This CR issue has been out for a while...

they are right it is too basic, if you dont have a monitor, keyboard or mouse already. But if you need all those things and want a mac the logical thing is to buy a iMac or even a used G4 tower.

the market for mini is very specfic and apple has even spelled it out. 2nd computer or for those who have the monitor, keyboard or mouse already.

They're missing the main point, which is the softwre that accompanies the mini. Without that, it might be deemed just "adequate," but with it, the mini+s/w = an unrivalled package in terms of price/performance compared to a similarly priced PC with whatever second rate s/w they include

Check the article, consumer reports says the Mac mini doesn't have the horsepower for gaming or video editing, so the included iLife is a bad joke. Any switcher who buys the Mac mini will know why Mac users are called iLemmings.

People always say that the Mini is only for people who already have equipment. It's not. It's a good buy even if it's your first computer. I bought my Mini + monitor + keyboard + mouse for less than the cost of an "equivalent" eMac. And I got a much nicer monitor, too - a 17" LCD with 16ms response time. If I had opted for a more "consumer-level" monitor, like the eMac's 17" CRT, it would have been $100-$200 cheaper.

However, I agree that perhaps the Mini is too "basic" for some people. The Mini is essentially a headless eMac; i.e., a low end machine. A headless iMac would make a nice addition. As it is now, there's a big gap in the lineup for people who don't want an all-in-one design. This should be corrected.

Apple used to have their 2x2 grid: Consumer/Pro, Desktop/Laptop. But now that's changed in the desktop space, and there are three columns: Consumer (eMac/mini), "Prosumer" (iMac), and Pro (PM G5). The consumer column has an all-in-one and a headless. The "prosumer" column should, too. The high-end pro column obviously doesn't need an all-in-one system, so it's fine as it is.

There's definitely room in Apple's lineup for a ~$1000 dollar headless machine.

Sorry to burst your bubble, RC, but the writeup doesn't single out the mini as a less than stellar performer. The quote from their review:

"As with Windows-based budget PCs, the Mini doesn't have the horsepower for serious performance gaming or heavy-duty video editing."

Pretty sad for the first troll of the week.

A mini could play all theese games well if fitted with no less than 512 MB RAM:

Diablo 2, Warcraft 3, World of Warcraft, Starcraft, Civilization 3, Dungeon Siege, NeverWinter Nights, Unreal Tournament 2004, Max Payne, Command and Conquer Generals, Return to Castle Wolfenstein, Medal of Honor, BF 1942, Homeworld 2, Icewind Dale, Freedom Force, No One Lives Forever 1 & 2, Fallout 1 & 2, LoTR Return of the King, Tiger Woods 2003, Nascar 2003, XIII, Stronghold, Undying, Jedi Knight 2 and 3, Age of Empires 2, Age of Mythology, Star Wars Galactic Battlegrounds, Everquest, Quake 3, Rise of Nations, Railroad Tycoon 3, Commandos 2 & 3, Sims, Sim City 4, Zoo Tycoon, Spiderman, ETC.

It could even play Doom 3 at lower resolutions with low graphics.

But sure, otherwise it sucks for gaming

I continue to get a kick out of people call a Mac a toy because of its (alleged) limits to playing games.

I can't understand why anyone would consider purchasing a budget PC (or Mac) to play games. Only raging PC fanboys would suggest that even a $500 PC is a better deal than a $150 Playstation. With the Playstation, you'll still have plenty of $$$ left over to purchase quite a few games.

Quote

Guest wrote:
Only raging PC fanboys would suggest that even a $500 PC is a better deal than a $150 Playstation. With the Playstation, you'll still have plenty of $$$ left over to purchase quite a few games.

I wonder why there is no effort to hide "troll"s when a user is logged in? Hmm, that would mean that I wouldn't be fulfilling my real purpose on these boards. Inspire click-thoughs!

RealityCheck

Quote

jimothy wrote:
I continue to get a kick out of people call a Mac a toy because of its (alleged) limits to playing games.

There is one, sort of - the Power Macintosh G5 1.8GHz SP, which uses the same processor as the fastest iMac. Unless you'd rather have something with less expansion capability, a smaller form factor, and a plastic case, which will probably save a couple hundred dollars at most.

