Filed under: Hardware, OS, Reviews
"30 Days with Mac OS X"
Bryan Boyko spent 30 days using Intel Macs running OS X, which he found to be well designed but not worth the price in the end.
Unfortunately, he started by testing a Mac Mini with only 512M RAM rather than a better equipped unit and ran into a lot of swapping slow-downs. The inability of the OS X hardware to run all his Windows peripherals and the minimal support for X11 also disappointed. Further, he was unhappy with the lack of quality freeware (italics are his). New Mac users, he writes will probably have to shell out for Microsoft Office and Adobe Photoshop--NeoOffice and OpenOffice didn't offer the full functionality he needed.
It's always easy to second-guess unhappy switcher reviews though in this case Boyko did a pretty thorough job, which he documents in his 11-page review.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Kai Cherry said 3:15PM on 6-06-2007
I read this yesterday. He seemed to be making it harder on himself than he had to...but that wasn't the worse thing.
The WORSE thing was, he asked for help from Mac people, and was chided, cajoled and even accused of being a shill.
I really wish some of these damned Mac Users would grow the hell up. Cut off noise/spite face.
Out all the problems the guy was having, it really pained me that he couldn't get quality help...thus making his experience more difficult than it had to be, and ultimately, sullying the whole thing.
Just you watch, there will be at least 20 responses to this attacking the guy...
Reply
MahRain said 3:21PM on 6-06-2007
Who's going to write a response "Why just 30 days with Mac OS X isn't enough".
The guy truely got into the reviewing with his 'tweaker' mindset (just look at the site design, it screams "Case modding & overclocking", and reviews with a Windows-platform mindset: upgrading your own hardware, 10.000 bad options for a 'freeware word processor', not needing WiFi?
This clearly shows that he didn't 'switch' and tried to make it work, but was really just reviewing and looking for things he did or didn't like for 30 days.
Reply
Sang said 3:21PM on 6-06-2007
My only gripe with this article is that windows users have to buy photoshop and microsoft office as well. Certainly if OpenOffice did not give him what he needed on the mac, it wouldn't on windows either. Gimp also runs on OS X without X11 anymore.
It was still a good thorough article though. It really is a shame that he got chided on the messageboards as well. This also happens on linux messageboards too.
Reply
Kai Cherry said 3:23PM on 6-06-2007
Sang,
Aren't we supposed to be...better than that?
Reply
Dave said 3:37PM on 6-06-2007
"Just you watch, there will be at least 20 responses to this attacking the guy..."
On the unofficial APPLE weblog? Nah! That's just silly. We all love Microsoft here.
Anyways... I agree with #2
Reply
Jettyboy said 3:54PM on 6-06-2007
If you use a Mac you like it, as I do, or you wouldn't use one. So why would anyone really care what someone who doesn't use a Mac thinks. Are your lives so empty you have nothing better than to get offended when someone criticises what computer you use? Use what works for you, and try and remember it's just a fricken' machine.
Reply
Dan said 4:04PM on 6-06-2007
"The WORSE thing was, he asked for help from Mac people, and was chided, cajoled and even accused of being a shill."
It's stuff like this that makes Mac users look like BMW drivers during the morning commute. A majority are just regular people, but enough are speeding-cellphonetalking-suddenlanechanging-chowderheads that everyone that owns one gets cast in a bad light.
Reply
Kai Cherry said 4:18PM on 6-06-2007
Dave...
You are part of the problem. Also, probably didn't bother to read all 11 pages, let alone 1 or 2...because if ya' did, you would have realized that backing up Number 2 (hrm...) was moronic; the guy gave OSX the same 30 days he gave ubuntu and vista.
And yeah, someone says "hi...I'm trying out OS X for 30 days and I'm having problems...mind helping?" and your answer is "Why? If its just for 30 days, then you probably a secret Bill Gates molester and will only write bad things about MacOS X anyway...so up YOURS buddy! Macs are teh gr8est machines evar!! We're leeter than j00!!!"
I'm soooooo sure that's REAL HELPFUL.
Yet-Another-"Elitist"-Mac-Snob-With-A-Malformed-Ego, ruining it for the rest of us.
Thanks.
Reply
Noob said 4:19PM on 6-06-2007
I learned my OSX on my own. I got a book, but haven't really dug into it yet. I can only imagine the lack of word processing made this guy write an emo gripefest.
Reply
Pepe said 4:21PM on 6-06-2007
Apple should be slapped for even offering a Mac with 512MB. One gig (on one stick so that it "can" be upgraded) is a must. It's like selling a new BMW with an AM/FM Stereo and charging for a CD player. We are, after all, paying for a BMW so we might as well expect one...
[Yea Kai (poster 1) watch me get bashed for this too ;-]
Reply
Big Fat Eric is Yelling said 4:24PM on 6-06-2007
sure. windows vista come with Office 2007 for free plus Adobe Creative Suite Master Collection.
Reply
Pepe said 4:32PM on 6-06-2007
I hear ya, BFE ;-)
Thing is though, if you would have read the article it was describing Windows user with lots of software and might want to switch on the cheap without spending normal/nominal amounts of "extra" cash on software they "already" have. Sure this is a little simplistic but it's the premise the article was (at least I think so) written on...
Reply
Jesse Gillespie said 4:39PM on 6-06-2007
This guy really went wrong when he opted for the Mac Mini. It's simply not meant for someone like him. He complains about the lack of easy upgrades, but I'd be very surprised to find any easily upgradable computer in that form factor.
