Posted on 10/20/2016 12:42:26 PM PDT by Swordmaker
“Easier than learning the next iteration of Windows. There is a learning curve, but once you get over it, you ask yourself “Why was Windows so backwards and unintuitive?” “
That is utter nonsense.
Do you even use Windows?
Please inform me, as someone that used Windows from 3.11 all the way through to 10, what I had to learn that was so difficult.
This ought to be amusing.
The answer is yes. Microsoft is in the business of selling operating systems. Apple is in the business of selling hardware, not Operating Systems. Big difference.
A little learning curve. Mainly the names and the Mac equivalent.
They are bullet proof.
I remember letting the grandkids play on my PCs and always having them locked up, or some other problem.
With a Mac? let them play, no worries.
I can’t remember ever using the command line on my Macs. Do they even have a command line?
True drag and drop, plug and play.
Switched in 2007 and still using those machines. Don’t feel the need to upgrade. They just keep bopping along.
No virus scan, scandisk, defrag.
Buy both. Seriously, buy a Mac laptop and a PC laptop. Learn to use both and compare them. Keep notes during a 3-year period. Download updates and apply them as they are announced. Observe the problems you have on the PC, and your frustration levels. When the PC slows to a crawl and you're dealing with unknown driver issues, finally taking it to an expert to attempt fixing it, you'll be a Mac convert.
I've already got a full trademarked version of UNIX™ on my Mac. It came with it. Why should I do something that requires me to spend most of my time working ON my computer rather than WITH my computer, accomplishing useful thing? I've been there and done that, through with that long ago!
Yes. I agree with you. That is why I do not see the conflict between the two that most others see to.
I like both, and make a lot of money off of both companies, and also Linux (but not a specific company on that).
So it’s all good to me.
And on your previous comment, I do know about not “buying” a MAC OS. There are ways to obtain it, illegally. I went to a “hackfest” once, and watched some people do it, from beginning to end, and I was impressed by their skills. Unfortunately they showed how to “pull out” the MAC OS. They kept saying “...it was illegal to do this, but we’re doing it just for demonstration purposes.”
So because you have an extremely specialized need that 99.999% of users will never have, Macs are inferior...
You understand how ridiculous your argument is?
Eighteen years of history belies your claim. When are we going to get level of attacks you guys keep claiming? What is the magic number that will make hackers, who are interested in money, come after the 99% of Macs that are running bare naked without any anti-virus/malware protection in the wild, operated by people who as a rule are wealthier than the majority of Windows users? 50 million? 60 million? 70 million? Well, there are over 110 million Mac users on OS X and macOS right now and the number real OS X computer viruses in the wild, after 18 years of trying to create one, is STILL ZERO, and the number of Trojans in the wild that will infect a Mac with the assistance of its user is under 110, in 8 families, EVERY ONE OF WHICH the OS will identify and warn the user if he or she attempts download, install or run one of them! It takes an industrial strength stupid user to ever get infected by one of those Mac OS X Trojans. Even hacking a Mac requires assistance from a user or physical access to the computer. Trying to do it remotely, good luck without first getting some kind of malware onto the computer.
Your security by obscurity canard has been shot down so many times it is ridiculous. As I said, when and what number of Macs is going to attract the hackers to this "vulnerable" platform? The Windows Witty Worm from 2006 was written to attack all 18,000 vulnerable Windows computers in the world. . . and it succeeded in infected every single one of them less than 45 minutes after it was released into the wild, no matter where in the world those computers were located. Computer viruses were written to attack iPhones modified to run LINUX. . . all three dozen of them! So when are the hackers going to attack the 110,000,000 vulnerable Macs????
Even those Trojans that were released into the wild for Macs, if you check, you'll find the rate of infection listed on the security labs is "less than 100 computers", or often "less than 50" or even just a proof of concept. There were a TOTAL of SEVEN proof of concept worms and virus candidates, not a one of which ever worked! Why? A lack of vectors to spread and protected memory when they were placed on a Mac.
The purported 600,000 member MacBot turned out to be a HOAX promulgated by a Russian vendor of antivirus announced as an attempt to publicize their release of a business version of their Anti-Virus for Mac. Not a single infected Mac was ever found in the wild. . . not one. Many of the so-called infected Macs whose UUID the vendor had listed on the honey-pot intercept server as being members of the MacBot, had not even been sold or even manufactured yet! Other Macs (including two I had in my office) did not have Java installed — a prerequisite to be infected — and were not infected. One of mine had never, ever, been connected to the Internet, being a dedicated computer for a specific purpose. Ergo, HOAX.
This article is NOT about prices at Best Buy, VanDeKoik. IBM does not buy computers from Best Buy, either Apple Macs or Windows PCs. Nor are they referring to the initial cost to purchase the computer. They and I am discussing the cost to OWN each computer over a period of time, including the cost to support it, run it, and finally dispose of it at end of useful life. In this instance, they are using four years as the useful life of each computer. IBM has compared these costs over that time period and the Apple Mac wins by a considerable amount.
