Hello!
The comments on this profile are unclaimed and thus are unverified.
Do they belong to you? Claim these comments.
Brett
Is this you? Claim Profile »
5 months ago
in What made the Mac different (Scripting News) on Scripting News
The good: Small footprint, integrated carrying handle. Mouse, copy and paste between applications, bitmapped graphics, black text on white background, variable font, size, and style, 3.5" diskettes, toolbox ROM, UI standards, built-in sound/ software synth, built-in clock (with external access to battery), Software Bundle: MacWrite, MacPaint, MacDraw. Only one forbidden file name character ":" Extensions not needed! Document metadata included type AND creator. Simple keyboard (no function keys). Undo!!!! No command line required! Macs could do things that PC users only dreamed of.
The bad: No option for a command line. Only one configuration. Tiny monochrome screen, zero backward compatibility with Apple II or PC. Very little third-party software at first, followed by plenty of shoddy "ported" software that violated Mac UI guidelines. limited RAM capacity with no (official) memory upgrade capability, expensive 2nd (external) drive required for practical use. No slots. Few compatible peripherals. Apple's ribbon-based Imagewriter printer couldn't produce crisp (daisywheel quality) text for business use-- although it was great for generating ransom notes using the San Francisco font. No support for alternative printers. The non-conforming Mac (and its owners) were mercilessly ridiculed for years.
In spite of the Mac's limitations, the good outweighed the bad for many of us. Over time, the Mac has evolved to overcome it's limitations without sacrificing too many of the good things that set it apart.
The bad: No option for a command line. Only one configuration. Tiny monochrome screen, zero backward compatibility with Apple II or PC. Very little third-party software at first, followed by plenty of shoddy "ported" software that violated Mac UI guidelines. limited RAM capacity with no (official) memory upgrade capability, expensive 2nd (external) drive required for practical use. No slots. Few compatible peripherals. Apple's ribbon-based Imagewriter printer couldn't produce crisp (daisywheel quality) text for business use-- although it was great for generating ransom notes using the San Francisco font. No support for alternative printers. The non-conforming Mac (and its owners) were mercilessly ridiculed for years.
In spite of the Mac's limitations, the good outweighed the bad for many of us. Over time, the Mac has evolved to overcome it's limitations without sacrificing too many of the good things that set it apart.
1 year ago
in What If Everyone Suddenly Believed the Apple Propaganda? on Digital Before Digital
While the Mac zealot's absolute statement: "PCs don't work" is clearly an exaggeration, there is a also a kernel of truth within. There IS a bit more maintenance overhead running Windows than Macs. Windows users ARE more likely than Mac users to have to reinstall their OS, or just buy a whole new computer when malware eventually grinds their machine to a halt.
That being said, there are plenty of users and uses for which a Mac may not be the best choice. Among them are hard-core gaming, do-it-yourself system-builders, people who need ultra-compact portables, tablet computing, CAD/CAM, and large server applications.
However, I believe the vast majority of ordinary people running Windows PCs for everyday tasks like word processing, email, web browsing, might actually be happier with a Mac.
Ironically, the Mac has historically been relegated to niche status (education, media creation, etc.) Lately, people are finally realizing that the Mac has evolved into a viable computer for a wide variety of uses.
The Mac vs. PC ads coupled with positive word-of-mouth from actual switchers are helping to increase Apple's market-share. I see the effect snowballing as long as Apple keeps delivering the goods.
That being said, there are plenty of users and uses for which a Mac may not be the best choice. Among them are hard-core gaming, do-it-yourself system-builders, people who need ultra-compact portables, tablet computing, CAD/CAM, and large server applications.
However, I believe the vast majority of ordinary people running Windows PCs for everyday tasks like word processing, email, web browsing, might actually be happier with a Mac.
Ironically, the Mac has historically been relegated to niche status (education, media creation, etc.) Lately, people are finally realizing that the Mac has evolved into a viable computer for a wide variety of uses.
The Mac vs. PC ads coupled with positive word-of-mouth from actual switchers are helping to increase Apple's market-share. I see the effect snowballing as long as Apple keeps delivering the goods.
1 year ago
in 2007/11/30/pepsi-amazon/ on Mashable - The Social Media Guide
Hooray! Another nail in the coffin of Microsoft's intention to "embrace and extend" control over all music sales by making Windows Media the defacto standard.
The article title should read "Pepsi and Walmart reject Microsoft DRM".
The article title should read "Pepsi and Walmart reject Microsoft DRM".
1 year ago
in The brand promise of Apple on Scobleizer
Your unfortunate personal experience not withstanding, if in general, Leopard requires less troubleshooting than Vista, then Apple's TV commercial is not misleading.
I've no doubt that, in terms of percent adoption and overall satisfaction, Leopard's first year will prove to be more successful than Vista's.
I've no doubt that, in terms of percent adoption and overall satisfaction, Leopard's first year will prove to be more successful than Vista's.
1 year ago
in Apple: What happened to thinking different? on Mathew's comments
You write " I think people have grown used to the idea of Apple as a different kind of company — the company that makes things easier to use, not harder; ...".
One of the ways Apple has traditionally made things easier to use is by limiting options. They have done this, for example, by selling relatively few different computer hardware configurations, and in the case of the iPhone by bundling a limited set of software. Apple is not prepared to support users with problems stemming from third party hacks. Apple products have NEVER been geared for tinkerers.
All the whining is coming from people who are trying to make the iPhone something that it is currently not: an open platform. Maybe someday it will get there but Apple doesn't owe it to anyone.
When Apple says Think Different they mean: products for non-geeks-- a simple streamlined, controlled environment with no hacking required or desired.
The iPhone remains consistant with this philosphy. I have no sympathy for people judging the iPhone for not meeting expectations that were never promised by Apple.
One of the ways Apple has traditionally made things easier to use is by limiting options. They have done this, for example, by selling relatively few different computer hardware configurations, and in the case of the iPhone by bundling a limited set of software. Apple is not prepared to support users with problems stemming from third party hacks. Apple products have NEVER been geared for tinkerers.
All the whining is coming from people who are trying to make the iPhone something that it is currently not: an open platform. Maybe someday it will get there but Apple doesn't owe it to anyone.
When Apple says Think Different they mean: products for non-geeks-- a simple streamlined, controlled environment with no hacking required or desired.
The iPhone remains consistant with this philosphy. I have no sympathy for people judging the iPhone for not meeting expectations that were never promised by Apple.
