my opinion of mac

[witzer]

i just purchased a starwars DVD sets (episode 1, 2, and 3) today. i was watching the bonus disc in episode 3 where it was showing the production process of the whole episode 3. the thing that interested me was that there were a lot of mac users shown in that production. whether it's sound editing, video editing, or just document typing, they were all done in mac.

 

and honestly speaking, i cannot find any microsoft windows being used throughout the entire production videos. i'm seeing apple logo everywhere. apple monitors, ibooks, etc etc.

 

the special effects and the heavy graphic stuffs were done in SGI though. and there were alse a few hints that showed usage of linux.

 

there's this notion that the O.S world is dominated by microsoft with its windows. they are the dominant force. but seeing that star wars production video made me think about windows and the notion i knew. well, maybe it's just me, a guy living in indonesia where microsoft is really dominant in terms of O.S knowledge. there are a significant percentage of linux users here too (well most of them are probably programmers). and mac can only be found on some exclusive (probably high class) spots.

 

when i was watching the DVD, i felt happy to see apple logos. i dunno why i'm glad to see apple logos. i really don't. sometimes i would think "hey, see. even the big guys at ILM and lucasfilms are using mac at work." i really really can't explain the feelings. i've been a windows user ever since i first touched a computer. something about mac really itched me. i think i may be lured and seduced by the "apple side of the force". the whole windows vs mac analogy is just like light side vs dark side of the force.

 

may the force be with you.

[bjr1028]

The creative fields have always been Mac dominated.

[Swad]

Yeah, it seems that most creative folks use Macs. I've never really pinpointed why (other than they were trained on one) or how that began, but it's the truth! For most Mac apps there are Windows equivalents, but most creatives still use Macs, which is great IMO. Granted there are a few things that Macs do better like color quality, etc. It's just an interesting phenomenon

[witzer]

apple for (most) creative people. really wonder how the thing got started huh? perhaps it's the pleasentness of mac's environment.

[jdsony]

I think it's because there are much less distraction is MacOS, the workflow is more straight forward and you don't need to tweak and fiddle so much. Not to mention the UI is actually professionally designed by artists not by programmers or street people or something. I'm probably going to move to a Mac when the new Intel Mac's come out.

 

PC's have had superior hardware for a a good number of years now but the OS is a piece of {censored}. I'm totally sick of Windows...been using and supporting it for years. There are so many issues and errors that happen for no apparent reason and I'm sick of having to support users that have these issues. Computers should be easy and not require a lot of thought to use on a day to day basis...It doesn't make people stupid to want an easy computer it makes them smart. I don't want to waste time with Windows which is what I always end up doing. I've been a PC user my whole life and I'm just getting tired of it. I see so many places around me where Windows is just a waste of effort and money...at work we support 1000 or so PC's running Windows. The majority of these are used mainly for the Office suite and that's it. Other's use archaic outdated software originally written for DOS or Windows 95. We have PC's that are set up exclusively for web access and we have to run all these hacks and regedit's to lock them down. (a lot of the security features changed for XP so we are still on Win2K for those). Why not use Linux on these machines with everything except web browsing stripped out, it would be faster and far more secure.

 

Wow...this is quite the anti Windows rant. You get that way when you have to fix frustrating issues that just occur out of thin air. For all you that have no problems with Windows and I'm just the crazy town drunk...you just need more time and you'll feel the same way eventually.

[Guest terry]

apple for (most) creative people. really wonder how the thing got started huh? perhaps it's the pleasentness of mac's environment.

 

I think it's fair to say that it all took off with Desktop Publishing.

 

Adobe's invention of PostScript (*), Jobs' early incorporation of this technology in the Apple LaserWriter, the Macintosh's very sophisticated graphical user interface(**) at that time that helped the success of Adobe (formerly: Aldus) PageMaker etc. are all cornerstones to the success story of the Mac.

 

(*) Remember: Both, PostScript as well as the ideas behind the Mac's user interface, can be traced back to Xerox' Palo Alto Research Center (PARC) and tie in quite nicely with each other.

