Post #46,534
7/23/02 3:10:14 PM
|
Au contraire
USB vs ADB vs FireWire or IDE vs SCSI - the average user could care less. Oh no. They care. They care a LOT. You can argue IDE vs. SCSI until you're blue in the face - but the average user will pick an IDE system every time, when told it costs $100 less. DVD? Can you say quicktime? Excuse me? To compare Quicktime with DVD is laughable at best, and the height of duplicity at worst. Especially Quicktime circa 1990. The two button mouse with the pop-open menus is not a PC innovation. But while it damn well might not be anything innovative on a PC, it isn't even featured on Apples. Sheesh, man, while it may be "supported", they *still* don't deliver a 2-button mouse, as far as I could tell from their web site. PC 2-button mice have been standard since pretty near the first time any were available. Like sound. Standard in the Mac since 1984. When did PC sound become ubiquitous? Seems pretty recent. And when did the Mac get color? Seems to me it took a long, long time for the Mac to get color. Even the pathetic CGA color featured by PC's in 1984, let alone the improved PC Jr. or Tandy color, were superior. (Let alone Amiga's or others). The computer for the rest of us was outperformed and outgunned at almost every step by the computers for the geeks of us, because those geeks did things with those computers that actually did useful and fun things for the rest of us. Hell, my Radio Shack Color Computer was more useful and expandable than the first Macintoshes. I was fully prepared to like the Mac (shoot, I loved that little 6809 in the Color Computer and was horrified by the 8086 in the IBM PC, I expected to love the 68000 in the Mac). WRONG. Famous last RPG quotes: "I'll just shoot this fireball down the dungeon passageway..."
|
Post #46,545
7/23/02 4:13:29 PM
|
Don't tease the Mac Fans
they don't like it when you spoil their party.
First they claim that the Mac had it first, then they will say that some other platform before the PC had it first but it doesn't matter that the PC had it before the Mac.
Quicktime, buggy as it is, always beats DVD players in their book.
They completely ignore the Cuecat, free device that Radio Shack gave out, improved the UI by allowing users to scan in bar codes to go to web sites. Sure beat typing in [link|http://www.radioshack.com/|http://www.radioshack.com/] to the browser and then searching for the item they wanted instead of scanning it from a Radio Shack catalog and jumping right to the site on the website to buy it from. But no, it wasn't on the Mac first, so it doesn't count. Or they will try aad say that it wasn't a true UI improvement, or that it didn't matter. As far as I knew, it was only PC technology, it used a PS/2 keyboard port. But they did invent a Linux interface driver for it.
Oh yeah, let's ignore the PCjr, because it was just a piece of crap. It didn't sell well at first, like the Original Macintosh. One of my friends actually got a cheap PCJr from a surplus sale and they threw in a free 300 baud modem with it, he was able to hook it up to his TV set and play Tradewars and get on BBSes way back when. To him, it wasn't a piece of crap, it worked as advertised. All he did was get a copy of Procomm, and zing, off he went. Software was easier to install/use on the PCjr than the regular PC, as some games came on cartridges. You cannot beat just plugging in a cart and powering the system on for an easy install. Plus the Sidecar expansion on the PCJr had a primative plug and play technology, this was before the Mac, and at a time when all the Mac had for expansion was serial ports (Before SCSI, and ADB) and that floppy port.
The Amiga pinoneered high color displays and desktops. It had 4096 colors, when the Mac still worked in shades of grey (on its built in monitor) and the best that IBM had was 16 color EGA. The Amiga also had a built in speech chip and an API to access it. Amiga BASIC had the first interface to it via the "SPEAK" command, and other languages had built in support for it. But it doesn't matter, because it was not a Macintosh?
Let's not get started on those HP systems and the touch screen that they had, oh no. It predated the Macintosh and the UI made things easier to use by pointing at it with your finger. No points there, even if it did use 3.5" drives before most other PC Clones.
I am free now, to choose my own destiny.
|
Post #46,557
7/23/02 4:38:16 PM
|
You miss the point
In 1984, PC and home computer users were typing commands to do stuff.
GEM hadn't happened yet, and Windows was still a twinkle in Bill's eye.
Mac users were dragging files to the trash.
PCs do this, they do that. Mainly the discussion about PC hardware and software is a discussion of What Microsoft Did Next.
The ability to play King's Quest in 320x200x16 colours is an evolution, not a revolution.
The ability to graphically manage your stuff, on the other hand, was a sea change that altered the face of computing for ever.[1]
So what if it was in black and white?
