All? Which ones? This would be news to me and probably a few other folks.

iPhone basically runs the desktop version of Safari sans Flash.

Best,.

Kurt

edit: The iPhone OS is basically a stripped down version of OS X, but very similar at the core.

I have a Samsung sch-i760 and I run Windows Explorer. I surf just as I do on my computer. There are some scripts like real time scores and such that don't work here and there (could be a plug in but I don't care that much) but otherwise I can go everywhere and view normal web pages. I also stream Youtube etc.

FWIW, I do not claim the Mac/OS X is a perfect system - I hope I am not coming across that way. I do have problems with WiFi from time to time through my 2Wire router and other problems that I have learned to remedy since I've used OS X since its release.

I don't doubt that Windows is an effective OS for millions and millions of folks. You won't find me barking in earnest that Windows sucks here or to my "PC" friends.

I also find some Mac user's comments grating. But, honestly, some folks with their baseless criticism of Mac/OS X are no less shrill than the Mac fanboys bowing to Jobs and accepting their machine as the talisman of cool.

Best

Kurt

web?:rolleyes:

Good gawd ... why wasn't this over with the Hitler comment?:rolleyes:

Pocket PC's and smart phones have been web-able for ever. It's just that it's not the best tool for the job. ...it's something you use in a pinch. You Apple fanboys are cuckoo for coco-puffs for your lobster-clawing HVGA touch-screens. --that is HALF VGA! ...you get the page and have to lobster-claw your way to part of the text. Oooohhh . . looky what I can do on my iPhone....:rolleyes: Uh, yeah; old news. Maybe in a few years the Apple fanboys will stun us all with cut & paste on their iPhones. We'll all act surprised for ya --we know you paid a lot. :cool:

Well, that's kind of my point re browsers. I've had cell phones with browsers for years and until mobile Safari, I did only use them in a pinch.

The point I am making is that the size of the screen coupled with desktop style browser allows many more people to actually USE the browser on a regular basis. That's why you see iPhones getting ranked extremely high in mobile web browsing. I also heard today that iPhone is the number one mobile browser at BoA - there are more stats like this and I would be happy to dig them up.

I think if you had actually spent a week or two using the iPhone some of your opinions might change.

Best,

Kurt

edit: P.S.: You and Mule been comparing notes? :D

I can browse several ways. One screen wide, normal screen size, picsel style(it's like .pdf files where you can touch the screen and drag around the site).

What does an iPhone do different? Is it just the crab claw thing?

Most of the smartphones & Pocket PC's let the user link their laptop thru their phone for a remote (cell based)web connection. Do iPhones allow that too? ( not rhetorical --I don't know)

LOL! Apple really bothers you, huh? :D

You can do that via a 3rd party app, not supported yet by Apple.

The SDK was released today and "supported" apps will be released in June.

FWIW, I found this from December:


Source: http://blogs.computerworld.com/iphone_browsing_marketshare_closes_in_on_1

"a week or two using ..."!?! Geez, you must think I'm pretty damn retarded, to need a couple weeks to figure out that limited feature set.:D


Before the iPhone, ("BI" for the religous) I had a Nokia 770. It's about the same size as the iPhone, and is a TS(touchscreen) UI web-browser, but it has 2.5x more pixels (800x480). That was, to me, the bottom end of what a web-device could have.

I was very hopeful for the iPhone, and obviously disapointed with the feature-set they delivered. I do give them credit for the fuzzy back-zoom. That does help navigate a page. But still, it is wanting pixels. I imagine that Apple will come out with an "HD iphone" soon . .something closer to vga. It's really kind of a no brainer.

Jesus, you guys...:rolleyes:

Just buy and use what you like, date the women that you want and let others do what they want. I've had both PCs and Macs; PCs actually do some things better, IMO, including web surfing, but Macs are a lot nicer and don't get viruses.

Life is just too short not to have cool gadgets. I like Mac computers, my Blackberry, (more than an iphone), Makita power tools, Persol sunglasses, etc... If I was flusher, I'd have a new GT-3 and a Ducati 1098s. What's wrong with that? I'm also perfectly OK with lesser tools and gadgets if budget won't allow the best. Macs are way nicer boxes and gadgets, in the opinion of the market. If you think it's all marketing, I disagree and can point to countless failed products that were marketed to death. :cool:

Well, it took me a week or two to get used to the UI, especially the key input. Sure there are some missing features, but it's still a new device.

