Mac OS usage poll

uccemebug · 09-25-2009, 04:04 PM

Originally posted by ryan s

It's that people want something just to have it. To keep it photo-related, how many times have people wanted a Canon or Nikon because it's a Canon or Nikon?

Marketing sows deeply into us. Apple makes you believe their products are better because of "appearance and interface" not because of actual function. Put a cool, smooth, face on a regular music player, and you have an ipod

Besides the Touch, what can an ipod do that a Zune, Sansa, etc can't? Syncing with any computer, without itune--oops...not that

Going back on topic...I do feel that OS X is good for the casual user but I feel "left out" when I can't change things to suit me. I tried Ubuntu...really hard to use. OS X is just a spiffied up Linux. If something doesn't work on OS X, I can't figure it out. Windows...no problem.

But that's kind of the reason I want OS X...so I can learn it and use it easily

Actually, OSX is a spiffed up BSD. The difference being that BSD is developed like a professional software product and Linux is not.

I recently bought my first OSX box this Summer (more than ten years after using NeXTOS). I didn't buy it for any of the interface stuff, I bought it because I wanted to return to a UNIX desktop for software development. I've got an article about my experiences on my site, but I'll summarize by saying:
-the OS is less visible/instrusive overall
-Finder is as bad as Windows Explorer (OSX users, try "Path Finder")
-I'll never go without a UNIX dev environment again

I agree with the sentiment about many of Apple's customers needing a kick in the balls, though. With a small child at home I don't get out much these days, and I find that when I do I'm surrounded by people staring into their iPhones and tittering over something like:
Genki Robot

Photo-wise, I just ordered my first book through iPhoto. Not cheap, but it's supposedly of better quality than Blurb (with which I've had problems).

uccemebug · 09-25-2009, 04:08 PM

Originally posted by ryan s

Custom built desktop running OS X...want.

Ah, the "Hackintosh". Perhaps a torrent or two are in your future? 8^)

ryan s · 09-25-2009, 04:50 PM

Originally posted by rinoaa52r

@ryan My custom build is all off the shelf parts.

Gigabyte P35-DS3L motherboard
Xeon equivelant of the Q6600
4Gb OCZ memory
EVGA 8800GTS 512mb Video
HDD and DVDRW are SATA

all buyable parts from newegg

the only thing I had a problem with is that it is a PITA to find a WIFI card compatible with OSX.

sorry if I started an arguement. It wasn't ment.

Originally posted by séamuis

so you are running OSX I presume? I thought of building my own and shoe-horning a copy of OSX onto it, but in the end I just went with a new notebook and running windows 7. (my specs are pretty much identical to those of the lowest priced macbook, the white one. for which I considered on the buy list at the time) I would love to be able to run OSX on it as well, but the nearly 400 dollar price difference (at the time, my lenovo was on sale) just didn't seem worth it.

Originally posted by uccemebug

Ah, the "Hackintosh". Perhaps a torrent or two are in your future? 8^)

Ohhhh have I thought about the OSX86...when I built my last computer, I was soooooooooo close to clicking the "download" button

I was on TPB...had located the version I wanted...

But it's been the niggling little things like WiFi and trackpad support (now that I have a Win7-loaded laptop instead of a PB G4) that have kept me away.

I, like others, have been kept away from "lightly-used" 1G MacBooks since they're still holding their value even compared to a brand new PC.

Someday...someday...

photolady95 · 09-25-2009, 07:23 PM

The last Mac I had in 1995 was running at 66Mhz. And it cost me $2500 for just the computer. Then I had to buy the modem, the monitor, and the printer/scanner. My first PC all quality parts cost me $1100 and ran at 333Mhz, also all parts were about $10 to $20 cheaper. The one below cost me just over $500 and it also has quality parts.

Asus M2N68-VM Amd 2+/3+
AMD Athlon 64 X2 7750 Kuma 2.7GHz Socket AM2+ Dual-Core black edition
G.SKILL 4GB (4 x 1GB)DDR2 1066 (PC2 8500)
MSI GeForce 9400 GT 1GB 128-bit GDDR2 PCI Express HDCP Ready
200GB WD
WD Caviar 640GB SATA 3.0Gb/s
Lite-On 22x DVDRW SATA
Antec TruePower 550W
SAMSUNG High Gloss Piano Black 22"
RAIDMAX Tornado
KeyTronic Standard
Logitech Trackman Marble
Dual boot Vista Ultimate 32 bit/Windows 7 RC/64 bit
Built by Me!!

