44$rqs:XWEnQ's Profile

  • Oct 12, 2011
  • 13
  • 0

Latest comments made by: 44$rqs:XWEnQ

  • Just thought I'd link to the following recent article as an interesting counter-point: http://pixobebo.com/index.php/pixonomy/articles/worst_mistake_ever_how_i_wish_i_could_forget_windows_forever/ The author had ditched the Mac for the precise reasons given in this article, namely more impressive hardware at a lower price. The reasons for the switch were apparently genuine; there's no evidence to suggest this was merely an attempt at a journalistic "side-by-side." @vachi: "Fruity" can variously mean "smelly," "full-bodied" (like wine) or (according to Private Eye, a fortnightly semi-satirical news publication in the UK) "sexy." It could just be a reference to a certain company with a fruit for a symbol, of course…
    44$rqs:XWEnQ had this to say on May 26, 2009 Posts: 13
    Apple, Please Give Us More Bang for Our Buck
  • @Beeblebrox: Other than cast some groundless aspersions on some people's motivations (which are quite often less than salutory, I agree), all you really did with your post was vent your anger at not having been prudent enough (or monied enough, to be fair) to buy Applecare for the iMac you mention. Occasionally, extended warranties can be a "rip-off" - there are legal moves in the UK right now to counteract those that clearly are. However, you yourself have just provided an example of the fact that they are offered for a reason. It's a fact of life that reliability is variable, despite manufacturers' best efforts—hard drive X may die after 2 months, 1 year or 10—so you weigh up the pros and cons of investing in an insurance package (or assurance package, depending on how cynical your point of view). Personally, I feel that if I couldn't afford the repair costs for a manufacturer fault down the line, I attempt to invest in a back-up plan. Applecare is, as far as I'm concerned, excellent value, especially considering that, as you say, Mac components can be expensive to replace. You have my commiserations on the outlay you incurred as a result of a (presumably) faulty iMac. Presumably its faults arose after the original 12-month warranty expired, otherwise you'd have taken the precaution of purchasing Applecare to guard against future calamities on an apparently problematic machine, yes? In my opinion, that would have been the wise thing to do. If the flaws manifested after the warranty expired, then you were very unfortunate, I agree. But, 1) You still presumably had 12 months' of trouble-free usage, and 2) are still the owner of equipment provided by a manufacturer that is one of the most generous around, whose (apparent) sympathy—but more likely policy—can provide wonderful outcomes without costing you a penny. Just look at the number of folk who have had water-cooled G5s entirely repaired, and even replaced with Mac Pros, well outside the warranty period. And that's just the tip of the iceberg. I myself started off with a refurbed PowerBook and ended up, after several months of repairs under warranty, with a brand-new, top of the line, Aluminium MacBook Pro with all its standard software. For that reason, I count Apple's support as a boon to any Mac owner.
    44$rqs:XWEnQ had this to say on May 21, 2009 Posts: 13
    Apple, Please Give Us More Bang for Our Buck
  • An interesting article that honestly made me wonder what it is I'm getting for the extra outlay on a Mac. All I can think of, and something that wasn't really covered in the article, was build quality, reliability and support - equating more or less to cost of ownership over the long-term. If there's one thing I cherish about my Macs, it's the fact that they're, on the whole, so maintenance- and worry-free. I don't attempt to argue that PCs aren't reliable, as I'm in no position to do so. However, I can honestly say that it's got to the stage for me that my anxiety levels increase at the mere thought of engaging with a Windows computer, thanks to so many problematic encounters over the years. Whilst the Mac's "It just works" maxim is a little tarnished these days (malware is beginning its slow creep into the Apple-made sphere; hardware failures have become more prominent) I still find myself feeling that problems are the exception rather than the rule. And there's every evidence of Apple's Snow Leopard being a serious attempt to buff out some of the dark spots. Frankly, I happily pay extra for the peace of mind that I get from using an Apple branded computer.
