Mac vs. PC: The stereotypes may be true

[Bernard SG]

some tasks in OS X, such as networking, is insanely hard than the simplicity of the Network and Sharing Centre provided in Windows.

What???
It probably depends on the specifics of the network you want to build, but overall, I always found it ridiculously easy to build a Mac OS network than a Windows one.
You may want to provide specific examples on how networking in OS X is 'insanely hard' as compared to Windows.

 

[torbjoern]

What???
It probably depends on the specifics of the network you want to build, but overall, I always found it ridiculously easy to build a Mac OS network than a Windows one.
You may want to provide specific examples on how networking in OS X is 'insanely hard' as compared to Windows.

Even under Linux, it's easier than in Windows.

 

[KnightWRX]

Even under Linux, it's easier than in Windows.

Networking is only hard if you have no clue what you are doing. Let's face it, most of it has been hidden away under layers and layers of auto-configuration that every OS under the sun has supported for decades now.

You barely even have to worry about cabling anymore, with MDI-X.

And personally, I find the Network and Sharing center confusing in Windows. It's like everything is buried way too deep. Windows 2000 was just perfect as far as the Windows implementation of a networking GUI configuration tool goes. It's been downhill ever since. Just give me flat text files any day of the week though.

 

[rasmasyean]

"Networking" in Windows CAN be hard. Because it provides a lot of flexibility and versatility. While MS does try to make "Home Networking" user friendly, I'm afraid I wouldn't say it's completely intuitive. But it's mostly because ppl don't RTFM! In this day, the internet has so many "guides" that it should not need a person with half a brain. Google is a really neat word ppl should learn. If they don't know about it by some chance...its in the dictionary! No joke!!!

Apple on the other hand, realizes this about some ppl who are "un-helpable" so their motto is to "dumb down the interface" so that ppl with 1/4 a brain can do many "computer tasks". But this doesn't really make a difference to ppl who require "powerful" networking, which includes all indirect benefits found in Windows...prolly grown since the intro of Windows NT. And that's why Windows has been the primary choice for industry. Not just your "word processing station" as well as evidently, the "server arena", but also as an interface to control machines from cash registers to robotic chained automation assembly lines that makes the actual computers!...including macs and iPhones!

 

[JoeG4]

Except of course, the Unix backend that powers OS X also powers ATM machines, practically every cellphone, a lot of cars, and many other servers/embedded devices as well.

You're right that Windows has the major retail cash register & ATM market down. However, a lot of stores don't use Windows (pretty much any small business that uses those casio cash registers doesn't, and many chains like 99 cent stores just use those tiny keyboard-is-the-computer registers that I am 100% certain DO NOT run Windows).

On that note, I can tell you that Dish Network uses Linux on all of their receivers, but then Comcast and VZ use Windows on their receivers *ponders*

 

[Aeolius]

“Mac users tend to be younger, more liberal, more fashion-conscious and more likely to live in cities than people who prefer PCs”

45, Libertarian, fashion is a prison for the weak, and I intentionally live in a rural area because I hate cities.

“The results suggest Mac users can be seen, depending on your perspective, as bolder and more creative -- or elitist and more pretentious.”

Can’t we be all four?

“Mac users have a college or advanced degree... are 80% more likely than PC users to be vegetarians, and, unlike PC fans, would rather ride a Vespa scooter than a Harley.”

College, yes. I like to refer to myself as a second-hand vegetarian - I only eat animals that eat vegetables. And I’d rather be driving a ’47 Studebaker pickup.

“Mac users prefer designer or vintage duds, hummus, red wine, indie films, The New York Times and (we're not making this up) San Pellegrino Limonata.”

Comfortable clothes; I don’t care what they look like. Conch fritters, beer, old horror flicks, local news, and what in Sam Hill is a San Pellegrino Limonata? I’ll take a Cheerwine, thankyouverymuch.

“Mac users also are more likely to describe themselves as computer-savvy and "early adopters." “

Four of my seven kids were adopted, but I’m not sure that’s what they meant.

Apparently, I am the Anti-Steve.

 

[KnightWRX]

Except of course, the Unix backend that powers OS X also powers ATM machines, practically every cellphone, a lot of cars, and many other servers/embedded devices as well.

No, it doesn't. The Unix backend that powers OS X is pretty much Apple built by now (Darwin/XNU don't at all ressemble their ancestors) and I don't think Apple is a SysV licensee, so they don't share any code from most commercial Unix systems.