That R. C. Gumby is a sub-moronic knob.

Quote

jimothy wrote:
I continue to get a kick out of people call a Mac a toy because of its (alleged) limits to playing games.

"Check the article, consumer reports says the Mac mini doesn't have the horsepower for gaming or video editing, so the included iLife is a bad joke."

Sorry, Reality Check, but you lose again. Maybe once and awhile you should pause from worshipping at the altar of Bill Gates to check the facts.

Consumer Reports didn't say that the Mini isn't powerful enough for gaming and video editing. Consumer Reports said that the Mini isn't powerful enough for SERIOUS PERFORMANCE GAMING and HEAVY-DUTY VIDEO EDITING, just like a budget Windows PC.

And before you call the Mini a "toy", you might want to consider that OS X Macs are much more serious than any Windows PC has ever been, from security to stability to digital media editing to having an underlying Unix system. So if the Mini is a toy, then Windows PCs are novelty prizes.

I'd challenge anyone to find a "toy" that is based on UNIX.

two words: MAC MINI

People tend to forget that the mini was not developed for gaming or for serious editing. The comments that RC and other windows users make about these issues are a waste of time! But then what else could they complain about with the Mini?

I no longer "log in" since it makes no difference than being a guest. Seeing that Macobserver doesn't permit logged in users to completely ignor - as in never see the posts (even the subjects) of known trolls, leads this puppy to believe that RC and other known trolls are plants by their employees in increase "eye balls" on the site for more revenue.

Unfortunately, too many users can't resist taking the troll-bait. This forum has officially degenerated to useless name-calling and troll-baiting.

I have to agree. Thses RC people seem to pop up on every forum spewing junk just to get a response from folks who actually use the forums for legitimate reasons.

Eh?!! You might get a keyboard and a mouse with a used G4 tower, but rarely is a monitor throuwn in unless you happen to be buying a used system. Your comment about the used G4 tower is nonsense.

Quote

Guest wrote:
... But if you need all those things [monitor, keyboard or mouse] and want a mac the logical thing is to buy a iMac or even a used G4 tower.

How many people in the creative business or any other want to go home and do work. I sure don't want to. A home computer is for playing music, reading email, surfing the web, organizing your photos and if you really have nothing to do -- cut up a home movie. All of these tasks I have done on macs far less powerful than a mini -- even sub G series. The mini is a very good home computer. If you want to be a freak and do maya animation at home and render movies then pick a G5 machine.

But how many consumers really know maya or universe? If you develop software then a text editor will run on anything.

iLife is a great bundle and worth the price of the computer alone. Lest we remember how much bundled PC software sucks. Paint and NotePad -- who cares they blow. Not to mention it is a unix box -- just a few years ago -- maybe 6 - 8, enterprise servers had less processing power. If you wanted to turn a mini into a personal server hosting email, websites, DNS, etc you could do it -- just without failover -- unless you clustered them, which you could do. So how does the mini suck?

I wonder where people get this idea about the Mini having to do all the chores that a G5 does. Your comments hit it right on the nail! This is the message that Apple has been saying all along and somehow people and the so called experts just don't get it. This machine is just a intro to Macs for PC users and a second machine for us Mac users. Nothing else! It is not a replacement for heavy gaming and labor intensive editing!

I have several macs and several windows machines. I don't see any reason why I would buy one. These are not really upgradable, (i.e. add a double layer dvd recorder, new graphics card, dual drives, etc.). Do you think any tech guy would suggest to their friends that they should buy this? I don't think I will suggest it to my family, friends or clients. I would be embarassed when they asked if they can upgrade this or that. I think the mini is cool, but that is about it. Not very practical in the computer world.

The Mini is just another attempt to seduce poor souls to Steve Jobs' legendary dead-end design of computers.

And when Apple becomes frightened by the number of people who successfully pry open the Mini and add a real hard drive, Apple is sure to make it even smaller.

Thats the point, get people to swith from PC's to mac, and its not only the hardware remember, the OSX, is more secure until now virus free.

