This was just the ice-breaker. Lots of things have changed since the emails in this article were originally written. What are your views today?
You must be logged in to the O'Reilly Network to post a talkback.

Showing messages 1 through 37 of 37.

• Hardware
  2002-07-31 22:31:37  gary54 [Reply | View]
  
  
  Its a question of hardware as well as software. They sure don't give a new Mac away. I have excellent hardware (Beige with G4 processors) that does what I need it to do (CAD) and works well with OS 9. I'd love to be able to take advantage of many of the new software offerings for OS X ... but my Voodoo 5 isn't supported at all and most likely never will be, and the new quartz extreme graphics engine won't run on any PCI graphics card ..including the only Mac compatible PCI card still being produced .. even though its AGP bretheren is.
  
  Now if the hardware support is broadened to include more older (and perfectly functional) hardware. I'd load OS X tomorrow.

• Brilliant for Java people
  2002-05-07 06:53:25  hawkettc [Reply | View]
  
  
  One great reason to embrace Java was that it allowed us to remove any dependence on windows from our code. If you've programmed in windows before, you know what I mean. Your code is pretty much stuck on that platform for eternity. What's the next great thing about Java? - we can jump ship to the next OS at the drop of a hat... (something to make MS shudder).... a nice GUI on a UNIX OS, and a sexy machine.... hehehe... cya windoze....
  
  This is good news for Java too - a seriously competetive client machine and OS means we need platform independence... Java is going to *really* fly now.... you want to write something that runs on OSX and XP?

• I switched!
  2002-04-10 18:23:46  dasper [Reply | View]
  
  
  I'm a software developer with over 20 years of experience on systems including MVS, VM/CMS, Windows, OS/2, AIX and HP-UX. I had been using Windows on my desktop at both home and work. I started looking for a new machine for home and decided that I didn't want to get Windows again. Over the years I've become a Unix and Open Source fan. I started asking friends and coworkers about running Linux on a laptop, and one of them showed me his PowerBook running OS X. I was fascinated, and bought an iBook about a month later. I have had no regrets, and found myself inwardly cheering when I saw Macs running OS X at JavaOne.

• Changing OS in a Changing World
  2002-04-01 05:48:55  nik911sc [Reply | View]
  
  
  I happily migrated to Mac in 2000 before OS-X had even been released. It stood to reason then as it does now that Apple would successfully implement the new OS and change the 'game' of personal and business computing. The reality is that Mac OS X is as user friendly to a new user today as it was when the Macintosh was conceived. I applaud Apple and Steve for their bold strategy and predict a success story that will be studied by academics in years to come.
  
  Finally, by virtue of the response that Apple has received in the media, its users and interested onlookers - its clear that OS X is the foundation of a very prosperus future for Apple. Ultimately, Apple has suceeded with OS X and the supporting hardware to create a brand that the others will find hard to out position. Whilst Microsoft sell software for computers and Dell and co make computers - the future is bright for Apple.
  
  Nik.

• The OSX move: about networking
  2002-03-31 23:21:00  bdmt [Reply | View]
  
  
  Despite the availability of products making OS9 compatible with professional heterologous networks, OS9 was never natively conceived for professional networking in secured multiuser environments.
  With Darwin and OSX/OSXserver, the story is completely different: both the serving and clients aspects are totally professional and familiar, and consequently perceived as such by IT managers.
  

• OS X
  2002-03-31 03:23:20  fearless [Reply | View]
  
  
  I admit, I was confused when I first saw OS X and perplexed by its strange workarounds, lack of spring-loaded folders, and a desktop where things don't land where you drop them. But since loading FCP3 a couple of weeks ago I've barely looked at OS 9. I'm a long way from living in Terminal (that's why I bought a Mac in 1990) but it's not that far away and it's a major cultural shift. Brave New World and all...

