Anyone else have good success at migrating from Windows to OSX? I hate that I still have to depend on Parallels for a lot of things, but overall, my computing experience has improved a LOT.

I love QuickSilver.

8/12/2007 11:52:21 PM

big deal. since you last posted everybody on tww has also switched.

8/12/2007 11:57:49 PM

no one cares. Why do you hate that you have a great virtual machine?

But yes, as soon as they work out the heat issues, I will be an instant MacBook convert.

8/12/2007 11:58:52 PM

No heat issues here, but then I am on a macbook. The MBPs are kinda big, and I already have a 17inch Inspiron.

BTW, LMAO, did that many TWWers really convert? The thing that made me jump fence was Safari for Windows, although it was an immediate failure.

8/13/2007 12:02:12 AM

yeah, it's true. i'm using like 8 macs right now

8/13/2007 12:04:47 AM

Quote :

"Why do you hate that you have a great virtual machine?"

Oh Parallels rocks, but I hate using it because it reminds me that I am still not Windows free. Although, I have to say that there's just so much good stuff in Windows world when it comes to software development, I doubt I could completely convert.

8/13/2007 12:05:41 AM

^among about 20 other industries with PC specific applications

8/13/2007 12:06:34 AM

well, for the most part industry adoption is governed by installbase/corporate support. Apple doesn't like selling to enterprises. Steve Jobs has this big thing about selling directly to the end user.

But now that Vista has been an utter failure (forced installs on new hardware notwithstanding), a lot of people are moving to Macs, especially since hardware is cheaper in most cases. I did some app development on my mac with Objective C, and all this Next Step stuff is AWESOME. Can't wait for garbage collection in Leopard, although it's still implemented in a way in Tiger.

8/13/2007 12:09:59 AM

got a macbook in march. was nervous about getting it as it would be my first mac, but I just heard too many good things from close friends and family to not give it a try.

proprietary stuff can be a little pricer, but you get what you pay for, and I'm very happy with it.

8/13/2007 12:14:20 AM

yea, Vista is a pretty much unequivical (sp) failure. It's a shame Apple doesn't jump in the gap and release OSX as a standalone

8/13/2007 12:14:39 AM

Quote :

"It's a shame Apple doesn't jump in the gap and release OSX as a standalone"

Apple is not a software company. History has taught them that licensing hardware to others causes problems. Also, what would they gain by releasing a standalone copy of OSX (which actually is available for PPC computers, BTW)? People associate Apple with cool and functional hardware, not just a robust OS.

Personally, since I bought this Macbook, I have also invested in other Apple products just because of the sleek hardware.

8/13/2007 12:18:45 AM

Quote :

"The thing that made me jump fence was Safari for Windows, although it was an immediate failure."

What? I don't quite get this.

At any rate, welcome back to TWW, and welcome to the light.

8/13/2007 12:31:32 AM

Quote :

"What? I don't quite get this."

It is buggy and had exploit-worthy code. It doesn't matter, though!

PS: I also subscribed to .Mac, bought iLife '08, and now own an iPhone.

This post is being broadcasted via an Airport Extreme base while I stream music through my Airport Express.

8/13/2007 12:34:13 AM

Quote :

"Apple is not a software company. History has taught them that licensing hardware to others causes problems. "

What? When was this?

If you are talking about the Mac Clone days, that's irrelevent. They sure are a software company. Their highest profit margin product is OSX, it's got more than triple the margins of any other product they sell.

And if you follow the development community, you'd know Apple is gearing up for this to happen eventually. 10.5 has support for thousands of devices that apple neither sells nor supports for OSX.

8/13/2007 12:36:25 AM

Well, duh, of course the OS upgrades bring in the highest profit margin, but that's not their core product, at least any more. No one would buy the upgrade if they hadn't invested in a Mac in the first place. By selling OSX in the open market, they forego the strict hardware requirements they have in place, and also lose control of where and how the end users use OSX. It loses its niche, and tie that together with Apple's mantra of selling only to the end-user, and you have a disaster. Plus, I don't think your argument for selling OSX stands any more simply because I can buy a top of the line macbook for cheaper/same price as a Windows laptop. If someone is on the edge, price isn't keeping them down...and I am not sure how releasing OSX in the open would help Apple sales other than marginally.

