Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 21:29:00 -0700 From: B&D <NO_SPAMnopsamCOM> Subject: Re: A Macintosh Computers and A Saab?
On 4/13/03 7:43 AM, in article b7bt7l$d0cbo$1nopsam52899.news.dfncis.de, "Grunff" <grunffnopsam.com> wrote: >> I agree. And with that kind of argument, you might find yourself the proud >> owner of a BMW one day as well! > > Hehe... In addition to my 3 900s and my 9000, I own (and am > *very* fond of) a 325i. The best non-Saab I've ever driven. :) I hear a lot of good things about BMW. Glad you enjoy yours! >> If you didn't need to modify and run scientific software, and did a real >> feature-to-feature comparision, and used conventional benchmarking of >> computing power to marketing clockspeed, as well as efficiency of memory >> useage, you would find that the Macintosh computer is a lot more price >> competitive than you figured. > > You're making an incorrect assumption that PC means Windows. For 90% of all PC's it is true, so I am sure you will undersdtand my assumption! > Resource management, whether CPU, RAM, or other system > resources, is done at the OS level. While many versions of > Windows are very poor at resource management (I won't say all, > because the 2000 kernel is a notable exception), other OSs > aren't. I use Linux and BSD for a lot of work, and the > combination of these OSs with PC architecture is very hard to > match. I heart a lot of good things about Linux. I really liked Unix on the Vax 11/780 I learned on, was gratified when Linux was brought forward, and that the Mac OS went to Unix. For me the OS is WAY more important than the platform. But with Linux, you are going to run into similar problem about software compatibility and so on if you are doing more typical and less back-office jobs. > Value for money was only one of the reasons I gave. I still > think it's valid, but I also think it's less important than the > 'let's cushion the user from all technical details' approach > which Macs have. As a Mac user, one is encouraged to know as > little as possible about how the system is put together. Even > more so than Windows. I think that's bad. I think there are two broad philosophies that pervade almost all product design: 1. Let's make the end user a better person and reward the user for it. 2. Let's cater to the weakness of the end user and do a decent job while were at it. Strategies for #1 are prevalent in a lot of European appliances, and early OS, and certainly some of the more modern ones such as Linux. I have an Asko washing machine (front loader) that demands that you clear all the pockets of change or it will break down (not shut down - BREAK DOWN) requiring service. If you obey the rules, your clothes get really, really clean, and you don't even use much water or electricity. I think manual transmissions for automobiles fall here as well (you get more acceleration and better mileage) Strategies for #2 seem to be the most attractive and drive most product refinement, and most US products fall in this category, certainly automatic and man-u-matic transmissioned cars fall here. You can use abuse and are required to become no better at anything due to your purchase. You usually do not achieve the heights of #1, but you are given decent performance anyway. I think both Windows and Mac OS (GUI's) fall here, except the Mac is still better at it - less complicated, requiring a smaller staff of IT people to keep a network running at the user level (at the network level it is still a #1 process). I do agree with you that I would love to see a world where computers, cars, and other things will allow people to become better people by the use of the products, most people for most things will prefer their things to be #2's and will pick only 1 or 2 things to be #1 (Such as someone who uses a Windows based machine or Mac machine, Fully US automatic appliances, but splurges on a manual transmission sport sedan and takes up climbing). IN the long run, #2 wins over #1. Where am I going with this? I think Saab is a #1 style vehicle (either the automatic or manual versions in this case) because it allows you to customize your car and rewards good driving will awesome performance. I think both Mac OS and Windows OS are #2's -- especially for non computer professionals, but Macs are better at doing that catering, though Windows will shortly catch up as we can see the amazing amount of self-automation displayed by XP. >> I will mark you down as "No, I own a Saab and not a Mac and never plan on >> ever getting one" then, shall I? :) > > As I said, I own one, but I still don't like them. Fair enough - I can see where you are coming from. It would be a more muddles distinction if you had to choose Windows and Mac's OS - but you did an end around with Linux - which is a wonderful OS!
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
