Posted on 02/04/2002 6:39:48 AM PST by gratefulwharffratt
David Coursey,
Executive Editor, AnchorDesk
Monday, February 4, 2002
It's been a week since I started using a new iMac as my full-time desktop and a PowerBook G4 as my portable PC, all as part of my month-long challenge to see if I, long a loyal Windows user, could make Apple the center of my computing universe. There are still a few problems--specifically related to getting PDA data in and out of Microsoft Office.
But besides that, I've made a very smooth transition. I have even started using the Apple key instead of the Control key when cutting and pasting.
None of the photos I've seen do the new iMac justice. It's hard to take a picture of a white computer with a clear frame around the screen and make it look good. It is especially difficult to do this against a white background, as Apple is prone to do. They had the same problem with the iPod, which people thought was much larger than it is because they had seen it only on a billboard. Now, they didn't think it was that big, but...
If you are trying to show off the iMac base--about the size of a big salad bowl turned upside down--it's hard to have the monitor in a normal position. This is probably why the best pictures of the new iMac, such as they are, have been taken from the side. That shows off the arm that connects the screen to the base rather nicely.
IN USE, the base of the iMac, which contains the computer itself, essentially disappears from view, hidden by the screen. The screen--a 15-inch flat panel--has all the predictable benefits of LCD displays, but the mounting mechanism is really special. This is the first time I've been able to position a screen precisely where I want it.
Mac OS X also does an excellent job of driving the screen, with great graphics performance. I am not quite so wild about the characters that show up while I am typing using Word or the other Microsoft Office apps. Microsoft has yet to fully implement the features of OS X that put great-looking fonts onto the screen.
This was likely lost in the rush to get a version of OS X to market and will be resolved in a future release. The "poor" quality of the Microsoft fonts is noticeable because the rest of the computer looks so great, not because it's putting my eyes out or anything.
The iMac has no fan--actually it has a fan, but I've never heard it--meaning my office is quieter than it used to be. The fan is thermally controlled, so it turns on only if the machine heats up. The iMac also has a very small footprint, leaving me with a lot of unused desk space.
If I were making any changes to the iMac, I'd increase the screen resolution (1024x768 is standard) or go to a 17-inch screen. The higher resolution is a personal preference (I need more open windows sometimes), and boosting the screen size would make the machines too expensive. To think of it, so would the increased resolution.
I'VE DISPENSED with the Apple one-button mouse that came with the machine. I replaced it with a Microsoft optical mouse with all the buttons and a thumbwheel. I just plugged it in, and it worked immediately. While the stock Apple mouse--with its single button--doesn't support right clicking, all the iMac apps seem to. This gives me access to a wide range of shortcuts I've grown used to under Windows. "Real" Apple users know you can control-click the one-button mouse to access the right-button features, but I still like my extra buttons and the thumbwheel.
The transition to the Mac way of doing things has been pretty easy, once I got the hang of the docking bar that is the OS X equivalent of the Windows start menu. Now that I have all my frequently used apps in the dock, I am a pretty happy camper.
Based on my experience, I have no reservations whatsoever recommending an iMac as a family's new or next home computer. Only really hard-core gamers would have trouble with a Mac, and those people should be looking at the new gaming consoles anyway.
I'M TEMPTED to say that Apple should have waited to make OS X the standard operating system for its consumer Macs, at least until there was better support for things such as Palm PDAs, media players for Windows Media, and Real Networks file formats. But as Steve Jobs told me on Day 1 of my Mac odyssey, there are some things that simply won't happen until the OS becomes the Apple standard.
I can't really disagree with that logic, so this is more a warning that you may find yourself working in classic mode from time to time. I am doing my very best to remain totally in OS X, so I have to admit that my concerns about this issue may be inflated.
As for working from the iMac, I can only hit the corporate Exchange mail server using a POP client or a Web browser. This isn't a problem for me, but it may be for a few of you. I also have not tried to find a VPN client, so I need to call our IS department and inquire.
The lack of OS X support for both Palm and Pocket PC devices is, however, troublesome. I think this will be worked out, at least for Pocket PC (and only with the help of a third-party developer) in a few weeks. Palm OS support will doubtless come, though I cannot today tell you when with any level of confidence. Six months seems likely.
