William Bokunic

Dipping into the Apple "Kool-Aid"

Thursday, July 5, 2007 9:26:39 PM

If you haven't dipped into the Apple “Kool-aid“ yet I'd suggest that you do very soon. Micrsoft Windows Vista is an atrocious piece of engineering. Not only are there four different version – all of which don't have nearly the amount of bundled software as Mac OS X – but there is this little annoying message that will bug you if you want to do absolutely anything! And how annoying is it? Well someone on Youtube did a video about it and apparently it finds Microsofts own Messenger a security threat and refuses to open it.

Now, if that wasn't a problem then the fact that only 30% of the current Windows programs function in Windows Vista is. Many have said that Vista will be the demise of Microsoft Windows, and I completely agree.

I bought a Mac Mini about a month ago refusing to upgrade to Windows Vista. And I did this for several reasons. One is the fact that Vista can only be installed on a single PC. You have to buy multiple copies of Vista if you have multiple PCs. And since my household has multiple PCs that's a load of crap. And of course the other major reason is Virus'.

Vista was in development for five years. It was recoded entirely from the base. Microsoft could have used a BSD core like Mac OS X and eliminated virus', but nope. They saw an opportunity for more moola [money] so they bought out a popular anti-virus company and are now selling Microsoft Anti-Virus. They don't care about PC security, all they want is more money.

Mac OS X, on the other hand, cost $129 and is bundled with more features than Windows Vista Ultimate [$400] can can be installed on any number of machines. Now, granted, you need an Apple Mac to install it [legally], but in a few years if you make the transition now, that won't matter. You're house will be filled with Mac's after you experience the power of them.

Now, there are obviously more pluses to Mac OS X, however I will not go into that. Just know that in the end, you'll be paying less to manage your Mac than your Windows PC, so saying that Mac's are too expensive [as many people do] is a false saying.

A Free 2.75 GB External Hardrive, or Two!New Youtube Intro

Comments

Uncle MickMickeyjoe-Irl # Thursday, July 5, 2007 11:20:07 PM

I agree that you would be mad to buy a Vista PC now, the problem is that anyone using Windows now will be reluctant to switch and have to deal with learning a new OS. Particularly if they are already using a Windows PC at work, which is likely to be the case.

My mother was given a Macbook for Xmas (by my brother who is rabidly anti-M$) Without our tech support, I don't see how she could have made the transition. Finding a driver for her old printer was a real saga, and even moving her old email across was a challenge.

Another reason is Windows popularity, in spite of it's flaws. While there are three or four shops selling Windows PCs in town, I'm not even sure where I could go to buy a Mac. As long as Windows is the easy option, Apple is going to face a struggle.

William BokunicWilliam_Bokunic # Thursday, July 5, 2007 11:50:41 PM

Yeah. Windows is very popular due to the vast number of shops selling it. There's one Apple store for every twenty Windows stores where I live.

For me the transition was kind of easy. I still can't get my printer to work, but I don't need the drivers. I mainly just need to find the printer model since Mac OS X already has a ton of drivers installed. Email was also easy. I use AOL so all of my mail is stored on a server, so I just opened up Opera and setup the account.

As for works, surprisingly a lot of them are switching over to Vista. Windows is moving in the direction of being way too demanding for work so this confuses me. I'd just install Ubuntu on all the work stations and be done with it. Or sticking to XP is good, though Ubuntu would work a ton better.

I'm also rabidly anti-Microsoft. All they do is steal, make their steals far worse than the original and overprice it. Apple, while their computers are slightly more than they should be, never overprice their OS. Why? Because they make enough off of the hardware. Plus, because Apple designs their computers, you rarely have computer defects.

Alexschmitty8225 # Saturday, July 7, 2007 4:13:01 AM

Macs are actually less secure. Vista is extremely mpre secure than Mac OS. Sense Vistas release more holes have been found in OS X than Vista. Legally you can only install Mac OS X on 1 computer unless you buy the family pack.

William BokunicWilliam_Bokunic # Saturday, July 7, 2007 5:14:59 AM

There's no limit, however, per disk. So I can install it on multiple systems, unlike Vista. Also, Vista has been out for only a few months, OS X has been out for seven years, it's bound to have more security holes. Vista is Windows however, I guarantee it'll end up having more security holes in the end without that Unix-core.

Uncle MickMickeyjoe-Irl # Saturday, July 7, 2007 10:38:13 AM

I think the only reason Apple isn't as anal about piracy as M$ is because you can only install OS X on a computer bought from... Apple.

Though I imagine there are folks working on that.

William BokunicWilliam_Bokunic # Saturday, July 7, 2007 4:20:31 PM

True, Apple's biggest selling market is their hardware, that's how they can afford to sell the OS cheaply.

William BokunicWilliam_Bokunic # Sunday, July 8, 2007 2:52:35 AM

I plan to buy a 500 GB miniStack v3 and format it to fat32. That thing has 3 USB outs, several Firewire outs and I think an eSATA or two. I plan to hook it up to all of my computers.

Alexschmitty8225 # Sunday, July 8, 2007 5:36:09 PM

In the 6 months that Vista has been out more security holes have been found in OS X than in Vista.

William BokunicWilliam_Bokunic # Sunday, July 8, 2007 6:34:26 PM

Again, this can be attributed to how old Vista is and the fact that people have had a chance to explore how it works more than Vista thus far. Knowing how something works is how you find security holes. But, even so, Mac's don't get Virus', they can't, so this alone places Windows at a greater security risk than anything. I'd rather have slightly more security holes than the threat of Virus' which are more likely to be exploited.