About the hardware stuff, Apple does support a lot of devices, through their own drivers, but that's got nothing to do with them preparing for an OEM launch or anything.

8/13/2007 12:45:46 AM

So why did an inferior version of Safari cause you to make the jump?

8/13/2007 12:50:21 AM

Font rendering.

Also, I was floored by the incremental search...it just looked sexy.

8/13/2007 12:51:01 AM

Bull. A baseline PC laptop costs 400 dollars. A baseline PC costs 400 dollars.

A baseline Mac Laptop is still 1000, a baseline desktop is still ~1000 with the Mini.

And I'm not talking about device support, im talking hardware support. OSX supports virtually all ATI, nVidia, Intel and AMD hardware. It supports most odm audio hardware, odm ethernet hardware and a whole bunch of other component level support.

It would allow Apple to grow into another huge market. They can best Microsoft at it's own core product, with far fewer resources and far less risk. Most of the US OEM's would quickly adopt OSX in their lines should it become available, which would turn Apple's competition into their customers. Not only that, it would only INCREASE the penetration for their own hardware configurations which ARE finally price competitive with white-box pc's. You make the software platform ubiquitous and it gives people that much more incentive to pair your OSX with an apple machine versus another manufacturer

8/13/2007 12:52:16 AM

Quote :

"A baseline PC laptop costs 400 dollars. A baseline PC costs 400 dollars. A baseline Mac Laptop is still 1000, a baseline desktop is still ~1000 with the Mini."

How many baseline PC laptops do you see with Core 2 Duos or 667Mhz DDR2 RAM? What about displays. I don't see as good displays as the macbook in the $400 range, even Dells. What about built in 802.11n draft? Built in Bluetooth. Built in webcam. Built in motion sensors.

Most OEMs wouldn't adopt OSX, simply because of the sucky profit margin. OEMs make good money even after paying Microsoft. How much do you think they would make on OSX that retails for $120 and comes in only one version? Plus, Macs use the latest Intel stuff, which would mean that cheap laptop/PC makers can't build on shoddy BIOS stuff.

8/13/2007 12:57:40 AM

Quote :

"How many baseline PC laptops do you see with Core 2 Duos or 667Mhz DDR2 RAM? What about displays. I don't see as good displays as the macbook in the $400 range, even Dells. What about built in 802.11n draft? Built in Bluetooth. Built in webcam. Built in motion sensors."

Actually just last week Dell had a Vostro and Inspiron laptop with C2D, 667Mhz DDR2 RAM. The Apple displays on the non-Pro are basically identical to the Dell's. 802.11n is still an early adopter technology, no real need to pay for it just yet. What Dell did have was 256MB ATI MOBILITY RADEON X1400 or 28MB NVIDIA GeForce 8400M GS instead of 64MB of shared DDR2 SDRAM. Apple doesn't even include the DVD-RW for the $1200 pricetag ($1099 + the upgrade to matching HDD size). These two Dell laptops were $599. That is half the damn price. Both have some features that the other doesn't have (bus speed, graphics card, wireless N, etc) but they are basically the same tech level. One just costs twice as much.

8/13/2007 1:53:35 AM

I don't know...when I was buying my laptop, I tried to configure a few Dells, but all of them ended up more expensive after optimizing the display or the processor.

8/13/2007 1:57:49 AM

Exactly, you want all kinds of addons and features.

The average consumer just wants a cheap laptop that works. They dont care about draft N, bluetooth or any of the other mess. They do care about the price tag.

And Michael Dell has said numerous times in the past that Dell would instantly offer OSX on their systems, should it become available. You can't get much more reliable than it coming straight from the man himself.

OEM's will do almost anything to get out of the death grip of Microsoft licensing. And OSX could easily undercut Windows licensing while still being Apple's highest margin product by far.