If I didn't have an iMac I would. Of course Apple kind of shoots themselves in the foot by making 256k standard, which is guaranteed to slow the mini down too much, but then Apple doesn't want to cannibalize their iMac/eMac sales.

Give it 512MB of RAM and the mini could absolutely be the mainstream computer for most folks. I'm doing development work on an 800Mhz iLamp, the mini with 512MB of RAM would certainly be faster, assuming no heavy-duty disk I/O.

To make matters more interesting, long time readers will know I'm a dyed-in-the-wool PC user! The only reason I'm developing on the Mac is the project I have in mind (a Dungeons & Dragons uber-utility) needs to be cross platform anyway, so I might as well indulge myself and put the otherwise idle iMac to work.

By the way, I hear all the standard Mac cheerleading going on in these forums and I have to comment.

Yes, the Mac is a good platform. No, it isn't far superior to an XP box. Not in the OS, not in the tools.

Right now I'm using RealBasic, Gimp, and OpenOffice as my tools and I find myself pining for the simple pleasures Windows offers. Things I never even thought about.

For one thing it's very obvious the Mac designers are not keyboard junkies. There's no universal keystoke to take you to start of line or end of line, for example. Yes, certain applications allow you to Ctrl-left arrow/right arrow but it isn't consistent.

RealBasic's IDE is awkward as hell compared to VB's--much less the far more capable Access IDE. Don't get me wrong, it has a few gems among the rubble, I particularly love the way RB handles constants. But the IDE as a whole feels very much like a stripped down Kia compared to a nice Toyota Camry.

Gimp's OK but it isn't native and even the very nice way it's been integrated feels kind of clunky. OpenOffice is OK too, since all I'm using it for is a glorified TextEdit that can zoom text without altering the document. (My eyes aren't the best after 25 years of 8+hours/day of computer use!)

I'm not a switcher, I far prefer PCs to Macs. But the Mac isn't bad and it has its charms. But vastly superior? Not a chance.

Having said all that, I *still* like the mini. The form factor alone opens up all kinds of possibilities, and as a way to get your feet wet in the Apple world it's brilliant.

Now if only it came stock with 512MB...

"The Mini is just another attempt to seduce poor souls to Steve Jobs' legendary dead-end design of computers."

Liar, liar, lair. You're talking like Windows PCs aren't also dead-end computers. Windows PC motherboards aren't magical pieces of hardware that will accept every new piece of technology that comes down the line. They have limits to the processors they can use, the RAM they can use, and all sorts of other things. For example, haven't you seen those nice and shiny new Dell Dimension PCs that aren't upgradable past 512MB of RAM? I dare you to tell me that's not a dead-end computer.

Quote

Guest wrote:
Do you think any tech guy would suggest to their friends that they should buy this?

Quote

Guest wrote:
I don't think I will suggest it to my family, friends or clients.

Quote

Guest wrote:
I would be embarassed when they asked if they can upgrade this or that.

Quote

Guest wrote:
I think the mini is cool, but that is about it. Not very practical in the computer world.

Consumer Reports does fairly thorough testing of lots of things. But their research and general comprehension has long been lacking. Why else would they rate a Ford Escort or Dodge Neon as a good value? (My brother is a mechanic. His paycheck is made of Escort, Explorer, and Neon repairs. Good value indeed.)

Anyway, I would like to reiterate part of what Roger Plowman said above. The keyboard and mouse issues of the mac really do suck. If the ctl/command and arrows combination was more consistent I wouldn't mind. If there was a universal "delete" key, I'd be happy. I fly through windows with keyboard shortcuts faster than switching between the keyboard & mouse or using a combo of the two would ever allow me to. This isn't possible on the mac, as you have to drag things to the trash since there isn't a universal delete key, I can't switch between open documents in the same application without the mouse, and many more awkward interface design issues. Funny for a platform that prides itself on interface design.

That said, this doesn't make Windows better. OSX is still FAR SUPERIOR TO XP. Security and stability alone make it so. Other features, such as Expose, outweigh the awkwardness of the keyboard and single button mouse issues. (I know you can plug in a 3 button mouse, but not all programs recognize it, and those that do aren't consistent in their usage. Also, my PowerBook only comes with one button, so if I'm travelling light and didn't bring along a separate mouse I'm back to awkwardness.)

