atszyman
May 24, 01:26 PM
GRRRRRRRRRRRRRR :mad: I'll get you!! BTW when are you planning on overtaking me, I have been waiting for three months or so...
End of June/early July. I've been lying low for the time being. Have to try to figure out who to taunt next. Maybe Rower_CPU? I should pass him sometime in 2009 at my current rate, which is due to fall since I have yet to complete a WU today.
Remember, set lofty goals so you always have a good excuse for failure.
End of June/early July. I've been lying low for the time being. Have to try to figure out who to taunt next. Maybe Rower_CPU? I should pass him sometime in 2009 at my current rate, which is due to fall since I have yet to complete a WU today.
Remember, set lofty goals so you always have a good excuse for failure.
Blues003
Apr 21, 09:01 AM
From what I read, the Intel HD 3000 is actually better-performing on OS X than the Nvidia 320m. People are paranoying this Intel 3000 issue like it's the plague, while in reality they are basically the same in terms of performance.
I don't have the money, but if I was to buy a MBA, I'd surely buy it once the Sandy Bridge version came out.
I don't have the money, but if I was to buy a MBA, I'd surely buy it once the Sandy Bridge version came out.
DeeGee48
Nov 17, 05:44 PM
Quote:
Lam's success has not gone unnoticed, however, as he has now received a letter from a purported private investigator claiming that Lam is trafficking in stolen goods. Lam intends to secure the services of a lawyer to defend himself against any possible action.
___________________________
If the PI is from Apple, or WHEN Apple does get involved, I predict the kid will be on the Lam pretty quickly! (Sorry, couldn't resist!) :rolleyes:
Lam's success has not gone unnoticed, however, as he has now received a letter from a purported private investigator claiming that Lam is trafficking in stolen goods. Lam intends to secure the services of a lawyer to defend himself against any possible action.
___________________________
If the PI is from Apple, or WHEN Apple does get involved, I predict the kid will be on the Lam pretty quickly! (Sorry, couldn't resist!) :rolleyes:
After G
Sep 19, 10:18 PM
Depends where you live, really.
My experience is more toward the 3 days.
My experience is more toward the 3 days.
more...
kerrels
Oct 16, 09:18 PM
Hey!! Stop talking about the iPhone!! It makes me hornY!!
gregorsamsa
Nov 5, 05:56 AM
From Macworld, Oct. 19th 2006..
According to IDC’s report, the growth puts Apple’s market share at 5.8 percent (fourth place overall), ahead of Toshiba at 4.2 percent. Dell topped the U.S. market with 31 percent, but suffered a negative growth rate of -6.7 percent. The top 5 is rounded out by HP with a 22 percent share and Gateway with a 6 percent share.
Apple's 5.8% marketshare would be far higher if it wasn't for the corporate bulk-buying of PCs for business; plus all the end of line, bargain-basement PCs that may figure in any such report.
According to IDC’s report, the growth puts Apple’s market share at 5.8 percent (fourth place overall), ahead of Toshiba at 4.2 percent. Dell topped the U.S. market with 31 percent, but suffered a negative growth rate of -6.7 percent. The top 5 is rounded out by HP with a 22 percent share and Gateway with a 6 percent share.
Apple's 5.8% marketshare would be far higher if it wasn't for the corporate bulk-buying of PCs for business; plus all the end of line, bargain-basement PCs that may figure in any such report.
more...
Flying Llama
May 24, 10:03 PM
we are in 21 place.
Ah, thanks! :)
(Hey we're not too far from 1st huh? ;)
EDIT: and thanks DeSnousa too!
Ah, thanks! :)
(Hey we're not too far from 1st huh? ;)
EDIT: and thanks DeSnousa too!
Applespider
Oct 17, 05:06 PM
(that's a "maybe" :D)
But then we can all go to the pub :D
But then we can all go to the pub :D
more...
petemc
Sep 25, 09:59 AM
how many of us actually care much about aperture...?
Pro photographer using Aperture right here. I care :p
Pro photographer using Aperture right here. I care :p
fabsgwu
Oct 26, 01:29 PM
This is a very bad prescient. The universal binaries are there for a reason, Adobe is not a good Mac developer imo for this reason.
On the other hand, the design professionals won't upgrade to Intel Macs until all of their apps are ported. Once that happens there will be a lot more incentive to switch to Intel, and in the end it will be good for Apple to really solidify the base of Intel-Mac users. I guess this is ripping the band-aid off quick and clean, but it's really not fair to a lot of users.
