Why do people buy Apple / OSX?

[abaxas]

You know, starting IM or Skype on Linux isn't exactly rocket science, open application menu, navigate menu, start programme, ta-da!.. You can even set your DE to start them when you login to your machine.

And you can get the same 'just works' experience buying machines with Linux pre-installed, if we're going to go comparing apples...

Providing you dont have a broadcom wireless adapter.

Here is a menu asking you about lots of **** that no human is meant to understand. Are you sure you with to install some **** that will make it work but will make you look like a pleb?

[aidanjt]

Trust me, if you have 40 terminals open, 4 instances of firefox and numerous remote X programs running. You'll want a mac.

Why? Linux can handle that, on a 10 year old machine. Also, if you have 40 terminals open, you might like having arbitrarily labeled tabbed terminals and terminal multiplexing, instead of scrolling through a long list of terminal windows, if we're talking about workflow efficiency. And as far as Linux desktops are concerned, *every* X programme (read: *every* GUI programme) is a remote X client, and handling hundreds or thousands of clients is routine.

Ubuntu simply doesnt cut it for fonts

Totally unreadable! And the 244 font packages in the Ubuntu repositories, and thousands more still, downloadable from the internet simply aren't enough!

UI speed or fast workflow.

Yeah because mac is so much more efficient at using multiple workspaces, and I'm totally typing way ahead of X11's text rendering.. oh wait, it only has one workspace, and I'm not.

Linux does have its problems, but this is just silly.

[aidanjt]

Providing you dont have a broadcom wireless adapter.

Why would a Linux laptop vendor sell you a Linux laptop with a broadcom wireless card?

Here is a menu asking you about lots of **** that no human is meant to understand. Are you sure you with to install some **** that will make it work but will make you look like a pleb?

What are you talking about? Jockey? You don't need to understand that, just click activate. And again, if you buy from a Linux laptop vendor, any proprietary drivers will be preinstalled already. And if you find this perplexing:

You may want to consult a brain surgeon, to confirm you still have one. A rudimentary command of the English language is all that's necessary to understand that dialog.

[mikerr]

Ubuntu simply doesnt cut it for fonts

Read my post #51 on why macs don't either

[peterb]

Have to disagree with fonts on Linux. Any of the truetype fonts will work - I copied* a few from my Win machine to my Fedora box to get the same functionality.

* Only those that weren't proprietary, of course.

[peterb]

Any True type font will work on a Linux (or Mac) box. I bought a couple of specialist TT fonts for a windows machine, then copied the font files to the Linux box - where they 'just work' as expected. The same is true fopr any of the TT fonts that are shipped with windows.

The same is true for Mac

http://desktoppub.about.com/cs/fixfo...ll_fonts_m.htm

[b0redom]

Why would a Linux laptop vendor sell you a Linux laptop with a broadcom wireless card?

I don't think I've ever seen a Linux laptop available in a shop? Sure you can buy them online, but one of the reasons people want an Apple is that they can go into a shop and get one, and also be able to take it back if they have a problem.

What are you talking about? Jockey? You don't need to understand that, just click activate.

And therein lies another problem, most users will blindly click OK, and then worry about it afterwards.

And again, if you buy from a Linux laptop vendor, any proprietary drivers will be preinstalled already. And if you find this perplexing:

Image removed.

You may want to consult a brain surgeon, to confirm you still have one. A rudimentary command of the English language is all that's necessary to understand that dialog.

First off, I thought we were supposed to be cutting out the personal insults?

Secondly if you rely on proprietary drivers being preinstalled then you're stuck with whatever Linux distro is preinstalled - witness the Asus EEE as to why that's a bad thing. You could install a different distro, but then you're at the mercy of whether the drivers are distributed with the distro. If you have an Apple, you never need to worry about drivers, or even what one is. If it's Apple hardware it is supported out of the box.

Thirdly, if you buy a new mac, you can buy 1-2-1 training with it for about £70. That gives you a whole bunch of training on the OS and bundled apps. We got this for the mother in law and she used it for learning how to get photos off her digital camera, how itunes works, how to print up photobooks etc.

I am NOT saying that OSX is the solution to everything. I have an iMac with bootcamp for the sole reason I can't play (very many) games in OSX.

I wouldn't even consider running OSX or Windows on a server if I could avoid it. Windows has come a long way and is much much more stable now, but it still adds a GUI which is simply wasted CPU cycles on a server. Servers are IMO firmly the realm of Linux, Solaris, AIX and the like.

The OP posited the question why do people buy Apple/OSX, and I'm answering why I personally do it.

I understand you're a big Linux fanboy, but you must see that there are situations where advocating over everything else it is like forcing a square peg in a round hole?