[1] Ye Olde Chestenutt about Xerox and the Star system is duly noted.
Peter
[link|http://www.debian.org|Shill For Hire]
[link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal]
[link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Blog]
|
Post #46,564
7/23/02 4:49:47 PM
|
Big deal
Do you care that AT&T had the phone system and long distance before any other company? Does that fact prevent you from using WorldCom, Sprint, or any other Long Distance Carrier? Diner's Club invented the credit card, but does that prevent you from using Mastercard, Visa, Discover, or American Express? McDonald's practially invented Fast Food, but would that prevent you from going to Burger King, Taco Bell, Jack In The Box, KFC, Hardee's, etc? Ford practially invented the car (I know I know, some German guy did it first) or rather the automobile assembly line but will that stop you from buying a Chevy, Toyota, Saturn, GMC, etc? What prevents you from using the service or product from the company that originaly thought it up, or that had it before anyone else?
Pepsi and Coke, which is better? Or does the average person care which one came first? Or are they more concerned which one costs less?
Most of the time people go with the less expensive product or service, that $600USD PC rather than that $1200USD Mac. Why? Don't ask me, I am not your average user.
I am free now, to choose my own destiny.
|
Post #46,562
7/23/02 4:48:04 PM
|
Think Not
RE: IDE vs SCSI, etc. The average user sitting down at a computer can't tell if there's IDE, SCSI, FireWire (which actually I think is significant because of the hot swappability) or a squirrel with tin cans and string. Its not an evident technology to the casual user and most Mac users couldn't tell when it switched. So where's the innovation there?
Purchase price changes don't fundamentally change the way people interact with computers the way something like wireless ethernet does. (Which I miss horribly at my new company as I was used to wandering from room to room while working - that's a fundamental change in my relationship with my computer).
| And when did the Mac get color?
Two years before the PC got Windows. Why?
|The computer for the rest of us was outperformed and outgunned
Not even going to answer this as performance is an undefinable quantity. At least they took the RISK to WASTE processor cycles on USELESS tasks like DRAWING understandable interfaces. IOW, they defined performance in a fairly different way than you do. That took balls.
Incidentally, the current MacOS X has at the core of its UI a hybrid C/OO Runtime that is over 10 years old and is at least 10 years ahead of its nearest competition TODAY. There's a reason free apps are getting cranked out. They're FUCKING EASY to write. If you're not a developer or your brain's been damaged by C++ or other languages of its ilk then walk on by - your calcified brain will never get it.
So how do you measure performance? MIPS? FLOPS? Time to swap out the motherboard? Pounds of hardware per $ spent? Who fuckin cares?
I am out of the country for the duration of the Bush administration.
Please leave a message and I'll get back to you when democracy returns.
|
Post #46,568
7/23/02 4:58:46 PM
|
Price, even if you like it or not, always is a big factor.
Apple may not always get it either. That $600USD PC is going to be bought over the $1200USD Mac even if the Mac is a better buy, runs faster, easier to use, and can do backflips. Price is a big factor, which is why Apple has tried to make cheaper Macs. If not, then Apple would have only made $2000USD systems and wouldn't have bothered to try and keep the prices down.
To own a Mac, you usually have to pay a higher price than that PC sold at Wal-Mart that is pre-loaded with Linux. Not everyone likes to do that. Not everyone is rich, and in case you haven't noticed, the economy isn't the best it ever has been, has a four year low.
My best idea of a system is an ATX based clone, just replace the motherboard and CPU every once in a while, and then upgrade the video, audio, hard drive, and optical drive when you can afford to do so. No need to buy a new $850USD or $1200USD system everytime you need to upgrade. If you cannot do it yourself, find someone who will. Most PC Dealers and Mom and Pop shops are happy to install hardware for you for an extra fee, like $35USD.
I am free now, to choose my own destiny.
|
Post #46,571
7/23/02 5:06:55 PM
|
So low price is a PC "innovation" copied by everybody else?
Not much of an innovation, is it?
I mean, companies have been competing on price long before the discovery of electricity.
What is your POINT here?
I am out of the country for the duration of the Bush administration.
Please leave a message and I'll get back to you when democracy returns.
|
Post #46,587
7/23/02 5:36:03 PM
|
The point is innovating to keep the price down, better bang
for the buck.
Or maybe you rather liked it when a computer system cost between $3500USD and $5000USD?