On the other hand, the design professionals won't upgrade to Intel Macs until all of their apps are ported. Once that happens there will be a lot more incentive to switch to Intel, and in the end it will be good for Apple to really solidify the base of Intel-Mac users. I guess this is ripping the band-aid off quick and clean, but it's really not fair to a lot of users.
more...
Phil A.
Sep 26, 02:47 AM
I wish people would actually read the letter before jumping on Apple's back! It clearly states: "While Apple, of course, has no general objection to proper use of the descriptive term podcast as part of a trademark for goods and services in the podcast field...."
bwaltens
Mar 4, 09:03 PM
I'm going to try to get there after school, so about 3 o'clock. Do you think this will be enough time? i'm going to the southlake store
more...
Sixtafoua
Mar 13, 09:50 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8B117 Safari/6531.22.7)
I have no idea what time it should be, but my iPhone's time matches my iPad's time, so I think it's right. :/
I have no idea what time it should be, but my iPhone's time matches my iPad's time, so I think it's right. :/
commander.data
Apr 25, 12:29 PM
It might be for cost reasons. A DVD + Mac App Store distribution model reaches everyone more cheaply than a pure USB or USB + Mac App Store distribution model. The Mac App Store being the primary distribution source for MacBook Air users.
more...
MPD
Sep 29, 09:06 PM
Lucky you.
5D, not so much.
How so. I have shot tethered from 5D to Macbook (RAW & JPG). What software are you using?
I have not tried yet with C1Pro but works with canon remote capture software.
5D, not so much.
How so. I have shot tethered from 5D to Macbook (RAW & JPG). What software are you using?
I have not tried yet with C1Pro but works with canon remote capture software.
leomac08
Mar 31, 11:47 AM
$4.69, $4.79 and $4.89 in Beverly Hills, CA when i went there like 2 weeks ago
$5.00 for full service... :O
but in Irvine and the OC average is $4.01 unleaded
In Inglewood cheapest is $3.97 :(
$5.00 for full service... :O
but in Irvine and the OC average is $4.01 unleaded
In Inglewood cheapest is $3.97 :(
more...
wizard
Mar 25, 01:37 PM
They have every right to sue if Apple violated their patent. They invented the technology and decided to protect it, period.
If Apple indeed violated the patent that is true, if the patent itself is valid under the law.
You'd be royally pissed if Microsoft came out with the mPhone which looked and felt exactly like an iPhone...parents exist for a very good reason.
1. When was the last time that Kodak came out with anything remotely similar to an Apple product?
The fact that kodak is a dying company is neither here nor there and has no place in this thread.
This is where you are absolutely wrong. The fact that Kodak is a dying company plays a big part in this because it looks like they are trying to drum up income by enforcing questionable patents. Further it leaves people with the thought that Kodak has given up on being a positive innovator and a company that contributes to both the local and the national economies. Frankly I have a serious question in my mind if Kodak could do anything remotely positive with the money if they did win.
If Apple indeed violated the patent that is true, if the patent itself is valid under the law.
You'd be royally pissed if Microsoft came out with the mPhone which looked and felt exactly like an iPhone...parents exist for a very good reason.
1. When was the last time that Kodak came out with anything remotely similar to an Apple product?
The fact that kodak is a dying company is neither here nor there and has no place in this thread.
This is where you are absolutely wrong. The fact that Kodak is a dying company plays a big part in this because it looks like they are trying to drum up income by enforcing questionable patents. Further it leaves people with the thought that Kodak has given up on being a positive innovator and a company that contributes to both the local and the national economies. Frankly I have a serious question in my mind if Kodak could do anything remotely positive with the money if they did win.
AdrianK
Apr 24, 05:08 PM
Hasn't this worked since the conception of SBS? Which is 2.x AFAICR.
daygoKid19
May 14, 07:02 PM
Since begining again and having lower points, I have now 2 dangerous enemies that are trying to take me out, stay away daygokid619 and Oculus, I have to admit it really is fun and I will make sure that none of you overtake me so I have recruited my iBook and old P4 to give me an extra 200ppd :eek::p
I must say it has been fun watching the stats, accumulating points and moving up the chart. The only thing at the moment i have running is the GPU system tray client which seems to be doing pretty well by itself. Oh and by the way i will catch you one day DeSnousa.
I must say it has been fun watching the stats, accumulating points and moving up the chart. The only thing at the moment i have running is the GPU system tray client which seems to be doing pretty well by itself. Oh and by the way i will catch you one day DeSnousa.