8/13/2007 2:32:16 AM

Quote :

" And if you follow the development community, you'd know Apple is gearing up for this to happen eventually. 10.5 has support for thousands of devices that apple neither sells nor supports for OSX. "

It's still a good ways off though.

There are lots of rumors that Apple is getting ready to bring multitouch to the computers (I'm betting the implement it on the trackpad, not the screen, at first), and making both the HW and SW allows them to do this easier. If they were licensing Mac OS that fact that their computers had it wouldn't change anything if Dell were still selling the cheaper laptops without it. With Apple, and only Apple, doing it though, it creates the perception that Mac OS is inherently great for that feature, when it's just a hardware-based add-on. Lots of little touches now are based on this same illusion, but it works, and needs to work, before Apple can unleash OS X to the masses.

8/13/2007 3:09:06 AM

I enjoy my Powerbook that I bought a few years ago. I don't own an iPod or anything Apple except for the laptop. It's pretty cool, and QuickSilver is totally FTMFW.

Now that the virtualization is pretty good (VirtualPC on a PPC works, but sucks), I may spring for an iMac or something along those lines the next time I plan on buying a new desktop, probably in a few years.

8/13/2007 7:13:42 AM

I'll run a MacOS when I can easily dualboot on the windows box I already have. I would never be able to use it all the time, but I think it would be fun to play with now and again.

8/13/2007 7:51:58 AM

Quote :

"I love QuickSilver."

QuickSilver by itself is enough to keep me on a Mac. At this point, I'd be lost without it.

Quote :

"I hate that I still have to depend on Parallels for a lot of things"

Give VMware Fusion a shot -- i've found that it's less resource intensive than Parallels (at least on a Macbook with only 1GB of RAM).

8/13/2007 8:11:01 AM

this thread seems set up for a neodata outburst.

8/13/2007 9:05:41 AM

Quote :

"Give VMware Fusion a shot -- i've found that it's less resource intensive than Parallels (at least on a Macbook with only 1GB of RAM)."

I purchased Parallels online, so I don't think I'll be moving to Fusion anytime soon. From what I have been reading on the official forums, it seems that the two are a whole lot alike, except for Fusion not being as good as Parallels with Unity. Coherence is simply brilliant, and I can seamlessly open my Mac documents in Windows, and vice versa.

http://forums.parallels.com/thread14582.html

Sure, there are some CPU usage issues in the current release, but I think they're working on it. That said, I wouldn't mess with a VM with only a Gig of total RAM. Makes things too sluggish. I currently have 2GB in my Macbook, and plan to upgrade to 3 soon.

One thing I really miss is multi-monitor support for coherence (Unity in Fusion terms). Right now it just treats two monitors as one giant display which doesn't work well if they aren't level or have the same dimensions/resolution.

8/13/2007 9:46:51 AM

PS: Holla at me if anyone wants a mySkitch invite.

http://www.myskitch.com/

8/13/2007 9:51:49 AM

If you like Quicksilver then check out Launchy or Colibri for Windows.

http://www.launchy.net/
http://colibri.leetspeak.org/

8/13/2007 1:29:53 PM

Yea Parallels Coherence mode makes it invaluable. And it has hardware 3d support now. That pretty much sold me on the software end of buying a Mac.

8/13/2007 3:30:19 PM

^^^ Skitch is a beautiful thing... been using it for ~month? now and i doubt i'd ever stop.

8/13/2007 4:42:12 PM

coherence is nice for some of the apps i use that don't run on os x

i try to get them to run in Darwine first, because i like things running natively.

gg esgargs.

8/13/2007 4:43:57 PM

Pretty sure my next desktop is going to be an iMac

[Edited on August 13, 2007 at 6:33 PM. Reason : 24"]

8/13/2007 6:33:25 PM

lame. I've been a mac owner since like 97, G. my first PC was my work laptop. i still don't own a PC. never will.

8/13/2007 6:41:16 PM

do you want a cookie?