• Apple right where it should be
  2002-03-17 19:54:09  grangera [Reply | View]
  
  
  There's so much I want to say regarding the state of Apple and its loyal customers in this new era of Mac OS X. However, I'm rather pressed for time, so I'll make just one observation, in very simple and direct terms:
  
  I've been an Apple user since my Apple II+ in 1980, and have been an unswerving Mac user since my original 128k Mac in December 1984. When I first saw the original NeXT cube in a computer lab at Indiana University sometime in 1989, my first reaction was "this is what the Mac always wanted to be." When Apple chose to buy NeXT over Be, I was indescribably thrilled.
  
  And now that Mac OS X is here and is standard on all new Macs, I feel like I'm finally home.
• Apple right where it should be
  2003-11-09 06:18:58  anonymous2 [Reply | View]
  
  
  I have the same feeling, I'm indescribably thrilled to be home.

• Lovin it
  2002-03-17 18:26:43  idaho [Reply | View]
  
  
  Count me in the camp with the OSX fans who still must spend most of my time in 9. At home, it's X for everything except a few games that still want sprockets (go USB Overdrive) for joysticks and such. At work, thought, life revolves around Quark and Photoshop. Quark and Classic don't play well together. This might be one of those areas where an enterprising soul could come from no where to build the next killer app, a publishing program to challenge the king. It would be a tough sell though. Quark users typically hate the company but love the product, and so much depends on what your printers and service bureaus support.
  
  At work, I am the IT guy for the Macs. As soon as practical, I will move the department to OSX. My experiences with it at home have been nothing less than amazing. It took a couple of weeks to get friendly with the dock, but I love it now. Font management was weird until Suitcase 10, but now that I've figured that out, I spend less time hyperventilating about how we'll handle that issue at work.
  
  Every day, some new solution comes along to move the platform a step closer to being ideal for business and home use. That may be the coolest thing about OSX. Computing on a Mac is really exciting again. On Windows, it's same-old-same-old. Everybody knows that innovation in that arena means a few dollars less, a few megahertz more, and whatever Microsoft can find to solidify its monopoly this month.

• Shows Classical Technology Adoption
  2002-03-17 15:28:28  jgruszynski [Reply | View]
  
  
  The categories of responses exactly match the classic population segments of the "Technology Adoption" curve as described by Moore, Christensen, Utterback, et al. In other words, Mac OS X is right on track as a new disruptive technology. So far Apple's execution has been good so I don't see a problem. I'm an '"early adopter" so I've already switched most of my daily activities off Win2000, Mac OS 9 and Linux, onto Mac OS X.

• Almost ready for OSX
  2002-03-13 09:21:10  unixgeek [Reply | View]
  
  
  Spiritually, I'm ready for OSX. As an age-old UNIX geek who also dabbles in various digital media pursuits, it's a dream come true for me when marrying the OS with graphic/multimedia apps and a decent UNIX underpinning. While at Sun many years ago, I'd often wondered why Sun wouldn't drop a lot of it's old and unsuccessful efforts trying to make it's UI "easy to use" and just partner with Apple to do something like OSX to counter Microsoft. Touche Steve Jobs and Apple!
  
  I've also struggled at home many years with WinX OS's, and in the process have invested in many applications from companies like Adobe and Macromedia that do more what I want than freeware alternatives on Linux (which I also have a box running at home). I and many others in my situation really want to make the switch now and avoid XP! I think it's no coincidence that Bill Gates pushed XP out the door earlier and end-of-lifed support for older WinX OS's soon to try and grab people like me onto XP as soon as possible, when faced with the growing competition from Apple's OSX.
  
  Getting a new Mac box at home isn't the problem. I'm resigned to having to buy a new hardware box and peripherals every few years to keep up-to-date much as one would buy a new car periodically. The big problem is moving my application investments over to OSX. I really want OSX for the main reason that it is the first UNIX OS that will make owning apps like Photoshop and Dreamweaver, etc. on it practical. However, an "upgrade" to Photoshop 7 on the Mac from my current Photoshop 5.5 (which would involve purchasing a full package from Adobe) would appear a lot more costly than upgrading to Photoshop 7 on XP.
  
