Leighgion - 17 July 2005 03:18 AM

I think it boils down that people spend time on things they feel they care about.

That’s it. Mac folks are more “informed users” than Windows PC users. We care about decisions. We view PC ProblemsÙ as a waste of time and money and effort and just won’t put up with it. PC Users assume that the troubles they go through each day are the norm, standard, That’s The Way It IsÙ and there can’t be anything better.

We’re not called Mac evangelizers for nothing… spread the word!

Tera Patricks - 17 July 2005 11:52 AM

We’re not called Mac evangelizers for nothing… spread the word!

Picked up on a note from MacDailyNews (Wild West Forum of Macdom) about Rob Enderle’s latest predictions. Looks like Apple might be ready to drop the big media center bomb on the world.

For those who don’t know Rob is a Windows apologist who’s predicted Apple’s demise something like 147 times in recent years.

The media centers that exist are fragmented, overbearing jokes, including the one from Microsoft. Too complex. Too expensive. Don’t get the job done.

Bambi Hambi - 17 July 2005 08:06 PM

Picked up on a note from MacDailyNews (Wild West Forum of Macdom) about Rob Enderle’s latest predictions. Looks like Apple might be ready to drop the big media center bomb on the world.

That’s an interesting article as Enderle explores some of why and how IBM got ditched by Apple for Intel. Then, of course, Rob says this and his credibility dropped 90-percent (from a lofty 2-percent high for 2005):

“With Apple effectively announcing the end of all Power-based products, it is really hard to see how Apple hardware can survive until the Intel-based offerings show up.  Given that Apple normally isnÌt this stupid, it has led many of us to speculate that there is a summer announcement that will provide the market with its next iPod-like offering.”

That’s a prediction, folks. Rob says Apple hardware will stop selling while the world waits for the new Apple Intel-chip machines. Let’s see… hmmmm. Apple Macs (hardware) were up an astounding 35-percent since Apple’s Intel chip announcement.

News Flash: most Mac buyers don’t care what the chip is so long as it’s a Mac and NOT Windows. Chatting with the folks in the local Apple Store all I got was a puzzled shrug when asked if traffic had dropped, or Mac sales had dropped since the announcement. Traffic has increased and sales continue to increase.

I suspect that there might be a plateau in the growth but the so-called iPod halo effect is for real. People are buying Macs in big numbers. All Macs, including laptops, which are in need of an overhaul.

RonnieMac - 17 July 2005 08:38 PM

That’s a prediction, folks. Rob says Apple hardware will stop selling while the world waits for the new Apple Intel-chip machines. Let’s see… hmmmm. Apple Macs (hardware) were up an astounding 35-percent since Apple’s Intel chip announcement.

News Flash: most Mac buyers don’t care what the chip is so long as it’s a Mac and NOT Windows. Chatting with the folks in the local Apple Store all I got was a puzzled shrug when asked if traffic had dropped, or Mac sales had dropped since the announcement. Traffic has increased and sales continue to increase.

That’s probably the case. I’d expected sales of Macs to drop following the announcement but it doesn’t look like that’ll be the case. Sad, though. We won’t see a G5 PowerBook, and won’t see a 3ghz PowerMac.

I wonder if we’ll ever see a dual-core IBM chip on a Mac?

It may not matter as most recent developer reports continue to sing the praises of OS X on Intel as faster on single Intel CPU box than a dual 2ghz PowerMac.

OK, by me. I just want it to run OS X and run fast as Tera from a bottle of Clairol.

RonnieMac - 17 July 2005 08:38 PM

OK, by me. I just want it to run OS X and run fast as Tera from a bottle of Clairol.

LMAO

Why do these threads always turn in to a Windows vs Mac bashing?
I “put up with” lots of deficiencies in OSX.  I’ll take the high road, and point out that OSX -feature for feature- -flaw for flaw- does not have any usability advantages over its Windows counterpart.

The rumor of OSX running zippy on an Intel machine:
Of course Mac runs as fast or faster on Intel.  Any copy of FreeBSD run against an Intel machine would tell you that would be the case.
Note that Linux also does a very good job of multitasking, so I would expect an Intel Mac to follow suit.

Anyway, I have about the same interest in videoPods as I do Podcasts.  Zero, nadda, none.

