# How do people even USE Windows?



## winwintoo (Nov 9, 2004)

Why do I even have a Windows machine?

My grandson foolishly thought he could manage with a Dell lug top for uni. I think he tried to carry it in his backpack and realized uni was going to be way more work than it needed to be. So we made a deal and I ended up money ahead, but stuck with this brick.

It's only a few months old, running Win8, and I have no doubt it's a perfectly serviceable computer, but trying to web-surf with all the pop-up ads is nearly impossible. 

Ant helpful hints will be greatly appreciated.

I know there's a program that let's you run Windows on a Mac, is there one that let's me run Mavericks on this Dell? Or even if I could run WinXP?


----------



## hexdiy (Dec 18, 2011)

You could have a look at some Hackintosh sites: Downloads - HackintoshOSX.com, tonymacx86.com
Good luck in trying to build a Hackintosh!


----------



## IllusionX (Mar 10, 2009)

winwintoo said:


> Why do I even have a Windows machine?
> 
> My grandson foolishly thought he could manage with a Dell lug top for uni. I think he tried to carry it in his backpack and realized uni was going to be way more work than it needed to be. So we made a deal and I ended up money ahead, but stuck with this brick.
> 
> ...


pop-up ads? Browsing the web on a windows machine should be no different than on a mac. Use firefox or chrome, don't use internet explorer.. use adblock plus


----------



## winwintoo (Nov 9, 2004)

IllusionX said:


> pop-up ads? Browsing the web on a windows machine should be no different than on a mac. Use firefox or chrome, don't use internet explorer.. use adblock plus


Thanks, installed adblock plus.

And I figured out how to watch my tv shows, so I might be OK for all I need.

Now if I could only get used to the small shift key on the left side and those annoying gestures on the trackpad and the two button trackpad etc, i'm good to go


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

I'm stuck in an office for the next three months with an "HP TouchSmart Envy20 beatsaudio" desktop all-in-one.

One week in, and I'm ready to put my fist through the screen...

Day One was spent removing the multiple antivirus (MacAffee / Kapersky / whatever the hell else, I just told the in-house tech to fix the damn thing), defragging, getting rid of the cutesy desktop photo with something that allowed me to see the 300+ folders / icons the previous person had installed, getting rid o a bunch of installed adware.... 

I've decided that it's too much bother to use as a work machine, so I'm pounding away on my old MacBook pro, and have convinced the boss to order me a Retina MBP.... now if the accountant doesn't give us too much trouble, I should have it in a week... hoping my MBP holds out. Keys have begun to fly off the keyboard as I type 

Ah, but yes, back to the original question: How *do* people even USE Windows?


----------



## winwintoo (Nov 9, 2004)

^^^^^^ :d:d


----------



## macintosh doctor (Mar 23, 2009)

my favorite is the crypto lock virus..
i will never understand why people want a windows machine that can have the potential of being locked out, turned into a brick and /or lose all of your files and screw up the network drives at the same time.


----------



## IllusionX (Mar 10, 2009)

winwintoo said:


> Thanks, installed adblock plus.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Because you have a French/bilingual keyboard. I always make sure I buy computers with an English keyboard.


----------



## IllusionX (Mar 10, 2009)

CubaMark said:


> I'm stuck in an office for the next three months with an "HP TouchSmart Envy20 beatsaudio" desktop all-in-one.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Properly configured, you won't have to go through the trouble. I setup my own machine at work, and it's always clean.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

While I have no doubt that some can run Windows trouble free, it is far from the norm among my friends. They are forever running to the repair shop to have their machines 'cleaned'. Many have thanked me for their Mac experience once I convinced them to switch.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

My son has used Apple products since he was born and recently visited the world of Windows--saying his face fell after few minutes of negotiating that monster is an understatement.


----------



## rgray (Feb 15, 2005)

What kind of weeny kid takes Grandma's Mac computer and dumps what he obviously thinks is an inferior machine on her? For a few ounces of weight - puleeze!!?? And leaves her to sort out the issues? Tantamount to elder abuse!!!

Also a very short sighted decision.

On the wide view, statistically, he should notice that 75% or more of his fellow students are doing just fine with Windows based machines.

Taking a long view, when he gets to the real world of work he will notice that Windows skils are a _de facto _job requirement as, again statistically, 90% of potential employers are going to expect him to be able to use a Windows machine.

I suppose the kid is somewhat fluent in Mac. As a retired professor, I'll point out the obvious that the University experience is supposed to be about new experiences and learning some life skills. If you are going to duck that you are going to miss a good deal of education value. Learning to deal with windows is such a skill.

Why do people use Windows?

Simple because the equipment is cheaper!! Also there is a wider range os niche programs like the psych tests I used in my lab.

The gap has closed since I converted my lab to Mac in 1987. Haven't looked back but still have kept my hand in on Windows because there a few psych tests not available on Mac and I have always taken pains to make my students semi-fluent on both systems.

Last I looked a basic MBA cost about $1000 whereas an Asis(sp?) ultra book of arguably similar specification and performance was available at Staples for $267!!!!! That 75% is a powerful inducement.


----------



## IllusionX (Mar 10, 2009)

You can't really say that windows based machines are cheaper. You have the compare the specs. 

A 600$ laptop certainly cannot compete with even the MacBook Air. 

An ultrabook with the same spec as a MacBook Air 13 will run around the same price.


----------



## IllusionX (Mar 10, 2009)

rgray said:


> Last I looked a basic MBA cost about $1000 whereas an Asis(sp?) ultra book of arguably similar specification and performance was available at Staples for $267!!!!! That 75% is a powerful inducement.



I missed this part.. Are you sure it is similarly spec'ed? Ultrabook 13" core i5 with 128gb SSD and 4gb ram? No mfg will sell that at sub 300$


----------



## rgray (Feb 15, 2005)

I am willing to stand corrected on the ultra book pricing. The cited example was a sale special a few months ago. 

That does not change the fact that the majority of the world uses Windows, notwithstanding that I think that the Mac OS is superior in every way and have invested heavily in Apple gear as proof.

However I still believe that is good, useful, realistic, for a student to become fluent in Windows as they face the world of work. However good their Mac skills, they face somewhat limited employment possibilities just because most employers have Windows equipment.


PS: I still think the kid in the OP is a weeny...... Just my $0.02.......


----------



## Kosh (May 27, 2002)

rgray said:


> Taking a long view, when he gets to the real world of work he will notice that Windows skils are a _de facto _job requirement as, again statistically, 90% of potential employers are going to expect him to be able to use a Windows machine.


I've never had a problem adapting from Macs to Window computers. They pretty much all work the same way except for 3-4 keys. Heck I've even used mainframe terminals and some sort of computer that had no screen, it had paper for the screen (forgot what it's called). 

Any kid nowadays, likely won't have a problem adapting either.


----------



## winwintoo (Nov 9, 2004)

rgray said:


> What kind of weeny kid takes Grandma's Mac computer and dumps what he obviously thinks is an inferior machine on her? For a few ounces of weight - puleeze!!?? And leaves her to sort out the issues? Tantamount to elder abuse!!!
> 
> Also a very short sighted decision.
> 
> ...


I wanted to respond to this earlier, but it waited until I calmed down.

It's sad that your post displayed such a jaded view of youth. 

The old "you have to be able to use Windows" debate is so out-dated, I'm surprised that people still use it. As Kosh said, I've used every type of computer from mainframes to PDAs and never had a problem with any of them. I could make a mainframe obey orders, I've used every operating systems from OS/2 to Mavericks and every flavor of Windows and programmed in about a dozen languages.

I've worked with high school dropouts who were brilliant and with computer science grads who were as dumb as a bag of hammers.

I don't see the point of hauling around a ten pound Dell when there is a two pound MBA available. I didn't give the MBA to him, although I would have. He's earned it by being an honors student and acing the IB program. He is caring and respectful and thinks his grandma (me) is one of the most interesting people he knows.