I've read many reviews of the iPhone, both good and bad, and I don't recall any significant criticism of the screen. It's actually the "feature" that most critics and regular folks like. There are plenty of other "real" shortcomings to bark about.

The iPhone was remarkably hyped and many folks bought them just to buy them, but there is also a much bigger group of folks, IMO, who wanted the iPhone for its features. It may not fit your needs, or maybe you would never like an Apple product for your own religious reasons, but it's hard to ignore the success of the product. And, according to the reports of search engines like Google, the fanboys and regular customers are using the phones.

Of course there will be "new improved" and thinner and faster iPhones in the future. Perhaps HD, 3G and for sure a flood of new apps in June.

For some reason, I think if your desired feature set was available you still wouldn't be seen with an Apple product! :D

Take care,

Kurt

Denis--Funny thing about products in the market place; if anyone compare Apple's to Oranges, make sure that one of the product isn't actually an Apple product. They are a sensitive bunch (bushel?) ..and the easily bruse. :cool:

At HVGA The iPhone screen is better than any of the typical QVGA phones. BUT, if Apple wanted to be "Porsche of devices" they would have not been a just bit better . . they would have picked the appropriate screen for the job. Like I said, Nokia had set a good minimum standard, for the device type. Apple choose to be ‘VW Bug of devices’ with the iPhone. Cute, and a disruptive (market) product.

Whatever. :)

Have a nice evening!

Best,

Kurt

Opinions are like well, mouths lets say, but facts is facts. Apple has been drilling all you guys in the ass price wise for so long it doesn't hurt any more! I got a 4400 dual core AMD, 2 gigs, 320 gig sata HD, 19' wide screen monitor & Epson 7400 all in one printer for $600.00. You can barely get an iphone for that.

This speaks moutfuls:

View Trend Windows XP 78.37%
View Trend Windows Vista 9.19%
View Trend MacIntel 3.59%
View Trend Mac OS 3.22%
View Trend Windows 2000 2.97%"

In the immortal words of Sargent Preston of the Yukon, "This case is closed King."

Moutfuls?

Yep, PC user for sure. ;)

Ummm, what is the actual debate here?
high end servers?
phones?
OS systems?
regular desktop hardware?

I really think if your going to attack Apple or M$ then just point out what part!
Actually, the iphone versus blackberry and Nokia is pretty close to the above sentence.
However, do blackberry and Nokia run their own OS? As in build the hardware and OS?

I am sorry but if you think about it. Apple and Sun are the only companies that have been brought up (as to my knowledge) that bundle the hardware with an OS. What does M$ have besides XBox ?

As much as I like Sun, they had to opensource Solaris to gain lost ground. Do SGI still sell boxes?

Regarding boxes. Yes, a do it yourself or regular spec Dell tend to be cheaper than a Apple box. But then again Apple's mini does get close. General comparing really doesn't help this situation. As far as I have seen Apple has had a better resale value than almost any other system besides SGI.

I personally don't like the idea that you can swap MoBos on Apple products, this is a bit irratating but then again, you don't have to fiddle with the BIOS.

How can you compare WinTel to Apple ?????
Can somebody explain this to me!

MacOS and OSX are way more different than possibly the NT to Windows difference.

M$ just did not give Apple $150mil. They got stock and "code" (insider information). Code which helped stablize some parts of Windows. And in the deal got the DOJ off their backs a bit. I do believe that the $150mil only gave Apple the ability to say ther are "still alive" the cash input wasn't that necessary but rather the press/media buzz was a great more worth than the $150mil.

Apple's high end has 2 parts -- servers and workhorses (desktops)

I really thought MacOS was a sh!!tty as Windows 95,98, 98Se and Me. Windows NT, 2000 and XP are pretty good but as for OSX is up there with the latest from M$.

regarding that graph showing OS'es .... hmmmm very misleading since MacOS more than likely refers to anything pre OSX.