The PC Cloners innovated to find ways to keep the cost down, this made the system easier for the average user to be able to afford to use one. By Microsoft allowing OEMs to buy DOS and Windows, and not just limit to the IBM brand PC systems, but any X86 based system, it opened up a whole market for hundreds if not thousands of companies.
Sure competition is nothing new, but the PC companies focused on ways to make things cheaper, more affordable. Apple eventually had to follow suit. Eventually Apple used PC technology to keep prices down, like IDE hard drives and USB ports.
I am free now, to choose my own destiny.
|
Post #46,589
7/23/02 5:45:24 PM
|
Maybe
but I don't see it as an innovation.
Besides, at the moment, the PC makers are innovating with MS to push the price UP.
Its interesting that more than 50% of the base PC's cost is now software.
Some innovation.
I am out of the country for the duration of the Bush administration.
Please leave a message and I'll get back to you when democracy returns.
|
Post #46,600
7/23/02 6:16:39 PM
|
You apparently don't seem to see a lot of things
because you are so blinded by the Mac. You cannot see the whole picture, apparently.
PC makers pushing with Microsoft to push the price up? Do you have any proof of this?
More than 50% of the base PC's cost is software? Does that include that Linux system sold at Wal-Mart or the systems that are sold without an OS?
I am free now, to choose my own destiny.
|
Post #46,601
7/23/02 6:19:28 PM
|
What systems are those then?
Go to Dell, Compaq/HP, IBM, Gateway, whatever. Pick your system integrator. I don't care.
Now get them to sell you a regular box without an operating system.
Now walk over to the software shelf, pick up a copy of XP Home, and tell me how much it is.
Now consider that Windows 3.11 cost 30 bucks ten years ago.
Now do the math on how much of a percentage of the total system cost a copy of XP Home is compared to what the same percentage was for Windows 3.11 all those years ago.
Peter
[link|http://www.debian.org|Shill For Hire]
[link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal]
[link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Blog]
|
Post #46,969
7/26/02 2:55:10 AM
|
I always thought you were intelligent.
Windows 3.11 cost (bare-bones) a lot more than $30. Upgrade to 3.11, maybe. (And of course they never did manage to say exactly what they did from 3.10 to 3.11, other than incidentally breaking OS/2 support.)
And what does this have to do with expensive $2000 low-featured relatively low-powered unexpandable Macs vs. $1000 many-featured greatly expandable PC's?
The lawyers would mostly rather be what they are than get out of the way even if the cost was Hammerfall. - Jerry Pournelle
|
Post #46,973
7/26/02 3:39:55 AM
|
Expandable in which dimension?
They now use most of the same device busses so I'm curious how Macs are not expandable?
I mean: IDE, USB, Firewire, 802.11b, 56k modem, CD/DVD-ROM, both digital video and whatever the older (rgb?) thing is. What doesn't expand? Heck, the desktops flip open with a latch making component installation take a second - no screwdrivers required. I don't get your point.
Plus, I kinda think MacOS X is worth the price differential. Because while you may get yourself a PC for X dollars, it comes with a built-in money tap (halting regularly to demand upgrade money) that flows to MS. In the end you pay more unless you run non-ms software (which you still generally end up paying for once except for a few rare exceptions).
Then there's the value thing. Software I need to run doesn't run on linux. So the relative value of the PC is zero. Not a good value prop.
I don't think your assertion holds.
And what does this have to do with innovations that change the definition of what a computer is?
I am out of the country for the duration of the Bush administration.
Please leave a message and I'll get back to you when democracy returns.
|
Post #47,049
7/26/02 12:08:39 PM
|
Fear of a Red Hat
The Mac has taken on PC technology to become more expandable. USB, PCI, AGP, IDE, etc. But then the PC is using Mac technology for Firewire now.
Linux can run DOS and Windows software, just like a Mac can. There are emulators for Linux that can run DOS or Windows or both. In fact, a free project called WINE, is growing very popular [link|http://www.winehq.org/|[link|http://www.winehq.org/|http://www.winehq.org/]] there also is DOSEMU for running DOS, but you need a copy of DOS to run inside of it. Others are listed in the Linux forum if you are bothering to read it.
If you run Linux for the Mac, there is always MacOnLinux to boot MacOS 9.X or lower in a virtual Machine.
So what is this BS about Linux not being able to run the software you need? What software are you talking about? Why are Mac Fans so adamantly against Linux? Fear of a Red Hat?