Why wouldn't I want his university journey be as enjoyable as I could help him make it.

And, businesses use Windows because in their short sighted view, they think they are cheaper. They overlook the loss of productivity as their employees deal with the inferior operating system.

Part of my earlier frustration was related to a failure at my ISP caused by a recent storm. It's been seven days and it's not fixed yet. They run *Windows* on their servers. Luckily I can use my *iPhone* to create a personal hotspot and do what I need to do.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

To me it's like where you buy your groceries. We tend to shop at a particular place not because they have the best deals necessarily, but because we know where everything is and we can get in and out quickly. And so it is with operating systems. I get Mac and iOS. I don't get Windows and Android.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## keebler27 (Jan 5, 2007)

But oh wait, Windows machines are cheaper.

Macs are soooooo much more expensive.

We're drinking the kool-aid.

blah blah blah.

I laughed at my stepDad who went and bought a new PC without even telling my Mom even though I'd almost convinced both of them to get an iMac.

Oh, the b*tching that everything changed and it's harder to find this, or that etc...
That was at first....I think they're ok.

Mom has since asked me about one other task and I fought back, but gave in and replied:
"Now you see....if you had a Mac, it'd be this click and that click and you're done. Now you have to this, that, the other thing and navigate the kitchen sink too."

I've had Windows users tell me how bad win8 is! ick.

As for your laptop Win, I'd sell it on Kijiji. 
Cheers,
Keebler


----------



## IllusionX (Mar 10, 2009)

keebler27 said:


> I've had Windows users tell me how bad win8 is! ick.


maybe it is. because they've changed things again. Windows XP has been around for way too long so people are not used to changes..


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

I am fluent in every Mac OS from 9 up to OSX version 10.9.4 and every Windows iteration stating as Windows 3 up to Windows 7.

Unlike many here I started on Windows so there was quite a learning curve moving to OS9 from Windows NT as I did it on the job.

So at first I hated Macs until I got to know it and then I hated some iterations of Windows after that until I got to know them.

All the differing OS versions both, MS and Apple, are like dialects of the same or similar language, once you clue into that to me it isn't all that hard to figure them out, albeit can be frustrating at times.

They all pretty much do the same thing, but just have different ways of doing them. Once you realize that and calm down from your frustration and try and understand the "dialect" it really isn't that hard to move from one OS to the other.

Just my experience over the years.


----------



## hbp (Apr 18, 2007)

I use an MBP as my main machine but have no issues switching over to Windows. My well tuned Windows machines work as well as my Mac, just a difference of choice.

Seems like many of your Windows problems are user errors.


----------



## Andrew Pratt (Feb 16, 2007)

A clean install of Win7 is actually pretty decent to work with esp. on solid hardware. The biggest gripe I still have though the constant updates that often need reboot's which interrupt my work. With the PCIe SSD installed though reboots are very fast so I can't complain too loudly.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

hbp said:


> I use an MBP as my main machine but have no issues switching over to Windows. My well tuned Windows machines work as well as my Mac, just a difference of choice.
> 
> Seems like many of your Windows problems are user errors.


Yep. 

The main problem with Windows IMO is that you need to be much more diligent when it comes to security, i.e., malware, Trojans, viruses, etc.

But if you take the necessary precautions with a Windows machine it can operate every bit as well as an Apple machine.

However, in general I would say (based on my experience) running a "clean" Windows OS does take more time and effort than running a "clean" Apple OS.

That is why I moved from Windows (MS) to Apple for my own personal use.

On the flip side of the coin, if you know what you are doing in Windows it can be much cheaper (due to the ubiquity of MS) to run a Windows machine especially when it comes to hardware expansion/upgrades. 

Not to mention you have *much* greater choice and less expensive compatible peripheral/internal devices/upgrades when running Windows (MS based machine) compared to any Mac.

They really are opposite sides of the same coin, each has their own strengths and weaknesses.

It all comes down to what matters to you most. 

That being said, you can always run both (I did on a personal basis for about 3 years, i.e. I ran both a Mac and a Windows machine at the same time and I had KVM switch to go back and forth between the two), it is just a matter if you can afford it or not or have the need to, I could and did at the time.


----------



## hexdiy (Dec 18, 2011)

Starting late in 1993 ( computerwise, i'm a bit of an enigma: technology loving Luddite) on a borrowed Atari 1040 (floppies to start up with, you needed to be very patient), putting together my first 486 PC from discarded parts, running DOS 3.1 under DOSShell and Norton Commander (also from junk sales and skip hard drives), I bought my first (second hand of course) Mac in 1997 for an audio-for-video project. Quadra 840 AV running 10.7.6. It was a revelation, and served my humble needs fully till about 2004.
In neither OS was I very expert, but as long as it ran, I was content.
In 2008 I was back on the internet with a PowerBook G4 550 MHz under 10.4.11, and again, that was a revelation, as well as a quantum leap. Since then, I've ran Leopard, Snow Leopard and lately Mavericks on various Macs. Although reading up on a pleiad of issues the last few years, I am still very much impressed.
Since November 2012 I've had to deal with Windows XP and now Win 7 for work. I do cope. Just. But my, Win is ugly, juggling with hardware is a pain, fiddling with networks also, plug and play as well, hardware problem diagnosis too indeed. Not to mention viruses.
If experienced Mac users see me system profiling or fault finding on a Mac they sometimes rub their eyes. But then again I know exactly what I'm doing on Mac OSX. If I put an unresponsive Win machine back on track at work, colleages are equally amazed. But with those machines, I feel I am only the sorcerers' apprentice.
Well, maybe it's just me...


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

hexdiy said:


> Starting late in 1993 ( computerwise, i'm a bit of an enigma: technology loving Luddite) on a borrowed Atari 1040 (floppies to start up with, you needed to be very patient), putting together my first 486 PC from discarded parts, running DOS 3.1 under DOSShell and Norton Commander (also from junk sales and skip hard drives), I bought my first (second hand of course) Mac in 1997 for an audio-for-video project. Quadra 840 AV running 10.7.6. It was a revelation, and served my humble needs fully till about 2004.
> In neither OS was I very expert, but as long as it ran, I was content.
> In 2008 I was back on the internet with a PowerBook G4 550 MHz under 10.4.11, and again, that was a revelation, as well as a quantum leap. Since then, I've ran Leopard, Snow Leopard and lately Mavericks on various Macs. Although reading up on a pleiad of issues the last few years, I am still very much impressed.
> Since November 2012 I've had to deal with Windows XP and now Win 7 for work. I do cope. Just. But my, Win is ugly, juggling with hardware is a pain, fiddling with networks also, plug and play as well, hardware problem diagnosis too indeed. Not to mention viruses.
> ...


Everyone's background is different, that is why some people are more comfortable with one OS or another, but as I said previously they all basically do the same thing, they just "speak" a different dialect. So once you understand that it, it is really just a matter of details.

For some things I find Windows much more "intuitive" and for others Macs.

I think the difficulty lies mostly for those who have not had to switch back and forth between the two and only know one or the other.

But even if you have only a moderate experience of both you will be better off than only knowing one, at least in terms of flexibility, IMO.

For most of us I think it is better to be "conversational" in both OSs than it is to be an expert in either one.

As an analogy, I think of it like this... In day to day life, is it better for the average individual to be scholar in English or French or to be able to communicate with both French and English speaking persons at a moderate level?

To me, for those with "vested" interests in one language/dialect over the other they will go full force in promoting one over the other. But I think the average person will be better off knowing a moderate amount of both (Canada is a good example in that regard IMO).

No language/dialect of any kind is *intrinsically* *better *than the other *at this point in time.*


----------



## hexdiy (Dec 18, 2011)

screature said:


> To me, for those with "vested" interests in one language/dialect over the other they will go full force in promoting one over the other. But I think the average person will be better off knowing a moderate amount of both (Canada is a good example in that regard IMO).
> 
> No language/dialect of any kind is *intrinsically* *better *than the other.


