Re: PC or Mac?

[pausch@saaf.se (Paul Schlyter)]

In article <slrna5hru2.uk3.byron@b60z27hbb464i.ab.hsia.telus.net>,
Byron Q. Desnoyers Winmill <byron@b60z27hbb464i.ab.hsia.telus.net> wrote:
 
> In article <a39vlq$kpp$1@merope.saaf.se>, Paul Schlyter wrote:
>> However your comparison does not quite hold.  A Mac user has no
>> choice but an OS provided by Apple.  But the PC user _does_ have a
>> choice: he can choose some version of Windows provided by Microsoft,
>> or he can choose Linux or Free-BSD.
> 
> Linux is available for both PowerPC and 680x0 based Macs; FreeBSD is being
> ported to PowerPC based Macs; NetBSD is available for PowerPC and 680x0
> based Macs; OpenBSD is available for PowerPC and 680x0 based Macs.  Aside
> from FreeBSD I have used all of these operating systems on my machines
> without fail.  Mac-on-Linux even allows you to run Mac OS under Linux (on
> the PowerPC) better than DOSemu ever seemed to work on the Intel.  BeOS
> will run on some PowerPCs.
> 
>> I think even Solaris nowadays is offered for x86 based architectures.
> 
> A very limited number of PCs, but some nevertheless.  I am not denying that
> there are fewer OSes available for the Macintosh.  This is probably because
> most Mac users like Mac OS.
> 
>> therefore, not all PC's run Windows
> 
> And not all Macs run Mac OS.  This is a simple proof by counter example:
> my G3 does not run Mac OS.  The only HFS partition includes yaboot and a
> couple of support files -- and no version of Mac OS.
> 
>> Again, to choose something except the standard alternative, you
>> should know what you want and why you want it -- but the alternative
>> is there if you want it.
> 
> Likewise for Macintosh users.  Since Unix provides the only real alternative
> to Windows, the additional options available to Wintel users are nominal to
> say the least.
 
Isn't BeOS available for the x86 platform as well?
 
> Can you not accept that Apple is a legitimate choice?
 
Did I ever claim it wasn't?  Particularly if you're into one of the
niche markets Apple is aiming at (mostly graphics and media stuff)
then the Mac can be an excellent choice.  And even if you're doing
something else with your computer, the Mac can be a good choice.
 
However the fact remains that the hardware of a Mac is a monopoly
market: you have only one supplier: Apple Computer.  The hardware for
the PC is not a monopoly market -- there are many brands to choose
among, and you can even build your own computer if you want (it's not
that difficult).  Of course this doesn't mean you should never choose
a Mac.  On a monopoly market you don't have to choose, and this can
be an advantage to some people who find it hard to choose.  Also if
your needs agrees well with what the Mac provides, then of course the
Mac is a good choice!!!
 
The world isn't just black or white.  Just because the Mac isn't
always the best choice and perhaps not even the best choice most of
the time doesn't imply that it's never the best choice.  Different
people have different needs, so we should be happy there are
different computers out there.
 
 
> Or are you going to continue bad mouthing Apple for unsubstantiated
> facts simply because they abandoned to Apple II for a platform which
> has survived 18 years and had been mimicked by many different vendors?
                            ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Could you elaborate more on this?  I believed Apple agressively sued
anyone who cloned the Mac, and that's why we have no Mac clones.
Apple even tried to sue Microsoft once for "look and feel
infringements" with Windows -- fortunately Apple lost that case.
Which is as it should be -- GUI's should not be a monopoly market.
 
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Schlyter,  Swedish Amateur Astronomer's Society (SAAF)
Grev Turegatan 40,  S-114 38 Stockholm,  SWEDEN
e-mail:  pausch at saaf dot se
WWW:     http://hem.passagen.se/pausch/index.html
         http://home.tiscali.se/~pausch/