Also, software for a Mac was more expensive. When I changed machines, I got my Adobe Photoshop for nothing, I just exchanged the Mac version for a Windows version.

AlmightyPentax · 09-25-2009, 07:32 PM

If you had asked me a year ago I would have said yes. Now that windows 7 is out and I've been running it since beta...

My mind has been changed. I still have my imac, and I love it. But I built this PC for 1/3 the cost of a new imac and it's got the same specs. If I time both of my machines starting up as well as running processes in CS4 the PC is winning hands down.

If windows 7 stays stable and quick, I can't see spending the extra money on the "Apple Tax"

séamuis · 09-26-2009, 05:31 AM

windows 7 has been very good for microsoft so far. it really is the best OS since XP, maybe the best OS period. I know several people myself that switched to a cheaper PC from a mac after using windows 7. I love it, its a fantastic OS.

rinoaa52r · 09-26-2009, 07:41 AM

Well it isn't fully the OS that keeps me with mac. Granted I like the ease of use that OSX offers. I like the way Aperture works. I am also messing around with making home movies and I haven't seen a windows program that works like Final Cut does. Vegas comes close but not nearly as streamlined.

séamuis · 09-26-2009, 10:36 AM

Originally posted by rinoaa52r

Well it isn't fully the OS that keeps me with mac. Granted I like the ease of use that OSX offers. I like the way Aperture works. I am also messing around with making home movies and I haven't seen a windows program that works like Final Cut does. Vegas comes close but not nearly as streamlined.

which is why a lot of people would love to be able to use OSX on a PC.

mysticcowboy · 09-26-2009, 05:56 PM

One of the real advantages Apple has is that it makes both the software and hardware. I've run OS X on non-supported machines, Hackintoshes they're called. It's not the same. Windows has to support all comers and that makes is less predictable, which is what you'd get if Apple let OS X run on any box. That's a long winded way of saying probably not.

But then again, I still bi--h when I have to use Windows for any length of time so maybe yes.

séamuis · 09-27-2009, 08:58 AM

Originally posted by mysticcowboy

One of the real advantages Apple has is that it makes both the software and hardware. I've run OS X on non-supported machines, Hackintoshes they're called. It's not the same. Windows has to support all comers and that makes is less predictable, which is what you'd get if Apple let OS X run on any box. That's a long winded way of saying probably not.

But then again, I still bi--h when I have to use Windows for any length of time so maybe yes.

no apple does not. they switched to intel based systems. that means the hardware on the inside of your mac is basically the same as on the inside of intel based PC.

photolady95 · 09-27-2009, 09:08 AM

Nor did they before. The hardware was made by various manufacturers for Apple. My PowerPC had a Western Digital harddrive and PNY memory.

Just like HP, Dell, Gateway do. Their hardware is manufacturered specifically for their systems.

And this poll, questionaire or whatever you want to call it, has been a debating issue since the beginning.

mtroute · 09-27-2009, 09:13 AM

Originally posted by séamuis

no apple does not. they switched to intel based systems. that means the hardware on the inside of your mac is basically the same as on the inside of intel based PC.

Basically the same is not the same as exactly the same...Those tiny differences mean the difference between tight hardware/os integration and "windows"...

séamuis · 09-27-2009, 11:40 AM

Originally posted by mtroute

Basically the same is not the same as exactly the same...Those tiny differences mean the difference between tight hardware/os integration and "windows"...

the specs on the cheapest apple macbook are virtually identical to those on the lenovo im using to type this. the only real difference is the graphics, but my lenovo can run OSX just as well as it can run windows 7. so what would be the difference if it ran OSX? hardware integration? ok yes, understandable on a desktop system but on a notebook its meaningless. but either way, you speak of windows as if its a negative. since when did it become a bad thing for the industry to have an open OS like windows for the development of hardware? if everyone operated like apple, where would we be?

rinoaa52r · 09-27-2009, 12:11 PM

I use both Windows and mac. Even on aftermarket hardware to me it seems X is a little more stable. I haven't used 7 yet but having to reinstall Vista every 3 months like I had to to on a regular basis seemed annoying. I don't use my comp for anything that would deliberately get me viruses and had AVG on it but for some reason a file would go corrupt or something causing me to reinstall everything and start all over again.