Agreed up to a point, Screature. With Mac OSX development heavily being abandoned by Apple in favour of IOS, they have lost their traditional spearpoint in the audiovisual and prepress world. Guess Win performs just as well now in that sector- if you care to work with Win.
Linux and various flavours of BSD (other than OSX(/XNU), that is), seem to remain a bit in the draughting board or do-it-yourself stage other than in small electronics (Android?), huge server and router software/OS. In the audiovisual world, they tend to look too amateurish still, unless you want to make it your hobby.
Anyhow, I've got a Kali Linux installer disk which I might get around to eventually.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

hexdiy said:


> Agreed up to a point, Screature. With Mac OSX development heavily being abandoned by Apple in favour of IOS, they have lost their traditional spearpoint in the audiovisual and prepress world. Guess Win performs just as well now in that sector- if you care to work with Win.
> Linux and various flavours of BSD (other than OSX(/XNU), that is), seem to remain a bit in the draughting board or do-it-yourself stage other than in small electronics (Android?), huge server and router software/OS. In the audiovisual world, they tend to look too amateurish still, unless you want to make it your hobby.
> Anyhow, I've got a Kali Linux installer disk which I might get around to eventually.


hexidy, your knowledge is clearly not that of the *average* user so while I know where you are coming from, what you refer to really does not apply to the conversation at hand. I believe we are talking about general everyday use for the average non-geek user.

Just my take on your and post as it relates to the OP.

But it is an interesting side note.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

hexdiy said:


> Agreed up to a point, Screature. With Mac OSX development heavily being abandoned by Apple in favour of IOS, they have lost their traditional spearpoint in the audiovisual and prepress world. Guess Win performs just as well now in that sector- if you care to work with Win.
> Linux and various flavours of BSD (other than OSX(/XNU), that is), seem to remain a bit in the draughting board or do-it-yourself stage other than in small electronics (Android?), huge server and router software/OS. In the audiovisual world, they tend to look too amateurish still, unless you want to make it your hobby.
> Anyhow, I've got a Kali Linux installer disk which I might get around to eventually.


It was the pre-press spearpoint that got me onto Apple in 1992!


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Macfury said:


> It was the pre-press spearpoint that got me onto Apple in 1992!


As it did with almost everyone involved in desktop publishing at the time. 

I don't know anyone who was using Windows for DTP at that time. 

But things do change... 

22 years later is almost like a century in terms of the rate of technological progress before the advent of the computer.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

screature said:


> As it did with almost everyone involved in desktop publishing at the time.
> 
> I don't know anyone who was using Windows for DTP at that time.


I knew some, but their files would be translated... and those translations would not always be 100% accurate.

Truthfully, I have now simply become comfortable with Apple aesthetics. I like the OS less and less as it merges with tablets and phones, but it will need to become a lot uglier before I switch.

If I wanted massive speed at an attractive price point, or if I was a cutting-edge gamer, I would switch to a Windows box.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Macfury said:


> I knew some, but their files would be translated... and those translations would not always be 100% accurate.
> 
> *Truthfully, I have now simply become comfortable with Apple aesthetics. I like the OS less and less as it merges with tablets and phones, but it will need to become a lot uglier before I switch.
> 
> If I wanted massive speed at an attractive price point, or if I was a cutting-edge gamer, I would switch to a Windows box*.


Agreed on all points.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

One BIG way that Windows and iOS are not the same is the need for antivirus software on Windows boxes. That is a big enough difference to me that the extra cost is worth it. Also, Mac software is considerably less expensive in my experience.


----------



## IllusionX (Mar 10, 2009)

fjnmusic said:


> One BIG way that Windows and iOS are not the same is the need for antivirus software on Windows boxes. That is a big enough difference to me that the extra cost is worth it. Also, Mac software is considerably less expensive in my experience.



Things have changed since windows 8, as Microsoft bundles their AV software if you don't have one installed. 
Yes I know it is still not the same. But you just can't get away because of executable and DLL files...


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

IllusionX said:


> Things have changed since windows 8, as Microsoft bundles their AV software if you don't have one installed.
> Yes I know it is still not the same. But you just can't get away because of executable and DLL files...



The point is that the Mac does not require AV software at all. For like 14 years now. That's is a pretty huge difference, and any attempt to superimpose AV software on an already good system just makes a meds and slows things down. Just because AV comes bundled in Windows 8 doesn't really make it much of an improvement. Making a system so that it does not require AV at all—now that would be something.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## winwintoo (Nov 9, 2004)

About an hour ago I decided to watch a movie on my windows 8 laptop. Then this happened. It will probably take another hour.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

fjnmusic said:


> The point is that the Mac does not require AV software at all. For like 14 years now. That's is a pretty huge difference, and any attempt to superimpose AV software on an already good system just makes a meds and slows things down. Just because AV comes bundled in Windows 8 doesn't really make it much of an improvement. *Making a system so that it does not require AV at all—now that would be something.*
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


IMO that will never because, "if humans make it, humans can break it". I cannot think of an example where it is not the case.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

screature said:


> IMO that will never because, "if humans make it, humans can break it". I cannot think of an example where it is not the case.



The Mac OSX operating system is an example at least as far as viruses are concerned. So is iOS. Other malware, sure, but no virii.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## bse5150 (Jan 25, 2013)

fjnmusic said:


> One BIG way that Windows and iOS are not the same is the need for antivirus software on Windows boxes. That is a big enough difference to me that the extra cost is worth it. Also, Mac software is considerably less expensive in my experience.


I use Linux on my PCs. No need for anti-virus software and Linux software is generally free. It's a pretty good thing that Linux users have going.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

fjnmusic said:


> The Mac OSX operating system is an example at least as far as viruses are concerned. So is iOS. Other malware, sure, but no virii.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


There have been many vulnerabilities identified. It is just that in the "wild" there is very little interest in hacking Apple OSs because they are not used in an enterprise environment.

Hackers want fame (infamy) and glory, that is their MO.

Apple's OSs are not invulnerable, it is just that the hackers have bigger fish to fry.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

I remember being infected by the WDEF virus circa 1993, but nothing since.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

bse5150 said:


> I use Linux on my PCs. No need for anti-virus software and Linux software is generally free. It's a pretty good thing that Linux users have going.



True dat. Perhaps if I were more computer literate I'd give Linux a try. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

screature said:


> There have been many vulnerabilities identified. It is just that in the "wild" there is very little interest in hacking Apple OSs because they are not used in an enterprise environment.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



What would be a bigger conquest than putting the mighty Apple in its place? Fact is, there are vulnerabilities, yes, which they address fairly quickly with software updates, but no viruses. For over 14 years. That's more than dumb luck. There is a reason viruses cannot flourish or establish themselves at all on Macs (except perhaps on the Windows side of a partition). The OS simply doesn't allow it. Something to do with the Unix base as I understand it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

fjnmusic said:


> What would be a bigger conquest than putting the mighty Apple in its place? Fact is, *there are vulnerabilities, yes*, which they address fairly quickly with software updates, but no viruses. For over 14 years. That's more than dumb luck. There is a reason viruses cannot flourish or establish themselves at all on Macs (except perhaps on the Windows side of a partition). The OS simply doesn't allow it. Something to do with the Unix base as I understand it.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


So we agree. 

Viruses, no because as I said hackers want glory, meaning the biggest bang (disruption) for their time and as I said it is because Apple OSs are not used in an enterprise environment. 

Unix is more difficult to hack yes, but you can rest assured that if government departments/agencies and mega corporation networks were run on Unix, there would be an all out war on Apple OSs.

As I said before if humans make it humans can break it. There is and never will be any such thing as an invulnerable OS.

I run on Macs and Apple OSs just because it significantly reduces the risk of any kind of vulnerability, but mostly that reduced risk comes from hackers going for the low lying fruit of Windows (MS) OSs and their ubiquity and yes greater vulnerability.