AppleScruff1
Apr 22, 05:21 PM
The report found that 67% of Mac users have a college or advanced degree, as opposed to 54% of PC users. Mac loyalists are 80% more likely than PC users to be vegetarians, and, unlike PC fans, would rather ride a Vespa scooter than a Harley.
Mac users also are more likely to describe themselves as computer-savvy and "early adopters."
1. Real men ride Harleys.
And Mac users consider themselves as computer savy, LOL! They prefer a simple OS that a monkey could use. Now that's savy.
Mac users also are more likely to describe themselves as computer-savvy and "early adopters."
1. Real men ride Harleys.
And Mac users consider themselves as computer savy, LOL! They prefer a simple OS that a monkey could use. Now that's savy.
extraextra
Oct 26, 04:45 PM
I'm interested in the program, but I can't use it on my Powerbook, uggghhh. Damn you Adobe!
kwick87
Mar 16, 11:44 PM
$1.10/L for regular at the co-op across the way i think that makes it about $4.17/Gallon
MikeTheC
Nov 3, 01:19 AM
I'd like to tackle a few points in the discussion here.
Dirt-Cheap vs. Reasonable Economy (a.k.a. "The Wal-Martization of America"):
Apple has always had the philosophy that their name needs to mean a superior product. They have tended to shy away from producing bargain-basement products because it tends to take away from the "high-quality" reputation they are otherwise known for and desire to continue cultivating.
At direct odds with this is the pervasive and continually-perpetuated attitude in the U.S. (and elsewhere, perhaps) that the universe revolves exclusively around the mantra of "faster, cheaper, better", with emphasis on the latter two: cheaper and better. What I have noticed in my own 34 years on this planet is a considerable change in attitude, most easily summed up as people in general having their tastes almost "anti-cultured". It isn't "... cheaper, better" for them, but rather "cheaper = better". You can see this at all levels. Businesses, despite their claims to the contrary, tend to prioritize the executives specifically and the company generally making money over any other possible consideration. They try and drive their workforce from well-paid, highly competent full-time people, to part-time, no-medical or retirement-benefits-earning, low-experience, low-paid domestic help; and the second prong of their pincer movement is to outsource the rest.
Or, in short, "let's make a lot of money, but don't spend any in the process."
My goal here is not to get into the lengthy and well-trod discussion of corporate exploitation of the masses; rather it is to show the Wal-Mart effect at all levels.
More and more over the years I find that people have no taste. Steve Jobs accuses Microsoft of having no taste (a point I am not trying to argue against); I think however that he's hit a little low of the mark. The attitude out there seems to be one of total self-focus -- and not merely "me first", but rather "me first, me last, and ******* everybody else". They're the "I don't want to know anything", "all I want to do is get out of having to do anything I can, including not using my brain except for pleasure-seeking tasks," and "For God's sake, I surely don't want to have to spend more than the minimum on a computer" bunch.
Now, clearly, not everyone in the U.S. is like this; obviously, if they were, Apple would have no customers at all. But this is a real and fairly large group. Short of Apple practically giving away their computers, it's hard to imagine them being all that specifically attractive to that demographic. Moreover, those people are not merely non-enthusiasts; they want all of the benefits of having this trendy computer thing, but wish to be encumbered by none of the responsibilities.
To my way of thinking, frankly however large this group of people is, I would encourage Apple to avoid appealing to them whenever and wherever possible. If this means continuing the perception mentioned above of being a computer "for yuppies", then so be it.
Market Share Percentage and it's Perception:
Clearly, there is something to be gained by having the perception that "everyone's doing it". It's part of the reason why smoking, drinking, under-age sex, and drugs are so amazingly popular with us human beings the world over. It's part of the reason (maybe even a significant part) that iPods are so incredibly successful. Now, before someone here puts forth the argument that, "Well, you know, Apple's got a better design, and that's what attracts people to it," -- and that's quite true in it's own right -- let's break things down a bit.
Many animals develop and learn through a process called "patterning", and through imitation. Humans are not psychologically exempt from this; we do it all the time, and particularly so when we're younger. It's the fundamental force behind fashion, fads, and trends. There are definitely positive benefits to this. Kids, as they develop their social skills, learn from others the socially approved ways of behaving and interacting. Please note I did not use the term "correct" nor "right", but merely the "approved" (or, one might call it the "accepted") way. We also learn and learn from such things as casualty (actions have consequences), and other factors too numerous to pursue here.