 

http://www.prepressure.com/ps/history/history.htm

 

Alto and Star:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xerox_Alto

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xerox_Star

 

Pix and movies of running machines, and much more:

 

http://www.digibarn.com/collections/games/...lto-fastart.mov

http://www.digibarn.com/collections/movies...ceoncbsdsl2.ram

http://www.digibarn.com/collections/systems/xerox-alto/

http://www.digibarn.com/friends/curbow/star/

http://www.digibarn.com/collections/system...8010/index.html

http://www.digibarn.com/collections/softwa...star/index.html

http://www.digibarn.com/collections/system...oot/page_01.htm

http://www.digibarn.com/collections/system...6085/index.html

http://www.digibarn.com/history/pathfinder...ival/index.html

http://www.digibarn.com/collections/system...king/index.html

 

etc.

 

(**) Remember Windows 1.0 or 2.0? This was simply disgusting. The only thing that came near to the Mac's ease of use was Digital Research's very nice GEM (on DOS and Atari ST computers), but, frankly, it was very much an ambitious copy of the Macintosh's GUI, and therefore DR got sued by Apple and had to cripple it. Nevertheless, even though Apple was the only one who got it all together in one nice package during the time of Windows 1 and 2, there was something remotely comparable for the PC: the Ventura Publisher for GEM, which became the most popular DTP software for IBM-compatible (DOS) PCs. It almost goes without saying that again, also Ventura Publisher can be traced back to Xerox.

 

http://www.dtp-service.com/ventura/ueber_vp/chronicle.html

http://www.dtp-service.com/ventura/ueber_vp/pre-corel.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corel_Ventura

 

Screenshots:

 

Ventura Publisher 2.0

http://www.dans20thcenturyabandonware.com/...ublisher-20.gif

 

Amstrad PC running GEM:

http://benser.net/c_pc1640.htm

 

Further reading:

 

Q. When was desktop publishing invented?

http://desktoppub.about.com/cs/beginners/f/when_dtp.htm

 

Inside the Publishing Revolution: How the LaserWriter and Photoshop Changed the World

http://www.creativepro.com/story/feature/18332.html

 

Steve Jobs and the LaserWriter

http://www.creativepro.com/img/story/12030...PubRev_Jobs.pdf

[Swad]

Wow, thanks for the great post, terry. Here's what I wonder - why did Apple end up losing to Windows? I understand the whole IBM issue, but it still seems like Apple should have come out on top.

 

I'm curious to hear your opinions everyone.

[witzer]

Wow, thanks for the great post, terry. Here's what I wonder - why did Apple end up losing to Windows? I understand the whole IBM issue, but it still seems like Apple should have come out on top.

 

I'm curious to hear your opinions everyone.

 

i think it was affordability issue.

 

also, microsoft sells its OS to branded and non-branded (self built) PCs. mac is selling its OS together with the hardware. mac os is also exclusive to apple hardware only. whereas windows can sell more OS coz of the wider PC base.

 

i also think that linux as the younger of all OS, has managed to keep up with windows. the thing is, linux is not great at usability as windows are. my opinion is that the true OS that has windows friendliness and linux stability would have to be mac.

 

great informations from terry. thanks a lot.

 

i also have this notion that in U.S, mac users are quite high in numbers. is it true? if it is true, why in U.S only?

[bjr1028]

Wow, thanks for the great post, terry. Here's what I wonder - why did Apple end up losing to Windows? I understand the whole IBM issue, but it still seems like Apple should have come out on top.

 

I'm curious to hear your opinions everyone.

 

People could install windows on their DOS machines. The same could not be said for the Mac.

[nyichiban]

The problem for Mac is that they were hardware exclusive and could only be installed on their machines. But with windows people that had OS2 or DOS (popular in those days) Could have installed it without a problem. This "flexibility" helped Windows achieve it's success. Apple tried to mimic this a little too late when it allowed certain vendors to sell MAC hardware under their own names Umax being one of them. But I believe Mac has always had a better GUI and user appreciation. Windows is just too buggy. Case in point: A fresh install of Office 2003 on my WINXP machine failed to work after 3 days because I installed the new AOL IM client. Seems absurd to me.