The only thing they share with those other Unix systems is having passed the certification suite from The Open Group.

However I do agree with you that the other guy doesn't really have a clue. Windows is about as flexible as a concrete slab and as versatile as a blade of grass in the networking arena. The only reason it's so widespread in the server arena is because you need to multiply the number of installations just to get a working LDAP directory that resists logon requests from 5 client boxes. Meanwhile, any commercial Unix worth its salt can serve up many times more requests from a single box, while consolidating other services as well.

ATMs might run Windows, but the backend they connect to is a Unix system (and actually, my bank here still uses some version of OS/2 Warp for their ATMs, something I found out after finding a DoS bug in the card reader that crashed their software and forced a reboot).

 

[macsmurf]

"Networking" in Windows CAN be hard. Because it provides a lot of flexibility and versatility. While MS does try to make "Home Networking" user friendly, I'm afraid I wouldn't say it's completely intuitive. But it's mostly because ppl don't RTFM! In this day, the internet has so many "guides" that it should not need a person with half a brain. Google is a really neat word ppl should learn. If they don't know about it by some chance...its in the dictionary! No joke!!!

Apple on the other hand, realizes this about some ppl who are "un-helpable" so their motto is to "dumb down the interface" so that ppl with 1/4 a brain can do many "computer tasks". But this doesn't really make a difference to ppl who require "powerful" networking, which includes all indirect benefits found in Windows...prolly grown since the intro of Windows NT. And that's why Windows has been the primary choice for industry. Not just your "word processing station" as well as evidently, the "server arena", but also as an interface to control machines from cash registers to robotic chained automation assembly lines that makes the actual computers!...including macs and iPhones!

For me, a terminal shell is an indispensable tool. In other words I find Windows frustrating.

Anyway, what exactly is this powerful networking you're talking about?
Extra large tubes?

Oh, I just remembered an anecdote. Some years ago, we had a bit of a problem at my home. We received a complaint from our ISP that we were sending out spam. The problem is that our local network is used by around 30 apartments and the guy who received the complaint didn't really know anything about networking. He's really just a contact person. Anyway, he knocked on my door and luckily I had an old P4 with two NICs that ran some version of Linux, so I configured it as a bridge and to log packages going to port 25 (SMTP) via netfilter. Then we just put it between the router and local network. After a couple of hours I checked the logs and we found the culprit.

How would I go about that using Windows? Is it in the manual? To be honest, I'm not sure how to do it in OS X either (nor would I want to)

 

[Fubar1977]

I find windows 7 does a fantastic job of networking, that`s why it runs my home network, the Mac frequently fails to even appear on the network or will take ages to show other machines on the network.
With my windows machines it`s instant and rock solid.

Probably just because I`m running a mixed network but still, Windows gives me less of a headache when it comes to networking.

Prefer OSX for everything else tho

 

[macsmurf]

I find windows 7 does a fantastic job of networking, that`s why it runs my home network, the Mac frequently fails to even appear on the network or will take ages to show other machines on the network.
With my windows machines it`s instant and rock solid.

Probably just because I`m running a mixed network but still, Windows gives me less of a headache when it comes to networking.

Prefer OSX for everything else tho

What do you mean by "runs my network"? If anything runs a network it's a router.

 

[KnightWRX]

How would I go about that using Windows? Is it in the manual? To be honest, I'm not sure how to do it in OS X either (nor would I want to)

On OS X, I'd figure this was it :

IPFW(8)                   BSD System Manager's Manual                  IPFW(8)

NAME
     ipfw -- IP firewall and traffic shaper control program

Oh yeah, that's the manual btw.

Windows... versatile and flexible. I'm still laughing about that one.

What do you mean by "runs my network"? If anything runs a network it's a router.

He's talking about his file serving and printing services most likely. I have no problems with my Macs here running off of a Samba server on an embedded Linux installation (NAS box), something is probably wrong with his setup and it's probably called : Software firewall.

Anyway, to add to your point "runs my network" is more than just the router, it's the switches, the cabling and the network software infrastructure services (DHCP, DNS, etc..). None of it is powered by Windows in his home is my guess.

 

[macsmurf]

On OS X, I'd figure this was it :

IPFW(8)                   BSD System Manager's Manual                  IPFW(8)

NAME
     ipfw -- IP firewall and traffic shaper control program

Oh yeah, that's the manual btw.