Seriously, Roger, how can you possibly prefer downloading weekly patches and daily virus definitions (not to mention paying for 3rd party virus software), and buying 3rd party registry checking/fixing software like Norton Utilities (or spending hours checking the registry yourself), more than the simplicity of OSX? Program crashes in Windows and you have to restart the whole system just to be sure it didn't leave any TSRs or corrupt any memory. Program crashes in OSX and you just restart the program. You can leave the machine on for weeks after a program crashes and the rest of the system still functions just fine.

I agree that the mouse & keyboard designs are ridiculously outdated, but OSX is still FAR SUPERIOR TO WINDOWS.

I'd rather slit my wrists than reformat my drive every few months because of infection or corruption by Windows or any renegade program it allows to take control. But, if that's your idea of fun, you just run with it.


- Jon

Tab to select, Command-down or Command-O, Tab to select, Command-Delete. Just an FYI to those with PEBKAC type problems.

Hi Jon,

Not to flame you but you do seem to have some misundestandings about Windows XP.

On the subject of stability and security, OS/X is no better than XP. I haven't had XP crash on me since I've been using it--and I've been using it since it shipped. Nor have I had any virus problems, nor spyware, nor any other malware problems.

Of course I haven't had these problems on OS/X either.

That means 0 problems on both platforms, so how is OS/X better than XP in this regard?

By the way, my lack of XP problems isn't because I take extraordinary precautions. I have ADSL broadband, so I'm sitting behind a NAT router which is a pretty good defense, but that's just the nature of ADSL. I personally did nothing more than subscribe to ADSL...

I do run Norton's AV of course. And it did cost me $29. But note there are many free AV programs available in the Windows world (with FREE subscriptions) that are just as effective as Norton's.

I also have Microsoft's new antispyware program, the one they bought Giant Sofwtare to get. It's pretty nice (and free) but it's never found anything on my system.

"Other features, such as Expose, outweigh the awkwardness of the keyboard and single button mouse issues. (I know you can plug in a 3 button mouse, but not all programs recognize it, and those that do aren't consistent in their usage. Also, my PowerBook only comes with one button, so if I'm travelling light and didn't bring along a separate mouse I'm back to awkwardness.)"

Expose is nice, but the Mac has always encouraged SDI design (single document interface) and in my opinion that makes things far too cluttered. Of course some programs (like calculator) are SDI apps by their nature. But most are not.

I prefer the natural segregation that MDI applications provide. This is one reason I far prefer the Access IDE to VB's SDI based IDE--less clutter.

As for the mouse issue I use a cheap USB scroll-wheel mouse and I've had no program on the iMac that hasn't recognized it--except for the Gimp/OpenOffice crowd. Apparently OuroberOS/X has occassional trouble remembering the scroll wheel...

Oh, and have you tried Right-Click/Move to Trash? Very handy.

"Seriously, Roger, how can you possibly prefer downloading weekly patches and daily virus definitions (not to mention paying for 3rd party virus software), and buying 3rd party registry checking/fixing software like Norton Utilities (or spending hours checking the registry yourself), more than the simplicity of OSX?"

There are a number of misconceptions here:

A) MS releases patches monthly, not weekly. The critical and security patches are downloaded without intervention on my part, then Windows tells me patches are ready to apply. I tell it go ahead and that's the end of it. To get less important patches I occassionally log in as Administrator and run Windows update, click what I want and say apply it. This is onerous? Oh, yes, occassionally XP wants me to reboot. I do (takes about 30 seconds) and then log back in as myself.

On OS/X I do pretty much the same thing. The only difference is OS/X prompts me for the Admin password rather than having me log in as Administrator. Oh, and OS/X has that veeerrrryyyy long optimization step. But that's OK, I just go watch TV or something till it's done.

How then is OS/X any different from XP in regards to patching?

B) I don't own Norton Utilities nor any other registry checking program. I've been running XP (on several different computers) since it shipped and never had any registry issues. Ever.

Where did you get the idea you need such things? Besides, there are lots of free ones about if you should want/require such a thing.