[fonkyfresh]

After readin all those posts, i felt that i had something to say.

I'm using Mac from day to day, for surfing and for video editing.

It is a great tool, you don't waste time tweaking it or looking for the right driver so your software. Even thou sometimes, either the soft works or it do not. I agree!

 

A PC under windows could be great for professional uses, i swear i saw some PC working really good without too much maintenance but for few SPECIFIC applications. I also never knew why people who are only surfing and writing text needed to have the last 50.0 GHz PC with tons of so-called cool features. Probably half of the person who have computer do not use'em at their full capacity.

The thing is that PC have not been created for everybody, a PC was not supposed to be on everybody's desk. A Mac was,even tho Apple stole the mouse concept from Xerox, they thought about the use a random lambda user could do. Steve Jobs is a visionary, i do not worship him or something but I think he is one of the man who changed our lifestyle when it comes about using computers. Apple is still in the Guinness World record book for the fastest growth in the computer industry.

 

I remember when Apple allow UMAX and few other brands to sell Power PC based computers running Mac OS, since Apple was not really selling its OS, that was a bad move at the time. Now it would be totally different. Apple brand's equity is huge...

At school (yeah i'm a MBA student), everyday I see people asking me to fix their PC under Windows, you do it once, twice and even three times but when people come up to me and tell me, "hey I would like the kind of computer you have because it is slick, it is simple to use and do the job it is ask. could you hook me up??" Usually i say yes and tell them what they need to do, but the question often ask is can i use WORD on a Mac??

The problem is that Apple is such a Minority that people do not know enough about this brand, (except the iPod) In the last 2 years, i have been able to convert over 15 people to buy Mac instead of PCs. At the beginning they were a little reticent, less games, less compatibility and other things. But once they got their hand on a Mac, they used ichat to call me up and say hey what's up, Mac was a great decision for them and some are starting to know more about Macs that i know. lol No need to worries about security patches, viruses etc..

 

Moreover, Apple is a minority! And by being a minority it means less problems, less viruses, less troubles but also less things available to you.

Hopefully moving to Intel processors tends to change the image of Apple.

As a matter of fact out here in France (yeah i'm French) intel tv ads are not saying that they are using Windows like before. I haven't been to the states for a while so i don't really remember how commercials were, but here intel and Microsoft were assimilated as a SINGLE BRAND, weird isn't it???!!

 

To answer a previous post from WITZER, Mac users are highle present in France (i.e: www.macbidouille.com), the Mac community is growing bigger and bigger everyday and i think the 3 or 4 percent market share that Apple has on the market is evolving big time.

Steve Jobs always said that he was better than Microsoft, i think this charismatic man has other ideas in mind concerning our future and using computers, look at the ITMS and the iPod.

hope this was not too long and too boring :-)

Anyhow i will never buy a PC to run Windows on it, it is not for me!

[bjr1028]

I remember when Apple allow UMAX and few other brands to sell Power PC based computers running Mac OS, since Apple was not really selling its OS, that was a bad move at the time.hes, viruses etc..

 

The Michael Spindler Apple ran a clinic on how not to license your computer. Umax and PowerComputing (both startups for the PC market) were the only types of computer makers allowed. Dell and Gateway both applied for licenses, but were denied.

[fonkyfresh]

Apple refused Dell and Gateway but they didn't know what to expect from this type of management maybe Apple is not risk taking type of company?!

[bjr1028]

Apple was just a poorly run company in the beige days.

[witzer]

great thoughts fonkyfresh. i guess apple has a growing number of followers everywhere. and it's probably not so much about apple chasing after microsoft (in OS war ie), coz i dun think apple will be able to beat microsoft marketing muscle at this time. but one or few people started to drop windows for mac.

 

in the case of fonkyfresh, 15 people turned to mac. it's people to people marketing and it probably would work becoz it's great to have others followed your advice when your advice has really been proven.

 

i'm probably one of those anxious people trying to get at least an macintel ibook. i've seen mac thru this forum and tried it myself (although illegally). my greatest hope for macintel is the affordability.