The current incarnation of devices that can play portable video (Creative, Sony PSP etc) are at best a niche product.  My main theory is that the size is a bit too awkward for most folks, and they tend to be on the expensive side.  I couldn’t possibly think of taking a video iPod everywhere I go like my current 3G.

Portable DVD players will continue to rule the roost on the airplanes.  For $200, if you need movies, you can’t go wrong with one of those.  However, I think most would much rather watch my entertainment on a big screen.  I have hard enough of a time trying to figure out whether I have the right suit selected while playing Solitaire on my iPod.  I couldn’t imagine trying to watch Lord of the Rings for three hours on a 4-6” screen, angled just right for clarity. 

I also don’t understand the merit of BUYING A MUSIC VIDEO.  All of them are streamed on the Internet anyway.  They are made to help sell albums, and albums only. (But, if NIN’s “ONLY” is anything to judge… maybe also to sell Powerbooks(?)) Why would I want to buy something I can watch for free anyway?

A video iPod would likely have some other application to possibly make it more inviting, but I don’t think music videos or movies merit a strong sales pitch.

John Edwards - 18 July 2005 06:15 PM

Why do these threads always turn in to a Windows vs Mac bashing?
I “put up with” lots of deficiencies in OSX.  I’ll take the high road, and point out that OSX -feature for feature- -flaw for flaw- does not have any usability advantages over its Windows counterpart.

I read all the posts above and couldn’t find anything that bashed Windows.

It’s fun, though.

John Edwards - 18 July 2005 06:15 PM

The rumor of OSX running zippy on an Intel machine:
Of course Mac runs as fast or faster on Intel.  Any copy of FreeBSD run against an Intel machine would tell you that would be the case.
Note that Linux also does a very good job of multitasking, so I would expect an Intel Mac to follow suit.

And so the first reports indicate. Even low-end Intel-based Macs should be a good match for Celeron-based machines. Bragging rights make folks feel good about their purchases.

John Edwards - 18 July 2005 06:15 PM

Anyway, I have about the same interest in videoPods as I do Podcasts.  Zero, nadda, none.

The current incarnation of devices that can play portable video (Creative, Sony PSP etc) are at best a niche product.  My main theory is that the size is a bit too awkward for most folks, and they tend to be on the expensive side.  I couldn’t possibly think of taking a video iPod everywhere I go like my current 3G.

Yeah, I agree. The size will be critical. Rather, the size of the screen relative to the whole package. Too small, and the user experience will suck. Too large and it’s too painful to carry around.

The market won’t be the same, though. We’ll carry our iPods everywhere. We won’t carry a videoPod everywhere because we won’t drive or walk and watch a video.

It needs to be some kind of device that fits elsewhere than just an iPod that does videos on a larger screen.

John Edwards - 18 July 2005 06:15 PM

Portable DVD players will continue to rule the roost on the airplanes.  For $200, if you need movies, you can’t go wrong with one of those.  However, I think most would much rather watch my entertainment on a big screen.  I have hard enough of a time trying to figure out whether I have the right suit selected while playing Solitaire on my iPod.  I couldn’t imagine trying to watch Lord of the Rings for three hours on a 4-6” screen, angled just right for clarity. 

What kind of entertainment do you have that requires a big screen? Perhaps Apple has something in mind that’s about the size of the nicer small DVD players.

John Edwards - 18 July 2005 06:15 PM

I also don’t understand the merit of BUYING A MUSIC VIDEO.  All of them are streamed on the Internet anyway.  They are made to help sell albums, and albums only. (But, if NIN’s “ONLY” is anything to judge… maybe also to sell Powerbooks(?)) Why would I want to buy something I can watch for free anyway?

Now you’re thinking, but extend the process a bit. People are collectors. We like to “own” things. Why buy a DVD of a movie you’ve already seen? Why buy a CD of music that’s free on the radio? While it’s easy enough to stream some music videos on the Internet, the experience is crummy and so is the quality (often).

Get me a QuickTime, full-screen version of Shania Twain’s video of “Man, I Feel Like A Woman” or Robert Palmer’s video of “Simply Irresistible.” Sweet. I’ll pay for those in a heartbeat. And pay to collect more.

