Apple Computers - Seeking Opinions Before Buying

[scorpa]

Ok I know there was a thread about apple computers somewhere along the line in GD but I will be darned if I can find it so for now I guess I will start a new one. Anyway, my HP computer is in the shop yet again and it seems like it spends more time being fixed than working so I am contemplating getting a new computer. I despise the new windows vista so that pretty much leaves me with a mac, and I was kind of wanting to try one out anyway. They are a lot of money so I just wanted to ask some opinions before I made the decision to buy one, I know there are some mac users on this forum so hopefully I can get some good reviews. The computer I am looking at is the Apple MacBook Intel Core 2 Duo 2.16GHz Laptop with the 13.3 inch screen, here are the specs http://www.futureshop.ca/catalog/pr...665000FS10089197&catid=23016&logon=&langid=EN One question I have is compatibility issues, the world seems basically geared to pc so I was wondering if anyone has ever had trouble using an apple for school applications such as using webmail or webct, or accessing any other online class material.

Thanks

 

[Moonbear]

For online coursework, call your IT department and ask if they support Macs. MOST places I've been, this is not an issue at all, and not an inherent problem with software compatibility. HERE, however, our IT department seems stuck in the dark ages and some of our classroom software is not compatible with a mac...I've been told by another mac user on campus who is more familiar with the software that it is supposed to be compatible with Macs, but our IT department hasn't done something they need to do to make it supported. So, the best bet is to just call and ask if there are any issues.

As for anything else, I haven't had any compatibility problems. I've currently started using a PC because of the aforementioned problems here (and a few other issues I've given up fighting about with the IT dept), and have transferred all my Mac files over and haven't had any problems working between both operating systems (though I keep forgetting if I'm supposed to press apple-c or control-c when copying. )

 

[Tony11235]

Ok I know there was a thread about apple computers somewhere along the line in GD but I will be darned if I can find it so for now I guess I will start a new one. Anyway, my HP computer is in the shop yet again and it seems like it spends more time being fixed than working so I am contemplating getting a new computer. I despise the new windows vista so that pretty much leaves me with a mac, and I was kind of wanting to try one out anyway. They are a lot of money so I just wanted to ask some opinions before I made the decision to buy one, I know there are some mac users on this forum so hopefully I can get some good reviews. The computer I am looking at is the Apple MacBook Intel Core 2 Duo 2.16GHz Laptop with the 13.3 inch screen, here are the specs http://www.futureshop.ca/catalog/pr...665000FS10089197&catid=23016&logon=&langid=EN One question I have is compatibility issues, the world seems basically geared to pc so I was wondering if anyone has ever had trouble using an apple for school applications such as using webmail or webct, or accessing any other online class material.

Thanks

I despise windows as well, that doesn't mean the only options left are macs. Don't be afraid to give a user-friendly linux distro a try.

 

[Danger]

As far as I know, the Intel Macs will run Windows (whatever version you want) as a secondary OS, so there are no compatibility problems. For most other Macs, there's a programme called 'Virtual PC' available that emulates Windows enough to run most apps at a reduced speed. When you want to do something useful, switch back to Tiger.

 

[Mk]

I've never had compatibility issues, personally, and I encounter a massive amount of different extensions daily. The only thing is, you can't run .exe files. If you really have trouble with compatibility you can always download Boot Camp from Apple, and buy Windows, or use a virtualization software like VM Ware or Parallels. If you're an application pirate or computer whiz you can certainly P2P anything you need.

If you can manage it, I recommend waiting until October when all the laptops will be upgraded and will ship with the new operating system, 10.5 Leopard, for the same price.

 

[Chi Meson]

Rave. As a clarification of what has already been said, "Boot Camp" will let you run windows on your Intel-chipped Mac, not as a virtual OS, but as an actual OS. You do need to restart as you move between OSX and Vista, but with that machine, you're talking about, what, 10 seconds?

I am still using my hearty 2004, 800MHz half-dome iMac, and I can count with thumbs alone all the problems I have had with it (both due to 3rd party software, running in OS9 emulator).

Oh yeah, I'm not sure if this is still the case, but with a Mac, always get as much RAM as you can.

 

[scorpa]

If you can manage it, I recommend waiting until October when all the laptops will be upgraded and will ship with the new operating system, 10.5 Leopard, for the same price.

Do you think it will be pretty good then? I would hate to wait and buy it and find out it is terrible like vista.


Thanks for the advice everyone, I am still wrought with indecision haha, but I really think I am maybe getting closer!

 

[scorpa]

Ok so I have decided on getting the 13.3 inch Macbook. Do you guys think it is worth the extra money to upgrade it from 2.0 Ghz to 2.16Ghz and from 1.0Gb Ram to 2.0Gb Ram? I'm not super computer genius or anything so I don't really know whether it will be worth the money. But I also don't want some crappy slow computer either. I want to do this right the first time.