For those who are appalled at my lack of testing before applying patches, I'll simply say I've never had a problem from either MS or Apple about patches breaking things (and yes I know both companies have occassional problems). Besides, these are my home systems.

C) Norton downloads its virus signatures on a regular schedule. I never have to do anything. Why then would its auto updates bother me? Likewise, MS Antispyware downloads and runs on a schedule, without my intervention. So where's the pain exactly?

"Program crashes in Windows and you have to restart the whole system just to be sure it didn't leave any TSRs or corrupt any memory."

Um,

TSRs have not been in use since the days of DOS 6.0--the days of Windows 3.1. Nor will a crashed program generally corrupt memory. XP, like 2000 and NT before it, are very good at memory segmentation.

What you WILL occassionally find is that a RUNNING program will have a memory leak and slowly consume free space. These kinds of programs are badly written--and OS/X is just as vulnerable to this, since a memory leak is just a program asking for more and more memory as far as (any) OS is concerned.

"Program crashes in OSX and you just restart the program. You can leave the machine on for weeks after a program crashes and the rest of the system still functions just fine."

The same is true for XP, and I speak from personal experience. I have two XP machines that run 24/7. The only time I reboot them is to patch--and that's only if XP asks me to.

"I agree that the mouse & keyboard designs are ridiculously outdated, but OSX is still FAR SUPERIOR TO WINDOWS."

Not really. As I've said above to me XP and OS/X are pretty equal. Put some of the more convenient navigation keys in OS/X where ALL applications use them and a lot of my irritation with OS/X goes away.

"I'd rather slit my wrists than reformat my drive every few months because of infection or corruption by Windows or any renegade program it allows to take control."

Funny, I've never had to reformat my hard drive. Ever. I've never gotten an infection in XP, nor data corruption. Nor, in point of fact, has a renegade program EVER been on my system.

Windows XP will occassionally slow down because of disk fragmentation issues. When it does I simply log in as Administrator and run defrag manually. Then I go to bed. In the morning I log off.

By the way I only have to do that every 3 months or so--less often if I haven't been creating/deleting large numbers of files.

One final note. Yes, I'm a computer professional. I make my living every day working with and on computers. But keeping a Windows computer happy isn't that hard!

1) Run defrag every few months. Makes a huge difference.

2) Don't run around on porn sites (which is where a lot of the virus stuff is to be found) unless you either A) know what you're doing and/or B) are at a site you trust.

3) Don't open spam.

4) Don't open spam.

5) Don't open spam.

6) Let XP turn on its firewall. It really is rather effective, at least in keeping stuff out.

7) For now, download MS Antispyware. It's going to become part of XP (for free) so you might as well. MSAS guards against 9 or 10 of most often used attack vectors.

8) If you like, get an AV program. Viruses are pretty passe these days but you never know. Lots of free AV programs out there too, including free subscriptions.

It isn't rocket science. For now OS/X isn't on the bad guys radar. But that won't last forever, especially if Apple ever manages to get a decent chunk of the market.

How is OS/X so much superior to XP? I'd say they're equivalent.

We found him, Ladies & Gentlemen: The exception to every problem Microsoft has. Roger Plowman has NEVER experienced ANY of the problems that Windows is notorious for.

Amazing. Shouldn't he win a prize or something?


- Jon

Actually, Roger, I found your post extremely well written. Thank you.

I am certainly not a fan of MS products, but do use them when they are appropriate.

I'm glad that you have not had problems with XP. It seems to me that there are two types of XP users: those like yourself that seem to have no problems; and those who have nothing BUT problems. Unfortunately, I hear from the latter group every day in my office (and I am not the IT guy). Generally I have had fewer problems with OS X than most around me have had with XP, but that is just my own limited sample set.

Again, thank you for the non-confrontational post.