[Platinum]

I bought my 11" air for the hardware, I have no love for OSX, Thin, light (great for me, wheelchair user), and powerfull (went for the i7 reviews said it was worth it), and it was a good price, ill await the replys where people show me dells / Lenovo's ect but I have looked trust me and no one offers anything close to the air for a cheaper price.
Best I found was the Lenovo X1 I think it was and a few Sonys, both more expensive.

So there we go, I got it for the hardware, am I weird?

[TheAnimus]

I'm sorry but talking about usability, and hardware support etc, for OSX vs Linux....

Thats akin to talking about if a golf cart or a go cart is faster, when the win7 lot have a Porsche.

Software, waaaay more bits of software work on windows than on OSX, far more hardware works.

The interface for installing something like a printer, or a USB microphone is much better too on win7 too.

There are always edge cases were one solution is better than the others, but I've still got no one explaing why mactards damn well lie so much.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

All the CPU SKUs in the MacBook Air are dual cores so it is the difference between a slightly slower dual core and a slightly faster dual core.Meh! Most people still have no problems with CULV laptops and netbooks such as the older MacBook Air or the much cheaper PC alternatives so TBH any of the CPUs are OK for most uses. Having said that I still rate the MacBook Air design and build as one of the best for an ultraportable under £1000.

If Apple offered a cheaper Core i3 version for around £699 it would probably do for 99% of all users anyway. If they even offered a Pentium based version for £599 it would be fine for most people.

In fact it is the use of an SSD which is the biggest help for general responsiveness.

[Platinum]

If Apple offered a cheaper Core i3 version for around £699 it would probably do for 99% of all users anyway. If they even offered a Pentium based version for £599 it would be fine for most people.

In fact it is the use of an SSD which is the biggest help for general responsiveness.

I am sure if Intel had a ULV Core i3 Processor Apple would use it in one of there machines, as it stands Apple can only use what Intel manufacture

[usxhe190]

All the CPU SKUs in the MacBook Air are dual cores so it is the difference between a slightly slower dual core and a slightly faster dual core.Meh! Most people still have no problems with CULV laptops and netbooks such as the older MacBook Air or the much cheaper PC alternatives so TBH any of the CPUs are OK for most uses. Having said that I still rate the MacBook Air design and build as one of the best for an ultraportable under £1000.

If Apple offered a cheaper Core i3 version for around £699 it would probably do for 99% of all users anyway. If they even offered a Pentium based version for £599 it would be fine for most people.

In fact it is the use of an SSD which is the biggest help for general responsiveness.

Totally agree on this. CULV is so underrated. And agree that MacBook Air (the latest design) is one of the best ultraportable on the market. I also like MacBook Pro.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

I am sure if Intel had a ULV Core i3 Processor Apple would use it in one of there machines, as it stands Apple can only use what Intel manufacture

Intel do make ULV versions of the Core i3 and Pentium:

http://ark.intel.com/products/54646

http://ark.intel.com/products/54624

http://ark.intel.com/products/55628/...he-1_20-GHz%29

Any of the CPUs will probably be much faster than the previous CULV based MacBook Air.

TBH,they should have introduced a cheaper £500 to £600 SKU. However,I suspect this would potentially affect iPad sales which Apple probably have higher margins with.

In fact the same goes with the UltraBooks too. Companies should be trying to aim for under £600.

[b0redom]

I'm sorry but talking about usability, and hardware support etc, for OSX vs Linux....

Thats akin to talking about if a golf cart or a go cart is faster, when the win7 lot have a Porsche.

Each to their own I guess. I'm happy in whatever OS. I just prefer OSX on a day to day basis. Windows 7 is growing on me, but if I want to batch process a bunch of stuff, I'm happier in bash/PERL than powershell.

Software, waaaay more bits of software work on windows than on OSX, far more hardware works.

Can't argue with that, but the fact that the hardware subset is tiny means that it's waaaaay more fully tested.

The interface for installing something like a printer, or a USB microphone is much better too on win7 too.

Don't agree with that TBH. I bought a laser printer and it was detected fine under both.

There are always edge cases were one solution is better than the others, but I've still got no one explaing why mactards damn well lie so much.

Now you're complaining about fanboys, not about hardware/software which is what your OP was about. Fanboys exist for almost everything. Football teams (which is where the term fan came from - shorted from 'fanatic'), games consoles, GPUs, CPUs etc.

I agree with you that every platform has it's own pros and cons. Rather than being a fanboy or anti-fanboy for one I just choose what's best on it's merits for MY (or my customer's) use case. It just happens that recently Apple has been best for my HTPC (Macmini running Plex), main desktop (imac), laptop (macbook pro), tablet (ipad).

My server is a MicroServer running FreeNAS, and I've got a raft of VMs sitting on top of VMWare ESXi sitting on a Fujistu Siemens Intel server to emulate environments I need to work in for customers. I also work fairly regularly on Windows, AIX and Solaris.

There are rumors about Apple moving the iMac to an ARM chip. If that happened, I'd drop it like a hot potato.