I'VE HAD NO trouble exchanging files with colleagues, sending and receiving e-mail, or browsing the Web. And the free mail client Apple provides, though lacking a calendar function, works very well. Actually it's a better pure mail client than Microsoft's Entourage, its office productivity suite for the Macintosh platform.
It's for this reason that so many Mac users have separate calendar, contact management, and e-mail programs. The single-solution approach, àla Outlook and Entourage, is very attractive, but I am looking at other options as well.
The iPod is a fantastic MP3 player, and iTunes does a good job of managing my music. I want to find a "disco" software package, which I believe exists, to do some mixing, but the basic dubbing of music from CD (or Internet) to computer to iPod works very well.
THE MORE I USE IPHOTO, the more useful I find it. The program is not a photo editor, although it will allow you to crop a photo, correct red eye, and convert color images to black and white.
But iPhoto really shines in managing a large photo collection, thanks to its ability to vary thumbnails of the photos from very tiny to full-screen. This means you can zoom back and easily scroll through hundreds or, more likely, thousands of photos and then zoom in to pick the one you want.
iPhoto is also great for sharing your images. While the program does not have an easy way to resize and e-mail an image, it does a very nice job of collecting photos into books, which you can print at home or have commercially printed by Apple ($30 for 10 pages, and the books are really quite nice). iPhoto can also be used to create slide shows, HTML photo pages, and, of course, order prints.
OVERALL, I'D RATE the Macintosh photo "experience" significantly superior to Windows XP, although XP has the basics covered.
I have not played with iMovie, but finally have an idea for a home movie project (lacking kids, I have no ready players), so I am planning to compare the Mac and XP cinematic experiences this weekend.
Another area in which OS X has a little maturing to do is support for streaming media. Microsoft Media Player doesn't support all its formats on the new OS, meaning I can't listen to a number of online radio stations. Real doesn't seem to have announced an OS X version of RealPlayer, though I suspect one will appear.
So that's where things stand after the first week of "Mac Month" here in my office. About the only thing I am still using the XP box for is some instant messaging (especially during the radio program) and to keep the Outlook telephone directory open when I need to make a quick phone call.
Steve Jobs downfall. He wanted the software and the hardware locked in. And they call Microsoft a monopoly
Apple OWNED the microcomputer genre before Tandy tried horning in. It made very smart business decisions like giving computers to schools, and a few dumb ones like shutting out other software and hardware vendors with closed architecture. It had a tremendous running start by partnering with Motorola. (BTW, why not call it Appola since you call the other axis Wintel? Just curious....) It had tremendous venture capital support, vision, marketing, and a burgeoning user base. But then it created the IBM PC behemoth. Created it? Yes, because Apple left its fatal flaw exposed -- that idiotic closed architecture.
IBM's MFWICs had no idea of the potential of PCs. Don Estredge in his skunk works down in Florida far away from IBM headquarters in New York picked up their half hearted guantlet -- "IBM needs a presence in the microcomputer market" -- and ran with it. There aren't many "IBM rules" he didn't break. Open architecture, open source components, non-IBM software, etc. PCs had the IBM name and logo, but that was about all of IBM they had in them.
Before that, Tandy was almost alone as Apple's competitor. But it too copied the blunder of closed architecture even though its niche was to be business backed by its huge Radio Shack sales resources.
Faced with the new blue boy competitor from rat mouth, how did Apple respond? Did it change its business model? Did it adapt? No. The personality cult was too strong and idiotically proud. They snatched defeat from the jaws of victory, and their business manual was titled "How to Make a Small Fortune." For those who haven't read the book, its entire contents are "Start with a large fortune...."
IMO, Bill Gates isn't a fantastic visionary innovator. He is a fantastic visionary marketer. He started by selling something that wasn't his, DOS, to a company that didn't use outside software, IBM. He rode IBM's reputation into jointly creating Windows -- another sales job. Meanwhile, he sold dreams, promises, and some performance to us, to HP, and to anybody else who would listen to his spiel about the HUGE market potential of microcomputers. Meanwhile, Apple was selling to the small niche markets of school trained users and purveyors of the graphic arts. Gates knew that schools have young captive students eager to get out, but businesses have captive students of all ages who MUST produce just to stay in. Choosing the latter as a target market was a no-brainer.