I didn't get the idea for this to start a argument between the mac people and windows people. I just wanted to know how many of you would switch or think about switching if apple released the os fully. Both has their benefits and faults.

séamuis · 09-27-2009, 01:35 PM

Originally posted by rinoaa52r

I use both Windows and mac. Even on aftermarket hardware to me it seems X is a little more stable. I haven't used 7 yet but having to reinstall Vista every 3 months like I had to to on a regular basis seemed annoying. I don't use my comp for anything that would deliberately get me viruses and had AVG on it but for some reason a file would go corrupt or something causing me to reinstall everything and start all over again.

I didn't get the idea for this to start a argument between the mac people and windows people. I just wanted to know how many of you would switch or think about switching if apple released the os fully. Both has their benefits and faults.

use windows 7 before making judgements. its head an shoulders above vista. as for the virus thing.... seriously, I cant understand how people have such a problem with that. I run windows 7 and since getting my lenovo about 4 months ago, I have not run one single antivirus program. ive used a few online scanners, from time to time for a quick check, but I havent had one problem.

I didnt run an antivirus with XP either....

View Poll Results: Would you use OS X on your PC if it would be fully legal and supported?
Yes	39	49.37%
No	31	39.24%
Maybe	9	11.39%
Voters: 79. You may not vote on this poll

09-26-2009, 05:56 PM	#24
mysticcowboy Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: port townsend, wa Photos: Albums Posts: 968	Macs have a one house advantage One of the real advantages Apple has is that it makes both the software and hardware. I've run OS X on non-supported machines, Hackintoshes they're called. It's not the same. Windows has to support all comers and that makes is less predictable, which is what you'd get if Apple let OS X run on any box. That's a long winded way of saying probably not. But then again, I still bi--h when I have to use Windows for any length of time so maybe yes.

09-27-2009, 12:11 PM	#29
rinoaa52r New Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: St. Louis, MO area Posts: 11 Original Poster	I use both Windows and mac. Even on aftermarket hardware to me it seems X is a little more stable. I haven't used 7 yet but having to reinstall Vista every 3 months like I had to to on a regular basis seemed annoying. I don't use my comp for anything that would deliberately get me viruses and had AVG on it but for some reason a file would go corrupt or something causing me to reinstall everything and start all over again. I didn't get the idea for this to start a argument between the mac people and windows people. I just wanted to know how many of you would switch or think about switching if apple released the os fully. Both has their benefits and faults. Last edited by rinoaa52r; 09-27-2009 at 12:22 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Silkypix usage	waynelr	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	10	04-24-2010 05:56 AM
Getting my first Mac - PSPX2 & SILKYPIX & MAC??	vievetrick	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	17	03-25-2009 09:59 AM
k20d usage	SteveM	Pentax DSLR Discussion	2	01-18-2009 10:10 PM
K10D photo series - mac / aperture / .mac	Tom M	Photographic Technique	7	12-29-2007 03:13 PM
Pro Usage?	benjikan	Pentax DSLR Discussion	18	03-05-2007 07:54 PM

09-25-2009, 04:04 PM	#16
uccemebug Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Tokyo Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 962	Originally posted by ryan s It's that people want something just to have it. To keep it photo-related, how many times have people wanted a Canon or Nikon because it's a Canon or Nikon? Marketing sows deeply into us. Apple makes you believe their products are better because of "appearance and interface" not because of actual function. Put a cool, smooth, face on a regular music player, and you have an ipod Besides the Touch, what can an ipod do that a Zune, Sansa, etc can't? Syncing with any computer, without itune--oops...not that Going back on topic...I do feel that OS X is good for the casual user but I feel "left out" when I can't change things to suit me. I tried Ubuntu...really hard to use. OS X is just a spiffied up Linux. If something doesn't work on OS X, I can't figure it out. Windows...no problem. But that's kind of the reason I want OS X...so I can learn it and use it easily Actually, OSX is a spiffed up BSD. The difference being that BSD is developed like a professional software product and Linux is not. I recently bought my first OSX box this Summer (more than ten years after using NeXTOS). I didn't buy it for any of the interface stuff, I bought it because I wanted to return to a UNIX desktop for software development. I've got an article about my experiences on my site, but I'll summarize by saying: -the OS is less visible/instrusive overall -Finder is as bad as Windows Explorer (OSX users, try "Path Finder") -I'll never go without a UNIX dev environment again I agree with the sentiment about many of Apple's customers needing a kick in the balls, though. With a small child at home I don't get out much these days, and I find that when I do I'm surrounded by people staring into their iPhones and tittering over something like: Genki Robot Photo-wise, I just ordered my first book through iPhoto. Not cheap, but it's supposedly of better quality than Blurb (with which I've had problems).