8/13/2007 7:47:43 PM

Macs were shit until OSX.

8/13/2007 10:10:30 PM

Quote :

"Macs were are shit until OSX."

8/13/2007 10:40:11 PM

^ You're an idiot.



Macs have little to no downside now. Even if you think they suck, you still get a killer piece of hardware with awesome design that you can run windows on.

8/14/2007 8:00:09 AM

Quote :

"The average consumer just wants a cheap laptop that works. "

The problem with that is that although those 499 dekstops are just fine at running only the software you need, they often come loaded with all sorts of crap. They basically come underpowered for what's preloaded on them at day 1. Couple that with the fact that the kind of user buying a $400-500 isn't likely to know enough to remove the things they should remove and you have an almost guaranteed bad user experience. The low end macs on the otherhand are more than sufficient to handle basic needs and then some.

While for any of us it would make more sense to buy the cheapo PC laptop if all we needed was a browsing word-processing machine, the average user would likely be better off buying a more expensive Mac for such a need. The end result is that you're right in theory, but PC companies like Dell, HP, Gateway and even Lenovo are fucking theory up with trial software, preloaded over-bloated antivirus suites, etc.

[Edited on August 14, 2007 at 9:25 AM. Reason : ]

8/14/2007 9:22:09 AM

Quote :

"The low end macs on the otherhand are more than sufficient to handle basic needs and then some. "

I use my low end $1k macbook for everything...including work.

8/14/2007 9:24:50 AM

Yeah, base-configured macbooks (like mine that ran 889 at the bookstore) are great for everything except 3D design programs and games. Not sure I'd want to run maple on mine without another gig of RAM. I think I'll keep using my PC laptop for that.

8/14/2007 9:26:28 AM

Oh yeah...I upgraded my RAM to 2GB the next day, and also put in a 250GB hard drive.

Thinking of upgrading it to 3GB as I have heard that that's the max the macbook would support.

8/14/2007 9:29:43 AM

Quote :

"Even if you think they suck, you still get a killer piece of hardware with awesome design"

you're admitting they're form over function? weakness

MACS BLOW

8/14/2007 9:41:47 AM

I think he's saying that even if you don't like OSX, you still get a wonderful piece of hardware that can run Windows.

Hardware without software has no function, just form.

8/14/2007 9:42:53 AM

barely on topic...but i played with an iphone the other day and was immediately filled with tech-lust. don't think its worth $500-$600 without GPS and 3G, but i still want one

8/14/2007 10:14:25 AM

Quote :

"Oh yeah...I upgraded my RAM to 2GB the next day, and also put in a 250GB hard drive. Thinking of upgrading it to 3GB as I have heard that that's the max the macbook would support."

no longer making it a base model 1k notebook.

And I've owned sub 500 dollar laptops since 2001. In fact, Ive never owned a laptop that I paid more than 500 bucks for. And they've all done everything i needed, from gaming to productivity.

8/14/2007 10:18:30 AM

just wondering...how good do those integrated GPS receivers work inside buildings/cars?

I thought about the lack of 3G for a while, but then realized that it was a moot point for a while, at least for ATT customers. The ATT 3G network isn't substantially faster than EDGE at present, at least in the triangle region. And then, I don't use EDGE a lot as is, simply because I get a Wifi signal at most places. When I am driving, I am just checking my email or looking up directions, so it really doesn't matter whether the connection is 400kbps or 250 kbps.

8/14/2007 10:19:44 AM

Quote :

"And I've owned sub 500 dollar laptops since 2001. In fact, Ive never owned a laptop that I paid more than 500 bucks for. And they've all done everything i needed, from gaming to productivity."

I dunno man...I see a lot of $500 laptops on dealnews everyday, but none of them get me aroused even a single bit. As for my upgrades, keep in mind that none of those were required or increased any functionality. I use VMs all day, so I went for 2GB RAM. The bigger hard drive is just for music.

8/14/2007 10:21:45 AM

how does these networks compare to the evdo network, if they are comparable?

8/14/2007 10:21:52 AM