 

it's still a great view to see george lucas doing a presentation on an ibook. they really zoomed close that we are able to see the ibook logo so well. hehehehe.

[fonkyfresh]

Witzer, if you think that a Mac is expensive, that is not the case.

Everything is different, but i can understand if you are not willing to pay for a obsolete GPU in iBooks. BUt the 12 inch iBook as an example is a great product, there is no question about it. Of course you can get a Pc much faster for less. But are you willing to take the risk?? If you run Mac OS yes but windows is not safe (to me), in terms of surfing, viruses and all the bad things about computer hacking. I'm not saying that it is not possible on a Mac, but much harder.

Anyway, word of mouth is the best marketing muscle you can ever have, it does not cost a cent to the company! And if you are able to prove it to people, they will stick with it! Why people are buying PCs?? because you find 'em everywhere, local store, Wall mart, on the net. But if you wanna Mac, most of the time you have to get it online, in an Apple Store or into a specialised shop. It is about being outhere, on the market that makes things working really good. Look Dell how much they are spending on advertisment! Seriously this company is a great one, they have not created anything, Microsoft build the OS, and some company (probably asian for cheap labor) is building the computer. But on the other they have no store to manage! That is a HUGE competitive advantage!

In the beige days, Apple was recovering, Jobs came back and launch the G3 and the iMac, seriously he reused the old concept of the Macintosh all-in-one ! And reconquer market shares...

[witzer]

Witzer, if you think that a Mac is expensive, that is not the case.

Everything is different, but i can understand if you are not willing to pay for a obsolete GPU in iBooks. BUt the 12 inch iBook as an example is a great product, there is no question about it. Of course you can get a Pc much faster for less. But are you willing to take the risk?? If you run Mac OS yes but windows is not safe (to me), in terms of surfing, viruses and all the bad things about computer hacking. I'm not saying that it is not possible on a Mac, but much harder.

 

oh well, maybe that's my definition of expensive. ibook 12.1" is selling US$1,000++ here. with that money, i get a better windows based laptop. apple is a great product none the less. i've tried it and really like it. it's true what you say. it's the risk. even though i never had any real great problems working with windows (virus, BSODs, etc), i really like to switch to mac. well until january then.

 

In the beige days, Apple was recovering, Jobs came back and launch the G3 and the iMac, seriously he reused the old concept of the Macintosh all-in-one ! And reconquer market shares...

cheers till the day apple catches up with microsoft. it'd be great to see them in equal shares. that would mean more competitions.

[fonkyfresh]

In the movie Pirate of the silicon valley, (yeah i know it is jsut a movie).

I remember Jobs saying to Bill, we are better than you are.

I can totally picture that, because i heard some rumors/facts about Jobs and his behavioral towards people. Might be cocky sometimes but you have to show off sometimes ;-)

And even thou Gates is the richest man on earth and has over 90% of market shares in OS. I'm sure Jobs want to make him pay.

 

About the iBook, i'm so used to slick product with the keyboard and a power button, that i can't stand laptop PC with all those sometimes fancy buttons all over the computer. Not for me! i"m a simple person

[Metrogirl]

Well, we've gone right off topic now but never mind. My feeling on the Mac losing out to the PC is that it was in part due to the fact that you could customise a PC in almost every way imaginable but the Mac was sort of Hobson's Choice machine. There's a good old British expression which I don't think made it to this side of the Atlantic, so I'll explain what I mean by the metaphor. (If you want to know about Hobson's Choice, try Google).

 

With a Mac you got everything rolled in and there wasn't much you could do that wasn't part of Apple's design. No lifting the hood and changing the spark plugs. Not many settings to tinker with or tweak. It worked out of the box and that was great for many people, particularly those designers and artists who wanted a tool that didn't need much maintenance. They loved it.

 

However a lot of techies were excited by computers and felt really insulted by the Mac's simplicity. They wanted to do things to it, and Apple didn't really give them room to play. Schoolkids couldn't brag about their new I/O board or plugin upgrade, speed freaks couldn't bang on about CAS latencies and gamers could't watercool them or whatever gamers do. "I am computer-literate, so I don't need a machine which holds my hand". I was guilty of this too, looking on with amusement at my technically incompetent friends who used Macs. The Macintosh was seen as the Fisher-Price alternative to a 'real' system by many, and I think that was a big part of why the PC won out.

