What makes a Mac better for designers?

23n1th

alexjohnson wrote: »

It's amazing how this evil system has ever taken off, isn't it? I mean, what with that nasty business of allowing millions of people first to buy tracks one by one from all the record companies, and then to catch up on TV they might have missed, and to buy movies they can watch on multiple devices unlike DVD (legally) on devices that are simple to use, highly popular, and when launched often require crowd control, to say nothing of launching a phone which was popular because it allowed users control (have a look at what Vodafone has been doing with 360 as a little flashback to pre iPhone awfulness before we swallow too much Android hokum) - I mean these people must be stopped! They're evil! Selling great stuff that people want to buy - devils! Burn them!

It always amazes me how Apple get away with things Microsoft get crucified for. The users of these products only have as much control as Jobs/Apple see fit.

The people seem to like the Android hokum though dont they, even though apple are seemingly suing everyone who touches it. Seems they dont want any competition.

Look, Apple stuff isn't cheap. I honestly believe it's great value, which isn't the same thing. It's well-made, and its a pleasure to use. I use a PC at work - and I am quite comfortable with getting as techy as you like - but I just don't like it. I think it's ugly, the interface is inconsistent, and the hardware too often cheap-looking.

That depends on what PC you buy though, doesn't it?

joeypesci

CharlesCooper222 wrote: »

This ability to process data gave Apples a huge advantage when it came to mathematically intense operations such as graphic rendering and display. At a simple level, even today just moving the mouse across the screen seems to move just a bit more smoothly on the Apple than the PC. And this all stems from Wozniak 30 years ago.

What a load of marketing brain washed crap. Moving the mouse across the screen seem move bit more smoothly is !!!!!!!!.

Designers picked Apple back in the day as that's where most of the designer packers were. Now, it's even. I'd go for a PC any day as they are more powerful for a lot less money. You just pay for the name with Apple now.

joeypesci

alexjohnson wrote: »

As does Mac OS X. And by the way, Opera is available on the iPhone. What's your point?



Abortive? You mean with over 50% of web video now in (open - how's that for irony) HTML5? Including iPlayer? Abortive in the sense that Adobe now sells a transcoder from Flash to HTML5? You're tough - if that's abortive I wonder what you have to do to be successful!



It's amazing how this evil system has ever taken off, isn't it? I mean, what with that nasty business of allowing millions of people first to buy tracks one by one from all the record companies, and then to catch up on TV they might have missed, and to buy movies they can watch on multiple devices unlike DVD (legally) on devices that are simple to use, highly popular, and when launched often require crowd control, to say nothing of launching a phone which was popular because it allowed users control (have a look at what Vodafone has been doing with 360 as a little flashback to pre iPhone awfulness before we swallow too much Android hokum) - I mean these people must be stopped! They're evil! Selling great stuff that people want to buy - devils! Burn them!

Look, Apple stuff isn't cheap. I honestly believe it's great value, which isn't the same thing. It's well-made, and its a pleasure to use. I use a PC at work - and I am quite comfortable with getting as techy as you like - but I just don't like it. I think it's ugly, the interface is inconsistent, and the hardware too often cheap-looking.

Nuts. The iTunes downloads were always locked down so could only be played on the one device, not multiples. Any other MP3 player allows drag and drop and no need for iTunes. iPhone didn't allow control. I got rid of my iTouch for that very reason. Was WAY to locked down. Apples attempt to try to make Jailbreaking illegal. How's that giving the user control? If I go and buy an Android device I'm free to put any iteration of the Android OS on I see fit. And Android is still free.

23n1th

alexjohnson wrote: »

As does Mac OS X. And by the way, Opera is available on the iPhone. What's your point?.

This may be of interest for you reference opera since it seems the only way it got on the iphone was because it shrewdly side stepped apples rules and sort of black mailed them into letting it on the device. However apple have since changed the rules so it might diappear: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/11/06/opera_feted_for_apple_iphone_play/

alexjohnson

joeypesci wrote: »

Nuts. The iTunes downloads were always locked down so could only be played on the one device, not multiples. Any other MP3 player allows drag and drop and no need for iTunes. iPhone didn't allow control. I got rid of my iTouch for that very reason. Was WAY to locked down. Apples attempt to try to make Jailbreaking illegal. How's that giving the user control? If I go and buy an Android device I'm free to put any iteration of the Android OS on I see fit. And Android is still free.