  At the crossroads for many Windows OS users who wish to avoid XP, I'm not sure why Apple isn't more aggressive about "persuading" it's key ISV's like Macromedia and Adobe towards offering competitive upgrades for users who want to switch from PC's to Apple. I'm not going to buy a Photoshop upgrade (PC or Mac) or other upgrades until the smoke clears, so Adobe is losing money instead of gaining money with me by not offering such an upgrade). I cannot afford to invest in new licenses on a Mac for all of my apps. All it takes is one or two decent success stories in this area (where a company like Adobe shows they make more money by adopting this strategy), and other companies will follow if they see a trend of more users coming over to OSX. I'll see that as a potential trend, get an OSX platform and get that upgrade now and run the others under windows emulation until they follow suit.
  
  If there is a time to try and make it easier to move from Windows to OSX, now would be the time to do so. I wonder if Apple is afraid of MS pulling the plug on IE and Office apps, etc. on OSX if they were to become aggressive in this fashion. All the more reason that I hope that the 9 dissenting states in the latest anti-trust court battle hold onto that requirement that MS be required to still offer Office and IE, etc. on the Mac.
  
  Then the consumer might have more of a chance to make the choice they really want in an OS!

• Mac OS X = change; people don't like change
  2002-03-11 11:19:54  simx [Reply | View]
  
  
  I've been using a Mac since I got my first Mac Plus, and I've been using Mac OS X since OS X 10.1 came out (since that was the only usable version on my computer). I love OS X, but I can understand why people don't want to move to OS X.
  
  What it all boils down to is change. Mac OS X is the epitome of the word "change". UNIX underpinnings, totally revamped interface, new ways of doing things, totally different menus in the Finder, Dock, new Apple menu, etc. People are ingrained into their Mac OS 9 habits and they don't want to take the trouble to learn the Mac all over again (even though it isn't nearly that hard to learn Mac OS X from Mac OS Classic as it is to learn Windows from Mac OS Classic). But when you immerse yourself in OS X and learn how to do things, you'll find yourself loving it, and doing things much faster with OS X.
  
  Come in. The water's warm. Or should I say, the Aqua's warm. :)
• Mac OS X = change; people don't like change
  2002-03-12 03:30:43  steve53e [Reply | View]
  
  
  Change isn't the only issue here! For starters, OS-X is downright slow. While Aqua is nice looking, it does little for the overall performance of OS-X. Apple should have released a dumbed down theme with OS-X for those people who can barely tolerate OS-X in it's current state. Secondly, there are compatibility issues. Almost every peripheral in my office is incompatible with OS-X. And while you can lay blame with whomever you want, the point remains that I'm not willing to go out and spend tens of thousands of dollars to replace perfectly good peripherals for the sake of running OS-X. Don't get me wrong. I like OS-X and use it on my home computer. And while OS-X is the future of Apple and has potential to greatly impact the Mac community, it will never see the light of day in my business until the myriad of speed and compatibility issues are cleared up.

• Mac-X
  2002-03-11 06:26:59  rskyberg [Reply | View]
  
  
  I work at a large newspaper as team leader for publishing support. We have to make Macs work in a high-stress, maximum uptime environment. Once OS-X was announced, we immediately began researching it, finding out it flaws and weaknesses (Few major publishing apps out Native); how it will impact our work, and what will be needed to implement it 'across the board'. All of us in the support side LOVE X! We hate switching back to 9. It offers a robust server, integrated security features (IE: we can 'lock down' stuff that we dont want 'idiots in the newsrooms' to mess with), and a 'slick' interface. Our X-boxes have nary a crash, our OS-X server has not crashed (EVER!); and our lives ARE changing.... for the better. Once the big-boys of Publishing (photoshop, quark, etc) release past the ' Dot-0" release, we are switching.
  (Even our IT director, a diehard Wintel geek, wants a TiBook. He's gonna get one, but its a hand-me-down.... ;) )
  - RbS
• Mac-X -- Hand Me Downs
  2002-03-11 16:23:27  Derrick Story | [Reply | View]
  
  
  I think it was Will Rogers who said, "I never met a TiBook I didn't like." And that applies to hand-me-downs too ...