Roger,

That was a very thoughtful post. Thank you. I enjoyed reading it even though my own personal experience has differed greatly. I too work on both platofrms and I will say that WHEN IT IS WORKING PROPERLY, I enjoy my user experience with 2k and XP. Having said that, I do believe that you are more the exception than the rule. I (and the rest of the people on my workplace network) have ALL experienced repeated infections from virii, corruption of registries, and other "fun" effects of malware that has infiltrated the network. We have several full-time network "gurus", a content filter, and "enterprise grade" anitvirus/spyware software. Your situation is unique, or at least uncommon. This I believe is due in part to your knowledge of computers, and also from your computing habits regarding opening spam, surfing to particular notorious sites, and general maintenance. IF all Windows users followed those basic tenets of smart computing, the debate over Windows vs. OS X wouldn't be so heated I don't think. However when rubber hits the road, most users don't enjoy the benefits of both a hardware and software firewalls. Most users don't keep virus definitions up to date. Most users DEFINITELY don't exercise discipline about the sites they visit or the e-mails they open. Most users don't know the first thing about general maintenance of their PC. In this regard, I would have to say that OS X is far more forgiving than either XP or 2000.

Hi Intruder, Jonkun227,

Two things to note. I do indeed have no trouble with XP, but then I follow prudent computing practices--which are largely OS agnostic.

As for XP problem children, yes, I have one at my work. But then he doesn't follow prudent practices. For example he downloads software from god knows where, he's a sucker for IE toolbars, and other such spyware-bait.

Making matters worse he's fairly computer illiterate and is *proud* of the fact, refusing to learn anything about the most basic best practices.

And to put the cherry on top he's a corporate officer--and thinks he's qualified to instigate IT projects; which when they don't work I have to straighten out... Sigh. PHB's do live and breath, to be sure.

Even so, a nightly run of MSAS and Spybot S&D keeps his system fairly problem free.

Again, I do nothing extraordinary and yet manage to keep a nearly pure MS IT environment virus free and spyware free and it takes me only about an hour a day to be the system admin for 8 servers and over 50 PCs spread across a dozen offices scattered over a third of the US. Keep in mind that includes everything, including adding and deleting users, unlocking accounts when they forget their passwords, and all.

I'm the *only* IT guy in our company--yet my main responsibility is software development. I'm by no means a super-admin either.

I suspect my lack of trouble comes from some really, really, basic and simple ideas.

1. Have good hardware. We use Powerspec PC's (Microcenter's house brand) exclusively for desktops. They're very inexpensive (averaging around $700 per system sans monitor) but they're rugged, reliable and have pretty good performance. Our servers are Dell PowerEdge machines. We use Toshiba laptops. Again, nothing extraordinary.

2. Make sure the network cabling's good. The only problems I've had related to bad network cables and once a bad NIC card.

3. Run Norton AV on the mailserver. Eliminates 99% of the threat right there. It autoupdates, natch.

4. Run good backups.

5. Warn users about spam. Endlessly...

6. Turn on auto-updates for the workstations. Every so often check for manual updates. I try to do this every couple of months, but I don't worry if I miss a month or two.

It isn't rocket science. Good, solid computing practices. The same kind of thing would apply to an OS/X network, a Solaris network, or a Windows XP/2000 network.

Good hardware. Good computing practices. Good cabling. A modicum of common sense, some user education.

I suspect a lot of the problems encountered in the XP world are PEBKAC related. But again, that's OS-agnostic...

Hi Acdc1174,

While I believe you, I have trouble understanding why. With a content filter trapping most of the garbage the only way malware could appear is if users invite it in.

Of course user education is a must, I mean would you want a clueless newbie wandering around the physical world who would believe whatever a scam artist chose to tell him?

Then again, if everybody practiced common sense the [non-computer] scam artists would starve!

"Your situation is unique, or at least uncommon. This I believe is due in part to your knowledge of computers, and also from your computing habits regarding opening spam, surfing to particular notorious sites, and general maintenance."

I truly find it hard to believe that I'm unique as an IT person. Of course the larger the company, the more 10D 0T errors there will be...

"IF all Windows users followed those basic tenets of smart computing, the debate over Windows vs. OS X wouldn't be so heated I don't think."

Amen to that.

"However when rubber hits the road, most users don't enjoy the benefits of both a hardware and software firewalls."