 

[Aquafire]

Re Leopard Vs Vista.

Forget the comparison. Vista is simply not in the same league.

I have a friend who used to be an utter Windows fanboy until he went to study IT at University of SA. To his astonishment all the professors were running Mac laptops with various ports of Linux/unix alongside of OS X.

As a matter of interest a growing number of Linux Distros are being cut for Intel based Macs. In fact, just last week, Mepis released Mepis Linux which will run perfectly well on an Intel based Mac.

http://distrowatch.com/

So if you want, you can run Vista, (God knows why) along side Darwin Unix, and Linux.. all alongside OS X then Mac is the way to go.

Heck even Linus Torvalds runs Macs.

BTW Here are two Desktop examples of my Linux set up.

http://img69.imageshack.us/img69/7322/aqualinuxge4.th.png

http://img257.imageshack.us/img257/9207/granularnm6.th.png

Cheers

Aquafire

 

[scorpa]

Oh and for the record I am getting the computer right away which means I will be getting the Tiger OS and missing out on the leopard :'( I had planned on waiting for the leopard OS but my computer had to be sent away back to HP and futureshop sent it UPS so now it is lost and no one knows where it is and it has been gone a month already. So now I have school starting in a bit over a week and have no computer. Anyway I am buying the thing tomorrow so if anyone has any comments on the 2 --> 2.16GHz and the 1GB --> 2GB upgrades and whether they are worth it I would appreciate the advice.

 

[rcgldr]

Hunter Cressall review of the mac:

 

[las3rjock]

Oh and for the record I am getting the computer right away which means I will be getting the Tiger OS and missing out on the leopard :'( I had planned on waiting for the leopard OS but my computer had to be sent away back to HP and futureshop sent it UPS so now it is lost and no one knows where it is and it has been gone a month already. So now I have school starting in a bit over a week and have no computer. Anyway I am buying the thing tomorrow so if anyone has any comments on the 2 --> 2.16GHz and the 1GB --> 2GB upgrades and whether they are worth it I would appreciate the advice.

I definitely recommend upgrading from 1 GB of RAM to 2 GB. The processor upgrade is up to you, but consider that 2 GHz to 2.16 GHz is only an 8% speedup, whereas if your computer runs out of RAM, it starts using the hard disk as RAM, which is almost a million times slower.

 

[scorpa]

Well I went and bought the 2.16 Ghz with 1GB of RAM, I wanted 2GB but they didn't have a model with 2GB there and I needed a computer right away. I will use it like this for awhile and if I think I want it faster I will upgrade it to 2GB later. I am just busy installing stuff and playing around right now and so far I really like it. It seems very simple to use and is very visually appealing. The fact that it is so small will be great for packing it around campus!

 

[las3rjock]

Well I went and bought the 2.16 Ghz with 1GB of RAM, I wanted 2GB but they didn't have a model with 2GB there and I needed a computer right away. I will use it like this for awhile and if I think I want it faster I will upgrade it to 2GB later. I am just busy installing stuff and playing around right now and so far I really like it. It seems very simple to use and is very visually appealing. The fact that it is so small will be great for packing it around campus!

I forgot to mention that it is easy to upgrade the RAM on your own, and much cheaper than having Apple do it. See, for example, http://www.crucial.com

 

[scorpa]

I forgot to mention that it is easy to upgrade the RAM on your own, and much cheaper than having Apple do it. See, for example, http://www.crucial.com

Thanks! *need more words ****

 

[Tony11235]

I would certainly put OS X way ahead of vista. But Apple is a f...control freak IMO.

 

[Aquafire]

I would certainly put OS X way ahead of vista. But Apple is a f...control freak IMO.

Almost true...

More accurately, Microsoft is the "F***cking Control Freak" company.

(Here picture a brute with a hairy back whipping slaves chained to wall)



Whereas Apple is more into... errmmm... let's call it ... "Bondage"

(Here picture a blonde with long legs, whipping slaves chained to bed)

Aquafire...:tongue:

 

[Tony11235]

Almost true...

More accurately, Microsoft is the "F***cking Control Freak" company.

(Here picture a brute with a hairy back whipping slaves chained to wall)



Whereas Apple is more into... errmmm... let's call it ... "Bondage"

(Here picture a blonde with long legs, whipping slaves chained to bed)

Aquafire...:tongue:

But seriously, they encrypt their binaries, which is not only paranoid, it slows performance down a bit. Not to mention, all the stupid downsides to the iPhone, like a specialized audio jack, not allowing one to use just any head phones. But don't get that because I'm saying this I'm a microsoft person.

