Are you folks MAC or PC?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by baker1, Dec 20, 2005.

  1. baker1

    Ray Fischer Guest

    Might be, if I get organized enough.
    Ray Fischer, Dec 25, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  2. baker1

    Bill Funk Guest

    And do you see that they must follow Apple's guidelines?
    Anyone can produce hardware or software for PCs; it's an open system.
    To do the same for a Mac, there are very specific guidelines that must
    be adhered to; it's not an open system.

    I'm not bashing, just pointing out the realities. I know people who
    use Macs, and, for the most part, they are very happy with them.
    But, many are religious in their zeal, too, which puts me off the Mac.
    Bill Funk, Dec 25, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  3. baker1

    Nikon User Guest

    If you get there, look me up.
    Nikon User, Dec 26, 2005
  4. baker1

    Nikon User Guest

    And do you see that they must follow Apple's guidelines?[/QUOTE]

    And to work with Windows, they must follow Microsoft's guidelines.
    Thing is that there has been software for the Mac that didn't follow
    Apple's guidelines, and it worked--sometimes even after the next
    revision of the OS was released or even after the next revision of the
    hardware was released.
    That has nothing to do with it.
    And anyone can do that too.

    Curious thing, though; I can plug many firewire or USB devices into my
    iMac and they work without my having to download a driver. But those
    same devices come with a CD ROM containing the drivers for Wintel
    machines--without those drivers, they don't work.
    Nikon User, Dec 26, 2005
  5. baker1

    Bruce Hoult Guest

    I'm afraid you seem to have some incorrect misconceptions.

    I've been programming Macs since 1984, and other systems such as
    Windows, Linux, Solaris at various times.

    Here's how the traditional Mac (pre OSX) works when it runs a program.
    It runs your program and you are in charge. You can use as much CPU as
    you want and no other program can do anything until you make a special
    system call that lets them. You can gget direct access to any hardware
    you like, such as the screen memory, in which you can dra anyting you
    want into any pixel you want. There is nothing forcing you to do
    anything whatsoever in Apple's way. You can take over the entire

    But, y'know, it's a lot of work to implement an entire user interface
    from scratch. And Apple just happens to provide a rather large and
    rather nice library of code that makes it pretty easy to follow Apple's
    published user interface guidelines. Easier in fact than doing your own
    thing. The line of least resistance is to take advantage of that. And
    then your users will love you annd buy your product because it acts how
    you expect. But you don't have to. Not even a little bit.

    This is far more free and open than Windows. In Windows, it's not your
    program that is in charge, it's Windows. Your program only gets called
    when Windows thinks that it needs to respond to something. Windows is
    the boss. You're not.

    On to Mac OSX. OSX is a bit more like Windows. Your program is still
    pretty much in charge, but it can no longer deny resources such as the
    CPU to other programs. But the Carbon API still puts your program in
    charge of its own user interface. You can choose to follow Apple's
    guidelines, or not.

    But the big new thing with OSX is that you can get the complete source
    code for a portion of OSX that corresponds to what you get in a
    text-based version of Linux. You can get the source code and compile it
    yourself and modify it if you want. You can run standard X Windows and
    KDE or Gnome on top of it, or you can put your custom version of the OS
    underneath a standard OSX install. You can also boot any commercial
    copy of OSX into text mode by entering ">console?" into the user name
    box on the login screen and then run it in text mode or run X and KDE
    etc (if you install them yourself).

    That seems pretty open to me. Certainly far more than Windows is, and
    anything available in Linux (etc) is also available, with source code,
    for OSX.

    We can go into hardware if you like.
    Bruce Hoult, Dec 26, 2005

  6. How do you explain the fact that Windows application and PC hardware have
    become the industry standard in all walks of life?

    Our Air Traffic Control System in Canada is using PCs and Windows to display
    Air Traffic radar information to the Air Traffic Controllers. That is a lot
    of confidence placed the readily available PCs and Windows.
    WannabeSomeone, Dec 26, 2005
  7. baker1

    Nikon User Guest

    That has nothing to do with what you replied to.

