I'm coming a little late to this party :) Ken makes a good point about the difference between how one sees the OS, and how the hardware moves bits around in the hardware. That being said, it really does come down to the users experience. When a user can sit down in front of an OS and use it intuitively, they believe it is a better OS. As technical people, we can point out the flaws in any OS, Windows, different flavors of unix and Linux, OS X, and develop workarounds for them. For the end user, though, it comes down to....Does it do what i want it to do, and do that on a consistent basis?
I was quite perturbed when I had a dual 850 MHz Dual processor G4 and found that I was unable to install Leopard on it, even if I was prepared for it to be a less than stellar user experience. That being said, I have not gone out to purchase something newer. OS X 10.4 does just fine for the tiny bit I do. Because of work and professional development, my platforms tend to be Win XP, a bit of Vista, a bit more of Novell's SLED and SLES (OES) server stuff..and some Windows Server technologies (2000 and 2003). Time only goes so many directions. The few times I want to use my MAC, though, it just boots and works. Because I don't know enough to realize all of its potential, I don't tend to put things in that will screw it up :)) Not sure that this adds or detracts from the debate. In the end, though, being able to install Leopard in some sort of VM would be helpful to learn the OS without having to kick out the cash. If I do need it, though, I'm sure a mini would be my route, cost wise. Wonder how hard it would be to MOD a PC case to get more storage :)) Regards, Paul Paul Muhlbach, A+, CNA, MCSE, MCT APM Computer Services Lethbridge, AB >>> Ken Schaefer <k...@adopenstatic.com> 12/18/2008 6:30 AM >>> OK - let's get back to basics here. Unless you believe in the Jobs RDF, then Macs still obey basic laws of physics. They don't move 1s and 0s around any faster than other electronic devices. They use the same graphics cards, hard drives, memory, LCD displays, CPUs and chipsets and so on that are available in every other brand. The design might be good, but I don't see what they have over similarly priced competitors (even Dell's getting into decently looking hardware these days). So, please explain, in some more detail, what exactly you find "optimised"? I have two Macs here at home (just for my own use), and plenty of others I come into contact with. I can't say I've seen anything spectacular about them (except that I need to install 100MB of updates each month). There's one thing to say "I prefer the way the OS works - it suits the way I think". It's another thing to say that an OS magically gets more Hz out of a CPU... Cheers Ken From: Eric Brouwer [mailto:er...@forestpost.com] Sent: Friday, 19 December 2008 12:16 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: OT - Anyone VM a Mac Leopard OS on a PC? I was a COMPLETE anti-Mac zealot up to June of this year. Then I was forced to work on them at my new job. Now I'm begging for one of my own. I admit, there still seems to be a lot of voodoo and black magic going on in the Macs, but they run amazingly well. I can run far more apps with better response on a Mac of "lesser" raw tech specs than I can on any PC. Granted, I can't speak about the mac performance vs. a *nix based computer as I don't have the experience. Also, my experience with Macs is their G5 and Power Books, not the Macbook, mini, nor iMac. Far more expensive, to be sure, but a much better all around experience for me. So yes, in my experience, the Macs are very optimized IMHO. They just seem much more dialed in out of the box. On Dec 17, 2008, at 8:07 PM, Ken Schaefer wrote: Huh? I haven't noticed anything particularly optimised about the two Macs (one Macbook and one Mac Mini) I have at home, that I can't get in other brands... Cheers Ken From: Eric Brouwer [mailto:er...@forestpost.com] Sent: Thursday, 18 December 2008 5:02 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: OT - Anyone VM a Mac Leopard OS on a PC? Agreed. Apple's are FAR from generic white boxes. They are HIGHLY optimized, extremely efficient architectures. On Dec 17, 2008, at 12:23 PM, Jonathan Link wrote: It's not whitebox, it's branded, that brand is Apple. When I purched my MBPro, I spec'ed similary equipped notebooks from HP, Dell and Lenovo. Apple was more expensive than some, less than others, and I had the option of running a true UNIX as was mentioned earlier. Apple is a Tier 1 manufacturer just as HP, Dell and Lenovo are. On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 12:11 PM, <michael.le...@pha.phila.gov<mailto:michael.le...@pha.phila.gov>> wrote: "Joseph L. Casale" <jcas...@activenetwerx.com<mailto:jcas...@activenetwerx.com>> wrote on 12/17/2008 11:13:17 AM: > >Yes, but Apple is all about total control - if you limit the OS to > only running hardware you produce, then you absolutely know that it > is *guaranteed* to work with any hardware your customer owns, and > > you can spend your software time and resources in other directions, > rather than finding ways to make it run on any hardware ever > invented (which is part of MS's problem). > > > >That's the theory, as I see it, anyway. > This was exactly my point in the old justification towards the > expense of the platform. Sorry; I haven't been following the whole thread ... > Now its whitebox intel run-of-the mill stuff? Does this _still_ apply? It does if they say so. :-) Eric Brouwer IT Manager www.forestpost.com<http://www.forestpost.com> er...@forestpost.com<mailto:er...@forestpost.com> 248.855.4333 ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
