What DON'T you do in OS X?

[mulcyber]

I still do everything serious using Windows.

The first reason for that, is that I won't hurt myself for hours with the blurry Apple font rendering. I stay days long in front of a computer screen, i need crisp and sharp fonts. Even Ubuntu has understood that fonts matters and really made a big deal with version 10.04. and its brilliant perfectly hinted Ubuntu font. Steve still sticks alone to its crappy Adobe rendering from the late 80's, which might be adequate for layouting printed stuff, bus it completely unadapted for screens and day-long reading. Shame on him!

 

It is also damn limited, since it's windows can only be resized from that ridiculous lower right corner. Many applications won't let you really chose where to save, you cannot create a folder on the fly during saving, all things I really miss in a business environment. On dual monitors, getting the menus from the other monitor is also somewhat nerving and frankly absolutely unergonomic.

 

OSx is nice for a netbook-like usage, since it boots up fast and is fancy to use, but I never would use it for longer than half an hour.

 

Just my few cents....

 

Laszlo

 

I like FireFox because with about:config, userChrome.css, and userContent.css

a user can fix the font size in just about any area of the browser, whereas

Internet Explorer and Safari are limited in this regard.

 

I do lots of searches and comparisons. Windows and Linux permit two

or more instance of FireFox to run at the same time. Hack doesn't

and though sometimes running FF and Safari at the same time

works out, still one doesn't have the easy "Show Windows" options

available from the taskbar to automatically share the Desktop viewing.

I had somebody try to tell me that multiple tabs fixed all this.

 

Windows XP had the worst default viewing and font structure that

I've ever encountered in modern times. And it was a pain to fix it.

Windows 7 and Hack are ok, but don't compare with Pinguy, a Ubuntu

10.10 derivative. Hacks inherit the momentum and mystique of the

era in which Macs were superior, especially for video stuff. Now, 15%

of Mac laptops require repair in the first year, although the Desktop

percentage is 7, which is good. I think normal users are attracted to

Hackintosh because they don't know that it's a geek hobby; at this

stage I see minor pros and cons for the average user, in choosing a

Mac or Windows or Linux/Pinguy. A few big specific advantages more

for the professional/specialist user with one OS over the other OS.

Hackintosh is very expensive time wise for an average user to install.

 

To close another topic, I don't think Linux does much for Hackintosh

since HFS+ journaled became the standard, such as deleting kexts.

Some of the linux commands (dd, lspci) have been ported to Hacks. But

most people wonder about installing Hack from Linux and I don't think so.

[Hackintosh2000]

I still do everything serious using Windows.

The first reason for that, is that I won't hurt myself for hours with the blurry Apple font rendering. I stay days long in front of a computer screen, i need crisp and sharp fonts. Even Ubuntu has understood that fonts matters and really made a big deal with version 10.04. and its brilliant perfectly hinted Ubuntu font. Steve still sticks alone to its crappy Adobe rendering from the late 80's, which might be adequate for layouting printed stuff, bus it completely unadapted for screens and day-long reading. Shame on him!

 

It is also damn limited, since it's windows can only be resized from that ridiculous lower right corner. Many applications won't let you really chose where to save, you cannot create a folder on the fly during saving, all things I really miss in a business environment. On dual monitors, getting the menus from the other monitor is also somewhat nerving and frankly absolutely unergonomic.

 

OSx is nice for a netbook-like usage, since it boots up fast and is fancy to use, but I never would use it for longer than half an hour.

 

Just my few cents....

 

Laszlo

 

I agree. I read THIS incredibly biased puff piece that was posted in THIS thread. The thread was basically saying OS X has a superior UI than Windows. As someone who is fond of large multi monitor setups my jaw hit the floor when I read that. Having to drag your mouse constantly to the upper left hand corner of the screen gets annoying fast.

 

I have a Hauppauge TV tuner card with the 881 chipset

Nomad jukebox Zen ( mac application not as good wont work i tunes)

Phone Flashing ( not a biggie )

Pocket PC Intergration ( compaq iPAQ )

 

So Windows is needed for these

 

Yup. The abysmal TV tuner card support in OS X keeps me firmly rooted in Win 7. Windows media player is the best kept secret in the world. It comes with the OS and it just works. No additional fees to pay EVER. Every time you turn around you are getting charged on Mac OS X. I have my desktop connected to my Xbox and all my OTA shows are DVRed on my PC. I turn on my Xbox and watch 1080i OTA DVR content on my 55" flat panel in my living room for FREE.

 

Watch TV, Play Games

 

It is annoying to use office 2007, because it crashes often.

 

Coding IDE's are more refined on windows. I have used eclipse.

 

I feel I spend too much time trying to use only one OS

 

Yup. I hear you. I stick with Win 7 for Office 2007. It just works. No crashing. No compatibility issues. I love going to big meetings. There is always one guy with a Mac who has some Mac Office compatibility issue with their presentation.

[vbetts]

Heavy gaming. There are some games I have that I play on my Os X partition like TF2, HL2, Doom 3, Quake 4, Call of Duty 4, but everything else I play from Crysis 2 to emulators I do in Windows.