Re: Apple, Jobs, and the irony of it

[Sheldon Simms <sheldonsimms@yahoo.com>]

On Tue, 19 Aug 2003 16:26:51 +0100, Richard Kilpatrick wrote:

> In message <pan.2003.08.19.14.55.26.571029@yahoo.com>, Sheldon Simms 
> <sheldonsimms@yahoo.com> writes
>>Perhaps you two would care to elaborate the differences between a
>>"personal computer" and a "workstation" because, frankly, I can't
>>think of any.
> 
> Level of security offered.

Mac OS X isn't secure?

> Ease of use of the Operating System - and the operating system provided. 
> You can't get the average muppet in the street to use Solaris or IRIX, 
> or even the advanced features of NT, but they'll deal with Mac OS X 
> fine.

The link I posted was for systems that included your choice of Red Hat
Linux, Mandrake Linux, or Windows 2000

> Marketing. That's the real biggie, of course; my PC is technically a 
> server, but it's actually a pretty lame PC.

IOW, the seller calls it a PC? What has that got to do with how one
uses it?

> Either way, it's fairly pointless as an argument. I just don't 
> understand why people feel the need to knock Apple for producing a 
> Really Good Computer. There will always be something faster somewhere.
> Why not bring in supercomputers, or $15,000 workstations?

Well we wouldn't want to do that, but since the Opteron workstations
are cheaper than G5s, I think it's fair to make the comparison.

I don't want to knock Apple anyway. Their claims don't bother me, although
they aren't really true. The only people who are actually impressed by
Apple's claims are the people who would buy a Mac anyway.