Yeah, I kind of figured that for packet logging. The bridge was more of an issue, but it looks like one can just use ifconfig.

Anyway, I don't like to use OS X for server stuff so it's pretty much academic anyway. Not to mention that you'd need a mac pro for dual ethernet ports.

Windows... versatile and flexible. I'm still laughing about that one.

I like the argument, though: Product X is pretty confusing but that's because it's so much more powerful than product Y (without going into the specifics of what "powerful" means).

Anyway, to add to your point "runs my network" is more than just the router, it's the switches, the cabling and the network software infrastructure services (DHCP, DNS, etc..). None of it is powered by Windows in his home is my guess.

I agree. I just didn't want to write all that

 

[KnightWRX]

Not to mention that you'd need a mac pro for dual ethernet ports.

You can use a USB Ethernet adapter. Or 5.

 

[macsmurf]

You can use a USB Ethernet adapter. Or 5.

Ah. Good point.

 

[rasmasyean]

Except of course, the Unix backend that powers OS X also powers ATM machines, practically every cellphone, a lot of cars, and many other servers/embedded devices as well.

You're right that Windows has the major retail cash register & ATM market down. However, a lot of stores don't use Windows (pretty much any small business that uses those casio cash registers doesn't, and many chains like 99 cent stores just use those tiny keyboard-is-the-computer registers that I am 100% certain DO NOT run Windows).

On that note, I can tell you that Dish Network uses Linux on all of their receivers, but then Comcast and VZ use Windows on their receivers *ponders*

Way to hijack the topic in order to spew your Unix fanaticism.

And how exactly is “the Unix backend” related to desktop computers that the vast majority of ppl have in their homes, bags, and cubicles???

Yeah, “Unix” (or some derivative) is “good” where you need a low footprint. Number crunching, data processing, small devices dedicated to a specific function, etc. Ppl don’t take “servers” to class, nor use “DVR’s” to check their email!

Yes, maybe there are some unix boxes that process 1 million transactions per day from the stock market or whatever. But so are there mainframes, and minicomputers too! Not to mention that all the “Application Servers” that actually interact with human beings rather than just update databases! You think all software in the world is a “garbage in garbage out” obscure program that no one knows exists except ppl like you who sit in the basement and panic making tons of calls when it errors? I’m sorry to enlighten you and expand your horizons, but the most prevalent AND most sophisticated software have USER INTERFACES! Thats where the developer thinks of not only “Error code 224345-AX-301”, but all possible scenarios when an idiot user can break the application...and also not frustrate her in frequent routines. There's even "psycology" in it in some cases because users are human beings...something alien to many unix geeks.

There reason why Microsoft is so big, is not just because of “Windows Home Edition”. It’s because of they have tons of applications software that involves both the frontend AND the backend, and they have a vicegrip hold on the integration of all these technologies put together. SharePoint, Dynamics, ASP.NET, Windows.NET, etc. and now Silverlight. All of these tie into everyone’s favorite “Microsoft Office Suite” (yeah, and in addition to Windows itself not to mention).

I hate sink your boat, but Unix has a long way to catch up.



EDIT: Also, btw...regarding "Windows Cash registers", if you open your eyes, you will realize that these "touchscreen cash regeisters" are no longer confinded to Wallmarts and McDonalds. There have been creeping in more and more into the "small and medium business" counters. It's not that expensive to operate anymore and look arround when you shop. You might just see "Dell" where you least expect it.

 

[macsmurf]

I hate sink your boat, but Unix has a long way to catch up.

I'm guessing those powerful windows networking features weren't all that powerful since you ignore the question.

You, my friend, try to cover up your own ignorance by being rude to people. You're not convincing anybody.

 

[rasmasyean]

I'm guessing those powerful windows networking features weren't all that powerful since you ignore the question.

You, my friend, try to cover up your own ignorance by being rude to people. You're not convincing anybody.

You don't know enough about computers past home networking to understand my posts I guess. I just mentioned a handful of them above. "Networking" is not just used to ftp files and HTML pages. That's actually just a small fraction of what happens in the real world. I'm just trying to give some of you hard-line MS haters an idea of why "Windows" dominates. But you just keep making up these fanciful "drawbacks of Windows" as if Microsoft is some obscure company. Or perhaps that they've managed to fool every pro out there with degrees all the way up to Ph.D. and YOU know something that they don't! I'll tell you what's "obscure". Go arround the shopping mall and ask how many ppl have heard of "unix".