I think the main problem for MS is that they have always sacrificed security for compatibility. They made their OSs in such a way that you could upgrade from one iteration of the OS to another without too much difficulty. In so doing, they built in a lot of the vulnerabilities from an older iteration to the newer iteration.

I think for them now is the time to create an OS that is stable and secure without worrying about making it compatible with older iterations... or maybe don't even call it Windows... 

(Apple effectively implemented this strategy when they moved from OS9 to OSX . They started "fresh" and I think MS needs to do the same.)

Maybe something like... "Shades" or if keeping the Windows trademark is necessary call it "Windows™ Shades" with the tag line, "We hide you from prying eyes".

They can continue to sell and even develop Windows for those who still want to run legacy products. They simply would have another product to sell.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

screature said:


> So we agree.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You can certain that the only way they'll abandon the "Windows" moniker is if you pry it from their cold dead hands. Windows phone, Windows surface...that name ain't going anywhere anytime soon.

Having said that, I agree they need a complete rewrite of their OS the way Steve Jobs and his people did back in 1998. I imagine he would get annoyed when people wanted him to update ClarisWorks/AppleWorks instead of embrace Pages. It's the same reason why a huge number of PC users still prefer Windows XP, even if it is about 14 years old now, simply because it's hard to learn a whole new system, and also because "new and improved" still contains many deal-breaker flaws. Apple went through that sea change long ago.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

fjnmusic said:


> You can certain that the only way they'll abandon the "Windows" moniker is if you pry it from their cold dead hands. Windows phone, Windows surface...that name ain't going anywhere anytime soon.
> 
> Having said that, I agree they need a complete rewrite of their OS the way Steve Jobs and his people did back in 1998. I imagine he would get annoyed when people wanted him to update ClarisWorks/AppleWorks instead of embrace Pages. It's the same reason why a huge number of PC users still prefer Windows XP, even if it is about 14 years old now, simply because it's hard to learn a whole new system, and also because "new and improved" still contains many deal-breaker flaws. *Apple went through that sea change long ago.
> *
> ...


Indeed and look at where they are now. MS has to "suck it up" and do something similar, or get left behind IMO.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

screature said:


> Indeed and look at where they are now. MS has to "suck it up" and do something similar, or get left behind IMO.



I get the feeling they may be just too stubborn for that, in the same way Blackberry was too slow in adapting to touchscreen interfaces. The Microsoft model of expensive software is outdated in the world of apps and mobile in the same way that TV set gamers have their days numbered. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

fjnmusic said:


> I get the feeling they may be just too stubborn for that, in the same way Blackberry was too slow in adapting to touchscreen interfaces. The Microsoft model of expensive software is outdated in the world of apps and mobile *in the same way that TV set gamers have their days numbered.
> *
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I don't quite see it that way. 

The Xbox, Xbox One and Play Station dominate gaming sales by a wide margin compared to computer based sales of games (at least in my understanding).

So IMO I think computer based gaming is on its way out and not console based gaming.

Which to me makes perfect sense. 

Why should you need to buy a computer to play games if that is basically what you do?

Not to mention the consoles can also be used to access the internet...

If primarily what you do is play games and use the internet, there is no need for a computer at all these days.

Buy the Xbox, Xbox One or Play Station and with the tablet or smart phone of your preferred OS flavour you are golden.

No need for a computer at all.


----------



## IllusionX (Mar 10, 2009)

screature said:


> I don't quite see it that way.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I think a lot of the gaming happen more and more on tablets..


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

IllusionX said:


> I think a lot of the gaming happen more and more on tablets..


Sure low level stuff, but not high level 3D stuff which is what I am talking bout, that is the domain of computers or consoles.

Tablets have come a long way but there is no way you could ever play, for example, *Call of Duty* of any iteration on any current high end tablet.. Completely impossible.

Not to mention the games that are played on tablets or smart phones are pennies in revenue and profit compared to console or computer based games in terms of gross/net revenue and profit.

Tablet/smart phone games are a drop in the bucket when it comes to big ticket releases for a console and/or computer game.

The side sales alone for major releases are astronomical by comparison.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Ahh s**t... sorry duplicate post.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

I think the word "computer" may be what's outdated. I don't know anyone who uses one to "compute" things exclusively, even if that's essentially what's going on in the low level machine language world. A smartphone, an iPad, even your vehicle all use computers to get the job done. It is the interface and perhaps the processing speed, power and method that may change, but make no mistake, the PC running Windows was designed for a different generation. The iPad (or tablet) and touch screen smartphone may be the most popular form factor at the moment, but they are not the final word either. Neither is OSX. They are just steps on the evolutionary journey until somebody comes up with something better. And we can't rely on Steve Jobs to keep discovering the next big thing for us anymore.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Tablets, iPads, iPhones or any other lesser 'computer toys' are totally useless for me to maintain my daily website. And while I can get by with a 2013 Mac Mini I keep as backup, it is painfully slow and what I really require, no need, is the computing power of my top of the line 2014 MBP. Picture sizing and adjustments, quick online searches, manipulation of hundreds of images, running multiple programs at once, writing and editing as well as assisting way more folks that I care to with problems they have, mostly unrelated to my website but utilizing diagnostics. So now you know at least one person who uses a machine to compute on various levels every single day.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

Exactly, Don. You have a need for the complexities of a more advanced computer. So do I for music production, word processing, and tons of other tasks. Like Steve said, there's always going to be a need for big trucks (especially here in Alberta it seems) but many people can get by with much smaller and more efficient vehicles. And I bet most of the truck drivers we see in these parts aren't using them for the off-road heavy duty stuff you see on the commercials. In Alberta truck ownership is a status symbol. And so it is with computers I'd say. All the Alienware computers I've seen are definitely not the cheaper alternative to the Mac. I mean these things are pimped out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

Ugh. The accountant is throwing up red flags to my rMBP purchase. "Too expensive". For the fifth time in two days, she's asking me why I can't just get a Windows laptop. This may not end well.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

CubaMark said:


> Ugh. The accountant is throwing up red flags to my rMBP purchase. "Too expensive". For the fifth time in two days, she's asking me why I can't just get a Windows laptop. This may not end well.


Maybe show her a price for a top of the line tricked out Windows laptop machine as a comparison??? Say that is what you need to do the same thing. Or sumpthing? beejacon


----------



## vancouverdave (Dec 14, 2008)

Any chance it will last twice as long? Or maybe it already includes all the software you need? Calculate a (total cost of ownership) for the life if the machine, and do the same for the windoze laptop. That might help.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

fjnmusic said:


> I think the word "computer" may be what's outdated. I don't know anyone who uses one to "compute" things exclusively, even if that's essentially what's going on in the low level machine language world. *A smartphone, an iPad, even your vehicle all use computers to get the job done. *It is the interface and perhaps the processing speed, power and method that may change, but make no mistake, the PC running Windows was designed for a different generation. The iPad (or tablet) and touch screen smartphone may be the most popular form factor at the moment, but they are not the final word either. Neither is OSX. They are just steps on the evolutionary journey until somebody comes up with something better. And we can't rely on Steve Jobs to keep discovering the next big thing for us anymore.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


While I "think" I understand where you are coming, a smartphone, an iPad or your car do not simply *use computers* to "get the job done". 

Those *devices* could fundamentally not exist without *real *computers running the show behind the scenes and most likely never will, or at least it is a far ways off yet before that will happen... certainly not in our lifetime IMO. 

Who knows what the future might bring.

But that is the beauty of how far technology has come *today*... you don't need to own a computer on a personal basis any more for low level stuff. 

Now, you just need to have a "smartphone, an iPad, your vehicle" (and just to add an XBox, Play Station, Apple TV, many PVRs, NASs etc.) to communicate with a network. There are a plethora of ways now albeit they aren't all "mobile" in the "conventional" sense.

However a computer is (for the time being at least) a very different beast.