In any case, I'm bored with this thread now. Seems to be mostly people posting "Apple is teh suck. If you buy Apple gear you're a moron because you can do it better/cheaper/faster with Linux/Windows etc etc"

At the end of the day spend your money on what best suits your use case.

[aidanjt]

I don't think I've ever seen a Linux laptop available in a shop? Sure you can buy them online, but one of the reasons people want an Apple is that they can go into a shop and get one, and also be able to take it back if they have a problem.

And I'd rather they didn't sell me stuff that breaks down so frequently that they have to be next door to me.

And therein lies another problem, most users will blindly click OK, and then worry about it afterwards.

And that's different from what *every* other operating system does, how?

First off, I thought we were supposed to be cutting out the personal insults?

It wasn't a personal insult, well, perhaps it is if you can't read, but then you couldn't recognise the insult. So, null point.

Secondly if you rely on proprietary drivers being preinstalled then you're stuck with whatever Linux distro is preinstalled - witness the Asus EEE as to why that's a bad thing. You could install a different distro, but then you're at the mercy of whether the drivers are distributed with the distro. If you have an Apple, you never need to worry about drivers, or even what one is. If it's Apple hardware it is supported out of the box.

Dissociative reasoning. This is like buying a mac, installing windows, and complaining that not all the hardware works right away.

Besides, nearly all 'proprietary driven' hardware sold with Linux machines is solely GPU (nVidia, sometimes ATi) related, for which pretty much all distros support or are supported by the GPU vendors, early netbook problems were fringe problems created by clueless OEMs, not Linux machine vendors. And for Ubuntu users, it's as troublesome as plugging the machine into the router with an ethernet cable, click on the hardware card icon, and click activate to get broadcom support going.

Which is even less complicated than with Windows, where you plug it into the router, pray that your ethernet chip is supported by stock drivers, if not beg to use someone else's computer, try to find out what wlan card you have, probably fail, otherwise google the company's name, try to navigate their slow ugly ass site, download the drivers, hope they're the right ones, install, cross fingers. And nobody says Windows has terrible hardware support. Which it isn't, Windows supports more hardware than OS X. It's just rather unpleasant.

In reality, Linux supports more hardware than any other operating system. While old PPC and x86 machines lose support by bitrotten drivers and lost in architecture switch overs, Linux support just keeps trucking on. It's only now that X.org developers are talking about dropping 3Dfx support, and when was the last time they released a card? mid 2000? And the kernel is still stockpiled with drivers for all manner of ISA cards, and that's just covering x86. So your operating system support will well outlast your machine's ability to run, much less its useful lifetime.

And with all this irrelevant digression out of the way. Please stick with comparing like for like. Saying Apple gives you all the hardware support you need out of the box? Fine. So does System76.

Thirdly, if you buy a new mac, you can buy 1-2-1 training with it for about £70. That gives you a whole bunch of training on the OS and bundled apps. We got this for the mother in law and she used it for learning how to get photos off her digital camera, how itunes works, how to print up photobooks etc.

Like so?

I understand you're a big Linux fanboy, but you must see that there are situations where advocating over everything else it is like forcing a square peg in a round hole?

I'm not advocating it over everything else, merely dispelling silly Linux myths, which are clearly still aplenty, and entirely generated by people slapping some old Linux distro on some new machine on a whim and yelling 'screw this crap!' at the first inevitable hurdle which will crop up when they do a sloppy DIY install job.

[Biscuit]

There are always edge cases were one solution is better than the others, but I've still got no one explaing why mactards damn well lie so much.

I have come to the conclusion that its all part of the advertising culture based around it. They are told everything is ok and nothing ever goes wrong so they believe it, even when its not true. Just purely brainwashed by the advertisement and glossy bollocks.

In any case, I'm bored with this thread now. Seems to be mostly people posting "Apple is teh suck. If you buy Apple gear you're a moron because you can do it better/cheaper/faster with Linux/Windows etc etc"

At the end of the day spend your money on what best suits your use case.

Personally i don't think that's the case, there are situations in certain fields which call for mac over other OSs however thats not really what this is about primarily. The problem is, as Animus has stated multiple times, the whole idea of mac being this bomb proof, fast, reliable, works with anything OS/Hardware combo is utter lies. To prove it, i have a friend who buys mac hardware which is broken from ebay, gets it repaired or repairs it himself then sells them on. He easily gets through 5 computers a week. Its not always a hardware thing, although the dumbass users dont know that. Quite a lucrative business really!

What makes it even worse if the fact that for some relatively unknown reason, the people who own the macs are so brainwashed they will sit at a completely malware ridden mac that runs slow as crap because they have so much rubbish installed on it yet continue to say, 'its better than a PC'.

The culture which has built up around them is unbelievable... and i mean that in the most literal sense possible, i honestly do not believe some of the crap 'mactards' come out with. Its like, i buy a mac, now i know everything which is rubbish about everything else because i have the best.