No more proof that MS is a marketing company rather than an innovative one is needed beyond IE. Netscape owned the browser genre at the practical beginning of the Internet. Gates was caught flat footed! The company focus became "Internet browser" at a time that a new version of Netscape was being released about every month. By IE3, Netscape was the inferior browser. By IE4, it wasn't even close. Microsoft has a business plan. It's "Give customers what they want. Tell them what they want, and give it to them."
"Apple is successful...?"
Sure it is. A sometimes low double digit percentage of the market shows that, doesn't it? Let's just not bother ourselves with thinking about what percentage it had along with unlimited capital and opportunity in an eager and undeveloped market.
I'm just a curmudgeon who measures success by what you did with what you had according to the Biblical principle. Then again, I like finding out what I need and having it available. It's constantly amazing how much I needed things I never knew about before I got them! Thank you, Henry Ford, Glenn Curtis, Nicolai Tesla, Bill Lear, Bill Gates, and all your contemporaries. Life wouldn't be nearly as much fun without you all.
Aw, let's all say it again. "Apple is successful." Again, with conviction! "Apple is successful." And once more before bedtime so it might be true in our hopes and dreams... "Apple IS successful."
You must not be a pioneer. I am. I bought an HP dvd100i CD+DVD writer. It gives new meaning to the phrase "arrows in your back." That thing doesn't just crash Windows 2000, it takes the rest of the hardware with it. I have to actually cut the power to get my machine back. To anyone considering buying one of those things: wait until rev 2 of the drivers comes out.
"Any system that depends on reliability is unreliable." -- Nogg's Postulate
= )
And, as a member of the advertising community, I'd eat a bullet before I'd buy a Dell. That kid is SO ANNOYING! The only thing worse is an anti-smoking commercial (you know there's nuclear waste in cigarette smoke? self_righteous.com). Hell's bells, both those campaigns make me, personally, want to do the EXACT OPPOSITE, just to spite the idiots who put them out.
My sister has an ATI "All-in-Wonder" video card with TV tuner, video capture and kitchen sink built in. It works fine but doesn't do anything as well as top of the line separates.
I am almost never in a financial position to buy hardware before the drivers are debugged.
I beg to differ. XP is just Win2000 with some fixes to plug 'n Play, some new utilities, and a some minor changes to the "skin".
And deep down it's just NT with bug fixes. NT has always been the choice for anyone doing Photoshop, CAD, or database apps. Win95/98 were never able to utilize more than 128 megs of RAM -- a fatal flaw for anyone running serious programs.
Oddly enough, XP has "compatibility" modes to run programs that require Win95 or 98. It also has a DOS shell that will run any DOS program that doesn't require writing directly to hardware -- which includes most custom database apps.
Try running an Apple II program on your Mac. Try finding one worth the effort.
Well, building my own from scratch, I'm looking at about $100 for the 40 gig drive, $70 for the CD burner with Nero software, which will burn video. 128 megs of DDR RAM would set me back about $40. GeForce 2/64 meg card, avout $70. Motherboard, case, keyboard and CPU, anywhere from $200 to $500, depending on CPU speed (850 mHz to 1.8 gig)
This is going to tigerdirect.com, but not doing any serious price shopping.
So, it's a DVD Burner for $70? Or, are you saying it's a CD burner that will burn video CD's? That is, will the finished product playback in a baseline consumer DVD Player?
Also, you didn't address the software question. Remember we're talking newbies here, little or no existing software base. So the fact that you (or I) may have a plethora of software just waiting to be dumped on a blank disk is not exactly relevant.
Anyhow, aside from that, this reply seems to me to bring it all down to one thing: net value of your time.
Seriously, I've looked at the 'build your own' bit, too. And, as you point out, I can substantially lower my costs (yes, even with a Mac, dear children). Where I run into a barrier is the time and space factor. I ain't got enough of either. That is, when I sit down and figure my freelance costs, vs. assembly time, it's either a tie or a win for the preassembled version.
Now, y'all may be able to whip up a functioning box in an hour or two, but I dare say it'd take me a bit longer.