• The proof is in the pudding
  2002-03-07 08:16:29  larsonbj [Reply | View]
  
  
  I'm running OSX server and trying out lots of new (for me) and not always completely thought out ideas on the machine. Running Apache, PHP, mySQL, Bind (Webmin, what would I do without you?) etc., etc.
  
  Given all this and my relative lack of experience in *nix, I think that the uptime of 57 days, 2:53 speaks for itself.
  
  'nuf said? Long live OSX!

• old book explains how Apple "gets it"
  2002-03-06 21:35:31  jsepeta [Reply | View]
  
  
  "Computer Wars", I forget the author and now long out of print, explains that the companies who survive are the ones who can make the tough decisions that cannibalize sales of older products or services in order to move people to new platforms. A good example is Intel, who changed from making RAM to making processors. Apple, however, takes the prize. They're the first vendor to successfully migrate people from extremely disparate systems:
  
  1) from the Apple II to the Macintosh
  2) from System 6 to System 7 (ooh, multitasking)
  3) from 680x0 to PowerPC
  
  This is far more than the change from Windows 95 to 98 to ME -- Apple's big changes were vast shifts in direction because they required a very different way of THINKING.
  
  I think Apple will be successful with OSX, but it's still too slow and is quite cumbersome for people with a substantial investment in hardware and software to make an easy shift. My graphic designer clients hate it, and Apple should realize that they cannot afford to lose their old client base to $500 gigahertz PC's that have perfectly acceptable performance in Photoshop, Dreamweaver, and InDesign.
  
  I've used a Mac for 18 years now. My primary computer runs WinXP for a number of business-related reasons (including the fact that PC jobs pay a lot better than Mac jobs), but I sprung for a dual-processor G4 this January to handle the chores of my home music studio. I'm not 100% happy with OSX, but I've been asking for these features since the early 90's -- an OS that runs multiple processors, multitasks properly, is terribly stable and has much better memory support than MacOS9. I just hope that Apple didn't miss their window of opportunity by coming out with OSX so late. I mean, some of these features have been around in a nice GUI since <gasp> Windows NT 4 / sp3 in 1997. I should know -- I've used them all.

• The Unix brought dependability
  2002-03-06 21:30:53  maniabug [Reply | View]
  
  
  In 2000, ready to leave my job at an ISP, the upcoming Mac OS X made me decide to put the Mac at the center of my career. My experience with Linux allowed me to see the value of Apple's Next-based strategy.
  
  Now, as an engineer for a local Apple Specialist, I'm really excited about the new dependability Mac OS X brings. In the final analysis, dependability is the one real thing a solution provider offers its customers. When it's lacking in the technology, the provider's life is hell.
  
  Apple is finally producing a dependable product, and that product's dependability is augmented in a larger sense by its participation in open standards. Apple is miles ahead of Microsoft in this regard.

• MacOS X synergy
  2002-03-06 20:33:10  wfolta [Reply | View]
  
  
  If you're a MacOS X skeptic, go back to the article and read the comments by the UNIX geeks who are excited about MacOS X as a programming platform. A cool platform with free (and advanced) Internet/hacker/geek/UNIX tools plus a cool graphical front end is 100% the key to the continued life of the Mac!
  
  No programmers, no programs, dead OS. Excited programmers, free tools, cutting-edge tools and graphics, thriving platform. It's that simple.
  
  Remember the old days of the Mac where the coolest new (graphical, audio, artistic, educational) software came out first for the Mac? Remember when there were Mac-only killer apps that never made it to the PC?
  
  Those days were long gone with MacOS 9. You could count the number of Mac-first/Mac-only developers on one hand. Most of the remaining developers were not only Mac-second, but Mac-second-class. (Or Mac-never.) That's the way a platform dies.
  
  So get over the worship of the Perfect Interface, change some habits, and be darn thankful that geeks like MacOS X.
  