    The answer to your question is another question: How do you explain
    that VHS became the standard for consumers instead of the superior
    Nikon User, Dec 26, 2005
  8. There's a great old New York Times quote about that:

    'DOS Computers manufactured by companies such as IBM,
    Compaq, Tandy, and millions of others, are by far the most
    popular, with about 70 million machines in use worldwide.

    'Macintosh fans, on the other hand, may note that
    cockroaches are far more numerous than humans, and that
    numbers alone do not denote a higher life form.'

    Not too long ago, the Ford Escort was the most popular car in the USA.
    It was an awful car; but it was cheap, good enough (barely) for most
    purposes, and agressively marketed. Sound familiar?
    Scott Schuckert, Dec 26, 2005
  9. baker1

    George Kerby Guest

    Absolutely agreed, N.U.!

    As much as you are an asshole and use a p.o.s. Nikon, you DO have a
    redeeming factor.

    I would suggest to those out there who want to bash the Mac and tout
    Micro$oft Windoze, to go to the library (too cheap to buy) and pick up a
    copy of "Just Say No To Microsoft" by Tony Bove. They will be in for a

    Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 -
    <><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>
    George Kerby, Dec 26, 2005
  10. baker1

    George Kerby Guest

    Funny, this was done a year and a half ago. Ancient by today's standards...

    Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 -
    <><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>
    George Kerby, Dec 26, 2005
  11. baker1

    Cynicor Guest

    Yeah, great quote and all, but really quite irrelevant to the
    discussion. Just like thinking that iPods are revolutionary or better
    just because Apple says they are, when every release of a new iPod is
    years behind cutting edge.
    Cynicor, Dec 26, 2005
  12. baker1

    Nikon User Guest

    They're better because they're better. Unlike Windows, which had a
    hardware headstart on the Mac, the iPod ate up existing competition.

    By hardware headstart, I mean that there were millions of DOS machines
    that could run Windows; customers didn't have to buy new hardware to run
    it, as they did with the Mac.

    But there are people who will knock Apple and anything that Apple makes
    simply because it's Apple
    Nikon User, Dec 26, 2005
  13. baker1

    Pinehollow Guest

    Just like there are people who will knock Microsoft and anything that
    Microsoft makes simply because it's Microsoft.

    Pinehollow, Dec 26, 2005
  14. baker1

    Pinehollow Guest

    Economics - Economics - Economics.

    Pinehollow, Dec 26, 2005
  15. baker1

    Bob Salomon Guest

    Bob Salomon, Dec 26, 2005
  16. It all boils down to personal preference. I don't think anyone can produce
    valid indisputable evidence that one is better than the other. In the
    beginning Apple screwed themselves by trying to keep a tight lock on the
    market and strong-arming their customers into buying overpriced hardware
    that couldn't be upgraded. The simple concept of IBM clones was the
    greatest thing that ever happened to the computer world.

    As for the iPod, it was the only thing that saved Apple's ass. Fortunately,
    the iPod prevented Apple from joining the Tandy TRS-80 on a display shelf at
    the Smithsonian.
    Yep! Apple screwed the pooch and is continually screwing it by making their
    hardware/software obsolete and not upgradeable.
    This is true, but there is some validity to the complaints. It does make
    for some good entertainment to strum along the people that get caught up in
    these simple minded wars, especially the browser wars.

    Rita Ä Berkowitz, Dec 26, 2005
  17. baker1

    Bill Funk Guest

    Betamax was superior on paper, but most viewers couldn't see any
    Then, when Sony refused to meet VHS's increase in recording time, that
    sealed Betamax's fate.
    Bill Funk, Dec 26, 2005
  18. baker1

    Ray Fischer Guest

    IBM supported MS-DOS on their early PCs.
    Ray Fischer, Dec 26, 2005
  19. baker1

    Ray Fischer Guest

    Wasn't so great for IBM.
    Ray Fischer, Dec 26, 2005
  20. Nope! But, if you read the history behind it all you will see that IBM made
    a conscious decision to throw all that away. And, of course, they are still
    kicking themselves in the ass now for this mistake.
    How so? If it weren't for the iPod being the core sales for Apple they
    would have went down for good this time. Microsoft bailed Apple out last
    time they had cardiac arrest, I'm not sure if Billy Boy would have done it
    again. Thank goodness for the iPod.

    Rita Ä Berkowitz, Dec 26, 2005
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.