    44$rqs:XWEnQ had this to say on May 20, 2009 Posts: 13
    Apple, Please Give Us More Bang for Our Buck
  • I agree with OSZen, who identifies the Desktop version of Linux as the true issue here. An analogy springs to mind: Linux is an incredibly advanced combustion engine, and you really have to be a trained mechanic to work with them. On the other hand, the frame, chassis, components and interior of the vehicle are there for the user to engage with, and provide you with the comfort, safety and facilities you need to get from A to B. When the vast majority of people drive a vehicle, the engine is not the point (unless you're Jeremy Clarkson) - the journey is. In essence this is the problem with Linux - it's a fantastically versatile engine capable of being tweaked and manipulated to suit a plethora of needs, but no-one's yet come up with the user-friendly "chassis" to plonk on top of it that completes the package and makes it a product worth investing in (either monetarily or temporally). To belabour the point: Microsoft touted Aero for Vista in its mass-market advertising; Apple touted Aqua for OS X. It's about time we stopped crowing about the value of Linux, and simply started focussing on the user experience. I mean, at the end of the day, it's only a kernel, and you don't hear people crowing about Mach day-in day-out. They'd rather just get on with the job in hand, using the OS and GUI of preference, and forget about it. So long as they can complete their tasks with the minimum of fuss, they're happy :-)
    44$rqs:XWEnQ had this to say on May 19, 2008 Posts: 13
    About Linux and Why Nobody Seems to Care
  • EDIT: "I think all the analogies so far have been inaccurate…" except Sydneystephen's, whose comment wasn't onscreen yet as I typed.
    44$rqs:XWEnQ had this to say on Jun 13, 2007 Posts: 13
    The Problem of Staying Updated
  • I think all the analogies so far have been inaccurate. Remember, the fictional Apple-provided "Third-party software updater" isn't broken (the author's Bose system or Simo66's free toy), but the product it provides access to. _Of course_ you'd complain to Honda for supplying a broken stereo, but you wouldn't if the radio station you liked listening to on that stereo had consistently poor reception because of a botched transmitter upgrade. And Version Tracker? What's wrong with MacUpdate? (If anything neither stays on top of every update 100% of the time - some apps are many versions behind on available updates).
    44$rqs:XWEnQ had this to say on Jun 13, 2007 Posts: 13
    The Problem of Staying Updated
  • I agree with vb_baysider. Two things sprang to mind reading this article: first, "Is this what happens when a troll writes an IT article?"; two, "I guess there's not a lot of Apple news to report right now".
    44$rqs:XWEnQ had this to say on Apr 09, 2007 Posts: 13
    When Will iTunes Sell Porn?
  • Beeblebrox: Semantic crossed-wires here! I meant "they want" in the "they want to get their fat a** round the block a few times, lose some weight" sense, not the "I want to go shopping" sense. I totally agree that Apple has already trodden on toes more than once - Konfabulator is an excellent example. My point was rather that you, Beeblebrox, shouldn't encourage them by asking for a fully-fledged multi-protocol chat client that competes with the likes of Adium, Proteus et al.
    44$rqs:XWEnQ had this to say on Jan 05, 2007 Posts: 13
    Leopard - What We Know & What We Can Expect
  • Beeblebrox: I think at best iChat should support a plug-in architecture allowing 3rd-party vendors to provide connectivity at minimal cost. Let's not forget that the more software Apple provides with the OS, the narrower the market for third-party vendors. They want to increase the opportunities for the burgeoning OS X software industry, not reduce them. Better theu don't step on too many toes, but rather increase the opportunities for software companies to get their feet under the table.