Oh, and just in case you think this, Mac's don't get virus' because of the Unix-core, not because the Mac OS X market-share is only 5%.

Alexschmitty8225 # Monday, July 9, 2007 2:30:09 AM

http://www.sophos.com/security/analyses/search-results/?search=macintosh&action=search&x=0&y=0
9 Pages of various threats the the Mac OS. There are security holes along with trojans, virus, and worms. The myth that Macs are impervious to anything hazardous is just a flat out fallacy. I would much rather have a OS that has the potentional to get a virus over a OS with security holes because AV protection gets updated much much quicker than security holes. There are still holes in OS X that havent been fixed for almost 18 months.

William BokunicWilliam_Bokunic # Monday, July 9, 2007 2:42:04 AM

Mac's don't get virus', there's one confirmed worm for Mac's, and trojan's have been known to get on ever OS. Windows gets a lot of Virus', worms and trojans due to its lack of a Unix-base. Mac's will never get Virus' therefore they are safer since Virus' are more vast in numbers.

Alexschmitty8225 # Monday, July 9, 2007 6:03:34 PM

Ok this isnt going to go anywhere. I give you a link to a website that has almost 9 pages full of mac viruses and you continue to tell me that there is only 1 virus for macs.

William BokunicWilliam_Bokunic # Monday, July 9, 2007 6:17:49 PM

Mac's have virus', I won't deny it. The difference here is that Mac's aren't effected by them. They cannot be, that's why I am saying that. The Unix-base makes them impenetrable by virus'. Virus' can be made for anything, it's not hard, it's just if they are able to harm the system or not that matters.

brim4brim # Monday, July 9, 2007 6:54:37 PM

Ubuntu is a better choice IMO and I'm writing this on it. You can easily install it over your current OS and the installer has a built in migration tool. You can also just duel boot your existing OS with it so that you can go back if you don't like it or you break it.

I think Ubuntu is easier to use than Mac OSX but then I'm a programmer so maybe its all in my head. Synaptic and add/remove applications makes Ubuntu very easy to use.

All Linux really needs it better hardware support. Luckily my laptop is now 3 years old and I like it too much to change to a new laptop until this one breaks. Ubuntu supports about 90% of my hardware. The only things that aren't working are my 56K modem and my ligths for WiFi which I'm not too worried about. All the keyboard shortcuts work and my wireless card is configured out of the box with my ATI graphics card being detected and the driver installed via the restricted drivers manager after installing the OS.

Easy as pie to do all that. Installing the graphics card drivers is optional too.

William BokunicWilliam_Bokunic # Monday, July 9, 2007 7:00:55 PM

I'd have Ubuntu installed still if my HD is bigger. It's only 60 GB. Once I get an external HD though Ubuntu is coming back. I like Ubuntu. It's not my main choice of OS right now but it's still a really good one that I like. Ubuntu, in some respects, is easier, but not all. I have to go into the terminal to get it to goto my current monitors resolution of 1680x1050.

The main thing holding back linux is actually its open source factor. Open source is great, I love it, but software companies don't so linux doesn't get many important programs.

AndreigreatAndrei # Sunday, February 10, 2008 9:05:36 AM

well, i have to disagree.
vista is bad no question asked. but mac os x leopard isn't such a great piece of engineering. it is limited, it is filled with restrictions and the eye-candy isn't that big, for the amount of resources in uses.
It offers a good workflow, and claims to be very safe, but it isn't actually acurate. more than 90% of computers have windows on it, so it's logical to make the most viruses for windows. I work on a mac, and it is very annoying cause of all the restrictions. and honestly the folder architecture is stupid. i work on tiger, but saw leopard a few times. it is an improvement, but legaly it costs more than windows, and they have a tendency to break and so on.
and apple is as much a money eater as microsoft, maybe even more.
i have a dual boot ubuntu-windows xp wich is the best thing to have at this hour(in my opinion)
coding and some projects in ubuntu, and flash/photoshop/games/other in windows. and it works perfectly, resource friendly and user friendly.
have you ever tried to find a free anything for a mac?
everything has to be apple aproved, and that costs big money.
if vista ultimate is 400$ and a pc is 500$ and a leopard + mac computer is 3000$ for the exact thing what will you pick?

Unregistered user # Friday, June 6, 2008 3:51:14 PM

Anonymous writes: greatAndrei, you point out that: - leopard is a memory hog - it is not safe - there is no freeware for Macs. Okay #1 goes down first. You can run Leopard on a PBG3, which is a very old processor. Most people can not buy Vista unless they bought their computer with vista on it or they upgrade their RAM a lot. Vista is the true memory hog. #2 It is not safe. Okay then, you say that nobody makes viruses for Macs because there are less. Sure that may be true, but it also may be due to the fact that Vista leaves it doors unlocked and fully opened, keeping a Chihuahua to guard from intruders. Mac OSX has vulnerabilities, sure, but it locks the door and is generally engineered to be safe. If you want total security, you can choose to encrypt all of your data. And another thing is that Mac users care about their security. If a virus is created, we will all get rid of it and return to normal. Windows users would patch it up, but become more vulnerable for another attack. A messy room only gets messier, but if you pick up a small amount in the beginning, it is more likely to stay clean. #3 No freeware. Excuse me? Was that a radical assumption? You can get so many things from third party developers for free from more eye candy to screensavers to system utilities to games to organizers that it is not even funny. That is because the people that learn to program for Macs learn to love programming for Macs. You get such satisfaction from the clean interface of XCode. Do some ask for donations, sure, but never assume that nothing is free just because it is a Mac. BTW, I would recommend you learning Obj-C and getting a Mac if you are a programmer. Seriously man, read up before you rant.