Anyhow, all of these factors are in operation when it comes to buying technology (which is the boiled-down essence of what we're talking about here). Microsoft has learned this game, and has played it well for many years. Regardless of the "technically, we know it's bulls**t" truth, the reality of it is (and has been) when an unsavvy person walks into a store to buy a computer, and they see ten Windows-running computers on the shelf, and only one or two Mac OS-running computers there, they get the prima-facia notion that most computers are Windows computers, and by extension that statistically most people must be running Windows; therefore they should buy a Windows computer, too. There's a whole other subject here about how the ignorant sales people in electronics stores essentially use the same process to unwittingly deceive themselves into thinking the same thing. This is one of the factors which helped catapult Microsoft into the major, successful company they became. In truth, this specific scenario is a bit more 1994 than but it helps to explain why most people today who own a computer have only known life in a Microsoft world. As enough people attained this status, it became the dominant developmental factor in the world at large, which sort of helped to self-perpetuate the effect.
Let's also not lose sight of the fact that these statistics of percentage of platform used by definition leave out one particular group of people -- those who don't use a computer at all. After all, if you don't own a computer, you can't browse the web, send or receive email, or have your computer platform of choice tabulated in any kind of statistical data sample. One might be tempted to think that such a notion is silly, but it isn't. True, once we get to the point that only a statistically insignificant number of people on this planet don't own a computer (which is still far from the reality of today), counting their numbers won't matter for statistical purposes, it does matter. Why? Well, the statistics as presented make it seem like Macs (or Linux, or anything else) are only used by a subset of people on this planet. Not true! They're only used by a subset of a subset, the latter being the number of people on this planet who have a computer to be counted in such statistics in the first place.
Also, statistics vary depending on a variety of factors. It's also easy to write them off as a business or let them drop "below the radar" by various statistical gathering or reporting agencies; or merely through the informal process on the part of business owners of anecdotal evidence. Here's a perfect example of that very factor.
When the Macintosh came on the scene in 1984, and as it continued through it's early incarnations in the mid 1980s, it entered the fray of lots of non-defacto computer platforms. Or, to put it another way, it "came late to the party". So, you had all these computer dealers who were already trying to sell Apple ][s, TRS-80s, Commodore 64s (and later, C128s), Timex Sinclairs, an assortment of other PCs running proprietary OSs, amongst which were those which ran this thing called MS-DOS, and so forth and so on. Also, people who wound up buying Macs didn't exactly fit the same profile as those who had bought the other computers. You had artists -- literary, graphic, musical, etc. -- buying these things. While they didn't mind being technologically self-sufficent, they were not people who were interested in such things as tearing their computer apart and having a go at it's various electronic innards. Anyhow, they formed their own communities, and for various reasons didn't get a lot of support initially from local dealers and computer software stores. However, Apple did get quite a number of companies to write software or build hardware for their Mac platform. These companies started using mail-order as a significant portion of their sales strategy. Consequently, Mac owners used it as their more-and-more-primary computer-stuff purchasing regimen.
Ultimately, fewer and fewer Mac owners were going locally to buy stuff, due to availability and pricing. What then happened largely was this "perception" on the part of shop owners (and later their suppliers, etc.) that nobody out there used a Mac. As a result of their mis-perception, companies began to simply ignore us Mac users (I was around back then), acting as if we didn't exist; or at the least there weren't enough of us to bother supporting us or even trying to make money from us.
Now, at this point there's no denying there's more Windows boxen out there than Mac boxen, but this is still a valid factor and should not be discounted.
Besides, what number you hear quoted still, as it has for many, many years, depends on what your source is. I've heard numbers within the past month that range from 4.1 percent to 6 percent. Which one is correct? Does anyone even really know?
Since we can run Windows, why run Mac OS? (paranoia of market erosion):
I've been hearing this since before Apple ever disclosed their plans to switch to x86. It was actually one of the topics frequently -- and rather hotly, as I recall -- debated in these forums. However, I think the fear is greatly unjustified, and here's why.
First, let's look at it from an economic standpoint: Buying a Mac to run Windows is hardly the most cost-effective approach.
Second, let's look at it from a socio-economic standpoint: People don't buy a Mac to run Windows so much as they buy it to either try something different, or to escape Windows and the onslaught of problems that, in more recent years, it has brought to them.
Third, and while this really applies more to tech-savvy people: Windows represents a security and stability liability which most other operating systems do not.