    44$rqs:XWEnQ had this to say on Jan 04, 2007 Posts: 13
    Leopard - What We Know & What We Can Expect
  • I'm still a Panther user, so the upgrade to Leopard is more enticing considering I'll be gaining all the benefits of Tiger as well. However, I'll be most looking for some basic improvements, as opposed to new features. For example, the Finder really needs some work still (IMHO) - I have issues with the way it presents information, the unreliability of the Total/Used Space implementation and other minor niggles that don't occur to me just now. I'll be looking for vast improvements to QT 7, which runs very poorly on my iBook G4 800MHz and occasioning a great deal more stuttering in playback with files that ran excellently in QT 6.5.2. SIP support for iChat would be nice, as would the ability to use different protocols and "invisibility" - or maybe that's just Adium? It's been a while... I'm looking forward to the Application Launcher aspect of Spotlight, though I hope it works as simply and effectively as Quicksilver otherwise i won't be using it. I heard a native GTK+ implementation may come as standard, which would be excellent news to a GIMP user like myself. The ZFS support looks good for me, as it seems a simple way (if I've read this correctly) to set up RAIDs. But all-in-all I just want my new Leopard install to rectify all the recurring bugs I'm noticing in my current Panther install: Open With... duplicates; broken >Console login method (despite a fresh install, hmmm). And of course, I'd like some speed hikes. I heard Tiger was a significant improvement in that regard over Panther - I hope Leopard proves to be similar. Oh, and I'm looking forward to using the wealth of Tiger-only apps and utilities that are currently beyond my reach!
    44$rqs:XWEnQ had this to say on Jan 04, 2007 Posts: 13
    Leopard - What We Know & What We Can Expect
  • Your "dream app" has been around for a number of years - it's called Detour, and it was made freeware maybe two years ago. It's available from the dudes at Rogue Amoeba (www.rogueamoeba.com).
    44$rqs:XWEnQ had this to say on Nov 23, 2006 Posts: 13
    Is Ear Candy a Waste of Noise?
  • Robotech Infidel said: "Many Mac faithfuls protested: “Why make iTunes Windows-compatible? It will always be better on a Mac”, and “The Mac is all you need for the iPod”, and others, “Windoze will degenerate the iPod EXPERIENCE”, and so on. From using both iTunes versions, I can’t tell a difference. My music sounds exactly the same." One of the changes that manifested as a result of the marketing of iPods to the Windows (TM) environment was the loss of the Firewire connection in a bid to improve compatibility. I for one see this as a major change. Though I haven't used an iPod I have used an iPod Shuffle, and I was /stunned/ at how long it took to fill it with tunes. The fact is, the Windows (TM) environment is actually more stagnant, and retains a lot of old technology that Apple has eschewed in favour of supporting innovation. Look at the new EFI standard in the Intel Macs, for example, or the decision to drop floppy disk drives and encourage online storage and transfer of files. In short, unbundling OS X and licensing it for the Windows PC crowd would in many ways be to hang an albatross around Apple's neck, stifling what Apple has come to be respected for: forward-thinking and originality.
  • I think Apple's point was meant to reflect it's dissatisfaction with the computer system owned and used by the vast majority of computer owners - and it has every right to do so. Apple produces OS X and, as xwiredtva points out, perhaps a little optimistically, "Apple controls their OS and took care of these problems LONG AGO." Whhy shouldn't it use this an opportunity to berate Microsoft? It's a Goliath that needs a David, as we all know, and one reason it is so successful is because /most people don't have an alternative/ (please, we all know Linux is an excellent OS but hardly for the majority - yet). Apple provides an alternative - a viable, attractive, stable and productive one at that. Yes, Apple's contracted iPod manufacturer screwed up, and Apple rightfully should accept responsibility. However, let us not ignore that, when a company holds a monopoly and uses it to propogate profits rather than propogate improvements that affect millions, it is abusing its position. It deserves to be criticised, and frankly, who else is there to do it? PS At the risk of diminishing the effectiveness of the reply above, I'd like to voice the opinion that this virus problem affected the iPod at a very opportune moment for Microsoft, no?
    44$rqs:XWEnQ had this to say on Oct 19, 2006 Posts: 13
    The iPod Virus: Apple Arrogance