I'm not sure if you are saying a smartphone, an iPad, etc., is the equivalent of a computer... 

I'm just a little unclear.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

screature said:


> While I "think" I understand where you are coming, a smartphone, an iPad or your car do not simply *use computers* to "get the job done".
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I'm saying they ARE computers. They compute things. They are a logical next step after desktop and laptop computers, designed to give the user more mobility. It's one of the few things Steve Ballmer and I agree on: tablets are computers. Not fully functional, but functional enough. Close enough for Rock'n'Roll.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## IllusionX (Mar 10, 2009)

CubaMark said:


> Ugh. The accountant is throwing up red flags to my rMBP purchase. "Too expensive". For the fifth time in two days, she's asking me why I can't just get a Windows laptop. This may not end well.



A good comparison against a rMBP would be a Dell latitude E7440 tricked out with a 4k monitor, which comes close or more expensive than a rMBP.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

IllusionX said:


> A good comparison against a rMBP would be a Dell latitude E7440 tricked out with a 4k monitor, which comes close or more expensive than a rMBP.


If they kabosh the rMBP, I'm going to propose the 13" MBA with the 8gig memory upgrade. With Yosemite coming, I don't want to be stuck with 4gigs. Price difference is about $200, which hopefully will put me under whatever arbitrary limit the accountant has in mind.

One thing about Mexico - electronics purchases here are just insane. The rMBP came in under budget, even with taxes, but apparently when you ask Apple Mexico for an institutional "factura" (official receipt), it raises the cost by about $3000 pesos (around $250). Some middle-man, somewhere, is making a killing down here.... 

Fortunately, for reasons that are not completely clear to me, the various things I've ordered via Amazon (electronics, parts, etc.) have all arrived without customs charges. So internet shopping is the way to go here. One good thing, it helps to avoid impulse shopping incidents


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

Good news. rMPB ordered  Apparently some last-minute, back-to-school discounts arrived at the Mexico Apple Store, and it came in under budget. Sweet. Delivery by the weekend  

As for Windows.... this stupid _HP TouchSmart Envy20 beatsaudio_ (who the hell comes up with these names?) I am forced to use at the office is a constant source of bother. I left it for 18 hours downloading and installing updates (supposedly) but it never did finish, nor does there appear to be a way to identify what the heck is being updated. I let the in-house tech fix it (I suspect he just pulled the plug). It just advised me of two updates to install, and for the heck of it I said "sure"! It's been 10 minutes now... the download bar finished after 2 minutes... not sure what (if anything) it's actually doing right now...

...and that damn Windows 8.1 tile interface keeps popping up and taking over my screen everytime after looking at a PDF and then closing Adobe Reader -it doesn't revert to the last app (Outlook) nor the desktop. It's quite an infuriating interface.... How DO people use Windows?


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

That is good news indeed CM, congrats!


----------



## IllusionX (Mar 10, 2009)

I'm back to work today after 5 weeks paternity leave. Having pulled the hard drive out before I left, I came back to work with some issues and 29 updates. 

My company have enabled deep packet inspection on the firewall. That caused big troubles with all ssl connections, so I plugged my MacBook while waiting for tech support to bypass DPI on my pc.
After a day on my mac, I don't want to go back to my windows machine. Lol


----------



## winwintoo (Nov 9, 2004)

CubaMark said:


> Good news. rMPB ordered  Apparently some last-minute, back-to-school discounts arrived at the Mexico Apple Store, and it came in under budget. Sweet. Delivery by the weekend
> 
> As for Windows.... this stupid _HP TouchSmart Envy20 beatsaudio_ (who the hell comes up with these names?) I am forced to use at the office is a constant source of bother. I left it for 18 hours downloading and installing updates (supposedly) but it never did finish, nor does there appear to be a way to identify what the heck is being updated. I let the in-house tech fix it (I suspect he just pulled the plug). It just advised me of two updates to install, and for the heck of it I said "sure"! It's been 10 minutes now... the download bar finished after 2 minutes... not sure what (if anything) it's actually doing right now...
> 
> ...and that damn Windows 8.1 tile interface keeps popping up and taking over my screen everytime after looking at a PDF and then closing Adobe Reader -it doesn't revert to the last app (Outlook) nor the desktop. It's quite an infuriating interface.... How DO people use Windows?


WOW! It's so intuitive, I can't even.

Windows 8, poke the upper right corner and get the panel that has Start etc. and click on Settings, then click on Control Panel, click on System and Security, Windows Update, Turn automatic updating on or off.

I'm keeping my fingers crossed and leaving a trail of breadcrumbs because I'm sure that if I ever choose to do an update, all previous settings will be lost.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

fjnmusic said:


> I'm saying they ARE computers. They compute things. They are a logical next step after desktop and laptop computers, designed to give the user more mobility. It's one of the few things Steve Ballmer and I agree on: tablets are computers. Not fully functional, but functional enough. Close enough for Rock'n'Roll.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Sorry for taking so long to get back to you... Been busy.

Ok so now I understand where you are coming from and we will probably end up having to agree to disagree.

Just because a given device has a* CPU, RAM, storage and an OS* does not make it a computer. For example PVRs have that, as do console gaming devices, Apple iTVs, NAS devices etc., to name a few consumer devices that share all those properties let alone other propitiatory devices.

Those characteristics are not sufficient for those devices to be called computers IMO.

Another example, you cannot do computational mathematics on a "smartphone, an iPad, your vehicle, an Xbox or a Play Station..." for that you need a computer. Just one small example of what you need a computer for that no smart device can do.

We are indeed blessed to have all the "smart" devices that we have today... But to call them "computers" is simply inaccurate IMO.

Imagine tomorrow if all the computers in the world were to disappear aside from "smartphones, and iPads, even your vehicle...".

Where would things be? Do you think you could still call them computers?

Maybe you would, but personally I don't think you could, unless you meant that without the real computers that create the networks and are absolutely *necessary *for all those devices to function in the way that they were intended they are fundamentally dead in the water. On that point we could agree.

But the main point is the difference between what is necessary and sufficient. 

I think that smart devices meet the conditions of what is *necessary* to call a certain device a computer, but the do not meet the conditions of what is* sufficient *for them to be called a computer.

Necessity and sufficiency...

But to call them "computers" is inaccurate IMO.

A smart phone or tablet is what a chimpanzee or gorilla is to a human, they all share some common characteristics but they are not the same thing.

Think about it in terms what of, ”What is necessary and sufficient to be a human as opposed to being another species?”

“Steve Jobs actually thought the iPad is an entirely new category, somewhere between a handheld phone-size device and a full laptop.” Should the Apple iPad be considered a computer? - CNET

I agree with Steve Jobs. 

IMO the iPad/tablets, smart phones, etc. are a new category of very capable electronic devices albeit they are for relatively limited and specific uses (compared to a computer), mostly they are for communications and entertainment purposes, which is what I have said here since their introduction.

There are so many “smart” electronic devices these days. But which are actually *computers*?

We couldn’t even be having this discussion if it wasn’t for *real *computers, the brains and backbone of our networked existence.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

One could also distinguish between computers and personal computers (a term also invented by Steve Jobs), but the terms are used interchangeably these days. The mechanic talks about the computer in my car, but it looks nothing like my desktop computer. I think the term "computer" is even more fuzzy than "calculator", though both represent different devices on the same continuum. Really, the biggest invention we've seen so far is the Internet, all if our computers and devices joined together into one common pool of knowledge. The computer then becomes simply an access point, much like a tablet or smartphone is. It is the Internet that is the real supercomputer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## winwintoo (Nov 9, 2004)

Not sure how we got here, but I have this to add:

In 1970, I worked on a "computer" that had no hard drive, and was as big as a city bus. It couldn't calculate or sort, input was by punch cards. The cards were read onto tapes which was taxied over to a computer utility company for sorting and computing.

The only "sorting" that got done at our facility was a sort of the punch cards before they were read to tape.