Multiply that by the number of computers they operate and that totals a LARGE AMOUNT OF MONEY! Just taking the smaller amount of $273 and multiplying it times 90,000 provides a substantial savings of $24,570,000. If the larger number of $543 per computer, then it's $48,870,000! That's nothing to ignore for IBM's bottom line.
In an earlier article on this subject last year, IBM found that it took ONE IT guy to provide service for every 497 Windows computers. If IBM has 200,000 Windows computers across their 2,800 locations around the world, they must have 403 Windows IT guys to service all those Windows computers. This article states as a fact that they only have to have FIVE (5) IT guys to provide service for 90,000 Mac computers! That's ONE IT GUY for every 18,000 Macs. One Mac IT guy is 36 times more effective and therefore more economical than one Windows IT guy! One Mac guy is worth 36 Windows guys!
IBM also found their employees using Macs were more productive as well.
Yes. The UNIX™ Terminal is a couple of key strokes away and a fully functional command line system that can give the user full control of the computer. (There are some restrictions that prevent damage to the underlying OS, but even that can be turned off.)
You already know that answer to that. I've owned a cross platform support business for more than 35 years. . . so of course I've used Windows. I know more about both platforms than you do. You only know Windows. . . and are completely ignorant about the Mac, but that's never stopped you from trying to tell us who do know both platforms intimately how ignorant WE are.
Way back, when I was running a Virtual Mac on my Amiga 3000 (did it also on my Amiga 500) I was using a Apple Mac ROM image. I did it the right way. I bought a dead Mac for $50 at a garage sale, so I legally owned the ROMs. . . and imaged those ROMs so I could legally use the image on my Amiga. Others downloaded their ROM copies, which was against copyright law, and just went ahead and used them. I had fun at the time arguing with Mac users that the Mac did indeed have "hidden" files on the boot disks. They couldn't see them, but I could see them from the Amiga OS. Funny. They would swear up and down there were no hidden files! You should have seen their faces when I showed them the pieces of the font files inside the suit cases. LOL! They thought they were monolithic files. I learned a lot about repairing damaged fonts from being able to see what was in those suit cases.
Of course, Apple still has hidden files, but you can still see them on a Mac if you know how.
Not specialized, or rather, in a big industrial corp., you tend to have thousands of “specialized” apps. Everyone has one or more, usually a whole suite for whatever process they are into, technical or business. Its a freaking zoo.
Thats how it is in that world, and thats a huge reason Windows hasnt been displaced by something else.
Heck, I’ve seen dozens of Java-written web-app interfaces for custom software which one would think could migrate to use other browsers - but no, they are tested and certified on just one. Generally IE of one flavor or another. Typical.
Thats Total Cost of Ownership (TCE) analysis. Gartner started the ball rolling on that @25 years ago. It gets kind of hairy doing these comparisons.
You have to somehow back out application support, because presumably this will remain similar. And Im talking mainly specialized apps which soak most of this up.
Then you have to budget application conversion, which can kill the whole thing, that can be a #$#-&+ even when just upgrading Windows. In my experience thats the main (and large) cost of a Windows version upgrade in the first place, and if so consider the fallout of moving to Mac.
Its a very, very complex calculation that needs to consider all sorts of details, and I have seen way too many very lightweight proposals for this sort of thing.
OK. I'll play this silly game...
If I don't plan to buy 1300 computers a month, how does that impact or affect me?
Hell, no wonder every Mac-head I ever knew thought their feces didn't stink because they could drag and drop and icon.
Not only that, you seem to think that the Russians et al are staying up at night trying to crack Mac security, whereas if they did what in the hell would they gain? Sure, there is a little mischief out there for Macs, but the big dogs could care less for this reason: lower market share among corporations and budget customers.
In PWN-to-Own hacking contests where hackers are timed to see who can infiltrate any system and take control of it the fastest Mac and Windows fair pretty much the same.
Today, integration is really moving forward, if that is your thing.
Mine is starting its 8th year without maintenance of any kind.
Before this I would keep a PC about a year and throw it away after it became too corrupted to use anymore.
“You already know that answer to that”
Just say you have no idea.
” know more about both platforms than you do.”
Ok.... If you say so. So far you aren’t very convincing.
“and are completely ignorant about the Mac, “
I’ve used Apple machines from roughly 1985-2004. From the IIe to the G4 Power G4 (because of my CAD courses) and that’s not counting my first gen Powerbook, Newton, Perfomia, and original iMac and G4. Most of which are still in my attic.
I even still have my original copy of The Little Mac Book on my bookshelf.
Funny how you never bothered to ask before you spouted off.
Oh btw, what did I say about the Mac OS again that you claim was no negative? Must be another one of those things you just assume you know.
“Debate over: IBM confirms that Macs are $535 less expensive than PCs”
“They and I am discussing the cost to OWN each computer over a period of time,”
Which isnt even any better. A completely subjective thing that some moron reporter entitles “debate over”, and you gladly shook with glee the minute you saw it.
Just a retarded troll click-bait article to massage your goofy near-fetish for a logo.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.