09-25-2009, 04:08 PM	#17
uccemebug Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Tokyo Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 962	Originally posted by ryan s Custom built desktop running OS X...want. Ah, the "Hackintosh". Perhaps a torrent or two are in your future? 8^)

09-25-2009, 04:50 PM	#18
ryan s Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Madison, WI Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,383	Originally posted by rinoaa52r @ryan My custom build is all off the shelf parts. Gigabyte P35-DS3L motherboard Xeon equivelant of the Q6600 4Gb OCZ memory EVGA 8800GTS 512mb Video HDD and DVDRW are SATA all buyable parts from newegg the only thing I had a problem with is that it is a PITA to find a WIFI card compatible with OSX. sorry if I started an arguement. It wasn't ment. Originally posted by séamuis so you are running OSX I presume? I thought of building my own and shoe-horning a copy of OSX onto it, but in the end I just went with a new notebook and running windows 7. (my specs are pretty much identical to those of the lowest priced macbook, the white one. for which I considered on the buy list at the time) I would love to be able to run OSX on it as well, but the nearly 400 dollar price difference (at the time, my lenovo was on sale) just didn't seem worth it. Originally posted by uccemebug Ah, the "Hackintosh". Perhaps a torrent or two are in your future? 8^) Ohhhh have I thought about the OSX86...when I built my last computer, I was soooooooooo close to clicking the "download" button I was on TPB...had located the version I wanted... But it's been the niggling little things like WiFi and trackpad support (now that I have a Win7-loaded laptop instead of a PB G4) that have kept me away. I, like others, have been kept away from "lightly-used" 1G MacBooks since they're still holding their value even compared to a brand new PC. Someday...someday...

09-25-2009, 07:23 PM	#19
photolady95 Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: May 2009 Location: Cruising the forum watching his back Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,712	The last Mac I had in 1995 was running at 66Mhz. And it cost me $2500 for just the computer. Then I had to buy the modem, the monitor, and the printer/scanner. My first PC all quality parts cost me $1100 and ran at 333Mhz, also all parts were about $10 to $20 cheaper. The one below cost me just over $500 and it also has quality parts. Asus M2N68-VM Amd 2+/3+ AMD Athlon 64 X2 7750 Kuma 2.7GHz Socket AM2+ Dual-Core black edition G.SKILL 4GB (4 x 1GB)DDR2 1066 (PC2 8500) MSI GeForce 9400 GT 1GB 128-bit GDDR2 PCI Express HDCP Ready 200GB WD WD Caviar 640GB SATA 3.0Gb/s Lite-On 22x DVDRW SATA Antec TruePower 550W SAMSUNG High Gloss Piano Black 22" RAIDMAX Tornado KeyTronic Standard Logitech Trackman Marble Dual boot Vista Ultimate 32 bit/Windows 7 RC/64 bit Built by Me!! Also, software for a Mac was more expensive. When I changed machines, I got my Adobe Photoshop for nothing, I just exchanged the Mac version for a Windows version.

09-25-2009, 07:32 PM	#20
AlmightyPentax Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Florida Photos: Gallery Posts: 31	If you had asked me a year ago I would have said yes. Now that windows 7 is out and I've been running it since beta... My mind has been changed. I still have my imac, and I love it. But I built this PC for 1/3 the cost of a new imac and it's got the same specs. If I time both of my machines starting up as well as running processes in CS4 the PC is winning hands down. If windows 7 stays stable and quick, I can't see spending the extra money on the "Apple Tax"

09-26-2009, 05:31 AM	#21
séamuis Banned Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Savannah, U.S./Baguio City, P.H. Posts: 5,979	windows 7 has been very good for microsoft so far. it really is the best OS since XP, maybe the best OS period. I know several people myself that switched to a cheaper PC from a mac after using windows 7. I love it, its a fantastic OS.