I have no clue why OSX is "UNIX" certified. However "unix" certified makes hell of sense. Becareful on the usage of capital letters. OSX is NOT UNIX it is a BSD derivative.

I wonder does UNIX still exist as an operating system outside of the lame lawsuits brought up by that company which bought the UNIX name ???

A little more number crunching is really needed. If Linux and BSD are combined the WinTel game is now fighting a B/LAMP like battle.

What is the ratio of WinTel vs NixTel + NixPower? This is fair to ask since all flavors of Windoze are grouped together while other systems are normally picked on 1 by 1 ;)

Let's back up a little bit here, OSX is really the only company to have brought the "unix derivatives" to the mass market. RedHat didn't Ubuntu sounds like it's making inroads especially if I'm not mistaken because Big Blue is behind it.

As for the Windoze thingy. The system itself is really a mess with patches every where to make it work properly (as in no 3rd party shenanigans). I really wish M$ would once and for all just do it right from the ground up and give up like Apple did when then went with the Next OS rebuild. lolo, I wonder what BeOS would have been like :D

I highly respect Billy Boy for his saviness in business and philantrophy, however I didn't like the way he ruled the PC kingdom with an iron fist. Jobso, is what I tend to think a perfectionist who is nailing the market without killing to many companies to get to the top but yet I think is an egolomaniac nut case the rest of the time.

So, let's talk OSX vs XP systems.
Who copied who ... is mute. They copy each other. period.

I find one less intuitive than the other ... errr ... I find putting on my trousers from the left leg to be intuiitive. People get used to one thing or place and then find everything else just that ... intuitive.
IMO, I find OSX/MacOS easier to use due to less menu travel and functions being in a slightly more inutuitive location. So, why do you find your favorite more intuitive?

The only trouble I have had with peripherals is with Printers. Everything else just plugs and plays including my cam-corder which wasn't supposed to work with my OS. .... go figure ;)

I really think that each OS really depends on people's character and their confort zone. It's really hard to jump between 2 systems.

Right now XP/Vista and OSX is a UI shoot out. Satbility and what not are there for each system. The virus factor should be taken away since M$ does have a huge market share and previous business practices have made it a unfair target.

Which has more applications? That is a really good question! Because you can compile most *nix code for OSX. Propriatary software is definitely in favor of M$. But those really are packages that you'll find sold at Walmart or whatever store you go to.

At one time, the theory was brought up that Doze had a lot of software per category that were redundate or offered very little functional difference between each other, ie A1 vs A2 vs A3 vs A4 software. Each did the same with 1 or 2 different being different. I find this now becoming true for OSX. Lot's of shareware out there that do the same thing.

Having more game titles ... wow! That really makes a difference.

hardware: previously Apple had a huge advantage over almost everybody except for IBM's thinkpad and a few others. Dell is .... errrrr ... Dell
Recently, Apple's hardware is on par with other mid-end machines. I have done some things with older Apple hardware that I'm sure I would NOT like to do with what is being sold today. Sorry ... Apple no longer gets points from me in this department.


So back to those wonderful numbers.
WinDoze is killing every one out there. So what ?
Is this because it is a better product? Did people taste test before they bought?

I think this is because Billy Boy was a genius and not a fool like Jobso. Jobso and Apple fumbled the ball big time. Look at the infrastructure that M$ built. Very impressive !!!
However, I still have that quizzy feeling as if I were driving a 78' Pinto.

But this is getting into the round robbin problem. So which is better. Today? Good Dang question!
I have no clue. As I wrote above is really a matter of taste for those who know better and a matter of being a lemming for the rest.

I have personally had more success with using OSX out of the box with no "adjusting/deleting unwated demo/what ever ware". I have spent about 10 minutes total worrying about my security of my machine compared to the ones in my office. I only reinstall the OS when a new version comes out (point versions are just an update with restart). I don't have to worry about Sony or other companies installing rootkits on my computer. Yes, this time obscurity is a blessing!

So, I came to the conclusion, if you are "just a user" OSX might just offer a better overall experience but if you are into DIY then go to a WinTel box. For those who are power users, you'll already have chosen your system based upon usage and feel of the OS.


