• CONTEST ALERT - Experience the power of DDR5 memory with Kingston Click for details

The Worst Thing about Macs

Status
Not open for further replies.

alsiladka

Noobie Pro
Another excellant article. No doubt Macs are a work of excellant technology, but there are even others things that do matter.

Here is an article from a Mac user since the Apple II. As is agreed everywhere, even he pays due credit to the Apple platform and performance. But the worst thing about macs, he says is the Apple Fans.

I opted not to post the article here, but here are the points he touches in his articles.

1. "Whatever MS does is a copy of others and MS simply buys others."
Dashboard is a rip of Konfabulator, Spaces a copy previous Virtual Deskop features, Cover Flow was actually purchased from a 3rd party developer, the iPhone ads are a blatant rips of a film "Telephones", Apple was issues cease and detist orders to stop an iPod ad because it was similar to an Eminem ad.

2. Whoever even tries to compete with Apple is greeted with the response "Why do they Even try".

3. What Apple does something, it is OK, but if MS does the same thing, the courts should take it down. What apple ads to OS X adds value to it, but when MS bundles its software its time for AntiTrust.

A sure read for all of you.

Source -
Part I
Part II
 

Nav11aug

In the zone
completely agree with point 3.

infact i remember it bcame so bad that at a point when Apple guys complained abt MS copying their features, some MS employee said that Apple might know how to make good things but MS knows how to make money out of it and thaz the whole point .
 

iMav

The Devil's Advocate
where is the salesman .... when the truth is mentioned the salesman doesnt reply :lol:
 
OP
alsiladka

alsiladka

Noobie Pro
QwertyManiac said:
But what's this doing under Tech News? Its just a view of the user after all and not news ..

Hey ya, i did not think about it. It should either be moved to Chit Chat or Random News.

Mods please move the topic.
 

gxsaurav

You gave been GXified
Apple is not bad, they just make crappy Software backend....& when they fail to make one, they steal from OSS
 

infra_red_dude

Wire muncher!
Nice read there.

alsiladka said:
1. "Whatever MS does is a copy of others and MS simply buys others."
Dashboard is a rip of Konfabulator, Spaces a copy previous Virtual Deskop features, Cover Flow was actually purchased from a 3rd party developer, the iPhone ads are a blatant rips of a film "Telephones", Apple was issues cease and detist orders to stop an iPod ad because it was similar to an Eminem ad.
Completely agree with this. People employ double standards when it comes to Apple and MS.

alsiladka said:
2. Whoever even tries to compete with Apple is greeted with the response "Why do they Even try".
Agree with this arrgant attitude too. Its wrong to undermine anything and everything!

alsiladka said:
3. What Apple does something, it is OK, but if MS does the same thing, the courts should take it down. What apple ads to OS X adds value to it, but when MS bundles its software its time for AntiTrust.
Do not agree with this as the market situation is different in both the cases. Apple never allowed 3rd party companies to enter the market, or allowed only a few very few. So if apple bundles a new software it won't hit other companies.

But in cases where MS has done that the motive has been to kill competition and hence wipe out the company itself. If MS had held the right over certain category of software since a long time then bundling them wouldn't haf caused any problems. It should've foreseen that it'll venture into specific categories (like media players, browsers, JVM etc.) and made sure that other companies don't start making a living outta such software. After everything said and done, its wrong to kill competition this way. Except the media player category m mostly all other bundled software is inferior to the comptitive products and aimed at killing it ruthlessly.
 

narangz

Web developer
infra_red_dude said:
But in cases where MS has done that the motive has been to kill competition and hence wipe out the company itself. If MS had held the right over certain category of software since a long time then bundling them wouldn't haf caused any problems. It should've foreseen that it'll venture into specific categories (like media players, browsers, JVM etc.) and made sure that other companies don't start making a living outta such software. After everything said and done, its wrong to kill competition this way. Except the media player category m mostly all other bundled software is inferior to the comptitive products and aimed at killing it ruthlessly.

In case they do not provide Media Player, Browser then I guess people out there will say- "Hey Man! MS doesn't even provide ya media players & internet browser. See I told ya MS sucks & Apple/Linux rocks"

C'mon man people can choose third party application for media playing, browsing. They still do. Who doesn't want to kill/defeat the competition?

3. What Apple does something, it is OK, but if MS does the same thing, the courts should take it down. What apple ads to OS X adds value to it, but when MS bundles its software its time for AntiTrust.