Well, XP corporate users certainly would, if their IT department made sure XP's firewall was turned on before giving the system to the user. In fact, XP does it by default now. Hardware firewalls are pretty much standard practice in all corporations

"Most users don't keep virus definitions up to date. Most users DEFINITELY don't exercise discipline about the sites they visit or the e-mails they open."

Virus definitions auto update, most espeically for the Norton AV corporate edition, but I agree about user discipline. Why they think it's ok to surf dodgy sites *at work* is beyond me.

Home users, of course are another matter.

"Most users don't know the first thing about general maintenance of their PC. In this regard, I would have to say that OS X is far more forgiving than either XP or 2000."

On this point I think I agree. However it follows that most OS/X users won't know how to patch their systems either. For example, how many users out there remember their Administrator password? Or bother to download patches when the system asks them to?

Unpatched systems+large market share = malware magnet. This is true for any platform. I would urge all OS/X users to not be lulled into a false sense of security. Should Apple ever manage double-digit marketshare again it's very likely to see more malware authors interested.

Oh, and please remember MALWARE DOES NOT NEED ADMIN/ROOT PRIVILEGE to do its dirty work. A user account is just fine to send spam with...and it doesn't even need to have security holes to run!

"On the subject of stability and security, OS/X is no better than XP."

I'm sorry, I didn't realize there were tens of thousands of viruses and spyware for OS X. Oh, wait. There isn't. OS X is malware free, and it isn't filled with the security holes of Windows.

Just because you keep malware off of your XP system, that doesn't mean it has comparable security to OS X. Following your logic, an egg is no more fragile than an Abrams tank because neither your egg nor your Abrams have broken.

"Just because you keep malware off of your XP system, that doesn't mean it has comparable security to OS X."

Um, yes it does.

Security is "the state of being free from danger or injury". As my systems have been free of danger (of viruses and malware) or injury (from viruses or malware) I have indeed experienced equivalent security to OS/X.

And, again I must stress, without undue effort on my part.

Also, keep in mind it isn't just my system, it's all the systems under my care. At the present time that's about 75 or so systems...only one of which is OS/X.

The debate between Roger and the rest of the group is good and meaningful however I think we fell of topic. The main discussion is about the mac mini and how CR says it is too basic. Everybody should re-read the original statements from Apple about the reason they introduced the Mac Mini. Those statements alone I believe everybody can agree on.

[quote="Roger Plowman]
One final note. Yes, I'm a computer professional. I make my living every day working with and on computers. But keeping a Windows computer happy isn't that hard!

1) Run defrag every few months. Makes a huge difference.

2) Don't run around on porn sites (which is where a lot of the virus stuff is to be found) unless you either A) know what you're doing and/or B) are at a site you trust.

3) Don't open spam.

4) Don't open spam.

5) Don't open spam.

6) Let XP turn on its firewall. It really is rather effective, at least in keeping stuff out.

7) For now, download MS Antispyware. It's going to become part of XP (for free) so you might as well. MSAS guards against 9 or 10 of most often used attack vectors.

8) If you like, get an AV program. Viruses are pretty passe these days but you never know. Lots of free AV programs out there too, including free subscriptions.

It isn't rocket science. For now OS/X isn't on the bad guys radar. But that won't last forever, especially if Apple ever manages to get a decent chunk of the market.

How is OS/X so much superior to XP? I'd say they're equivalent.[/quote]
Sorry Roger, don't mean to dis you, as you seem an intelligent chap, but... I've never worried about doing ANY of the things you list above, yet continue to run OS X with no problems. Thus it would seem that OS X is lower maintenance than XP, and lower worry, too.

As an IT guy, perhaps you scoff at folks who don't want to do even moderate maintenance on their computers. I understand that, as I do have friends in IT, but what they do not understand is that busy professionals scoff at IT folks who think that busy professionals have any real free time at all to worry about their computers

Thus for me, and not a few others, game set and match to OS X. Perhaps Longhorn will finally be the true 'don't worry, be happy' OS that Windows users have longed for. However, as I already have something in that category, I don't feel a need to wait for it.

Quote

Roger Plowman wrote:

One final note. Yes, I'm a computer professional. I make my living every day working with and on computers. But keeping a Windows computer happy isn't that hard!