  (Speaking of the Perfect Interface, there are many cool products to improve Apple's interface including DragThing and SNAX. DragThing is a necessity. SNAX is a replacement for the Finder! Imagine trying to do something like that under MacOS 9.)
• Open Source v.s. Proprietary
  2002-03-07 20:04:04  gerald_shields [Reply | View]
  
  
  Though I'm down with what you're saying, there more to it. These Mac-second developers were charging a premimum for these Mac-only applications and the Mac-never developers weren't bothering with Classic Mac OS because it either didn't or partially support modern OS features. With Mac OS X, those developers now have to deal with an array of open source software that was primary on Linux and BSD. Moveover, some Mac-never developers are now considering, developing or shipping Mac versions of their applications. That's great for users and consumers in the long run. Now, long time Mac developer must justify the cost of their applications versus open source alternatives, some of them having the same or better quality. For an example, Blue World Communications, Inc which developed a popular Mac program called Lasso,published of 56 page white paper report comparing Blue World Lasso Professional 5 to PHP 4.1.x.
  
• MacOS X synergy -- I agree big time
  2002-03-06 22:01:08  Derrick Story | [Reply | View]
  
  
  Working for O'Reilly and dealing with open source, Unix developers everyday, I can tell you ... these are people I want on my platform.
  
  It's true, they're smart. But just as important, they have passion for their craft. Now I know I'm making general statements here, but that's because these statements are generally accurate IMHO.
  
  If I could have any group of computer geeks on the planet come hang out on my laptop, I'd take these guys ... hands down.
  
  They have so much to do with my positive outlook for Apple's future.

• OS X is good for Rocket Science
  2002-03-06 16:08:17  eccentricanomaly [Reply | View]
  
  
  OS X is a great tool for aerospace engineering! Preliminary assesments where I work show that high-end Sun and HP workstations are only marginally faster than a high-end Mac for our tasks, even though these workstations are at least three times the price of a high-end Mac. OS X's unix core makes it easy to port our analysis code over. Finally, I can optamise spacecraft trajectories on a laptop... perhaps from the beach. And I can run Powerpoint and Word on the same platform which is a big advantage over a Linux laptop.
  
  I've used Macs, Unix, and Windows systems for years and OS X is easier for my type of work than any of them. I have a very nice GUI with OS X, but I'm not forced to use it when the command line is more convienant (say, for large batch jobs or for numerical work).
  
  I love little features of OS X like being able to drop an icon into the terminal window and having the OS expand the full path to the file... sweet!
  
  I ran OS 8 before upgrading to 10.0 on my G3, and I haven't had any major problems with OS X. I run Classis apps regularly with only the occasional glitch. I think people who are having trouble switching from 8 or 9 to OS X are having problems because they are trying to force OS X to be like 9, rather than simply spending a week to get to know the new OS.
  
  You can never have a good relationship if you always compare the new girls you date to an ex-girlfriend.

• Bright computing future
  2002-03-06 16:00:45  bjelkeman [Reply | View]
  
  
  "He's so exciting I even like his misses."
  
  Just like what I feel. The Cube is supposedly a miss. I called around 50 resellers after it was discontinued to make sure I got one with a cinema display, and boy, it is a joyful computer to use. I have always wanted "Unix with the Mac interface, BSD preferred" and one day OS X shows up. :)
  
  There are lots of rough edges on this OS/GUI combination still, but so it was with MacOS as well. MacOS 4-6 was not perfect usability wise. I know, I still have a Mac 128 (upgraded to a plus) which works booting from floppy. Sure, it was a lot better than the pathetic Windows, but it took years for the Mac interface to become the joy to use it eventually ended up as.... except for the frequent crashes.
  
  All the PCs (except the games machines) have been thrown out in my home and the next machine in the office will be a Mac as well. Windows 2000 is supposed to be stable, but we are having so many issues with it in the office on a daily basis (why did we upgrade from NT4 Workstation I wonder, it was my decision too, he he, oh well).
  
  As long as the Macintosh hardware / OS / free applications are as nice as what Apple are producing at the moment there is little point in using anything else for the desktop.
  
  

• Market Share
  2002-03-06 15:19:23  leenoble [Reply | View]
  
  
  Apple seems to be striking towards that other 95% from both sides.
  You've got the iMac for consumers to drool over, and OSX for tekky geeks to drool over. Businesses are obviously the hardest to win over and rest between the two.
  Get the tekkies on board and they'll start suggesting the Mac as a viable business system. Once people start using them at work they'll eventually realise that there isn't just windows in the world, making the mac an even more attractive proposition. Hopefully this double flanking maneuvre will work, but it really is a long haul thing.