I agree to this and all other points.
 

iMav

The Devil's Advocate
^^ thats not the point ... if i make 2 products which work together i hav the right to sell em as a package ... IE is an internet explrer .... media player is used for playing songs and watching movies .... i get my self a new os shudnt it do as is why the hell do i hav to go for alternatives or dwnld it from the net .... i like IE and wmp so if i buy windows y shudnt it be there and y am i being forced to look for alternatives .... and for God's sakes its business not ethics .... kill ur comptetion or die

now shoe lace makers wont in their sane minds sue nike for giving shoe lace with their shoes .... its the same thing ... an OS is incomplete without internet browser or a media player .... now have u forgotten google suing MS for making live search as the default search engine in IE .... did MS sue google for putting blogger as the default blog in picasa ....
 

infra_red_dude

Wire muncher!
iMav said:
^^ thats not the point ... if i make 2 products which work together i hav the right to sell em as a package ... IE is an internet explrer .... media player is used for playing songs and watching movies .... i get my self a new os shudnt it do as is why the hell do i hav to go for alternatives or dwnld it from the net .... i like IE and wmp so if i buy windows y shudnt it be there and y am i being forced to look for alternatives .... and for God's sakes its business not ethics .... kill ur comptetion or die
I don't like IE. So do I haf the option of NOT installing it in first place? Or can I COMPLETELY remove it afterwards (note the captilaized word there!). NO I can't! This is where the problem lies.

Kill competition but with better products!

iMav said:
now shoe lace makers wont in their sane minds sue nike for giving shoe lace with their shoes .... its the same thing ... an OS is incomplete without internet browser or a media player .... now have u forgotten google suing MS for making live search as the default search engine in IE .... did MS sue google for putting blogger as the default blog in picasa ....
There is no comparison with shoes, laces and OS, media players/browser. Use some logic when comparing things.

Can you wear a shoe without a lace (Not the non-laced models)? NO. Can you run an OS without a browser/media player? YES. Period!

I agree to other points as far as double standards are concerned. Its not correct to point fingers at MS for everything. But there are somethings where they are at fault.
 

gxsaurav

You gave been GXified
infra_red_dude said:
So do I haf the option of NOT installing it in first place? Or can I COMPLETELY remove it afterwards (note the captilaized word there!). NO I can't! This is where the problem lies.

An OS needs a web browser as an add on application. Why don't u go & sue Apple & Various Linux distribution because they also install Safari & Firefox by default whether u want it or not. In Mac OS X, u do no get an option during installation for not installing Safari. During the install of Ubuntu you also do not get option to select which packages to install & which to not so that u can remove Firefox from installing.

After u have installed the OS u can remove the browser in favor of any other browser u use, but here is the thing. The OS requires a HTML engine for many things, Mac OS X comes with the Webkit engine deeply integrated in Mac OS X due to which even if u remove safari, the webkit engine is still there. Same goes with Windows, you can uninstall IE 7 from Vista & IE 7 software will be uninstalled but the Trident engine that IE 7 used will still be there because the OS needs it. KDE comes with KHTML Engine & for that the software is Konqurer, again you can remove the browser but not the HTML Engine in any OS out there. Trust me, you cannot remove an HTML engine from even Linux. Unless its CLI only Linux.

You can very well remove the IE 7 software from Windows Vista if u don't need it. Tell me a GUI OS out there which can work without a HTML engine. This isn't Microsoft's fault that customer ask for better out of the box experience & when MS provides that in form of IE 7 & WMP 11 they get sued.
Kill competition but with better products!

Safari software works better then Firefox software on Mac

IE 7 Software works much better then Firefox on Windows.

Both open web pages fine, both are enough for good out of the box experience after which the user can install whatever they want. What is the problem here, I fail to understand.

There is no comparison with shoes, laces and OS, media players/browser. Use some logic when comparing things.

Yes there is. Both are products from a company & laces are also made by many other companies which are addon to the real product (Shoe)

Can you run an OS without a browser/media player? YES. Period!

Sure u can, but can u run a GUI OS without an HTML engine & Media Playback engine? Now don't tell me the CLI Linux thing...thats not GUI.
 

infra_red_dude

Wire muncher!
gx_saurav said:
An OS needs a web browser as an add on application. Why don't u go & sue Apple & Various Linux distribution because they also install Safari & Firefox by default whether u want it or not. In Mac OS X, u do no get an option during installation for not installing Safari. During the install of Ubuntu you also do not get option to select which packages to install & which to not so that u can remove Firefox from installing.
I've already made it clear that Apple hasn't allowed much of 3rd party developers from a long time unlike the PC platform.

gx_saurav said:
After u have installed the OS u can remove the browser in favor of any other browser u use, but here is the thing. The OS requires a HTML engine for many things, Mac OS X comes with the Webkit engine deeply integrated in Mac OS X due to which even if u remove safari, the webkit engine is still there. Same goes with Windows, you can uninstall IE 7 from Vista & IE 7 software will be uninstalled but the Trident engine that IE 7 used will still be there because the OS needs it. KDE comes with KHTML Engine & for that the software is Konqurer, again you can remove the browser but not the HTML Engine in any OS out there. Trust me, you cannot remove an HTML engine from even Linux. Unless its CLI only Linux.
There is no tagging of html engine and the GNOME DE. I can use or remove any browser I want, completely at any point of the time. In this respect Mac OS is the least tolerant. Prolly coz not many alternatives exist.

gx_saurav said:
This isn't Microsoft's fault that customer ask for better out of the box experience & when MS provides that in form of IE 7 & WMP 11 they get sued.
Certainly not for me and many many others!!!

gx_saurav said:
Safari software works better then Firefox software on Mac.
Exactly, they've killed competition with a better product. And the competition wasn't even a threat to them!

gx_saurav said:
IE 7 Software works much better then Firefox on Windows.