It was a "computer" because it could be programmed to do stuff. It's abilities were limited and by today's standards, my Keurig coffee maker has more computing ability than that big boy had.

Yes, my coffee maker has a computer in it. 

A computer computes. It doesn't matter if it can crunch prime numbers.

A computer can be programmed to do stuff. My iPhone and iPad are computers. The solitaire game toy that's in my bathroom is a computer because someone wrote a program telling it how to play.

Yes, I'm pretty old, and I've witnessed the evolution of computers and I'm glad to see all the creative things that computers are being used for.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

winwintoo said:


> Not sure how we got here, but I have this to add:
> 
> In 1970, I worked on a "computer" that had no hard drive, and was as big as a city bus. It couldn't calculate or sort, input was by punch cards. The cards were read onto tapes which was taxied over to a computer utility company for sorting and computing.
> 
> ...


I agree with you wintoo that the word "computer" changes in definition over the years.

It is truly a heuristic notion and also a moving target that is relative to a certain point in history and so the past cannot necessarily provide a definition for that which is contemporary/in current existence. 

Thus why even Steve Jobs didn't think iPhones and iPads (his creations) were worthy of the designation relative to the time in which they exist.

I think that is very telling indeed. 

It is a much more complicated proposition to define things the more we learn more and create.


----------



## heavyall (Nov 2, 2012)

My iPhone has several times the processing power of the G4 Power PC tower I used to have. It most definitely IS a computer.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

winwintoo said:


> Not sure how we got here, but I have this to add:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Nailed it Margaret. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

heavyall said:


> My iPhone has several times the processing power of the G4 Power PC tower I used to have. It most definitely IS a computer.





fjnmusic said:


> Nailed it Margaret.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Not compared to *contemporary* computers at all. 

IMO you are all mixing chronologically different apples and oranges. 

Try, just for the sake of logic, to stick to comparisons that are chronologically contemporary. That would be a good start in separating the apples from the oranges.

So it seems you all think Steve Jobs was wrong about the nature of the devices he created...

I think we could go one and on about this for dozens and dozens of posts without coming to any common ground.

So maybe at this point we could all just agree to disagree and move on...

If that is not cool with everyone else that is fine but I think I have said pretty much what I needed to say and if you don't agree with me that is cool, but at this point in time I really don't have anything else to say about the subject. 

Well, truth be told I do, lots, but I suspect we will just be going round and round in circles and wasting precious time that we could be spending with our flesh and blood family and friends. 

Peace out.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

screature said:


> Not compared to *contemporary* computers at all.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I think we outnumber you anyway, Screature. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## heavyall (Nov 2, 2012)

screature said:


> Not compared to *contemporary* computers at all.
> 
> IMO you are all mixing chronologically different apples and oranges.


And you just move the goalposts every time someone disagrees with you. If I gave you a list of contemporary computers that the newest iOS tech is as good or better than, you'd just nit-pick that list too.

I can word process, I can spreadsheet, I can email, I can surf the web, I can load and unload things to an offsite server, I can paint, and yes, I can play Call of Duty. It's not a computer, "sort of". It's a computer, PERIOD.



> So it seems you all think Steve Jobs was wrong about the nature of the devices he created...


Steve was very VERY wrong about a lot of things. His disdain for choice in screen sizes, stylus input, repairability, expansion, etc, was irrational at best. As much as he moved the tech industry forward with a lot of innovations, he also held it back by pronouncing important improvements as "bad".


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

heavyall said:


> Steve was very VERY wrong about a lot of things. His disdain for choice in screen sizes, stylus input, repairability, expansion, etc, was irrational at best. As much as he moved the tech industry forward with a lot of innovations, he also held it back by pronouncing important improvements as "bad".


THIS.

When I have to own a rMacBook Pro fully decked out at nearing $4,000 and I cannot even upgrade the RAM, Apple today is continuing the outright stupidity of Jobs in that respect. It is something that should be altered by Apple to reflect user's desires, not Steve's leftover crappy ideas.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

fjnmusic said:


> I think we outnumber you anyway, Screature.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Yes you do and I am fine with that.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

heavyall said:


> And you just move the goalposts every time someone disagrees with you. If I gave you a list of contemporary computers that the newest iOS tech is as good or better than, you'd just nit-pick that list too.
> 
> I can word process, I can spreadsheet, I can email, I can surf the web, I can load and unload things to an offsite server, I can paint, and yes, I can play Call of Duty. It's not a computer, "sort of". It's a computer, PERIOD.
> 
> ...


We shall have to agree to disagree.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

SINC said:


> THIS.
> 
> When I have to own a rMacBook Pro fully decked out at nearing $4,000 and I cannot even upgrade the RAM, Apple today is continuing the outright stupidity of Jobs in that respect. It is something that should be altered by Apple to reflect user's desires, not Steve's leftover crappy ideas.


I hear you but that has absolutely nothing to do with the argument at hand. 

One argument is about what constitutes a good business model, while the other is what constitutes being worthy of being called a computer in this day and age.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

heavyall said:


> *And you just move the goalposts* every time someone disagrees with you. If I gave you a list of contemporary computers that the newest iOS tech is as good or better than, you'd just nit-pick that list too.
> 
> I can word process, I can spreadsheet, I can email, I can surf the web, I can load and unload things to an offsite server, I can paint, and yes, I can play Call of Duty. It's not a computer, "sort of". It's a computer, PERIOD.
> 
> Steve was very VERY wrong about a lot of things. His disdain for choice in screen sizes, stylus input, repairability, expansion, etc, was irrational at best. As much as he moved the tech industry forward with a lot of innovations, he also held it back by pronouncing important improvements as "bad".


Actually I don't move the goal posts at all, the passage of time does that for me. 

But unlike some others, I am willing to accept that as just being part of reality.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

A computer is largely a device capable of crunching large quantities of numbers, whether lengthy numbers or simply the binaries of ones and zeroes. Even an abacus is a computer, while all of the later examples presented here are electronic computers.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

Computer was not a word in existence 100 years ago, and really, the idea of "computing" is far removed from what one normally uses it for these days. Sure computing is going on behind the scenes, but I think the reason Steve wanted to call the iPad and iPhone a new category of devices was to disconnect from that notion of strictly "computing". A smartphone might be better termed a "communicator" just like its Star Trek origins, but really it can do so much more. Maybe the word "computer" itself is the problem, since it really doesn't adequately describe what these marvels of technology can do.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

The term has actually been in use for hundreds of years. It was first applied to humans capable of number crunching and was then later applied to the mechanical computer and finally the electronic computer. 




fjnmusic said:


> Computer was not a word in existence 100 years ago, and really, the idea of "computing" is far removed from what one normally uses it for these days. Sure computing is going on behind the scenes, but I think the reason Steve wanted to call the iPad and iPhone a new category of devices was to disconnect from that notion of strictly "computing". A smartphone might be better termed a "communicator" just like its Star Trek origins, but really it can do so much more. Maybe the word "computer" itself is the problem, since it really doesn't adequately describe what these marvels of technology can do.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

Macfury said:


> The term has actually been in use for hundreds of years. It was first applied to humans capable of number crunching and was then later applied to the mechanical computer and finally the electronic computer.


Where did the word computer come from?

According to the Barnhart Concise Dictionary of Etymology (Robert Barnhart, ed., NY: HarperCollins, 1995), computer came into use in English in 1646 as a word for a 'one who computes' and then by 1897 as a 'mechanical calculating machine'. The word referred to an electronic machine by 1946. It is formed from the word compute, which was borrowed in 1631 from French, which was a learned borrowing from Latin computare, meaning 'to count, sum up; reckon'.

<<I stand corrected.>> :clap: 

The earliest personal or desktop computers became available in the early 1970s, perhaps after about 1973. These were generally assembled by their owners and were only capable of a few things. At this time most "real" computers were still fairly large, though the "mini computer" was becoming more common in medium businesses. It was generally about the size of a washing machine in contrast to the room fulls of equipment needed a few years before. 