 

[macsmurf]

You don't know enough about computers past home networking to understand my posts I guess. I just mentioned a handful of them above. "Networking" is not just used to ftp files and HTML pages. That's actually just a small fraction of what happens in the real world.

In reality my company manages just slightly over one petabyte of data distributed over various locations. We run this with *nix servers - mostly servers running Red Hat/CentOS and some Sun servers. We also have a few (virtualized) Windows servers as domain managers for most of our employees' Windows machines.

Granted, I'm not a system administrator. I'm a software developer. In our department we mostly use Linux as desktops. A few of us use OS X and one guy even uses Windows.

Nobody in their right mind would use OS X as a server system. That being said, I think OS X and its *BSD userland underpinnings serve admirably as a very versatile desktop system.

I'm just trying to give some of you hard-line MS haters an idea of why "Windows" dominates. But you just keep making up these fanciful "drawbacks of Windows" as if Microsoft is some obscure company.

I'm well aware of why Windows dominates.

Or perhaps that they've managed to fool every pro out there with degrees all the way up to Ph.D. and YOU know something that they don't! I'll tell you what's "obscure". Go arround the shopping mall and ask how many ppl have heard of "unix".

I work with people with degrees. Most of us have a CS masters degree. I am currently studying towards one but work as a software developer on the side. I believe KnightWRX is also an IT-professional and both of us have been called Apple haters before. I think we both have a healthy and critical understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of various operating systems, which seems to anger fanboys on both sides. Not that we agree on everything.

Let me know when you decide to back up your claims.

 

[Dr Kevorkian94]

Doesn't matter the bin Ladin family yes including usoma (well not anymore lol) owns part of Microsoft. This is why it's products cause so many people pain lol

 

[rasmasyean]

In reality my company manages just slightly over one petabyte of data distributed over various locations. We run this with *nix servers - mostly servers running Red Hat/CentOS and some Sun servers. We also have a few (virtualized) Windows servers as domain managers for most of our employees' Windows machines.

Granted, I'm not a system administrator. I'm a software developer. In our department we mostly use Linux as desktops. A few of us use OS X and one guy even uses Windows.

Nobody in their right mind would use OS X as a server system. That being said, I think OS X and its *BSD userland underpinnings serve admirably as a very versatile desktop system.



I'm well aware of why Windows dominates.



I work with people with degrees. Most of us have a CS masters degree. I am currently studying towards one but work as a software developer on the side. I believe KnightWRX is also an IT-professional and both of us have been called Apple haters before. I think we both have a healthy and critical understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of various operating systems, which seems to anger fanboys on both sides. Not that we agree on everything.

Let me know when you decide to back up your claims.

Not that I really think my own “anecdotal evidence” is any measure, but if you want to spew resumes in some sort of “well, I did such…” then fine. I’ve been in a company that has practically every technology you mentioned (prolly with the exception of OSX officially). But personally, I’ve worked with mainframes, through unix/linux, Windows servers, Sharpoint, Exchange, and even have been involved with firm-wide Windows and MS Office suite upgrades. I’ve used various languages on mainframes, *nix, Windows (including native .NET) as well. YES…I know COBOL *sniff*. I’ve been to enough “trade shows” to see Windows, et al take over industrial production chains in too many areas to count. And as you can guess, I’m old enough to see the “rise of Microsoft” and have first-hand experience to see WHY.

No one likes an overbearing giant, and I understand that. Regardless of how some of you “emotionally” feel about Windows, it doesn’t stop the truth of the matter that they obviously have pretty darn good products. Did they use some of their monopolistic powers to their advantage…yes, prolly…I can see that. But that doesn’t change anything. The STATISTICS show what neither of our anecdotes or whatever it is you want as “back up” to matter. “Sun” or something…or even “Redhat” are not household names. And they had like decades to back up their claim that they will supplant Windows. It just DID NOT HAPPEN! Today...OSX (a warped version of Unix) came the closest in the "consumer" desktop, true...but that's mostly because of the iPod craze, and not because of anything unixy.

 

[macsmurf]

Not that I really think my own “anecdotal evidence” is any measure, but if you want to spew resumes in some sort of “well, I did such…” then fine. I’ve been in a company that has practically every technology you mentioned (prolly with the exception of OSX officially). But personally, I’ve worked with mainframes, through unix/linux, Windows servers, Sharpoint, Exchange, and even have been involved with firm-wide Windows and MS Office suite upgrades. I’ve used various languages on mainframes, *nix, Windows (including native .NET) as well. YES…I know COBOL *sniff*. I’ve been to enough “trade shows” to see Windows, et al take over industrial production chains in too many areas to count. And as you can guess, I’m old enough to see the “rise of Microsoft” and have first-hand experience to see WHY.