John Edwards - 18 July 2005 06:15 PM

A video iPod would likely have some other application to possibly make it more inviting, but I don’t think music videos or movies merit a strong sales pitch.

For just music videos in and of itself, you’re probably right. But it’s the package that matters and we haven’t seen anything yet. Plus, remember that the iPod came withOUT an iTunes Music Store. All it had was iTunes.

I expect we’ll see a package that says, “Oh, yeah. Now it makes sense to do it this way. Cool!”

Jeff Mincey - 18 July 2005 06:48 PM

“The rumor of OSX running zippy on an Intel machine...”

I don’t know where you’ve been, but that’s not a rumor. None other than Steve Jobs himself made a formal announcement which spawned shock waves in the industry.

That might have slipped by you Jeff… The rumor was that OSX runs very fast on an Intel machine.  The keynote wasn’t all that impressive in my opinion… Photoshop took forever to open while running Rosetta.  The rumors I’ve heard have included such opinions from developers as:

“Web browsing is now just as fast as its Windows counterpart”.

Of course Mac runs as fast or faster on Intel.  Any copy of FreeBSD run against an Intel machine would tell you that would be the case.

It all depends on which Intel chip we are talking about. Your analogy of FreeBSD isn’t valid because it doesn’t use any window manager (in the X11 environment) which remotely taxes hardware the way the Quartz graphics engine does in OS X.

If Linux, and XFree run zippy on an Intel platform, I have no doubts that OSX should do the same.  That should most definitely calm fears over the switch from IBM processors.

“Note that Linux also does a very good job of multitasking, so I would expect an Intel Mac to follow suit.”

OS X already does a very good job of multitasking. This isn’t the same issue as raw performance—you may be fusing these two things.

“...I think most would much rather watch my entertainment on a big screen.”

In the recent past Steve Jobs has issued statements in agreement with you on this. Curious, hey?

IÌll take the high road, and point out that OSX -feature for feature- -flaw for flaw-- does not have any usability advantages over its Windows counterpart.

Now just what makes this statement an example of taking the high road? It smacks of dogmatism to me—what with its absolute all-or-nothing verbiage, to wit: “[OS X] does not have any usability advantages over...Windows.”

Not a single one, hey? Yeah, seems like a balanced view to me.

Alright… let me try and rephrase that again…

-feature for feature- -flaw for flaw- (AKA OVERALL), OSX doesn’t prove itself to be any better of a computer platform than Windows.  (Sorry I used the term ANY.) Note logically however, that doesn’t make Windows any better.  Note that depending on a specific use, Windows/Mac/Linux specific software may provide a better solution for an individual.

Jeff Mincey - 18 July 2005 08:06 PM

“That might have slipped by you Jeff÷ The rumor was that OSX runs very fast on an Intel machine.”

Jeff blinks—I did indeed overlook the word, zippy, in your original statement.

Tera blinks—I heard exactly the same thing from an Apple Developer who’s touched the machines. Used the machines. Apple engineers are reported to have said that there’s many built-in bottlenecks on PC boxes these days. Fast single Intel chip machines at the low end, dual dual-core Intel chips at the high end.

Woo hoo!

Of course, Apple’s next big thing is not a Mac!

As I found out by pure luck during my Finnish interlude, it is actually a budget hotel chain. They have been test driving it in Finland (http://www.omena.com - see the chain’s logo to the left), probably feeling safe that there are only 5 million Finns or so speaking a language noone else can understand (if they speak at all) so they can keep the secret.

Probably, the unique point of sale of that chain will be that they have a Mac and an iPod (soon, a video pod?) in each room. Judging from the logo, the Macs will run Windows. That of course must be the true reason for the Intel switch.

Cheers,

Utz

What about the cell phones coming out with live television feed. And cell phones have been able to download movies for awhile. saving them online and allowing you to access the movie when you want to. It would be cool to be able to rip movies though. And with the newest Nano Motherboards coming out, before long the systemy our talking about will be here. They recently built an entire computer inside of a power supply. ITX Motherboards from VIA. One major problem people are having with making things smaller is how to get wires to various chips. it makes it nearly impossible to get all your wires to your leads with the size chips are now, and if they get smaller, engineers may be in trouble. They have chips now where the chip itself is being used as the leads, but it’s still difficult. I think there needs to be a breakthrough before we get our midget computers.