About the middle 1970s some people began to see the value of small computers for business and home use and the Apple computer company started selling them as fully made up systems.

<<So I guess Steve Jobs would get the credit for inventing the PC or personal computer. Kind of ironic if you think about it.>>


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Macfury said:


> A computer is largely a device capable of crunching large quantities of numbers, whether lengthy numbers or simply the binaries of ones and zeroes. *Even an abacus is a computer*, while all of the later examples presented here are electronic computers.


Not at all, it is just a very antiquated calculator. 

A slide rule would be a closer example but even it is not a computer.

Think about it.

We had all manner of calculators long before we had computers but when real computers came on the scene we didn't suddenly try and lump calculators into being called computers.

When personal digital assistant devices came out (PDAs) we didn't suddenly feel the need to call them computers either.

Once again:

Necessity and sufficiency

We have different words for different things to differentiate between things.

Trying to lump things into categories to which they do not belong does a disservice to language, logic, and communicating with one another.

By way of fjnmusics, et. al. logic, we should call an Xbox (gaming console), iTV, NAS, etc. etc., computers as well.

Times change and so does language but sometimes language is not nimble enough to keep up with the change of things, especially in the ever changing technological world in which we now exist.

Trying to lump "computing" devices across the ages into the category of being computers is simply incorrect IMO.

Cripes if we did that even watches or clocks should be considered computers.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

screature, are you trying to differentiate between a processor and a computer?


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Macfury said:


> screature, are you trying to differentiate between a processor and a computer?


Nope.

But it is necessary in this day and age for a computer to have a possessor to be called a computer.

There are lots of things that aren't computers that do have processors but that does not mean having a processor is sufficient for something to be called a computer.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

If I say: 


> an analog computer is a mechanical, electrical, or electronic computer that performs arithmetical operations by using some variable physical quantity, such as mechanical movement or voltage, to represent numbers


would you disagee with the definition?


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Macfury said:


> If I say:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


In its chronologically contemporary time yes I would say that was a correct definition.

But not now, no I wouldn't because we have had multiple paradigms shifts since the time when that definition would have been applicable.

Would the average person call camera obscura in this day and age i.e., contemporary time a camera. 

I don't think so.

Think of it like this:










We call them all different things even though each was the predecessor of what came after. But they were not the same thing and should not all be lumped into being the same/thing/definition/word that is applied.

We didn't before and we shouldn't now IMO.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

screature said:


> In its chronologically contemporary time yes I would say that was a correct definition.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



But in your evolution of man analogy, there was no clear point in time when man was definitely of one type or another. Man merged from one for to another over thousands of years. It's like trying to separate the Pacific Ocean from The Atlantic Ocean down below the tip of South America; it's all one ocean with arbitrary divisions recognized by humans. The man chart grabs particular examples off of a continuum.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

I see. I would accept anything that can crunch numbers to be a computer--even a calculator. It's only for convenience that we distinguish between the two.

An X-box is a computer-controlled game system.

An ECM is a car's computer.

Even the timer on a coffee maker is a small computer.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

*How the heck did this thread end up here? *


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

fjnmusic said:


> But in your evolution of man analogy, there was no clear point in time when man was definitely of one type or another. Man merged from one for to another over thousands of years. It's like trying to separate the Pacific Ocean from The Atlantic Ocean down below the tip of South America; it's all one ocean with arbitrary divisions recognized by humans. *The man chart grabs particular examples off of a continuum.*
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Evolution is evolution either you agree with it or do not.

There is no "clear point in time" in the ancient past where you could definitively say when there was a paradigm shift... It was just so long ago and the records don't exist until anthropologists dig them up.

But today in a technological world the ancient past has become the equivalent of at most, one hundred years ( and being very generous at that) more like 50 or 25 years.

Exactly and thus why we no longer consider/define/refer to **** erectus, or Neanderthals, as being human beings. They were our *predecessors*, they are not us.

They kind of looked like us... and had rudimentary skills that even a ten year old has today... but imagine if you saw a **** erectus in a contemporary context would you be willing to call him I human as we know the word today?


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

CubaMark said:


> *How the heck did this thread end up here? *


lol!

Well it is one of the great things and bad things about ehMac... you never know what a thread will lead to....

Is that your baby CM?

Too cute!!!


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

CubaMark said:


> *How the heck did this thread end up here? *



Thanks! 👍 +1 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

screature said:


> Evolution is evolution either you agree with it or do not.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Well, my point was that each of these pre-humans was a snapshot in a continuum. Unless you believe in Adam and Eve (which I don't), then we just moved gradually from one phase to the next. If you space your snapshots a hundred thousand years apart, of course they're going to look like different critters, but if your shots are, say, taken every ten years, then their would have been no discernible difference along the way. We are cro-mag non man.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

screature said:


> Is that your baby CM?



Heh - not mine. Just a Google Image result. Trying to keep my son's internet presence to a minimum... as most parents probably should do.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

CubaMark said:


> Heh - not mine. Just a Google Image result. Trying to keep my son's internet presence to a minimum... *as most parents probably should do.*


Yes but try telling that Kimye...


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

From the Wall Street Journal today: 



> The iPhone 6 has a bigger battery, but is it good enough? Apple says the iPhone 6 will get slightly better battery performance than its predecessor. Yet where it really matters, performance appears to be about the same: When Web browsing over a high-speed LTE network with the iPhone 6, you'll get 10 hours, just like with the iPhone 5S.
> 
> Many iPhone owners, including this one, know that 10 hours still isn't sufficient, especially as the phone ages and the battery gets weaker.
> 
> ...


Bold mine. Nuff said. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

I want one of those cool flip phones that the bad guys use in "Breaking Bad"!


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

fjnmusic said:


> From the Wall Street Journal today:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Not really. 

I will go with Steve Job's viewpoint over that of some hack at the Wall Street Journal every time.

Also It seems your device isn't so great with HTML... Or Flash for that matter, which every real computer on earth can handle.


----------



## winwintoo (Nov 9, 2004)

screature said:


> Not really.
> 
> I will go with Steve Job's viewpoint over that of some hack at the Wall Street Journal every time.
> 
> Also It seems your device isn't so great with HTML... Or Flash for that matter, which every real computer on earth can handle.


I'm pretty sure a mainframe IS a "REAL" computer, but I can't see them having much use for either HTML or Flash but maybe I just don't understand beejacon


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

One more time:

Necessity and sufficiency

Things that can fly:


a fly
a mosquito
a bird
a plane
a bee
a helicopter
a cruise missile
etc...

All these things can fly, so does that mean that (taking into account the logic of necessity and sufficiency) a bee is a cruise missile or vise versa?

No.

Things that can compute.


a computer
a human being
a tablet
a smart phone 
an Xbox
a NAS
an iTV
etc...

All these things can compute, so does that mean that (taking into account the logic of necessity and sufficiency) a human being is an iPad or vise versa?

No.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

winwintoo said:


> I'm pretty sure a mainframe IS a "REAL" computer, but I can't see them having much use for either HTML or Flash but maybe I just don't understand beejacon


But it is *possible* for a mainframe to use HTML or Flash.

I didn't say anything about how much *use *a real computer has for them. 

Wow! 

I think that is the first time I have seen you use the beejaycon.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

That may just be playing with semantics:

Things that are computers:


a human being
a tablet
a smart phone 
an Xbox
a NAS
an iTV
etc...



screature said:


> One more time:
> 
> Necessity and sufficiency
> 
> ...


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Macfury said:


> That may just be playing with semantics:
> 
> *Things that are computers:*
> 
> ...


I disagree, it is a matter of the the logic of necessity and sufficiency. 

By saying, "Things that are computers:" In terms of logic you are putting the cart before the horse. Before we can logically differentiate between things we need to ascertain what is necessary and sufficient for a given thing to be what it is and nothing else.