This goes a long way from answering the OP's question, which was why the Mac is popular. But:

1. You are factually incorrect. iTunes downloads can be played on up to five computers and (I believe) an infinite number of iPods and iPhones and AirPort Expresses, so probably the AirPlay-equipped stereo systems being released now. Yes, those iPods and iPhones do need to be associated with one account. But you are wrong to say they cannot be played on multiple devices and in the real world real users are not bothered by this. If you mean non-Apple devices, that was true, but hasn't been now for a few years: tracks are AAC not MP3 but while that might knock out the cheapest of the cheap Chinese players, again, that's fine for the vast majority of players and phones these days. Almost all tracks bought with the old FairPlay DRM can be upgraded. True, it's cheap but not free, and true it's almost all tracks. But let's not pretend this is some kind of huge problem, like for example when Microsoft switched off its DRM servers and left people who's paid good money high and dry. In other words, don't let "not perfect" get in the way of "pretty good in the real world."

2. I guess you are a Windows or Linux user. Enough people say iTunes is bloatware on the PC that I'll take that as a fair view. But I have 3,919 items in my iTunes library, including podcasts which update and change daily. It's a large library (~350 CD's, in "old money"), but not a massive one. You think I want to manage that with drag & drop? You think 99.5% of people want drag & drop? I'm sorry but that is crazy - I'm glad there are products for people like you but I am even gladder there are also products for people like me. iTunes is getting bloated, even on the Mac, but where that is not a problem is actually in its original function: ripping CD's and managing music.

3. Android? Sure you will. Vodafone seems to have disagreed though:
Vodafone pulls 360 trick on Froyo hungry users
Verizon in the US seems to be planning much the same:
HTC Droid Incredible update to force Verizon app store
But you're thinking, "I'm clever, I can use Google, I'll just flash the ROM myself. Well perhaps you will, perhaps you won't, actually:
Android Lock Down! T-Mobile G2
And on Jailbreaking and the joys of "sideloading" onto Android, there's this little gem on app malware and spyware:
How Can I Tell If an Android App Is Malware?
Yep, most people look back on Windows XP's serial security disasters in what? 2003-2005? with fond nostalgia and can't wait to have that same experience on their phones too. Sure, I want Norton Antivirus on my phone…! I mean it's so obviously ludicrous to think most people want that. You're an expert user probably very happy with the issues so good for you, but in practical terms, what is the App Store stopping me doing that I want to do? Other than evade O2's wish for me to pay for tethering? Or more seriously, games developers' wish to be paid? As you know I'm sure, Android piracy is a huge problem which I understand is nice if you like free stuff, but is not so nice if you're a developer of premium apps and games. So, enlighten me.

Android is free to phone manufacturers. You have to pay for the phone. iOS updates are free to users too. I did have to pay for the iPhone. Run that "Android is free" by me again?

I'm glad there's serious competition, and I really couldn't care less what other people buy - I think if you don't buy an iPhone in favour of some Android device that's your loss and you're cutting your nose off to spite your face, but hey. However, if you really believe that the iPhone's being "closed" (whatever that means when it has no carrier control, the most apps, the biggest media store, and by a massive margin the most accessories available for it) is a problem, I wonder why you believe a device which carriers can and are inflicting with their hideous bloatware is somehow better. It seems like you're being defeated by your own argument as no one is monkeying with my device through some unasked-for OS update. I've got no malware. Despite it not being kosher I have a non-approved tethering app and I could be paranoid about Apple having a kill switch, but I also note that they don't seem to be using it. God it's grim in the tyranny of Apple, isn't it! Another day in the iPhone gulag.

And to drag this back OT, people prefer Macs and Apple products not just because of "it just works" - which is true even if occasionally unfortunately ironic when things fall over. (This just in: BMW's are very reliable and very well-made cars but some occasionally break down.) But, it's also because they understand that most people want stuff that works with them, and that's pleasant to use. And that is why Apple is the market leader, not as jbreckmckye was trying to suggest, because they lock people in. Your lock-in lasts as long as your phone contract.

By emphasising drag & drop and wanting to sideload apps you show that you don't understand that. That's fine, but you are the minority. The question is not whether you voice some concern most people share - you don't. No, the question is whether people care enough about the user experience to pay a bit more. Some people do, some don't. The even more interesting question will be whether Google and Microsoft (and RIM and Nokia?) can get their act together and build that better mousetrap. One thing I would love? The Droid's wifi hotspot. That's the only thing, but it's a great thing. It's in everyone's interest that they keep trying.

23n1th

Its quite simple really the iphone = DRM that is what is meant when people say its closed. Its mildly amusing that you mention difficulties for developers what with the amount of hoops apple make them jump through.

I'm happy they dont seem to be using the "kill switch" but I'd rather not use something that someone else ultimately owns. BTW I updated my desire through Vodafone and I have no vodafone branding. Also I only paid for a contract which was for 12 months, not 24 months, I didn't have to pay for the phone. My desire is pleasant to use and works with me. Certainly didn't bite my nose off when I got it but am smug I get everything the iphone offers for a lot lot cheaper.