[zorxd]

Apple pays the movie industry to put Apple computers in their movies.

 

You talked about episode 3 but :

 

AMD64 Is the Force Behind Star Wars: Episode III `Revenge of the Sith'; George Lucas and JAK Films Reinvent Digital Filmmaking with AMD Opteron Processor-Based Systems

AMD announced that AMD Opteron processor-based servers and workstations are providing the digital backbone for the final Star Wars prequel, Episode III: "Revenge of the Sith." The AMD64 digital processing pipeline at JAK Films, the production company for Star Wars: Episode III, includes pre-visualization and pre-postproduction, which involves 3-D match moving, 3-D modeling, lighting, shading, texturing, compositing and rendering techniques. The AMD64 processor-based workstation systems are running Microsoft® Windows® XP Pro, Alias' Maya and Adobe® After Effects software. AMD64 processor-based file server systems are running on clustered Microsoft Windows Storage Server 2003 software.

 

The full adoption of 64-bit capable AMD Opteron processor-based systems at JAK Films is the result of a long-standing relationship between AMD and the pioneering Pre-Visualization department at JAK Films. The relationship began during the making of Star Wars: Episode II and provided AMD with direct feedback from the world's foremost digital content creators. JAK Films is now using AMD64 technology to reinvent the digital filmmaking process. more at source

 

I never heard about Mac Opteron

Maybe they forgot to show their Opterons in the bonus features

[fonkyfresh]

C'mon Apple paying the film industry to appear in movies??

It would take too much money away from Apple, and that would be ridiculous...

Their brand equity is too strong, they don't need that.

If Apple products appears in movies, it is just a choice from the person who is directing the film or choosing the accesories...

 

Where did you get this Amd Opteron thing about star wars III?

Edited December 18, 2005 by fonkyfresh

[Guest terry]

C'mon Apple paying the film industry to appear in movies??

Sure. This is called product placement.

 

Where did you get this Amd Opteron thing about star wars III?

Don't pay attention to this, it's an urban legend. Here's the real thing: Clandestine work on episode I actually began back in the steam ages, when the first frames were rendered on Charles Babbage's difference engine no. 2. The more complex sequences of episode I-III were completed about 130 years later on a farm of cheap Commodore C64s. Modern computers like the ones we're using today were only needed for the incredibly sophisticated ending credits, and this is also the real reason why they had to delay the release of the first three movies and started the saga with the somewhat less sophisticated episodes IV-VI.

[Seeyou]

I'm a sound engineer for one of the largest post production and music production facilities in Athens/Greece. I can tell you why the music/sound/film industry prefers the mac over Windows.

 

Windows is a really great product when you are dealing with non-realtime applications. This includes Internet browsing, text applications (office etc), servers, mp3 encoding, DVD ripping, all sorts of conversions (wav> mp3, tiff>jpeg, avi>mpeg etc.), 3d rendering. Even CD/DVD burning is ok, because of the large RAM buffer used in the burning applications. And since WinXP came along, you can also run Photoshop reliably - it isn't an application that does realtime processing after all and therefore it is rock-solid.

 

When it comes to realtime prossecing, Windows just can't deliver. If you buy a new PC with a fresh copy of windows installed on it and you install realtime software like Pro Tools, Cubase, Avid or any other software that require resources in real time, you get unexplained error messages. "Buffer size to small" "could not complete the export in realtime" etc.

 

In most of the cases, artists are artists, they are no hardware heroes. Running complex realtime software on a PC, requires advanced technical skill and lots of time. Artists have less of both.

[Metrogirl]

I'm a sound engineer for one of the largest post production and music production facilities in Athens/Greece. I can tell you why the music/sound/film industry prefers the mac over Windows... etc.

 

Well said! A genuinely informed opinion and very welcome. Thank you, Seeyou, and thanks for ending this thread, which had degenerated into YET ANOTHER Mac versus Windows debate. Enough said, closed.