In other words, by and large, people out there who are switching to a Mac are doing more than merely switching hardware: they're switching OS platforms. The fact that they can run Windows on a Mac is only slightly more of interest to them than is running an x86-based distro of GNU/Linux.
Bottom Line: Apple will appeal to and convert those that they can, and those are the hearts and minds which are the most vital and important anyhow. Let's not forget the relative merits of dummy-dropping. Sometimes, Darwin's theories of Evolution are more satisfyingly applied sociologically than biologically.
Dirt-Cheap vs. Reasonable Economy (a.k.a. "The Wal-Martization of America"):
Apple has always had the philosophy that their name needs to mean a superior product. They have tended to shy away from producing bargain-basement products because it tends to take away from the "high-quality" reputation they are otherwise known for and desire to continue cultivating.
At direct odds with this is the pervasive and continually-perpetuated attitude in the U.S. (and elsewhere, perhaps) that the universe revolves exclusively around the mantra of "faster, cheaper, better", with emphasis on the latter two: cheaper and better. What I have noticed in my own 34 years on this planet is a considerable change in attitude, most easily summed up as people in general having their tastes almost "anti-cultured". It isn't "... cheaper, better" for them, but rather "cheaper = better". You can see this at all levels. Businesses, despite their claims to the contrary, tend to prioritize the executives specifically and the company generally making money over any other possible consideration. They try and drive their workforce from well-paid, highly competent full-time people, to part-time, no-medical or retirement-benefits-earning, low-experience, low-paid domestic help; and the second prong of their pincer movement is to outsource the rest.
Or, in short, "let's make a lot of money, but don't spend any in the process."
My goal here is not to get into the lengthy and well-trod discussion of corporate exploitation of the masses; rather it is to show the Wal-Mart effect at all levels.
More and more over the years I find that people have no taste. Steve Jobs accuses Microsoft of having no taste (a point I am not trying to argue against); I think however that he's hit a little low of the mark. The attitude out there seems to be one of total self-focus -- and not merely "me first", but rather "me first, me last, and ******* everybody else". They're the "I don't want to know anything", "all I want to do is get out of having to do anything I can, including not using my brain except for pleasure-seeking tasks," and "For God's sake, I surely don't want to have to spend more than the minimum on a computer" bunch.
Now, clearly, not everyone in the U.S. is like this; obviously, if they were, Apple would have no customers at all. But this is a real and fairly large group. Short of Apple practically giving away their computers, it's hard to imagine them being all that specifically attractive to that demographic. Moreover, those people are not merely non-enthusiasts; they want all of the benefits of having this trendy computer thing, but wish to be encumbered by none of the responsibilities.
To my way of thinking, frankly however large this group of people is, I would encourage Apple to avoid appealing to them whenever and wherever possible. If this means continuing the perception mentioned above of being a computer "for yuppies", then so be it.
Market Share Percentage and it's Perception:
Clearly, there is something to be gained by having the perception that "everyone's doing it". It's part of the reason why smoking, drinking, under-age sex, and drugs are so amazingly popular with us human beings the world over. It's part of the reason (maybe even a significant part) that iPods are so incredibly successful. Now, before someone here puts forth the argument that, "Well, you know, Apple's got a better design, and that's what attracts people to it," -- and that's quite true in it's own right -- let's break things down a bit.
Many animals develop and learn through a process called "patterning", and through imitation. Humans are not psychologically exempt from this; we do it all the time, and particularly so when we're younger. It's the fundamental force behind fashion, fads, and trends. There are definitely positive benefits to this. Kids, as they develop their social skills, learn from others the socially approved ways of behaving and interacting. Please note I did not use the term "correct" nor "right", but merely the "approved" (or, one might call it the "accepted") way. We also learn and learn from such things as casualty (actions have consequences), and other factors too numerous to pursue here.
Anyhow, all of these factors are in operation when it comes to buying technology (which is the boiled-down essence of what we're talking about here). Microsoft has learned this game, and has played it well for many years. Regardless of the "technically, we know it's bulls**t" truth, the reality of it is (and has been) when an unsavvy person walks into a store to buy a computer, and they see ten Windows-running computers on the shelf, and only one or two Mac OS-running computers there, they get the prima-facia notion that most computers are Windows computers, and by extension that statistically most people must be running Windows; therefore they should buy a Windows computer, too. There's a whole other subject here about how the ignorant sales people in electronics stores essentially use the same process to unwittingly deceive themselves into thinking the same thing. This is one of the factors which helped catapult Microsoft into the major, successful company they became. In truth, this specific scenario is a bit more 1994 than but it helps to explain why most people today who own a computer have only known life in a Microsoft world. As enough people attained this status, it became the dominant developmental factor in the world at large, which sort of helped to self-perpetuate the effect.