What he should have gotten is a used Mac Pro. That would have solved most of his complaints about price and upgradablity.
Reply
Lipmon Moy said 4:42PM on 6-06-2007
It seems to me that everyone has a preference for whatever platform that appeals to them. Each platform has its benefits and distractions. If there was an ultimate platform that everyone could agree on, it would be a lot simpler than dividing into different camps and wasting time and energy defensing their allegiences. Besides, who utilizes the fullest capabilities of any machine or software product?
Reply
Dana said 5:02PM on 6-06-2007
It's a fair review. Not every machine fits every type of personality.
It would be like me reviewing Ubuntu for use in my music studio. It's just not going to get a positive review.
To each his own.
Reply
trotz said 5:09PM on 6-06-2007
I also agree that he shouldn't have tested a macmini with only 512MB, but this is also Apple's fault for selling such a system. I upgraded my macmini to 2GB myself: no problems and low priced chips on eBay, the machine feels 4 times more powerful for only an extra 129,99$.
I am a recent switcher and I already own a macmini and a macpro (my second mac). They two totally different machines targeted to different users. There's no mini computer that can barely compare to the mac mini, specially considering the price. Also, it is quite difficult to find a match for a mac pro with eight cores, surprisingly also cheap compared to similar offerings from other companies.
I think that Apple offers a much better quality/price ratio since the jump to intel hardware. I would have never considered an Apple computer a few years ago.
Reply
Billy K said 5:22PM on 6-06-2007
Yes, this piece (read it yesterday) was THOROUGHLY documented, but it was all contradictions and navel-gazing. For example, he wrote how he was only going to test the OS X SYSTEM, then he went off at length about how upset he was about various applications which are not part of the system.
A lot of his headaches came from not being able to find a good word processor, but for some foolish reason he refused to use the 30-day demos of Word and Pages.
Huh!?
The piece was a rambling wreck. A lengthy, rambling wreck. Most Mac users will recognize it for that, but potential switchers may not. Shame on him,
Reply
Lukino said 5:28PM on 6-06-2007
Bryan is right, Mac is not right for him!
The whole article looks more like a "3 days with mac" than a whole month... And he deliberatly choosed complicated ways to do simple things. He is right about the hardware part, but the software... why installing osx? Why all this x11 galore when there are neooffice and gimp.app? Do they lack in functionality? It doesn't seems to me they are so different from Win versions!
He also missed lot of useful freeware, I never had problems converting video files! And, if he likes linux and apt-get so much (like I do! I will marry apt-get before you, moron) why not simply get ffmpeg or mencoder?
Ok, maybe i'm going to far, but it seems to me like he was pretending a too-complete-solution-out-of-the-box
Reply
Mitch said 5:30PM on 6-06-2007
This guy is cheap! I can't buy into the concept of buying the lowest end Mac (open box) and then refusing to spend any $$ for software.
How could you not review a system that matches your computing needs? He should have reviewed a system that matched to his needs (e.g. Macbook with Microsoft Office). I think he'd find that Macbooks are pretty good values (2.16 GHZ Core 2 Duo, 1 GB Ram, 120 GB hard drive, webcam, optical audio out, pre-N wireless, bluetooth, cd/dvd RW) + software (OS X, iLife, Office). It's not easy finding a comparable Windows laptop for much less. However, you can easily find systems with lower end specs for less money, but you get what you pay for.
This guy is a writer and he wouldn't spring for Microsoft Word (or pages)!? Come on!!
He barely mentioned the hidden savings (costs for Windows) - spyware software, virus software, having to remove crapware. Let's not forget the value of visiting the Genius Bar - what other platform gives you free IN PERSON tech support?
The author set himself up not to like the Mac. It's a shame he didn't give it a fair shot, he may have liked it.
Reply
TC said 5:32PM on 6-06-2007
I'm an admin for a shop running Ubuntu (64-bit) and Apple servers and used to be an admin for Windows servers (i.e., SharePoint, DCs, and ISA). Also, I currently use all 3 desktop platforms and support them - I didn't just try them out, I really use them all as a part of my daily work. All 3 of his articles had merit, but the inaccuracies in his articles overshadow the good so I will not recommend them to anyone.
For instance, he calls Vista a "lemon" because of his problems yet overall user experiences do not back the rating of lemon. That's like saying a restaurant is terrible because the cook/chef turns out a bad meal 1 out of 100 times. I guess it depends on what you view as acceptable "negative" levels.
Also, it was a ludicrous that he called OS X "crippled" because it will only run on Apple supported hardware. Last I knew I can only run Windows on Intel/AMD supported hardware (e.g., I can't install Windows on systems using certain RISC processors). So, by his apparent definition I guess that makes any OS that is not capable of running on every single possible hardware platform crippled. Furthermore, what's up with multiple versions of Vista desktop with some having functionality removed. I think he has it backwards when it comes to a crippled OS. Should I call a game "crippled" because it will only run in Windows and not in OS X or Ubuntu? Or, how about games that will not run on older video cards? Should they be called crippled because they have certain hardware requirements, too? He needs to reevaluate how he thinks about what makes something crippled.
The fact is, OSes are like any other product, each user has different preferences and all that really matters is that the product lets you do what you need and/or want it to do.
Second, you can't call something crippled because of a particular hardware requirement; otherwise, every single software application that requires a certain amount of RAM or processor speed to run would be considered crippled. Windows Vista Home Premium, however, can be considered crippled because it has some of the functionality from Vista Ultimate disabled regardless of the hardware it is running on.
Reply