Blitzzo
It's Mr. Computer!
DashFox2007 said:Sugar-coated lies? I think not, every windows user has come across confusing error messages, freezes, and crashes, pretty much during typical use.
That argument is incorrect on so many levels. First off, you don't even know what I'm referring to when I say "sugar-coated lies". Seriously, take a look at their marketing strategies. They try to look hip, cool, fancy, and most of all, like they're supposedly the best in the world. Look at this post you have written:
Oh my goodness! I'm at an apple store in New York and I'm trying out an apple computer, and it's awesome, I simply must switch to a mac!
If analyzed correctly, one can tell that you were a victim of Apple's corporate machine. "Hey, look! It's white and shiny! And the buttons are touch-sensitive! It automatically means it's good!" And then you look at some of their products like the iPhone, which has been so overhyped that people have overlooked some of its downsides, EG. no 3G connection, lack of browser features, limitations on developers, the AT&T network, etc. etc. As someone who reads tech blogs and watches CNBC, I give no doubt to the popularity of the iPhone, but at the same time, there are also several small issues that hurt its practicality.
And then there's Apple's Safari browser. Touted as the world's best browser when in truth there are more competent browsers, namely Firefox and Opera. The only thing Safari really has going for is its slightly faster page loading times. The rest of the areas are dominated by the competition. Look, every browser already has pop-up blocking, tabbed browsing, and RSS-reading capability. Not to mention, only Firefox has been able to do add-ons correctly so far, and only Firefox and Opera have the capability to block ads.
In response to Windows instability, it is quite clear that you have never, ever used an NT-based Windows system. News flash! The 95 kernel is unstable! The NT kernel isn't! Windows XP also effectively removes most BSoDs, and crashes are only at the fault of the software vendors. The only time XP will ever give a BSoD is in the case of hardware failure. This is understandable, because there really isn't much else that can be done when the GPU commits a fatal error or the CPU and RAM overheat to a degree in which they cannot operate safely. "Pretty much during typical use" implies that you have never used a Windows system, and further disproves your credibility.
Mac OS X Boot Camp, run XP or Vista on Macs, if I can run Xp on my mac and share files between the two OS's I can keep all my favorite exe's and use them without having to use two computers.
And as for user interface, I prefer a visually pleasing one that makes my time on a computer enjoyable and fun.
If you're going to use Windows to run your programs, why do you insist on also using OS X? Sure, it has flashy windows and bouncing icons, but you don't even need that kind of stuff. An operating system is what you use to run things from your computer. And you just can't run jack from OS X. Let me put it this way: I know a skilled Linux geek who is the IT tech guy at an upper-tier college in England, hosts a private IRC network, and two popular Yoshi fansites, and he still uses Windows as a personal operating system (though he uses Linux to run servers). Why? Software. In fact, that is the only thing that's preventing him from being entirely a Linux user. Most screenshots I see from him are of him running Windows. He's even given some positive feedback about Vista's latest update patch. Now that says something right there.
But what about pure power? For those of you who upgraded from Xp to Vista, I'm sure you had to upgrade your hardware and most of you probably say that Macs are weak and lacking in power, but Macs don't need as much power because they take up far less resources than resource hungry Vista.
I could recall reading the installation/upgrade manual for OS X and seeing that it had significantly higher system requirements than OS 9 had at the time. In those requirements: hardware-accelerated graphics. Just like what Vista has. Software rendering through GDI cannot possibly achieve such powerful effects as the Genie minimization.
If you get a virus on a PC, that's typical.
Sure, Windows only has 90% of the marketshare. It's inevitable that viruses will be developed for it. Now, granted, Windows' architecture isn't the most secure (as compared to Linux, which is quite impressive to me), but Microsoft has taken strides to patch those holes. Also, anti-virus software will usually dispatch of most any threat to come onto your computer. There are many free programs to choose from, so there's no excuse not to be protected.
I think I've covered about everything here.