Showing posts with label PC. Show all posts
Showing posts with label PC. Show all posts

Thursday, January 22, 2009

No pudding for you

And no iPhone nano or Apple Netbook either. Aaaah!

Am I bovvered?

By the way, someone tells me that he cannot imagine how I can type long replies — his fingers start hurting after only a few lines. First of all, it’s possible that I am a crazy graphomaniac (my biggest problem is usually not writing but trimming — in the writing for work, that is; here I don’t bother). Second, I can definitely see how typing on that small keyboard would make one’s fingers hurt — I tried (honestly) typing a little on one of our lab’s Apples (the one looking like a lunchbox), and I had to take a break soon. (Also, it’s very annoying. Little things I am used to in PC — like the End button — don’t work. And how do you see a new window? And where is the Start button?)

I personally have been using this. For a while I was considering switching to a proper one, but then decided against it.

Microsoft’s mice suck, though. Don’t even think about it. Go with Logitech.

Monday, November 24, 2008

Lawsuit against Apple



Who-hoo! A man sued Apple for having too many dropped calls on his iPhone. Apparently, when an iPhone user tries using a normal phone, the first reaction is surprise at how easy it is to speak without dropped calls, how easy it is to dial and use the phone, how easy it is to hold it. But then the addiction to shininess of the Apple abomination kicks back and the person has an urge to go and be intimate with his cute toy. The first comment to the second article expressed my thoughts almost exactly (I have additional reasons for hating Apple):
It seems like everyone who owns an iPhone knows that it sucks in so many of the most basic areas of mobile phone operation (especially for a supposed smartphone), and yet they just love that interface and all its “bells and whistles” so much they'll put up with anything! And same thing with the ubiquitous iPod; it’s mediocre in the most basic areas (sound quality, battery life, etc.) Plus the DRM-heavy iTunes all but guarantees that once someone buys on iTunes, they’re stuck with iPods and iTunes for good. Apple deserves kudos for its expertise in user interfaces, but even more than that it deserves the consumer backlash that will inevitably come if it keeps screwing customers like this. That’s why I’m sticking with Windows PCs, “other” MP3 players, and real phones. You keep your “sexy” Apple junk, just know that I pity you.
Someone I know didn’t know much about Apple and iPhones. She is a traditional PC (and normal cell phone) user. Then, her nephew in Israel asked her to buy him an iPhone and bring over when she goes there (iy”H). Last night, she went to an Apple store in a local mall and found out about the whole fascist Apple-AT&T love union. While before she thought my obsessive hatred of Apple was a bit strange, now she thinks that an American buying Apple is like a Jew buying a German car.

By the way, one of the reasons Windows is so glitchy is that Microsoft was forced by its rivals to spend almost a decade in anti-trust law suits. As a result, much of the company’s creative energy (especially that of its leaders who brought us Windows) was not spent on developing and improving the OS but on legal bullshit. The same thing happened with every company victimized by fascist anti-trust attacks. Either it was ruined by them (even when it won) or it suffered major losses affecting the quality of its product. At the same time, it is due to Microsoft that computers and OS are so affordable to everyday people. If it was up to Apple alone, there would be as many people using personal computers as there are people driving Rolls Royces. A personal computer would be a shiny item of luxury.

This is why I am so glad that Apple is finally being sued. Next step: suing the Apple–AT&T axis of evil as monopoly. Let the bastards taste some of their medicine.

Thursday, October 30, 2008

Mac will share... for a buck



By the way, Artemiy Lebedev reports that Apple has hierarchy based on the date of joining the company. Steve Jobs couldn’t register as number 1, so he had to get number 0. Just like in a Communist Part, says Lebedev, a Mac user himself. Well, if even those that are “using” agree…

In one of his posts in his LiveJournal, Lebedev mentioned that after coming to US, he soon realized it is no different from the USSR. Why? Because in the American warehouses they also use stupid slogans painted with unimaginative font in all caps.

As a designer, he probably thinks that things looking pretty (which is important) is all there is. A chitzon (a superficial person), in other words. This was also in the early 90’s when Russian idea of economics was finally legalized theft.

Of course, Mac users don’t give a damn about economics — or any internal process, for that matter. As long it’s shiny and pretty outside. Even if it’s difficult to use, as long as it is shiny and “designed properly”, well then...