1) Run defrag every few months. Makes a huge difference.

2) Don't run around on porn sites (which is where a lot of the virus stuff is to be found) unless you either A) know what you're doing and/or B) are at a site you trust.

3) Don't open spam.

4) Don't open spam.

5) Don't open spam.

6) Let XP turn on its firewall. It really is rather effective, at least in keeping stuff out.

7) For now, download MS Antispyware. It's going to become part of XP (for free) so you might as well. MSAS guards against 9 or 10 of most often used attack vectors.

8) If you like, get an AV program. Viruses are pretty passe these days but you never know. Lots of free AV programs out there too, including free subscriptions.

It isn't rocket science. For now OS/X isn't on the bad guys radar. But that won't last forever, especially if Apple ever manages to get a decent chunk of the market.

How is OS/X so much superior to XP? I'd say they're equivalent.

Roger, you've put it far better than any of us could have. You have to avoid certain websites to remain safe. We don't. Windows is full of security holes, such that you have to create lists and go through regular education with all of your users to keep them safe. Don't open spam because Outlook will automatically launch attachments. Don't visit certain websites because malware will automatically install. This just isn't an issue for a system that blocks such actions. Mal-people can multiply and attack us from all sides but as long as the system doesn't run crap without questioning it (or requiring a password as you so eloquently pointed out), it's not an issue.

I understand your position. Your industry would scarcely exist without a faulty system like Windows. I remember about a decade ago when my brother worked in the Media Arts Lab at BYU as the IT guy. He spent the first couple weeks fixing everything they'd broken (this was a mixed Mac & PC lab). The next couple months he educated them about how to not screw things up. Then he was out of a job because they didn't have any more problems. He vowed to never make that mistake again.

I guess that means Microsoft is doing the country a favor by keeping IT guys employed. ?


- Jon

"Security is "the state of being free from danger or injury". As my systems have been free of danger (of viruses and malware) or injury (from viruses or malware) I have indeed experienced equivalent security to OS/X. "

You can keep a Windows system free from injury, more or less, but you can't keep it free from danger, becuase there's ALWAYS the danger that should a virus or piece of spyware successfully make it's way on to Windows, it will infect or destroy your system. At it's absolute best, Windows security is like the Death Star; tight defenses gaurding the one weakspot that'll blow the whole thing up if it's hit.

How can they both be equally secure when OS X doesn't even have a weakspot to hit? If you somehow accidently run malware on your XP system, then the result is an infected XP system. If you somehow accidently run malware on your OS X system, then... Well, there isn't any malware for OS X.

The ever present danger of Windows getting hit by malware forces a person to put up a network of defences and watch what they click on if they want to keep their PC safe. The currently zero danger of OS X getting hit by malware means that a person doesn't have to lift a finger to keep their Mac safe.

A Star Wars reference! Guest, you took an approach I never would have thought to: Appeal to an IT guy's heart with a Star Wars reference. (Don't get me wrong; I'm a fan, too. Just not an IT guy, though most companies I've worked for have treated me like one. "Do you know why the network is down?" "Can you figure out why my email from the last 3 years disappeared?" "Can you resurrect this piece of crap?")


- Jon

In terms of "technology", the Mini is far _behind_ the curve, as is rather normal for the Mac world.The Mini is aimed at people who are already Mac fanatics (such as those who confuse form factor with technology).The old Imac, you could get plastic cases for your PC in peach and yellow. But having a colored case wasn't "technology", either. Marketing, sure. Not Technology.

Quote

Anonymous wrote:
In terms of "technology", the Mini is far _behind_ the curve, as is rather normal for the Mac world.The Mini is aimed at people who are already Mac fanatics (such as those who confuse form factor with technology).The old Imac, you could get plastic cases for your PC in peach and yellow. But having a colored case wasn't "technology", either. Marketing, sure. Not Technology.

Quote

Intruder wrote:

I, Troll Cop, actually admit the Mini is seriously outdated. However, I don't think you can honestly claim that the G5 Powermacs are far behind the curve, actually more than year behind, because they haven't been updated for so long! I'm actually depressed because I paid a huge chunk of money for my machine, and I can't do anything else with it.