To answer the question:
People probably hate Apple/Mac because of those diehard loyalist fanboi's. Everything else is just misleading sales information because most sales staff only know Win/Tel and not Apple/OSX (point of reference would be imagining the guy down at WalMart suggesting a Dell with Ubuntu on it to some guy off the street ... lolo ... not happening tomorrow.)

Funny thing is that most Apple Fanbois can give you reasons why they aren't on the Darkside compared to those who bag on them.



Anyway, I have clue why I wrote this :(
If you really want to buy one of those Dell Newspaper advertisment machines. Go do it ;)





PS, why does Apple/OS have a bigger share than Vista ????

This is a long one, but here we go....

Quote:

I am sorry but if you think about it. Apple and Sun are the only companies that have been brought up (as to my knowledge) that bundle the hardware with an OS.

SGI, HP, DEC, IBM, etc. Different niches, to be sure, but OS specialization on hardware has been happening for quite some time.

Quote:

As much as I like Sun, they had to opensource Solaris to gain lost ground. Do SGI still sell boxes?

SUN, primarily, is a hardware company that seems to make killer software. While gaining lost ground might have been part of the reason, I'm not sure it's the complete reason. Remember, SUN does more for open source than..well...anyone. Look at how much code they've opened. Hell, they spend $1BN on MySQL! DTrace, ZFS, et al.

SGI does still sell boxes, although I think their workstations are refurbs of older units. IRIX is more or less dead.

Quote:

I have no clue why OSX is "UNIX" certified. However "unix" certified makes hell of sense. Becareful on the usage of capital letters. OSX is NOT UNIX it is a BSD derivative.

OS X is UNIX certified because The Open Group, who owns the trademark and publishes the specs. and certifications, said it is after Apple paid to have it tested. The usage of capital UNIX is absolutely appropriate, legal and otherwise. In any event, there were 2 main branches of UNIX: BSD and ATT. Both were UNIX back in the day, and both are being certified now. You don't even have to have original UNIX code to be UNIX, technically. Solaris, FWIW, contains both BSD and ATT code. OS X Leopard, in all respects, is UNIX, from both a legal and technical standpoint.

Quote:

I wonder does UNIX still exist as an operating system outside of the lame lawsuits brought up by that company which bought the UNIX name ???

UNIX is more of a certification now, but as such, the systems so certified qualify as UNIX. AIX, HP-UX, Solaris, OS X Leopard, IRIX, Tru64 all come to mind. SCO didn't buy UNIX, I believe the courts decided that one.

Quote:

Let's back up a little bit here, OSX is really the only company to have brought the "unix derivatives" to the mass market.

That, too, is debatable. For just one instance, do not forget that Microsoft, before doing Windows, was a UNIX company. XENIX anyone? It rocked, fyi. Although, I'll grant you, Apple sure is doing it in a big way.

Quote:

PS, why does Apple/OS have a bigger share than Vista ????

When was OSX first released? When was Vista released? Wait until such time has passed, and then look at Vista's numbers TEN compared to OS X NOW. That's a more fair comparison.

Thanks for the information!

yes, you are right! OSX vs Vista was a bit of cheap shot :(

ugh, forgot that IBM had DOS/V stuff.
lolo, AIX is Apple :)

Really? M$ had XENIX ?!?!? I didn't know that. hmmm, I had always thought they just bought a DOS company and then beat IBM to the punch for Intel machines.
I did know that Word really got a kick start because of the Macintosh.
However, I'd wonder if XENIX was so good then why didn't it get more attention? (not being sarcastical here ... just really would like to know)

As for Sun ... I do agree it isn't the only reason but I don't think they are helping out the Opensource community just because they feel like it's "right thing to do" ... there has to be a bottom $ line to their actions.


Toaddy, one thing for sure, your major is definitely being useful here :D
( I'd go to paradise though :D )

'Cause, ---- it doesn't? I'm just saying.

View Trend Windows Vista 9.19%
View Trend MacIntel 3.59%
View Trend Mac OS 3.22%

+1

Got it.

Not so much. It appears you're still wandering in the desert there Mo. Maybe a Kia can run with your Porsche, not mine. It does excel at gas mileage. Just like a Mac excels at something, whatever that is.:p

It excels at having a shiny case.