 

[turbo]

One of the reasons for OS bloat and inefficiency in MS products was Gates' determination to preserve backward compatibility whenever possible. This meant that if your application software was adequate for your needs, you did not have to upgrade it when you upgraded the OS. Apple did not have this kind of respect for their customers, and a major OS upgrade could entail buying hundreds or thousands of dollars worth of expensive application software all over again. I worked for a company that ran into this problem, and rather than buy the requires licenses, the Tech Manager shipped us field reps Macs loaded with pirated software. I didn't feel to bad about leaving that company when I got a better offer. Since I had done a stint writing custom application software for businesses, I was a bit touchy about stealing software.

 

[Tony11235]

One of the reasons for OS bloat and inefficiency in MS products was Gates' determination to preserve backward compatibility whenever possible. This meant that if your application software was adequate for your needs, you did not have to upgrade it when you upgraded the OS. Apple did not have this kind of respect for their customers, and a major OS upgrade could entail buying hundreds or thousands of dollars worth of expensive application software all over again. I worked for a company that ran into this problem, and rather than buy the requires licenses, the Tech Manager shipped us field reps Macs loaded with pirated software. I didn't feel to bad about leaving that company when I got a better offer. Since I had done a stint writing custom application software for businesses, I was a bit touchy about stealing software.

That's one of the reasons why I stick with free and open source software.

 

[robphy]

One of the reasons for OS bloat and inefficiency in MS products was Gates' determination to preserve backward compatibility whenever possible. This meant that if your application software was adequate for your needs, you did not have to upgrade it when you upgraded the OS. Apple did not have this kind of respect for their customers, and a major OS upgrade could entail buying hundreds or thousands of dollars worth of expensive application software all over again.

Part of this story is tied in with the lineage of the Intel processors x86 (8088 to Core2Duo) in PCs.

Macs, on the other hand, have jumped around a bit: Motorola 6502 and 68000, IBM PowerPC, and now Intel Core2Duo... probably stranding some folks along the way. (I'm not sure how well the emulators work.)

(I like the fact that there's Linux around so that the old PCs can still benefit from some modern software.)

 

[rcgldr]

Macs, on the other hand, have jumped around a bit: Motorola 6502 and 68000, IBM PowerPC, and now Intel Core2Duo.

6502 => Apple 2, not a Mac. It ran at a whopping 1mhz (while the Atari's 400 / 800 / 65XE / 130XE ran their 6502 at 2mhz).

a short history of the mac and how it became so unpopular

The Lisa and the first Macintosh's used a Motorola 68000, but with the Mac only having 128k of ram, they didn't use a 32bit flat model, and instead used PC relative instructions and handles, which were pointers to pointers to allocated resources, which could change anytime a system call was made (had to re-establish the handles). With MPW (Macintosh Programmers Workshop), applications had to be manually split up into 32k chunks (by grouping source file object outputs) so that the handles, jumps, and calls would be within range of the PC relative instructions. Note that MPW ran in command line mode, similar to a windowed version of the dos console mode in windows. Think C improved on this with a GUI interface to specify how to group source files with a drag and drop interface. Later, Think C implemented a GUI interface to generate code from menus and windows created via a GUI interface (4th generation language). In spite of promises that the next OS (4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9) would have pre-emption, they never did, until OS-X. Macs might have been user friendly, but they weren't programer friendly.

Just 3 years after the first Mac, the Commodore Amiga and the Atari ST showed up, the Atari having 1024mb of ram (or 512mb). The Atari ST had a niche market in the music industry, but was otherwise never that popular, in spite of the fact that it was simply DOS ported to run on a flat 32-bit environment, with a Windows 3.0 like GUI called GEM (from Digital Research) running on top, bascially the 32 bit equivalent of DOS and Windows 3.1 on a 32 bit platform.

Back to the early Macs, they didn't have DMA, even though the very first PC's had it as well as most of the CPM systems prior to PC's. So the MAC's had a cluge called "blind reads" and "blind writes" to speed up I/O with a weak hardware handshake to throttle CPU reads or writes. Eventually 3rd party vendors made DMA SCSI adpaters, later the Macs incorporated DMA.

One of the mistakes by Apple was the decision to raise prices at the end of 1989, about the same time that 286 and 386 clones with Windows 3.0 were starting to flood the market place. Apple was pretty "smug" in those days. Market share eventually dropped to well under 10%, and party time was over.

Then again, there's the IBM PS/2 fiasco that occurred during the same time period. I'm not sure what caused confusion, but a lot of people though that PS/2's could only run OS/2 and vice versa. IBM wouldn't make a 386 AT, and that doomed IBM's market share, as the EISA group took over and made their own 386AT standard. Now it's Intel and Microsoft calling the shots.

I've always had the impression that Macs were overpriced, and non-compatable, especially if a person has any interest in computer games. At least with an Intel based Mac, it's compatable, but then what's the advantage of buying a Mac?

Since I do some computer gaming, I won't be buying Windows Vista, and will stick with XP for quite a while. Although I did buy Visual Studio 2005, I'm still running Office XP (prior to versions that have years in their names).