[NCLUG] Why you should take a Mac user to lunch

[J. Paul Reed]

On Thu, 25 Jul 2002, Terry M. Gray wrote:

> Paul is correct in many respects. You do have to install the free
> Developers Tools to get alot of the stuff UNIX users are used to.  Also,
> you have to install the free Fink (or Gnu-Darwin) to get to all the open
> software that runs on OS X (such as the undispensible f77).

Which... Apple's marketing department never mentions.

But then again, Apple's marketing department rivals Microsoft's, so I don't
expect them to be exactly forthcoming with the details when they have
supposedly "crusty old Unix users" feeling "right at home"
(http://www.apple.com/switch/ads/davehaxton.html)

> Personally, I have found it to be the best of both worlds.

... or the worst of either.

> I've been able to do what I've wanted to do with various chemistry and
> biology related packages.

And that's OS X's biggest strength: being able to run the applications from
FooVendor that only has time to release it for Win32 and Mac (if you're
REALLY lucky).

> I've put dual processor OS X boxes on our secretary's desks.  We've got
> 18 new G4 iMacs for a new computer lab.

That's some pretty hefty hardware, especially for the secretary. I can
understand why you bought it, but that reminds me of another "omission" I
remember about the article: I have a friend at Poly who's been a longtime
Mac/OS X user, and he just decided to sell his G3 laptop. What did he buy
to replace it? A new eMac (which was in his price range)?

No. A brand spanking new Dell (as in "Dude, you're getting a..."), dual
booted with Linux and XP.

Why? Because by the specs along, he could get a beefier computer for less
money. And if the operating system is becoming a commodity like the
article tries to argue, then Apple's justifications for higher overall
priced systems diminishes even moreso.

Companies and individuals will always fall into *that* trap as well: "Well,
I can get a 1.2 GHz iMac with 128 Mb of RAM and a 40 Gig HD for $1500 or I
can get a 2.5 GHz PIV with 512 Mb of RAM and an 80 Gig HD for $1150.
Hmmm..." When it's a choice like that coupled with an operating system
"everyone already knows" vs. a "Unix-based desktop operating system," Apple
will lose every time.

> The bottom line however, I think, is the installed base. Apple is now
> the leading distributor of "unix-like" (linux isn't unix either!)
> OS's.

True... but the Apple and the press never reports it that way, much to
Sun and IBM's chagrin, I'm sure. They're always "the largest Unix vendor on
the planet," which is just crap.

> And Apple has made things reasonably open--at least at one level--so much
> so that much of what linux developers do is easily portable to the Mac
> world now.

Mmm... that's another problem I've always had with Apple. They claim that
Darwin is open source, and it is, but if you look at it, it's like they
took all this stuff from BSD, added a few tweaks so it would compile on
PPC, and released everything that was already open sourced.

Gee, thanks Apple.

Part of what grates me about this strategy too is that Apple is playing
both sides of the fence. They keep their efforts to make porting
Linux/BSD/real Unix software to OS X relatively quiet because they want to
make sure things like Office X and IE keep getting made for the Mac... and
Steve Jobs makes sure that effectively gives the open source community the
finger whenever he has the chance (QuickTime anyone? And then he sues
Sorenson when they try to license the codec to anyone else... cute...)

I guess I feel like Apple does everything it does not because it really
gives a crap about Unix, open source, or helping Linux, but because Steve
Jobs wishes he were Bill Gates and Apple, Microsoft, and so he'll do
whatever's necessary to make up for that, including fraternizing with us,
the "enemy."

But I worry about what Apple will do if and when we're no longer important
to them.

> I'm scheduled to talk some about this stuff this fall at one of the nclug
> meetings. You can interrupt me every other sentence if you like. It might
> be as entertaining as python vs. ruby.

Or python vs. perl.

Let me know when the meeting is... I'll setup a conference call so I can
interrupt you. ;-)

> No intention to start a fight here--flame me if you like, but Mac users
> have long had flame resistant body suits. After all most of the crap we
> get comes from the same people who give linux users crap.

Indeed; and it wasn't my intention to start a flame war. I just wanted to
point out some flaws I personally saw in the article's logic and maybe
start some discussion on the subject.

So far, no asbestos that I can see... I didn't even call you a silly Mac
user! :-)

Later,
Paul
   -----------------------------------------------------------------------
   J. Paul Reed                 preed at sigkill.com || web.sigkill.com/preed
   Wait, stop!  We can outsmart those dolphins.  Don't forget: we invented
   computers, leg warmers, bendy straws, peel-and-eat shrimp, the glory
   hole, *and* the pudding cup!  -- Homer Simpson, Tree House of Horror XI