I don't see how you can claim a Mac is a "higher performance" experience as insinuated in the Porsche/Kia response. Does it get to web pages faster? Do they look better? Does Quicken do different things on a Mac? Can you write better papers on a Mac? Do spreadsheets perform more equations? What is the performance advantage?

Outside of the virus issues (which is big), I don't have a clue what the claim could be. Maybe the iLife stuff (which is software)?

oopps :rolleyes:
my bad ... I need to learn how to add :D

Viruses are not that big a deal any more really. But what the PC can never do is give you this kind of luxuriant shimmering hair.
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1204907910.jpg

I agree that the build quality is better and the designs are more attractive but none of this affects function in any real way. Then there is the "intuitive" claim, which certainly could make sense but in the real world I don't see it. I mean I'm no power user but I never have to pause to figure out how to do things on my computer, can someone give me an example of how I'm being held back on a PC?

In the end it's less like the cars analogy and more like this: A PC is a frosty glass mug full of good beer for $2.80. A Mac is forged aluminum frosty mug with some cool inscriptions on it full of the same beer for $3.50.

First virus hit mac in 2006 and its been on the incline ever since.

Excellent post!

To answer dd.'s legitimate (not trolling)question:
I don't think that people hate Apple/Mac product anymore than any other piece of electronic gagitry...: but people are often disappointed in Apple product when they follow those diehard loyalist fanboi's enthusiasm all the way to the Apple store, only to find out that for every advantage Apple may seem to have, there will be equal, or more, disadvantages.

The closest thing to "hate" that I can see is not for the product but rather for the pious behavior of the Apple fanboy. It's that over zealous pushy sell job that is so annoying. Apple products are just a sideways alternative... a different mix of features. Sure, I will listen to and investigate the next Apple offering. as I do for so many other tech toy mfg's. But I will apply an "exaggeration factor" from the Apple hype machine and fanboys..:)

Trying to keep things to an OS issue, where does a product excell at something?
How about -- time allotment.

Less time dealing with OEM Windows versus a pure Windows install
The ability to use the UI system more proficiently
The problem of DIY versus shelf bought units
Having a limited number of choices for software versus X number choices for similar software
Trying to figure which version of Vista is best for you ( ... this is a sarcastic comment)
having to learn proprietary standards even though open standards are available (thinking of web programming)


If time allotment is spent for things outside of regular usage, then -- yes, if your computer is having problems with this or that because of an OS issue then you will see a difference.

I'd like to discount the virus situation because over time with OSX market (possibly) increasing OSX will become a target, so number of viruses could theoretically even out.
... the question is whether UNIX is easier to hack than XP/Vista/future version


I do agree with Mule. Today Macs do not come out on top any more. Back in the day ... I might have disagreed.

Macs don't have a speed benefit outside of possibly releasing something slightly earlier.
I think that hardware is a non-issue since the chipsets are the same for Apple and other intel box makers. There might be a difference in quality ... just like car parts made in China but is that really going to make a difference in regular length usage? I doubt it.

Speaking of which, are the intel chips now better than the Power line? Let's keep AMD out of the issue ;)
Also, was wondering if the Cell chip will ever become a PC type or will it just stay an appliance item ....

web pages, if designed to open standards will look different if one browser doesn't parse according to those standards. Latest on the browsers is, who is going to be acid3 compatible and still not bug ridden.


Apple vs M$ just doesn't make any sense ...
Apple and Microsoft are different. Why do people consistently try to compare them?
Microsft is basically a software company.
Apple is a all in one company.
Microsoft's all in one products are the zune and xbox. Are there others ????

So let's compare the xBox to a mini :D
or
keep it to OSX vs XP/Vista


Kia to porsche is like a genereic box to a mac ???
I don't get it ...
build quality, design, long term performance, resale value, "hard to value" ownership pride and what not are different.

I can see:
Kia = newspaper Dells
Porsche = Apple

Carrying a Dell notebook versus an Apple notebook is different.
Both will do the same job, just like a Kia or a porsche, but it's sometimes the intangibles that make the difference. (lolo, IMO a powerbook/mac book pro feels better to me :D )

lolo, maybe Apple represents Yuppies ?????