I’ve got DSL. It runs at cable speed. (3 Mb/s) I don’t ever lose connection, have at least three computers online without any lattency problems, don’t have lag on gaming unless the other person too is wireless, in which there arises some problems for timing out and slow downs, and Bellsouth will have it fixed by tommorrow if it goes down. We can’t get cable anyway. Every road except mine has it. In a 300 house neighborhood, they forgot to run cable on one street. Happened to be mine. Stinks pretty bad.

Kyle - 19 July 2005 04:59 PM

What about the cell phones coming out with live television feed. And cell phones have been able to download movies for awhile. saving them online and allowing you to access the movie when you want to. It would be cool to be able to rip movies though. And with the newest Nano Motherboards coming out, before long the systemy our talking about will be here. They recently built an entire computer inside of a power supply. ITX Motherboards from VIA. One major problem people are having with making things smaller is how to get wires to various chips. it makes it nearly impossible to get all your wires to your leads with the size chips are now, and if they get smaller, engineers may be in trouble. They have chips now where the chip itself is being used as the leads, but it’s still difficult. I think there needs to be a breakthrough before we get our midget computers.

I’ve got DSL. It runs at cable speed. (3 Mb/s) I don’t ever lose connection, have at least three computers online without any lattency problems, don’t have lag on gaming unless the other person too is wireless, in which there arises some problems for timing out and slow downs, and Bellsouth will have it fixed by tommorrow if it goes down. We can’t get cable anyway. Every road except mine has it. In a 300 house neighborhood, they forgot to run cable on one street. Happened to be mine. Stinks pretty bad.

Kyle, I have no doubt you’re doing this for the fun of baiting people. Show us a cell phone that’s coming out that does live television feeds. Where’d you get that? Popular Mechanics?

Oh, cell phones have been able to download movies for awhile, have they? Which cell phones? Show us a link. If you’re really an engineer then you should know that most of what you write indicates otherwise.

Show us a little proof. Got a link about a cell phone that does live television? Got a link about a cell phone that downloads movies? Since you’re obviously not an engineer (unless ‘sanitation engineer’ is what you’re talking about) you need to know that most readers here consider you to be rather silly entertainment.

actually, I am an engineer. I’ve been an Applications engineer, and am more presently employed as an Aerospace engineer. Designing aircraft. I’m debating on going over to ASIC though, since they do get paid a good bit more than I do. I saw someone watching the fast and the furious 4 years ago on a cell phone. The guy at our local radioshack had satellite television with bad recption picture wise, but good audio. And I don’t get popular mechanics. I’ll find a link or two and send them to you. And I don’t put you down, so don’t put me down.

http://biz.yahoo.com/special/cell05_article1.html
Came out last January.
The live feed ones, here you go. http://www.mobitv.com/
Edit: A line was taken out of this because I believe I was too harsh. Bambi can believe anything she wants. I have nothing against her at all, and she appears to be fairly intelligent and very pretty, although she like everyone makes mistakes.

Kyle - 19 July 2005 05:33 PM

http://biz.yahoo.com/special/cell05_article1.html
Came out last January.
The live feed ones, here you go. http://www.mobitv.com/
Edit: A line was taken out of this because I believe I was too harsh. Bambi can believe anything she wants. I have nothing against her at all, and she appears to be fairly intelligent and very pretty, although she like everyone makes mistakes.

Kyle, I believe in you, man. I really do. But, no more Jolt Cola, man.

OK, the first link isn’t “real”, Kyle. I called Sprint and Verizon and asked about it. The sales guys laughed. The second link isn’t real, either. “Real” means you can call your cell phone company and get that stuff on your cell phone. You can’t. It’s anything but mainstream. Chances are good that it won’t be mainstream, either. Certainly not for a long time. Why?

Cell phone screens are a joke for watching TV and movies. Steve Jobs has already stated that a movie experience on an iPod would be something of a joke. Screen is too small. Same thing for an iTMS buying experience on a cell phone. Ain’t gonna happen in big numbers.

Having someone like you call me “pretty” really makes me nauseous. Really.

BTW - have you noticed that the site here is called “Mac360.” It’s about Macs. Keep it about Macs.