And, while some people may take great pleasure in such activities, it's too much like work for me. I'd rather be assembling a web site or a painting than a computer, I'm afraid. Keep in mind, I'm an artist dabbling in nerdsville, not the reverse.
BTW, are you a Johnny Cash fan? I ask because the 'I built my computer myself and it only cost a hundred bucks' crowd (which seem to flock to EVERY computer/tech thread) always make me think of the Man in Black, singing "I did it one piece at a time, and it didn't cost me a dime, you'll know it's me when I come through your town..."
= )
Oh, I almost forgot...
Where DID you see the $2400 iMac?
Power Mac G4s get nVidia GeForce4 Titanium option
Apple today announced that nVidia's GeForce 4 Titanium will be offered as a build-to-order option in its Power Mac G4 series. This news comes hot on the heels of Apple's revelation last week that nVidia's new mainstream GeForce4 MX chip is offered as standard issue on the revamped mid-range and high-end Power Mac G4 systems.
Very cool..... CC :)
LOL!
I was just psyching myself up to a Radeon Board.
Yeeesh.
= P
Y'ever wish you had the money to just buy the latest and greatest as soon as it came out?
Every time an article mentions a Mac, the entire thread turns into a pissing contest between PC, Linux, and Mac users, and I am just fed up with it, I tell ya. I can build a PC for $12 that can kick your Mac's ass ... Mac's are like Porsches ... Linux Rules, and it's free ... blah blah blah ...
Well, I have all 3 types of machines, and let me tell you people that you are upsetting them with all this talk, and they are fussy enough as it is ... My Win2K Server is angry that it has to funnel packets from the Mac to the printer because it says the Mac thinks its 'special' ... The Mac is angry that I have it on a network with a Linux box because it feels that Linux is too geeky ... the Linux machine is starting to cop a 'tude about OSX trying to be a real unix-based OS ... and you people aren't helping matters one bit with all this surly geek chat ...
I have a dream ... where a computer will not be judged by the color of its case, but by the content of its hard drive ... One network, under God, indivisible, with applications and productivity for all ...
I would be curious to hear from the first FReeper who actually tries to buy one of the new iMacs -- I'd like to know whether they are actually available for shipment, and how long it takes. The last time I ordered a Mac for my company it took calls to three different vendors to find one actually willing to sell what was in the catalog, and it took three weeks to arrive.
No kidding. I'd much rather go shopping for this stuff than shoes..... My gal pals think I'm a little strange when we go to the mall and I want to spend more time looking at electronics than make-up, clothes, jewelry or shoes.... Not that I don't like that stuff, too... heh heh.
Cheers, CC :)
P.S. Lucky me, I have 2 Apple stores within in convenient driving distance.
As far as comparison, from the articles I've seen (from PC and Mac magazines), if you actually assemble two computers on par with each other in most, if not all, ways, the costs are closer to equivilent.
By 'on par', by the way, I mean in actual performance, not rated mhz. Even Intel acknowledged that myth last year, when they released a chip (forget the name now) that had a lower mhz rating, but still performed better. Duh. So, it's what can the box do for me, and what is the net, not gross, cost.
That's when the "there's no software" argument get's pulled out of the closet...
And yes, there were indeed a lot of posts going back and forth between platform capabilities. For disclosures sake, I run a 350 G4 AGP at my job and a souped up 7500 at home (350 g3, 448 RAM, 18+9 HD, CD/R/RW, firewire/usb), and I use them to make things like La Mariposa Gifts. And no, an iMac would not be for me. I love my humongous 21" monitors too much to give them up.
But again, this swings both ways. I've seen some iMac stuff posted over the past couple weeks, EACH AND EVERY time, within, oh, 5 posts, the Wintel Warriors strike. The comparisons begin. "Ah, why buy a little fruity box when you can build your own supercomputer in your bathtub? I did!" and so on and so on. So, could we agree that the miscomparisons are distributed somewhat equally?
Let us be blunt. When everything (but EVERYTHING) is taken into account, the price/performance business is within, oh, 10% fudge factor either way. So what we end up with is generally a 'battle for the hearts and minds of the unitiated', which may be why these posts start to sound like holy wars after a while.
Lots of teachers from the local art college signed on as sales gurus. Why not? They know the platform and the applications...
Now that's what I want for a part time job! Big Time!
= )
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.