - I guess around 1999/2000 - asked Adobe to make a software (I guess it was Adobe Premiere) for the Mac and Adobe refused. Steve was nonplussed about it and decided to create Apple's own version. The rest they say is history. Final Cut Pro is like a defacto standard for movie editing now. Movies like 300, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button and The Social Network were edited using Final Cut Pro (some of them have been awarded best films for editing too). As for your case about Powerpoint, personally I have found out Keynote to be much much better than any software out there. It's cheaper too. I shared my experience of using Keynote to delivering presentations earlier.

[The Outsider]

There is a difference. Mac viruses dont impact Linux. Linux kernel patches are not applicable to Darwin. Darwin is based on BSD, while Linux is not AFAIK. They belong to the same NIX family but the update path and codebase is different. The speed with which Linux patches vulnerabilities cannot be matched by Mac or Windows for that matter.

Linux patches would obviously be available quicker because it is open source and there is no red tape which comes along with being part of a large organization - my comment was with regards to the basic OS design of Mac OS and Linux. Both are UNIX based and very similar. I don't even know where to start if you are bringing Windows in a discussion on security - the clowns release Service Packs the size of entire operating systems with fanfare as if it's something to be proud of. Having said that my experience of Windows 7 has been pretty good - with a basic anti virus - I've not experienced any problems with it. But Vista was just 4-5 years back and was a complete piece of crap, so Microsoft will need to come up with at least a couple of OS releases which can match up to the stability of Windows 7 before it can be considered to be a provider of reasonably stable and secure operating systems.

[Crookbond]

I hope everyone is aware of FSF's statement yesterday on Secure Boot. http://www.fsf.org/campaigns/secure-boot-vs-restricted-boot/whitepaper-web

[Crookbond]

Stand up for your freedom to install free software http://www.fsf.org/campaigns/secure-boot-vs-restricted-boot/statement

This could be a feature deserving of the name, as long as the user is able to authorize the programs she wants to use, so she can run free software written and modified by herself or people she trusts. However, we are concerned that Microsoft and hardware manufacturers will implement these boot restrictions in a way that will prevent users from booting anything other than Windows. In this case, we are better off calling the technology Restricted Boot, since such a requirement would be a disastrous restriction on computer users and not a security feature at all.

So much for "full control" on a Windows machine.

[bulbul]

Its just a more practical operating system and far more suitable for my daily usage. The way Linux installs and manages its software and updates, its very difficult to adapt to another OS after that. But giving up Windows is simply not an option. My entire work happens on Windows - the IDE, the databases and the web server. Some of my favorite games are on Windows too. I need both.

so if its not for Work u dont need much of MS for u r personal life

[Lurker]

Lurker - I hope you know that Apple hardly makes enterprise products. Steve Jobs (I think he said this at All Things D) hates the enterprise market and has never seriously even tried.

With all due respect to Steve Jobs, his denouncing of Enterprise market was always to come across as a rebel and bolster his image amongst the 2% who were buying their products. But that was clearly in the past. Whether Apple likes this today, or not, mobile/tablets have become integral part if Enterprise deployments. And clearly apple is the leader in this whole domain. As an end user nobody wants to carry multiple devices. Would you carry an iPhone for personal use, Blackberry for official? And if you had to pick one, and you pick iPhone, doesnt that confirm Apple as an Enterprise player already?

As for your Flash comment - Read Jobs letter on why Apple didn't support flash on mobile devices. It was definitely more than just ego clash. I hope you're aware that Adobe has vindicated Jobs by discontinuing Flash for mobile. Even Android one of the mobile OS market leader, has discontinued flash in it's 4.1 version. If it is just ego, Adobe should go ahead an support flash. There are various problems with flash on a computer and these magnify on a mobile device.

Yes, the technical issue are clearly a reason. But in this day and age of 64 bit OS it is easy to fix stuff like that, if there was genuine intent.

[akshayxyz]

Gates was a busenessman while Job's a visionary.. and its not like first round won by MS..first round won by Apple they introduced a succesful computer and made millions way before MS started domination... one of the factors allowed MS to surge ahead and dominate is Jobs stubborness of not licencing software while MS doesnt have interest in building their own Computers but happy to get money from software licences

Both were successful businessmen and both were visionary, and both were able to materialize their visions during different time frames.