Based on the responses to my posts I seriously doubt that anyone here has actually read the logic of necessity and sufficiency link that I have posted 3 times now.

What I find interesting is that no one has addressed my premise based on the rigor of said logic.

As I said in post #85:

Trying to lump things into categories to which they do not belong does a disservice to language, logic, and communicating with one another.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

Maybe you're just taking this way too seriously, Screature. There's dictionary definitions and then there's the meaning arrived at by everyday common usage. In both cases, people seem to have an agreed-upon understanding of the term "computer" that is far broader than what you are proposing. I don't think the association of computer with a particular desktop or laptop computing device is relevant anymore. Computers today come in many forms, and I really think you're splitting hairs if you make a big distinction between say a MacBook and an iPad. They are not the same, but I'd say they have more similarities than differences in common use.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

I would say that the ability to perform requested mathematical calculations is necessary, but not sufficient--in that one cannot know if the computer is doing what it is supposed to be doing. So I would add that it must perform _requested_ mathematical calculations and _provide_ the results of those calculations in a requested form.

Everything else that a computer can do is the result of its ability to do that.


----------



## CubaMark (Feb 16, 2001)

ON a happier note... my rMBP has arrived in Mexico City  I could have my hands on it by Saturday! And the parts (Hybrid 1tb HD, etc.) I ordered from OWC have also cleared Mexican customs... could be quite a weekend ahead...


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Congrats! I put a hybrid in my MacPro and was pleased with the speed bump.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

fjnmusic said:


> Maybe you're just taking this way too seriously, Screature.


I don't think so, it is important that we do not conflate one thing into being another for the reasons I already stated more than once.



fjnmusic said:


> There's dictionary definitions and then there's the meaning arrived at by everyday common usage. In both cases, *people seem to have an agreed-upon understanding of the term "computer" that is far broader than what you are proposing.*


No there isn't, I don't and neither did Steve Jobs. 

At one time there was a common "agreed-upon" understanding that the sun revolved around the earth and the earth was flat. 

Does the fact that there were so many people who "agreed-upon" a certain premise at a certain point in time mean that they are correct? History has shown us that no this is not the case.



fjnmusic said:


> I don't think the association of computer with a particular desktop or laptop computing device is relevant anymore.


Clearly. I understand your point of view.



fjnmusic said:


> Computers today come in many forms


Yes they do, but the devices were are discussing don't meet the logical criteria for what is both necessary and sufficient for them to be called computers IMO.



fjnmusic said:


> and I really think* you're splitting hairs* if you make a big distinction between say a MacBook and an iPad. They are not the same, but I'd say they *have more similarities than differences in common use.*


I don't believe I am.

I think there are very significant differences between the *capabilities* of even a low level computer like a MacBook and a device such as an iPad. The difference in capabilities (*i.e. sufficiency*) increases dramatically the higher you go up in the computer category as the capabilities of computers (since the inception of smart devices) has continued evolve, thereby maintaining the sufficiency deficit for smart devices to be referred to as computers.

Smart devices may have blurred the lines of definition for some people who are not as interested in the rigor of logic as I am. I am just not one of those people...

Also just to add, to say a smart device is a computer does a certain disservice to smart devices as they have specific attributes that computers don't.

Smart devices are compact, light in weight (and capabilities ) and can be carried in/on a pocket or purse or wrist, things that no computer can claim. Thus again another reason why it is important that we do not conflate one thing into being another.

Just to further add, try and imagine where taxonomy would be without the logic of necessity and sufficiency. All we would have are the categories of living things and non-living things. 

As I stated a while back, I think we will probably just have to agree to disagree. I think we may have reached that point and it is time to move on.

That said, this has been one of the more interesting and respectful discussions here on ehMac for a long time.

Peace Out.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

It seems to me you're creating an arbitrary and movable chasm between what you want to call a computer and everything else. If the "sufficiency" deficit exists, then name two devices on either side of the deficit:

1. The device that comes closest to being a computer without being one, and; 
2. The device that comes closest to not being a computer, but with all of the necessary attributes and capabilities to be called a computer.

If your way of looking at these devices is as rigorous as you say it is, then you should be able to make clear distinctions that could not lead to the conflation of 1 and 2.




screature said:


> I think there are very significant differences between the *capabilities* of even a low level computer like a MacBook and a device such as an iPad. The difference in capabilities (*i.e. sufficiency*) increases dramatically the higher you go up in the computer category as the capabilities of computers (since the inception of smart devices) has continued evolve, thereby maintaining the sufficiency deficit for smart devices to be referred to as computers.
> 
> Smart devices may have blurred the lines of definition for some people who are not as interested in the rigor of logic as I am. I am just not one of those people...
> 
> ...


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

For the record, I also hate the term "smart" as it relates to phones, watches, projection systems and other gadgets. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

fjnmusic said:


> For the record, I also hate the term "smart" as it relates to phones, watches, projection systems and other gadgets.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Yep, the smart part is provided by the human.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

> Phablets hold special appeal in Asia, where personal computers never reached the penetration they have in the U.S. and the idea of one single device that’s almost good enough for everything is especially desirable. I’ll have a more detailed look at this later, but it’s not unreasonable to argue if that was your goal, the iPhone 6 Plus would be as close to perfect as you could get right now. The wide array of iOS apps, the much improved ability to type on the larger screen, and the fantastic visuals make the 6 Plus one of the finest computers Apple — or anyone — has ever built.


Not my words, but I sure do agree with them.  

http://www.forbes.com/sites/markrog...the-world-the-iphone-6-plus/?partner=yahootix



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

I wouldn't argue with the person who called it a computer. The distinctions of necessity and sufficiency don't really apply well to this argument as I have shown above:

http://www.ehmac.ca/everything-else-eh/123441-how-do-people-even-use-windows-12.html#post1789122

iPhone 6s are personal computers that do a great job of being telephones.



fjnmusic said:


> Not my words, but I sure do agree with them.
> 
> Dear Samsung, Thanks For Bringing The World The iPhone 6 Plus - Forbes


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

Macfury said:


> I wouldn't argue with the person who called it a computer. The distinctions of necessity and sufficiency don't really apply well to this argument as I have shown above:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Personally, I've always found the telephone to be the weakest part of the iPhone experience. 😝

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

What is weak about their telephone capability?



fjnmusic said:


> Personally, I've always found the telephone to be the weakest part of the iPhone experience.


----------



## heavyall (Nov 2, 2012)

Macfury said:


> What is weak about their telephone capability?


They barely work as phones. I can't get a signal anywhere in my building at work. If I want to make a call, I have to go outside.

It also takes several steps to find the actual phone function. Not only do you have to launch the phone part as an app (as opposed to it being the actual core function of the device), but even then you have to navigate a menu to find the keypad to dial. There's a reason for that of course, it's not actually a "phone". It's a computer that, along with a host of other applications, also has an app that can make calls.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Now I know why I have settled for a Samsung--retroactive reasoning.



heavyall said:


> They barely work as phones. I can't get a signal anywhere in my building at work. If I want to make a call, I have to go outside.
> 
> It also takes several steps to find the actual phone function. Not only do you have to launch the phone part as an app (as opposed to it being the actual core function of the device), but even then you have to navigate a menu to find the keypad to dial. There's a reason for that of course, it's not actually a "phone". It's a computer that, along with a host of other applications, also has an app that can make calls.


----------



## fjnmusic (Oct 29, 2006)

heavyall said:


> They barely work as phones. I can't get a signal anywhere in my building at work. If I want to make a call, I have to go outside.
> 
> It also takes several steps to find the actual phone function. Not only do you have to launch the phone part as an app (as opposed to it being the actual core function of the device), but even then you have to navigate a menu to find the keypad to dial. There's a reason for that of course, it's not actually a "phone". It's a computer that, along with a host of other applications, also has an app that can make calls.


^^^^^^
As the French would say, exactement.


----------