Well, at least we're getting somewhere (although we've completely taken over the thread).

There's no doubt that Microsoft has done a lot of things right. One of the reasons Windows is big with businesses is that they actually care about this segment, whereas Apple is mainly a consumer company. That being said, there's this persistent notion that OS X is a toy system and that the users are pretentious clueless fanboys. There are plenty of those, to be sure. This forum is a good example.

No one likes an overbearing giant, and I understand that. Regardless of how some of you “emotionally” feel about Windows, it doesn’t stop the truth of the matter that they obviously have pretty darn good products. Did they use some of their monopolistic powers to their advantage…yes, prolly…I can see that. But that doesn’t change anything. The STATISTICS show what neither of our anecdotes or whatever it is you want as “back up” to matter. “Sun” or something…or even “Redhat” are not household names. And they had like decades to back up their claim that they will supplant Windows. It just DID NOT HAPPEN! Today...OSX (a warped version of Unix) came the closest in the "consumer" desktop, true...but that's mostly because of the iPod craze.

I don't really have any emotional connection to either Microsoft or Apple. I just prefer OS X because of an excellent GUI and a reasonable shell.

 

[roadbloc]

Doesn't matter the bin Ladin family yes including usoma (well not anymore lol) owns part of Microsoft. This is why it's products cause so many people pain lol

What has that got to do with anything?

 

[KnightWRX]

Not that I really think my own “anecdotal evidence” is any measure, but if you want to spew resumes in some sort of “well, I did such…” then fine. I’ve been in a company that has practically every technology you mentioned (prolly with the exception of OSX officially). But personally, I’ve worked with mainframes, through unix/linux, Windows servers, Sharpoint, Exchange, and even have been involved with firm-wide Windows and MS Office suite upgrades. I’ve used various languages on mainframes, *nix, Windows (including native .NET) as well. YES…I know COBOL *sniff*. I’ve been to enough “trade shows” to see Windows, et al take over industrial production chains in too many areas to count. And as you can guess, I’m old enough to see the “rise of Microsoft” and have first-hand experience to see WHY.

Oh great, basically a code monkey that thinks whatever he is doing now is what is dominant. As far removed from infrastructure knowledge and work as I have seen.

Please don't talk about infrastructure anymore. Pretty please. Though it is hilarious, I don't know how much more I can take. "Rise of Microsoft"... lol, as if they didn't just get their monopoly on a silver plater from IBM and then proceeded to just abuse the heck out of it to get anywhere.

Macsmurf : Yes, I'm in IT. Right now, I'm doing mostly HP-UX systems administration, though my team is also responsible for the Linux stuff and a couple of embedded boxes running various services.

 

[*LTD*]

And as you can guess, I’m old enough to see the “rise of Microsoft” and have first-hand experience to see WHY.

Universal licensing, allowing any junkbox maker to install their OS (and then following up with incentivizations and compulsion in order to keep it that way), and illegal behaviour. There's your "rise." And of course, copying Apple whenever they could. The jokes exist for a reason.

You're currently seeing the DECLINE, by the way. Do you have first-hand experience of Ballmer? LOL

 

[roadbloc]

Universal licensing, allowing any junkbox maker to install their OS (and then following up with incentivizations and compulsion in order to keep it that way), and illegal behaviour. There's your "rise." And of course, copying Apple whenever they could. The jokes exist for a reason.

I'll give you the first two, not that there is anything wrong with any of them and not that it stops them from making some quality products. Not sure about the third, how has Microsoft done anything illegal and gotten away with it? Copying Apple, yep, I'll give you that one. But Apple have also copied Microsoft in their time. Not sure what these jokes are.

You're currently seeing the DECLINE, by the way. Do you have first-hand experience of Ballmer? LOL

Hardly. Seriously, Apple have found a new market for themselves, and Microsoft haven't got there yet. That is all. Microsoft is still king of the OS, Office and Gaming Market. Apple aren't. Does that mean Apple are in decline as well?

Don't kid yourself that Microsoft are dead. They are far from it. I think they are under harder ground than Apple.