Getting a fair deal?

Grant Robinson santiago at
Wed Aug 30 12:25:18 MDT 2006

On Aug 30, 2006, at 10:46 AM, Hill, Greg wrote:

>> You invoke the rite of Mac Evangelist of your own choice?  So let it
> be
>> written, so let it be done.
> I don't really care for OS:X because it hides all the tasty stuff away
> so I have to google to figure out how to do anything significant.

You and Apple must have a different definition of "tasty" and  
"significant".  I would be mildly interested to know what you had to  
Google for in order to figure it out.

>   But,
> that part doesn't really bug me so much.  Allow me to elucidate what I
> find so funny about Mac bigots.

It is quite funny that merely by calling someone a "Mac bigot", you  
label yourself as a "anti-Mac bigot".  So, I will play along and  
point out that what I find so funny about "anti-Mac bigots" is that  
their dislike is (as Wade pointed out) founded on the actions and  
attitudes of the "Mac bigots".  It is actually quite similar to the  
debates between Windows and Linux users, in which many Windows users  
hate Linux and Linux users because the Linux users hate Windows.

<snip psuedo-conversations with un-named "Mac Bigot">
> So, yeah, Macs may be great and all, but the attitude of their sheep
> fans is kind of off-putting.

See point above.  I would also like to know of a following that does  
not have "sheep".    They all have their "sheep", and many become  
sheep just by putting themselves under the umbrella of Linux, Mac,  
Windows, Republicans, Democrats, etc, etc, etc.

> I'll stick to paying way less for way
> more.

Ah yes, the classic "Macs are more expensive" argument.  Don't look  
now, folks, but Mac laptops are actually cheaper than Dell or IBM  
(Lenovo), at least for now.  My father-in-law is pretty anti-Mac, and  
he just bought my sister-in-law a MacBook for school.  It was quite  
interesting to go over all the laptop choices he was considering.  At  
the time, the cheapest dual-core Dell that matched the MacBook specs  
was about $100 more than the MacBook, and a re-furbished IBM that  
matched the MacBook specs was $200 more.  It did have a fingerprint  
reader, but I could care less about that.  If you want biometric  
stuff on your laptop, then maybe the $200 price gap is worth it.

It may not stay this way, as Dell is very much about driving volume  
and so may drop their prices or offer more "special deals" to make  
Dells the same price or cheaper, but as of 2 weeks ago, that is where  
things stood.

>   And anyone who complains about Microsoft's monopolistic tactics
> should take a close look at how Apple does business.  They'd be  
> just as
> bad if they had that market share.  They already ripped off  
> Konfabulator
> and put several of their developers out of business by integrating any
> good idea that any Mac developer came up with into the OS or bundled
> software.

Please stop with the Konfabulator crap.  This is old news and has  
been re-hashed many times.  Do you really think that they were the  
first ones to come up with the idea of running mini-programs on the  
desktop?  (that was a rhetorical question, as they are not the first  
ones).  Apple had something similar clear back in the 80's, and  
similar ideas have existed for a long time in other operating systems  
as well.  There are truly very few completely original ideas around  
today.  Most things have been around in one form or another, people  
just improve them and tout them as new.  An interesting read the  
whole Konfabulator topic:

BTW, don't feel too bad for Konfabulator.  Yahoo! purchased them for  
a hefty sum to become Yahoo! Widgets.  They aren't eating at a soup  
kitchen, and neither are the other "developers" that Apple has  
supposedly put out of business.

>   I think they're going after Virtualization next.  I hope that
> new startup realizes that their days are numbered.

Even if Apple did Virtualization (which they have NOT announced), it  
would not immediately spell doom for Parallels (which is not a Mac- 
only startup, they already had virtualization products for Windows  
before the switch to Intel was announced).  Witness that VMWare, Xen,  
and Virtual PC all exist in pretty much the same space.

My personal take is that Apple won't bother to do it.  I believe they  
did Boot Camp to prevent people from making coasters of their new  
macs (as the original process was quite error-prone and could easily  
render your new Mac unusable) but why would Apple want to make it  
super-easy (as in, no reboot required) to run other operating  
systems?  Their view is that OS X is the best operating system for  
the Mac, and people should use that.  If other people disagree, let  
them write the virtualization stuff.  I am not privy to any inside  
information, but that is the way I have viewed the virtualization  
space on Intel Macs.  They didn't write their own x86 emulation  
software while on PowerPC, and I don't see them changing direction on  
that now.  But who said companies only do logical things?


More information about the PLUG mailing list