I am not a yuppie, actually, I'm too poor to be one :D

AIX is IBM, AUX is Apple. IIRC, AUX didn't fair too well, but was somewhat interesting. I've never been able to get my hands on one, but I've wanted to play with AUX for some time. AUX literally stands for Apple UNIX.

XENIX did get more attention, after MS sold it to SCO who then, IIRC, spun it into Unix-Ware. Unix-Ware for awhile was a very good system, that SCO eventually managed to turn into ****. Also, I think, but can't recall exactly, XENIX had somewhat hefty hardware requirements for its day.

The $$ component is definitely in SUN's equation, you'll get no denial from me, or SUN, about that:) By open sourcing, they attract not only the crowd that wants to use open software, and doesn't need/want support, but those that have traditionally used SUN, and want to continue doing so, and don't mind paying for support. And, it allows them to sell more hardware. Sure, Solaris is open source, but support contracts start at $350/yr, and if you don't have a support contract, you don't get patches for stuff. Only security patches I think.

Thanks, I try to make at least some useful posts for all the bull**** I post and ranting I do:)

Intel better than POWER? Not a chance. The POWER-6 is the fastest CPU available right now. The benchmarks and specs should be on IBM.com

(Unless you meant Power-PC, which is a derivative of the POWER architecture. That I wouldn't know.)

Good one.

Ian

I have run my medical practice on Macs for 15 years now. It's a small office. I use a network of 7 computers. The software is complicated, including billing, business management, claims, electronic medical records, etc.

In 15 years I have never has an IT contract. I have never had an IT consult. In 15 years, my network has not been "down" even a single day. I'm no computer expert, but I installed my network myself with little hassle.

Every computer on my network as well as 5 more Macs at my home have NEVER HAD A VIRUS. (My 17 year old son's Mac has been to some scary places on the internet. No viruses.)

My accountant manages only medical and dental practices. His group is frequently published in accounting periodicals. Our accountants like to track costs and compare practices. When they compared computer related costs for nearly 100 medical practices, the offices running Macs were consistently more cost effective. The top 4 spots were taken by practices that run on Macs. (Apples medical practice market share is still quite small).

It's easy to train new employees to use a Mac. (Most of my employees have been so impressed by the Macs we use at work that they have switched to Macs for home computing.)
Mine have been trouble free for 15 years.
No viruses in 15 years.
Networking, upgrading, peripheral connections are dead simple.
Much lower cost than a comparable PC bases system.

My Macs are workhorses. I'm keeping them.

This is not considering used/ebay pricing.

What is the cost of the beer itself?

What is the OEM price for the Vista Versions?
Can normal folk buy a version direct?

OSX 10.5 = $129.00

Full versions

* Windows Vista Home Basic: $199
* Windows Vista Home Premium: $239
* Windows Vista Business: $299
* Windows Vista Ultimate: $399

price cut article here:
http://blogs.computerworld.com/vista_price_cuts



No, Apple did not offer an upgrade. Upgrade Version prices are a better deal than Apple's pay to play system.

However, Apple didn't need to knee jerk to kick along their new system either. Users probably felt that the price to upgrade was worth it are under the influence of the jobso mind warp.
But if Vista is so good then why cut it's price so early in the game? Could Ballmer have dones another sweaty dance routine for us?


Home Basic seems to be the version that compares better to OSX. Other versions would be buying the additional software like iLife and iWork to catch up to premium. However, Home basic does not give you Aero ...

ummm, so sorry ... $1.29 for a glass that costs you $1.99 or if you want the head on your beer $2.39.


I do agree with the price of the mugs though.

Sounds like you should! This is the first post by a Mac person actually stating some fact. It sounds like your accountant is on to a good software package. It also sounds like you are pretty adept. Somebody is training your people. Maybe you don't need a consultant 'cause you're capable of it yourself. I would have a hard time believing that you are hiring folks that come in off the street & "pick it up."

Do you think there are similar PC stories?

Similar situation to Moses. Ran my own business solely on Macs for 16 years. I'm at an Internet techonology company now, and a year ago had the only Mac. Now fully 25% of the employees have switched over. Not because I evangelized, but because they are programmers and engineers and noticed the total lack of issues with OSX and the hardware (in strong contrast to their experiences with the declining numbers of Dells).