Both open web pages fine, both are enough for good out of the box experience after which the user can install whatever they want. What is the problem here, I fail to understand.
The Rendering speed, the out of box security etc. etc. Plz consider Opera in the discussion too.

gx_saurav said:
Yes there is. Both are products from a company & laces are also made by many other companies which are addon to the real product (Shoe)
This is a completely illogical comparsion. I won't say anything else. A lace is an integral part of a shoe. A browser and a media player are application software NOT system software. Hope you understand the difference.

gx_saurav said:
Sure u can, but can u run a GUI OS without an HTML engine & Media Playback engine? Now don't tell me the CLI Linux thing...thats not GUI.
Excatly, this is the key strategy here. Tag the HTML engine with the browser and the multimedia engine with the media player so that neither is completely uninstallable!!! I don't haf any qualms about Media Player. Its a very mature and worthy product.
 

iMav

The Devil's Advocate
infra how many users know of firefox how many users give a damn about which browser they are using as long as its browsing the bloody net ... and y do u wnat to COMPLETELY remove it leave it there and install which ever browser u want to that is not the problem u know that as well as i do .... :)

opera might be good u might like it but most of my frenz dont care they want to chk mail surf a lil porn and IE 7 does a solid job on vista :) and its not like windows doesnt allow u to install opera or set it as ur default browser

the example was apt and u too understood what i was trying to imply as u cant have shoes without laces (laced 1s) u cant have an OS without a browser and media player if u like a media player more thn the 1 bundled or ulike a browser more than the 1 bundled install and use who is stopping u u can set it as ur default browser then y the un-necessary fus abt it
 

gxsaurav

You gave been GXified
infra_red_dude said:
I've already made it clear that Apple hasn't allowed much of 3rd party developers from a long time unlike the PC platform.

Really, I doubt that judging by the sheer number of applications for Mac OS X & arya's reply.

There is no tagging of html engine and the GNOME DE. I can use or remove any browser I want, completely at any point of the time.

Wait, if you can see a HTML Help file, (*.chm) then there is a HTML engine still there in Gnome DE (example)

In this respect Mac OS is the least tolerant. Prolly coz not many alternatives exist.

I don't like Quicktime, can I uninstall it in Mac OS X, sure I can, but then the software will be uninstalled but engine will still be there. If I remove the quicktime engine, Mac OS X will seaize to work properly.

Certainly not for me and many many others!!!

Fine, u do have the option to install anything else u want. I don't like Firefox in Ubuntu, where is my option to install Opera during the installation of Ubuntu & not Firefox?
Exactly, they've killed competition with a better product. And the competition wasn't even a threat to them!

Lolz...Safari better then firefox, u must be joking right :))

The Rendering speed, the out of box security etc. etc. Plz consider Opera in the discussion too.

I was comparing IE 7 software only, thats why i mentioned it clearly.
 

din

Tribal Boy
While making examples, please make something sensible. Basically examples are for people like me (non geeks) to understand things easily. Do not make examples for teh sake of making it lol.

Comparing Windows with shoe and shoe lace is really funny and nice but they are no way comparable.

Consider the threads I mentioned. Car and stereo. A car can run without a stereo, no problem at all. Tomo if Maruti forces the user to buy some crappy stereo of their own (made by maruti -lol) thats not a good business practise.

Now if the media player or browser is a part of OS and they can't be removed - OK, agreed. Basically there will not be any need of the interface, am I right ? I mean the basic engine (whetever it is called) may be needed but not the browser as such and not the media player as such. Just like MS deliver Win without media player (yes they do even before the proposal) in EU, they can do it everywhere.

Example - no stereo in car, but the space is left, so we can buy and put it there :) Simple isn't it ?

MS always like monopoly and kill competition, as I mentioned on the other threads, at a customer point of view, we may not feel bad - afterall we get a browser and media player free ! But customer is not the only part in a business. So monopoly or un-ethical business practices may be good for customer sometimes but that does not mean that that is good business.

All other points in the thread (starting post) sounds sensible, except this one. When apple make something, thats not really a threat but when MS make something like that it is really a threat. Thats the difference.

Most of the discussion above is around the customer - like whos stopping you from uninstalling - installing etc etc. But the point is not about customer, it is about un-ethical business practice, bundling products to kill competition and monopoly. So there is no point in arguing at a customer point of view.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom