NeoThermic wrote:Buha?! Right, lets keep this straight. The hardware and software of a default install of XP is stable. So is, accoring to you, (and I do belive you), OSX. *That* is the main point here. XP isn't as instable as the adverts make out. mal/spyware isn't included with the OS. It isn't purchased. It gets there through nefarious means, and if you do not have anti-virus or a good sense of logic, then you will get infected. The same applies for Macs, where I'm very sure that with an hour, a Mac and an internet connection, I could bring the machine down harder than gravity.
As was pointed out, it doesn't matter how the malware gets there. The average person doesn't know enough to prevent it. You claim that it is basic logic. Would you care to tell that to the teachers at this school who want pretty cursors for their desktop (while we are on the topic of desktops, most of them refer to the desktop image as their "screensaver")? Can you explain to them that the weather widget that they just downloaded contains spyware? Can you explain what spyware is? The people that are being marketted to by these adds are not you and me -- they are people that walk into CompUSA and say "I done wants me a compootar." As hard as you may find this to believe, most people really do not understand how computers work, and if something goes wrong, they are going to curse at the computer, not the spyware that they downloaded. This is the audience that is being advertised to.
NeoThermic wrote:Funky cables? What? Really. keyboard and mouse on computers these days are USB. Video is still the same connector we all love, the 15 pin VGA. Power cables are identical, and one needs to go into PC and monitor. Oh wow, we have one extra cable to plug in! The consumer will die before it gets turned on! Hell, with my keyboard, there's only one USB cable, and it does both keyboard and mouse!
I am not talking about the connectors -- I am talking about the cable that comes off of many of the monitors that are shipped with the Dells and HPs that I have to deal with. It is a big fat cable that bundles the data cable for the monitor, the cable to the speakers, and the microphone cable -- all of which are built into the monitor. The cable divides about 3 inches from the end, giving just enough slack to get everything plugged in. Compared to three cables for the Mac (four, if you get speakers, though the internal speakers are good enough that most average people don't bother), the 6 or 7 from the average OptiPlex are harder to deal with.
NeoThermic wrote:Yes, but my point still stands about usage figures in relation to the exploits. (of which your attempt to throw apache & IIS into the mix failed, something we've silently ignored...).
I'm sorry -- I thought that by leaving it out, it could be assumed that you had won that point. I would rather focus on things that have not been settled. As it seems that it will help you sleep better at night, you can have that point. In the future, you can just assume that anything that is omitted is conceded.
xander wrote:Macs may not be as mind-bogglingly good as Apple claims they are -- they are advertisements, and meant to make Macs look as good as possible.
Which is why they are awful and why I say they are full of FUD and RDF.
Then what is the point of advertising? Any advertisement seeks to make the product being advertised seem like the greatest thing on Earth! This is true of Pepsi, McDonalds, and Advil. It is true of car commercials. The point of advertising is to make people want to buy your product. This often includes comparisons to other products, expecially when the product being promoted is not the leader in its particular market. Most people run Windows, and are familier with it and its shortcomings. Thus, Apple slightly exagerates those shortcomings in an effort to (1) be humourous (2) make their product look better (3) sell more computers.
They are not lying about their products, or about Windows. They are taking people's experience with Windows (and if you don't believe me, why don't you read through some of the tech support calls that people make -- most of them are posted on "joke" pages, because the questions that people ask seem so mind-bogglingly stupid), and comparing their product to that experience. Perhaps it is FUD, but only in that people really do fear their computers, are uncertain about how to work them, and have doubts about how well they work.
Your initial argument about the commercials was that they were lies, and FUD. You have failed to demonstrate to me that they lie (at least, not any more than any other commercial). If you would like to make the statement that all commercials are just as bad, on the basis that they exagerate, I will be willing to concede that the Apple commercials "lie," just like all other commercials. As to the FUD, the commercials may be taking advantage of the fact that people do not trust their computers, but they are not creating that distrust in the first place. If people trusted their Windows boxes, this approach to advertising wouldn't even get off the ground. The fact that they are making more such ads seems to imply that the ads are working.
That depends on if you want to play games or not..
Ah, but these commercials are not directed at the gaming crowd. They are directed at the group of people that wants to check their email, edit some photos, and maybe make a family video to send to grandma. I never have, and probably never will, claim that Macs are good for gaming. If you want to play games, get a Windows box. If Apple comes out with a commercial claiming that Macs are a better gaming platform, I would be the first to deride those commercials.
Aaargh wrote:Macs have a built in camera and speakers and sofort? If one of them breaks, you'll have to miss your Mac for a while. Builtin devices are anyways never as good as external.
Yeah, but people love those things. They may be crap, but the average person sees it as a "feature." It is something that they can play with that they probably wouldn't have gotten seperately, but enjoy since they have it (it is a "bonus feature," even). If they had gotten it seperately, it would have involved more cables, and one of the points that Apple is trying to make is that there are very few cables. So, to you, me, or NeoThermic, the built in devices are a cheap gimmick. To the not-so-tech-savvy, they are a desirable feature.
As trickfred said, those TVs with built in VCRs are crap. Yet notice how many of them get sold. The camera in an iBook^WMacBook may be crap, but it will still help sell the system, because it is the kind of crap that people go for.
Aaargh wrote:ANd what's with the viruses, I run my computer without an antivir for ages, and It has crashed only once, me being so stupid to overwrite the bootsector. I have as many problems with viruses as Macs.
Again, how do you compare to the people at the school where I work? Do you download cute little icon sets that come with spyware? How about toolbars for launching your favorite apps and malware? Do you open every email attachment that you get? Do you read all of those emails that say "ILOVEYOU?" Or are you savvy enough to realise that most of those things are vectors for malware?
The average person would have answered "yes" to at least one of those dangerous behaviours. They are the people being marketted to.
Aaargh wrote:Can you give me 100 games that run on Mac? It'll cost you a lot of time, while I just go to a couple of game sites.
As I said above, that is not the market that Apple is seeking. If you want the lastest FPS, get a Win box. However, if you want 100 games, have a look at Apple's downloads section
. Right off, I see Quake 4, Halo, and Call of Duty 2. While I really don't know much about any of these games (they are all FPSes, right?), they have appeared in the media enough to have made an impression on my mind, so they must be at least somewhat high budget and/or popular.
Aaargh wrote:The only thing that bothers me are the lockups and crashes. But even then, I prefer Linux above Mac, because Linux is open-source.
Wow! First you tell me that Macs suck because they have no games, then you claim that Linux is better because it is open source?! You don't see the contradiction there? Also, may I point out that the open source crowd is also not the intended market. The intended audience probably doesn't even know what the words "open source" mean, and has probably on the vaugest notion of what Linux is (assuming that they have heard the term at all). Sorry, Linux just doesn't cut it for the masses, though it may yet get there... someday.