• 1984 Mac User
  2002-03-06 15:01:58  tomp2002 [Reply | View]
  
  
  I bought two Macs in 1984 and, while using other platforms, have stayed with the Mac owning several dozen personally. System 7, not merely lousy management, was a disaster for the Mac.
  
  All the fumbling around with new OS systems, not just the lousy management, all but killed the Mac. Steve Jobs, whom I dislike personally, is correctly credited by Derrick Story as saving the corporation.
  
  I viewed OS X with great apprehensive from its first announcement. I spent about 100 hours with the public beta and hated it about 90% of the time. 10.0.0 was a grave disappointment.
  
  I played with 10.0.x off and on, mostly surfing, and learned to love that Quartz engine, but hated the slowness and interface in general.
  
  10.1 shipped. Magic. Speed. GUI was starting to shape up. I've been 95% OS X since, the other 5% being digital photo touchup with Photoshop under Classic. Can't seem to find any Classic app of consequence that doesn't run fine.
  
  From hate/dislike -> loving it. I dislike the rare occasions when I boot into OS9/Classic. The OS and interface I loved for 17 years is history for me.
  
  The number of shareware and freeware apps is incredible. GoLive 6 showed up in mail yesterday. Have used Office X since it shipped. All of Apple's "i" apps + stalwarts like QuickTime are nothing less than fantastic with OS X. The list goes on.....
  
  I found OS X both difficult and frustrating to learn. Too many old habits. And contrary to popular belief I believe the GUI will be more difficult for new users than Classic.
  
  Bottom line: it's worth it. This OS X is fantastic and I'm not looking back. I'm launching Terminal and picking up "recipes" to type in to do odd jobs. Have several freeware "Terminal Manuals" from around the web. I'm working on geekdom. Doubt it will come soon. But in the meantime I've got 95% of my apps and better and newer ones keep being introduced almost daily.
  
  Life is good.

• Mac conversion
  2002-03-06 12:50:57  tvaught [Reply | View]
  
  
  As a software developer, I have used many flavors of UNIX and Windows over the years. UNIX had always my OS of choice. In fact, I run cygwin on every Windows box that I am forced to use.
  
  Running UNIX at home was not very practical until LINUX came along. So I configured my PC at home to dual-boot Windows 98 and LINUX. I was very comfortable with it but my family was not. LINUX desktop environments (KDE and GNOME) were lacking as well as applications to replace Quicken and MS Word.
  
  Up until last year I had only used a Mac two or three times in my life. Last summer I decided to give Mac OS X a try and bought a refurbished PowerBook. So far, it has been a huge success. My family how has a nice desktop and great applications like Quicken and AppleWorks. I have access to the great command line tools of a traditional version of UNIX as well as a first class X Windows server. Mac OS X is a dream come true.

• Graphic Designer and Early Adapter and loving it.
  2002-03-06 10:55:14  cre8tif [Reply | View]
  
  
  Thank you for your insight to the the changing face of the Mac Community. Back when Apple was still debating on who to buy out ( BeOs or NeXT ). Everything indicated to me a least, that
  the OS I knew and loved was about to change
  in a radical way. As a result I started running
  Apples linux dist MkLinux, eventually I moved to YDL Linux ppc. This prepared me for the
  *nix based OS of the future that was being widly speculated on in the Mac press at that time. About the same time I began working as a designer for an online company. As a designer I was the sole mac user in a wintel
  company. Everyday I was reminded of the limitations of Mac OS 9. I had to use a seperate app. to Telnet, FTP, edit file remotely, use windows / unix shares. Things that my wintel based co-workers could do right from the prompt.
  
  When doing graphics work for print or the site, OS9 was as great as we all know...i.e. random freezes that would cause a reboot.
  
  I also had to have 2 computers. One running Linuxppc for server related work, one for graphics work.
  