I am just stopping short of abuse here. Don't get personal, just a fore warning. It doesn't need to read a 'memoir' of a PhD to understand that Microsoft has done more to academic/enterprise research than Apple - no doubt. It clearly shows that you aren't in the research business. I am not even a MS basher as you put it. I just call the shots as it is - I haven't even made one ill comment against Gates or Windows. However, can you see the other side? MS and Linux fan boys like you make idiotic comments about Apple based on a one-person book! I am huge admirer of Bill Gates. But, people like you will never understand that because you have to pick a side. In your books, one can't be a great admirer of Bill Gates and Steve Jobs. Are you even aware that in terms of pure humanity Jobs stands no where to Bill Gates? Do you even know that Bill Gates greatest impact on this world or whatever you call it is not Windows or the PC revolution? Obviously you won't because before you shoot before you think. People like you have all your facts muddled up and then spew venom in different directions.

:hysterical::hysterical::hysterical: at the bold and the rest of mind-reading attempt. Looks like few 'mildly venomous' attacks have disturbed your mental balance. And you are desperate to prove your 'identity'. :haha: Show me a place where I belittled Jobs. Do a quick search around, and you would know I have said great things about him too, and must have bashed Gates too - depending on the context. Since you have trouble understanding, and are judgmental too quickly - once again here is what I just said, Gates and Jobs - both dominated (in terms of business success) each other during different time frames. Both had visions, and executed their visions - successfully (to put it modestly).

[EnterTheVoid]

Dumdum, a history lesson for you kiddo: Jobs almost went broke trying to copy the GUI's Xerox showed him; The 'Lisa' computer cost astronomically high to manufacture and ultimately, he was booted off that project and joined the MacIntosh project instead.

[akshayxyz]

Sorry, my analogy stands true. You can find easy, cheap replacements for maruti parts anywhere in India. You can't change a beemers parts just like that.

Why "Maruti vs Beemer" is a bad analogy - as compared with - "Linux vs Mac". The usability, use-cases differences between Maruti and Beemer are far too wider than that is between Linux and Mac. few e.g. #1Try driving Maruti beyond 90-100 kmph... Whereas Linux can do everything Mac can promise - in terms of computational performance and stability. #2. Hardware components - there is hardly any difference between Linux vs Mac based laptops. 8GB ram on Mac is not different from 8 GB on dell-linux laptop. i7 on Mac is not any faster than i7 on dell-linux laptop 500GB HDD on Mac is not any more spacious than that on Dell-Linux laptop. and so on. Whereas 'hardware' difference between Maruti and Beemer doesn't even compute - in terms of what you can do with the product. #3 Usability/UI - yes there is a difference. But for some geeks/power-users, its much more irritating - to not to be able to customize/upgrade something they own - than fancy UI. When most of the time they are working in vi/emacs only.. and producing as great, if not greater software than someone with MBP. ..and so on. So - what you say as 'experience' - the key differentiator between Mac/Linux - is not an objective parameter - and very much subjective to the use-case and preferences of the user.

[Crookbond]

Show me a place where I belittled Jobs. Do a quick search around, and you would know I have said great things about him too, and must have bashed Gates too - depending on the context. Since you have trouble understanding, and are judgmental too quickly - once again here is what I just said, Gates and Jobs - both dominated (in terms of business success) each other during different time frames. Both had visions, and executed their visions - successfully (to put it modestly).

I hardly care about what you say mate - now since you've mellowed down, good for your mental health (ironic since the gray matter seems to non-existent). Now, since I turned the spam heat on you - you resort to comments on my mental balance. Great job keyboard psychiatrist! Oh btw - Was I the one lamenting about "no full control" on the Mac? Oh no - it was his highness TBH - I never said you belittled Jobs but painted one side of the story and called my comments a tangential diatribe. It's anything but that - Jobs was a Son of a B**** but Gates wasn't a saint either. Both played roles in technological revolution but Gates is and was always in awe of Jobs (courtesy - Walter Issacson).

[bulbul]

Dumdum, a history lesson for you kiddo: Jobs almost went broke trying to copy the GUI's Xerox showed him; The 'Lisa' computer cost astronomically high to manufacture and ultimately, he was booted off that project and joined the MacIntosh project instead.

:hysterical: [all these in Walter Isacsons book..which i already read..so no need some one else reminding me of history] Lisa was a mistake.. but he had guts to do that unlike some other busenessmen :giggle: in buseness things happens....but how u make a comeback is what matters... he invested in Pixar when they need funding [this during the same time he booted out] ..ended up its largest shareholder..we all know history of Pixar he then started Next..it may not be successful , but niether Apple at that time so they bought the company and we all know how history panned out..