I like drag and drop for my mp3 players as well as software to manage it, I like the choice even better.

But all this is opinion just like all your points, opinion.

What is apple the market leader of? Selling Macs?

[Deleted User]

23n1th wrote: »

What is apple the market leader of? Selling Macs?

Hoodwinking

alexjohnson

23n1th wrote: »

Its quite simple really the iphone = DRM that is what is meant when people say its closed. Its mildly amusing that you mention difficulties for developers what with the amount of hoops apple make them jump through.

I'm not a developer. I don't know whether a bigger market with much less piracy is a price worth paying for a curated App Store but as of late 2010, it seems the developers do. I also know exactly what you mean by "open" but my point is that's one definition that doesn't actually have much relevance to most customers, especially those who can't delete some carrier-inflicted crapware.

I'm happy they dont seem to be using the "kill switch" but I'd rather not use something that someone else ultimately owns.

It's a perfectly fair point. I would flip that round and say I'd rather worry about things that do happen - like Vodafone inflicting 360 on many users if, happily, not you - than things that haven't and that seem to be unlikely to.

But all this is opinion just like all your points, opinion.

That's both obvious and this is a forum to state the even more obvious, but also unfair - I did provide links. So no, I don't just make up that plenty of Android users seem to be on the butt end of openness.

What is apple the market leader of? Selling Macs?

No, they lost that. However their market share is growing at twice the rate of the PC market in general. They own 90% of the market for PC's costing $1,000 or more. They'll never make serious inroads into the large corporate market, but those people who can make a choice - and particularly those people not shopping on price (which means they are shopping on UI, looks, reliability, support etc.) - seem to be looking that way in ever greater numbers.

23n1th

alexjohnson wrote: »

I'm not a developer. I don't know whether a bigger market with much less piracy is a price worth paying for a curated App Store but as of late 2010, it seems the developers do. I also know exactly what you mean by "open" but my point is that's one definition that doesn't actually have much relevance to most customers, especially those who can't delete some carrier-inflicted crapware.

Open would hold relavence when apple decide to delete something from your iphone, be that apps, music, books etc which they have the power to do.

Are you talking bigger app market or market share??? Developers seem to like android as well btw I've no problems finding an app. Interesting read: http://news.cnet.com/8301-1035_3-20021763-94.html

Rooting the device will remove the vodafone branding, which btw is not automatic and you can choose not to download.

It's a perfectly fair point. I would flip that round and say I'd rather worry about things that do happen - like Vodafone inflicting 360 on many users if, happily, not you - than things that haven't and that seem to be unlikely to.

As above those users downloaded that update themselves it wasn't automatic. And that is a knock on vodafone not android.

That's both obvious and this is a forum to state the even more obvious, but also unfair - I did provide links. So no, I don't just make up that plenty of Android users seem to be on the butt end of openness.

I can provide links to back up my opinion (as I have above) about why andriods openness is good. And why apples lock down is bad. Whats your point?

I prefer a phone that I can do what I want with not what apple tell me.

No, they lost that. However their market share is growing at twice the rate of the PC market in general. They own 90% of the market for PC's costing $1,000 or more. They'll never make serious inroads into the large corporate market, but those people who can make a choice - and particularly those people not shopping on price (which means they are shopping on UI, looks, reliability, support etc.) - seem to be looking that way in ever greater numbers.

Is that home pc market share or office? Either way thats not really hard (saying the market share is growing faster), thats just a play on figures. If you have 4% of the market and jump to 8% is a 100% growth. Whereas 4% growth on a 90% market share well you can do the math.

[Deleted User]

alexjohnson wrote: »

I'm not a developer. I don't know whether a bigger market with much less piracy is a price worth paying for a curated App Store but as of late 2010, it seems the developers do.

And you don't think piracy is rampant in iOS world too? Nearly everyone I know who has an iPhone has Jailbroken for that very purpose. The difference with Android is you don't have to go through that process to be able to install whatever you want.

I also know exactly what you mean by "open" but my point is that's one definition that doesn't actually have much relevance to most customers, especially those who can't delete some carrier-inflicted crapware.

Open to me means that I can download the SDK, I can view the documentation, I can write my program and I can distribute it in whatever way I want. If I want to use a market then I expect to pay for that privilege in some way, but it's not the only way I should be able too.

No, they lost that. However their market share is growing at twice the rate of the PC market in general. They own 90% of the market for PC's costing $1,000 or more. They'll never make serious inroads into the large corporate market, but those people who can make a choice - and particularly those people not shopping on price (which means they are shopping on UI, looks, reliability, support etc.) - seem to be looking that way in ever greater numbers.

Good luck to Steve, the new OSX appstore is a frightening concept.