  As a linux user I had to wait for upgrades to the kernel to use devices my mac would
  automatically recognize or hack my system
  for accellarated graphics, sound, modem, usb , etc. Just like the closed source Os'es ports to the mac based linux happen as an after thought if at all, and just as quickly become outdated if not maintained.
  
  Finally OS X beta was released and I took to it.
  Yes, it took sometime to get used to it. But I've used OSX since. I 've enjoyed finally having a
  terminal to do all my server work ,and a graphics power house all in one computer.
  
  It really is a joy to be able to force quit a mis-behaving app and not pull the whole system down. The only time I really have any hassle is when I have to run an app in the classic enviroment. Which will now become less frequent once I get PhotoShop7.
  
  As far as linux goes, It really is great. I just prefer to not have to hack my system to do
  simple tasks.
  
  For those of you still running OS 9.x ... change when you are most comfortable. Read up on OSX. It'll be here when your ready. And it will be worth it.
  

• The Mac Community
  2002-03-06 10:17:49  Daniel H. Steinberg | [Reply | View]
  
  
  This is a nice, well balanced article. What struck me at the end, however, is what makes Apple different. Derrick says:
  
  "Now we're on the cover of Time magazine, have three of the coolest computers of all time, we're maintaining profits in a terrible economy, and arguably, have created the most exciting, controversial operating system ever implemented on a broad scale."
  
  It's that sense of "we" that makes the Mac different. Following on his sports analogy, it is the same way that fans will talk about how "we won" yesterday when the team they root for does well.
  

• Getting used to it
  2002-03-06 08:40:02  mjreiland [Reply | View]
  
  
  I upgraded to OS X about two weeks ago. I did so finally because GoLive, LiveMotion and PhotoShop were finally coming to it. I have spent the last two weeks getting used to this new OS. It's definitely elegant and potentially powerful. I personally like it. Sure, it isn't an one time sitting to figure it all out like other upgrades have been, but in the end I believe it'll be worth it. The OS itself hasn't crashed once since I loaded it. I look forward to using GoLive and LiveMotion tonight, as I just received the software today. I have also been an on and off C programmer and can't wait to sit down with my new book on Carbon programming to get back into that with Unix tools that I learned C on 15 years ago.

• Derrick Story Article
  2002-03-06 04:47:56  lpschram [Reply | View]
  
  
  If you started your article now, I'm almost certain that you'd get a satisfaction rating approaching 100%. We still need more and better printer and scanner drivers. We still await OSX native Photoshop 7 (but so do Win users) and Quark and their plug-ins. But after months of crash free OSX and persisting crashes in classic or pure OS 9 everyone can see that OSX increases the pleasure of use. The best competing OS is Win 2000. But Microsoft made the mistake of replacing it with XP, the privacy invading OS. Many Windows users have become very concerned about Microsoft's behavior. In fact, many of my Windows using friends (developers, graphic artists, scientists, consultants, executives) asked for demos then went out and bought Macs or put them first on their buy list.

• Possible New Mac User
  2002-03-05 20:43:08  Derrick Story | [Reply | View]
  
  
  An interesting letter I just received:
  
  -------
  
  Thank you for your article on the changing face of the Mac community.
  I speak not as a current Mac user, nor indeed as someone who has
  ever even touched a Mac, but as a Linux user who wants a neat laptop.
  
  Because all of the things that are wrong with my Dell Inspiron would
  be so much better if I went and bought a Mac laptop: the power management
  would be better, it would be lighter, it would be quieter, it would be built properly...
  
  I certainly come from the geek side of things, there's no doubt about
  that. I'm an alumnus of the early 80s UK computer boom, so I speak
  not of Apples and Commodores but of Sinclairs and Acorns, but I like
  knowing what the computer is doing, and I like the computer to behave
  in a predicatable manner. The lack of transparency and predicitability is
  just one of the things I intesnely dislike about Windows (even though
  I work with it every day) and what I love about Linux (and Unix in
  general). So Mac OS X is a big, big win for me.
  
  Anyway, I just thought you might like to know that reading the opinions
  of so many MacOS users, both those cheered and those disaffected,
  has pushed me a little further towards stumping up the cash for a Mac laptop.
  