I am free now, to choose my own destiny.
|
Post #47,048
7/26/02 12:03:18 PM
|
Not only that
but way back when, one needed a copy of DOS and Windows to get Windows functional. You couldn't just run Windows by itself with version 3.X, it needed a version of DOS to run on top of. So it was MS-DOS 5.0 and Windows 3.1, and each cost more than $30 a pop way back when. I recall in 1993, paying $99 for Windows 3.1, and about $99 for MS-DOS 5.0 when I worked for a Fortune 500 company in St. Louis and I wrote up purchase orders. Of course that was the discount we got from the vendor, I think it cost more than that unless you got an upgrade price.
Of course, look at Pricewatch: [link|http://www.pricewatch.com/1/182/4181-2.htm|[link|http://www.pricewatch.com/1/182/4181-2.htm|http://www.pricewat...2/4181-2.htm]]
If you buy it with hardware, you can get Windows XP Pro with a mouse for $130, way back when Windows 3.1 plus MS-DOS 5.0 cost more than that.
How is $130 half of the $600 el-cheapo systems out there? Is this some sort of New Math? It also is certainly less than $198 that I used to be able to buy Windows 3.1 and MS-DOS 5.0 for. Plus Windows XP Pro has a lot of things built into it that Windows 3.1 never had, like a TCP/IP stack, a web browser, Firewall, etc.
So just how much of this bullsh*t are we expected to swallow anyway? We know that Microsoft is evil, but don't exagerate things to beyond what they really are. Don't get caught up in the MacJihad, it does not suit you.
I am free now, to choose my own destiny.
|
Post #47,074
7/26/02 3:49:08 PM
|
You still need Office
Which is an insane amount of money these days.
Plus, MS puts you on a treadmill to keep the revenues running.
Linux? I've never bought a PC (think the hardware is lame and won't pay the MS tax) so I can't speak to its general usefulness - but the Linux distros for various macs (which I have installed) were so fiddly and lame as to leave me wondering what the noise was about.
My opion of the apps on linux - they kinda suck. The dev environment - ditto. Even nextstep isn't ready for prime time.
OS X is a nice supported commercial unix with good dev tools and a good suite of apps. Plus I like the hardware. Its not a fiddly thing that drives me nuts getting it running. It just works out of the box. So I like it. What a surprise, we're in the Mac forums and I'm saying I prefer OS X to any other OS out there. Try not to act too surprised, OK?
I do happen to have a linux box at the moment as a workgroup server. Its running resin to run the devtools.org wiki, its our cvs over ssh server, but we never use an interface more elaborate than bash on it. For what it does, its fine. But I don't think I'd use it for much more than that and I'm probably going to replace it with a solaris box.
I am out of the country for the duration of the Bush administration.
Please leave a message and I'll get back to you when democracy returns.
|
Post #47,091
7/26/02 6:38:14 PM
|
But Office isn't part of the OS
and it is optional. One does not need to buy Office to get a working PC. Maybe Dell and Gateway etc bundle Office with their PC, but I bet they offer models without Office, or ones that use MS-Works instead. That is like me saying that in order to use a Mac, you also have to buy Appleworks and Filemaker Pro and subscribe to the .Mac service.
BTW what is up with those $129USD MacOSX 10.2 upgrades? Doesn't Apple have an "upgrade" price to older OSX owners?
I am free now, to choose my own destiny.
|
Post #47,179
7/27/02 11:15:30 AM
7/27/02 11:18:10 AM
|
Sure it is
Just like Explorer is.
Actually, MS doesn't maintain a clear distinction between OS code and app code. No sense of architecture in their stuff. I've never seen a PC without Office and the rest of the MS app stuff installed by default.
RE Upgrade: OS development costs money. You have to pay for its somehow.
I am out of the country for the duration of the Bush administration.
Please leave a message and I'll get back to you when democracy returns.
|
Post #47,190
7/27/02 2:11:21 PM
|
I said it before
and I'll say it again for the hard of hearing. Office is an optional package for Windows, some systems use MSWorks instead for the bundled software package.
I am free now, to choose my own destiny.
|
Post #47,483
7/30/02 1:40:35 PM
|
Re: I said it before
some systems use MSWorks instead for the bundled software package. (raises hand) I haven't used much of it except the calendar, but I suppose its word processor and/or spreadsheet and/or whatever are adequate (even though I do still remember PC Write, PC Outline, probably with too much nostalgia.) The lawyers would mostly rather be what they are than get out of the way even if the cost was Hammerfall. - Jerry Pournelle
|