Let's also not lose sight of the fact that these statistics of percentage of platform used by definition leave out one particular group of people -- those who don't use a computer at all. After all, if you don't own a computer, you can't browse the web, send or receive email, or have your computer platform of choice tabulated in any kind of statistical data sample. One might be tempted to think that such a notion is silly, but it isn't. True, once we get to the point that only a statistically insignificant number of people on this planet don't own a computer (which is still far from the reality of today), counting their numbers won't matter for statistical purposes, it does matter. Why? Well, the statistics as presented make it seem like Macs (or Linux, or anything else) are only used by a subset of people on this planet. Not true! They're only used by a subset of a subset, the latter being the number of people on this planet who have a computer to be counted in such statistics in the first place.
Also, statistics vary depending on a variety of factors. It's also easy to write them off as a business or let them drop "below the radar" by various statistical gathering or reporting agencies; or merely through the informal process on the part of business owners of anecdotal evidence. Here's a perfect example of that very factor.
When the Macintosh came on the scene in 1984, and as it continued through it's early incarnations in the mid 1980s, it entered the fray of lots of non-defacto computer platforms. Or, to put it another way, it "came late to the party". So, you had all these computer dealers who were already trying to sell Apple ][s, TRS-80s, Commodore 64s (and later, C128s), Timex Sinclairs, an assortment of other PCs running proprietary OSs, amongst which were those which ran this thing called MS-DOS, and so forth and so on. Also, people who wound up buying Macs didn't exactly fit the same profile as those who had bought the other computers. You had artists -- literary, graphic, musical, etc. -- buying these things. While they didn't mind being technologically self-sufficent, they were not people who were interested in such things as tearing their computer apart and having a go at it's various electronic innards. Anyhow, they formed their own communities, and for various reasons didn't get a lot of support initially from local dealers and computer software stores. However, Apple did get quite a number of companies to write software or build hardware for their Mac platform. These companies started using mail-order as a significant portion of their sales strategy. Consequently, Mac owners used it as their more-and-more-primary computer-stuff purchasing regimen.
Ultimately, fewer and fewer Mac owners were going locally to buy stuff, due to availability and pricing. What then happened largely was this "perception" on the part of shop owners (and later their suppliers, etc.) that nobody out there used a Mac. As a result of their mis-perception, companies began to simply ignore us Mac users (I was around back then), acting as if we didn't exist; or at the least there weren't enough of us to bother supporting us or even trying to make money from us.
Now, at this point there's no denying there's more Windows boxen out there than Mac boxen, but this is still a valid factor and should not be discounted.
Besides, what number you hear quoted still, as it has for many, many years, depends on what your source is. I've heard numbers within the past month that range from 4.1 percent to 6 percent. Which one is correct? Does anyone even really know?
Since we can run Windows, why run Mac OS? (paranoia of market erosion):
I've been hearing this since before Apple ever disclosed their plans to switch to x86. It was actually one of the topics frequently -- and rather hotly, as I recall -- debated in these forums. However, I think the fear is greatly unjustified, and here's why.
First, let's look at it from an economic standpoint: Buying a Mac to run Windows is hardly the most cost-effective approach.
Second, let's look at it from a socio-economic standpoint: People don't buy a Mac to run Windows so much as they buy it to either try something different, or to escape Windows and the onslaught of problems that, in more recent years, it has brought to them.
Third, and while this really applies more to tech-savvy people: Windows represents a security and stability liability which most other operating systems do not.
In other words, by and large, people out there who are switching to a Mac are doing more than merely switching hardware: they're switching OS platforms. The fact that they can run Windows on a Mac is only slightly more of interest to them than is running an x86-based distro of GNU/Linux.
Bottom Line: Apple will appeal to and convert those that they can, and those are the hearts and minds which are the most vital and important anyhow. Let's not forget the relative merits of dummy-dropping. Sometimes, Darwin's theories of Evolution are more satisfyingly applied sociologically than biologically.
vistadude
Mar 30, 10:56 PM
It doesn't show up in xcode either? Is there some option I'm missing?
Thanks.
Thanks.