  Keep up the good work. Who knows, I might even be able to persuade
  my girlfriend to give up her Windows machine...
  --
  Dunx
  
• Possible New Mac User
  2002-03-06 15:18:00  tomp2002 [Reply | View]
  
  
  I have about half a dozen geek friends. Most are system admins or write Windows software.
  
  Every one of them is now doing virtually all their computing on a TiBook or iBook.. They have VPC for Windows stuff, Office X, and all have some flavor of Linux (no FreeBSD users in the group yet).
  
  One long time friend ordered a TiBook day one. Since formatting it hasn't seen any version of the Mac OS, just Mandrake distro of Linux. I keep bugging him about OS X. He bought X day one and has the 10.1 upgrade disk.......he keeps saying "maybe tomorrow."
  
  What he's really saying is that if OS X 10.1 had been available Day 1 when he received his new TiBook he'd be running it instead of Linux.....there's no doubt in my mind that sooner or later he'll get 'roun tuit and Linux will be history. He already has X Server 10.1 software on one of his smaller LANs and likes it.....
  
  'roun tuit will come

• Mac vs. Win2K in the aftermath of X
  2002-03-05 20:24:29  r0bis [Reply | View]
  
  
  Now Mac can really take over Windows. I come from publishing environment and Mac 9.smth crashes even more frequently than Win2K (that does depend a bit on the user though :), user interface for new programs on Mac 9 - Ms Office Quark Xpress and such is NO less complicated than on Windoz. And vice versa - Adobe Photoshop on Win2K works just like on Mac. You have to know what you are doing with the program and that's all. What else is diferent? User interface, allright. The New Mac look is good. It is no coincidence that WinXP has copied it :). Take a look and be proud to belong to the Mac crowd :) Then I read some whining about file/directory restrictions that MacOSX/UNIX forces on good old Mac users. Folks, this is pathetic! Mac file system was hierarchical the same way. You could not have 2 files with same name in a folder that is it. And as a final thought the move to Unix is really a clever one, Mac can be used for myriad of tasks now, just be little patient and better get used to the interface. It is no that different. And believe it or not - ALL computers run some "ugly" code, that is not for you to understand, beneath the interface layer. I had always thought that Mac's biggest mistake so far was the attempt to hide it completely from the users. I thought Mac considered its customers to be a real dumb crowd. Now I can see it is not so and I hope you will be happy about that as well. Best wishes. Robert

• OS X
  2002-03-05 17:49:55  etjo [Reply | View]
  
  
  With my new digital camers, both still and video, OS X and the Mac G4's (867) are simply unbeatable. My original response toOS X was: I want no part of it. Now I can't live without it. Thank you Apple!
  Dr. Ernie Topolnycky
• OS X -- Photographer's Delight
  2002-03-05 20:21:39  Derrick Story | [Reply | View]
  
  
  Now that we (almost) have Photoshop, I can't see why any digital photographer shopping for a computer would choose anything other than a Mac. And as you say, DV ain't so bad either. I use iPhoto, iMovie, QuickTime Pro, and iTools, plus drag and drop CD burning from the Finder, to satisfy my client's needs. And the best part, all those tools (except the $29.99 upgrade to QT Pro) came with the computer I was going to buy anyway.
• OS X -- Photographer's Delight
  2002-03-06 10:47:25  williams_dl [Reply | View]
  
  
  If you want to explore the new and fascinating possibilities opened up by the marriage of the Mac interface with UNIX, check out the free, open source "alternative" to Photoshop, GIMP.
  
  Installing and using GIMP is good introduction to the dark UNIX underbelly of OS X. You'll have to install a UXIX-based windowing system, and the GIMP application itself.
  
  You can find step-by-step instructions geared to people like me who were absolutely clueless about UNIX on the Mac OS X Hints website:
  
  http://www.macosxhints.com/
  
  Don Williams
• OS X -- Photographer's Delight (GIMP)
  2002-03-06 11:51:16  Derrick Story | [Reply | View]
  
  
  I was wondering when we'd hear from the GIMP guys! ;-)