In one British Mac vs. PC commercial, they are promoting an idea how PCs at home are boring and make home look more like office. I don’t know what exactly that means. Because I am able to custom-build my PCs, my office PCs area geared each for the specific function they serve (processing of heavy graphics, information analysis, a bit of computing), while my home PC is designed for things I do at home at my leisure — for example, computer gaming. But I forgot, Macs are so much better designed for computer games and other forms of fun than PCs…

Saturday, September 27, 2008

Apple and liberals



I always had a suspicion coming from personal experience: most of Mac users (and, more generally, Apple product users) by choice are liberals — at least in the US. When I write “by choice”, I mean: when they had an educated choice between a PC and a Mac — not when they had to use a Mac for professional reasons (being in graphic design, for example) or because they were computer-illiterate, and a Mac seemed easier to use.

Now I finally understood why. American liberals are emotional thinkers and wannabe socialists. To them, “looks/feels better” is equivalent to “better”, and they love the idea of a central controlling agency imposing this “better” on everyone. This is what liberal models of government and economy are all about, and this is what Apple is all about.

The story of iPhone, for example, is a classic story of socialism: central control introduces something that looks shiny and pretty (and has crappy inner functionality; its usefulness is inversely proportional to its shininess), something that has “all-in-one” principle; something whose particular use is forced upon the customers (you are limited to the companies, with which iPhone will work; you’re not allowed to download custom-made software — i.e., typical socialism), and all this centralized regulation results in a “black market” attempting to go around the regulations (the great number of people trying to “unlock” the iPhones — for which they are punished by Apple — to which the people respond by designing ways to overcome the punishment — and so on).

Every time you update an OS on a Mac, you need to do a complete revolution: by a new computer, i.e., change all of hardware at once. If you want to install Vista on an older computer, you have a choice about which hardware to upgrade: usually, the memory and maybe the video-card (although, not necessarily). Same when you want a brand-new computer: you have a choice of buying a PC from some company like Dell (or HP... or Asus... or many other companies, competing with each other) or building it yourself after buying parts. You can custom-build Macs too. In theory. It’s called “Hackintosh” — i.e., hacking the system by going around the regulations again.

It is always funny when people criticize Vista for not working on older systems. Did you try to install Leopard on an older Mac? This reminds me of those Russians that argue that they want to have democracy and capitalism but preserve “the authentic Russian way” — which means, apparently, having a mentality of tsarist and Soviet Russia (ruled by a despot; nobody takes personal responsibility for anything). Then they complain that they don’t work together: well yes, you need to update the hardware before you install the software that allows for greater functionality. The question is: will you have a choice on how to update it?

By the way, the decision to use Intel processors on new Macs is interesting: it reminds me of how Chavez introduces socialism in his country.

Finally, the propaganda campaign by Apple against Microsoft reminds me of Soviet propaganda against the West. “It works just as well; you can do everything here you can do there, and it looks shinier. And we will provide everything you need for you without burdening you with responsibility of making a choice. What? You can’t play games? You can’t use custom-made solutions? What do you need that for? More work, less play!”

How did this realization come about? Today I was re-reading Douglas Adams: an atheist, an intellectual who likes to talk and write about things outside of his area of expertise, and a Mac user — in other words, a liberal. In his essay “Frank the Vandal” (published in his posthumous book, Salmon of Doubt), he writes: “The Mac started out as a wonderfully simple and elegant idea (give them so little memory they won’t be able to do anything anyway) [...]”. In a different essay he writes that in his opinion, reducing possibility of choice is better: e.g., producing “snap-shot” cameras (called “soap-boxes” by Russians) that lack zoom and thus don’t allow people to take bad photos. In other words, let’s treat people as idiots and give as little control as possible, regulating their behavior instead — what socialism is all about.

* * *
On a separate note, the conversation between somebody who switched to a Mac from PC and a traditional PC user reminds me of a conversation between a Jew who turned (r”l) to Christianity and an Orthodox Jew:
— Why did you switch?
— For years I knew there was something wrong with it. Now, when I switched, I realized: this is what I was looking for to begin with and stuck with the old thing only because it was forced on me by tradition when I was younger.
— What was wrong with it?
— For starters, too many moving parts. The new thing is much easier to use, and it looks more shiny.
— Those parts serve a purpose. They are put there for a reason by the designer. Among other things, they give you flexibility, allowing you to use the system in all situations.
— Yeah, but it took too much energy to figure out how to use them.
— So, let’s see: you switched because you never took the time to read the manual and understand how to use the system properly?