09-26-2009, 07:41 AM	#22
rinoaa52r New Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: St. Louis, MO area Posts: 11 Original Poster	Well it isn't fully the OS that keeps me with mac. Granted I like the ease of use that OSX offers. I like the way Aperture works. I am also messing around with making home movies and I haven't seen a windows program that works like Final Cut does. Vegas comes close but not nearly as streamlined.

09-26-2009, 10:36 AM	#23
séamuis Banned Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Savannah, U.S./Baguio City, P.H. Posts: 5,979	Originally posted by rinoaa52r Well it isn't fully the OS that keeps me with mac. Granted I like the ease of use that OSX offers. I like the way Aperture works. I am also messing around with making home movies and I haven't seen a windows program that works like Final Cut does. Vegas comes close but not nearly as streamlined. which is why a lot of people would love to be able to use OSX on a PC.

09-27-2009, 08:58 AM	#25
séamuis Banned Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Savannah, U.S./Baguio City, P.H. Posts: 5,979	Originally posted by mysticcowboy One of the real advantages Apple has is that it makes both the software and hardware. I've run OS X on non-supported machines, Hackintoshes they're called. It's not the same. Windows has to support all comers and that makes is less predictable, which is what you'd get if Apple let OS X run on any box. That's a long winded way of saying probably not. But then again, I still bi--h when I have to use Windows for any length of time so maybe yes. no apple does not. they switched to intel based systems. that means the hardware on the inside of your mac is basically the same as on the inside of intel based PC.

09-27-2009, 09:08 AM	#26
photolady95 Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: May 2009 Location: Cruising the forum watching his back Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,712	Nor did they before. The hardware was made by various manufacturers for Apple. My PowerPC had a Western Digital harddrive and PNY memory. Just like HP, Dell, Gateway do. Their hardware is manufacturered specifically for their systems. And this poll, questionaire or whatever you want to call it, has been a debating issue since the beginning.

09-27-2009, 09:13 AM	#27
mtroute Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Portland OR Posts: 533	Originally posted by séamuis no apple does not. they switched to intel based systems. that means the hardware on the inside of your mac is basically the same as on the inside of intel based PC. Basically the same is not the same as exactly the same...Those tiny differences mean the difference between tight hardware/os integration and "windows"...

09-27-2009, 11:40 AM	#28
séamuis Banned Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Savannah, U.S./Baguio City, P.H. Posts: 5,979	Originally posted by mtroute Basically the same is not the same as exactly the same...Those tiny differences mean the difference between tight hardware/os integration and "windows"... the specs on the cheapest apple macbook are virtually identical to those on the lenovo im using to type this. the only real difference is the graphics, but my lenovo can run OSX just as well as it can run windows 7. so what would be the difference if it ran OSX? hardware integration? ok yes, understandable on a desktop system but on a notebook its meaningless. but either way, you speak of windows as if its a negative. since when did it become a bad thing for the industry to have an open OS like windows for the development of hardware? if everyone operated like apple, where would we be?

09-27-2009, 01:35 PM	#30
séamuis Banned Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Savannah, U.S./Baguio City, P.H. Posts: 5,979	Originally posted by rinoaa52r I use both Windows and mac. Even on aftermarket hardware to me it seems X is a little more stable. I haven't used 7 yet but having to reinstall Vista every 3 months like I had to to on a regular basis seemed annoying. I don't use my comp for anything that would deliberately get me viruses and had AVG on it but for some reason a file would go corrupt or something causing me to reinstall everything and start all over again. I didn't get the idea for this to start a argument between the mac people and windows people. I just wanted to know how many of you would switch or think about switching if apple released the os fully. Both has their benefits and faults. use windows 7 before making judgements. its head an shoulders above vista. as for the virus thing.... seriously, I cant understand how people have such a problem with that. I run windows 7 and since getting my lenovo about 4 months ago, I have not run one single antivirus program. ive used a few online scanners, from time to time for a quick check, but I havent had one problem. I didnt run an antivirus with XP either....