dfasfasddas Apple

I have a Macbook Air and a iPhone and a iPad and they are all great and I recommend them to anyone.

Not necessarily as a computer, smartphone or tablet PC, though ;-)

printz said:

I find MacBooks to be quite popular with programmers.

The only guy in my course that has a MacBook gets laughed at. I guess it doesn't have the same reputation here. I am a programmer, but I don't think having a MacBook would be useful. Sellers at the Apple Store tried to convince me to buy one of there computers. They sure have good arguments, but it's not worth buying one at all.

Why do people buy these? I'm curious if it's not to look rich, fancy, superior or cooler. Any idea? What does it have that Windows and Linux don't have? I see nothing.

StevieCybernetik said:

I don't even get what the iPad is good for since its basically just a flat laptop the size of a book that does only half the things a laptop does anyway...

I bought my partner an iPad a while ago, since she was getting back pain from lugging her laptop around for work (and was already well within the Apple ecosystem). She can use it for doing much of the work-related stuff that she was using her laptop for, and there are some great apps that have simplified a number of tasks for her. I like using it as a remote control for various devices in the flat (mostly Windows and Linux machines, heh), and it's great for doing internet stuff whilst on the couch or in bed - much better than using a laptop, since no fan noise, annoying cables, or heat source cooking my balls.

Oh, and you DJ right? It makes a pretty nifty Traktor controller :)

axdoom1 said:

Any idea? What does it have that Windows and Linux don't have? I see nothing.

OSX. The only reason for owning one as a programmer is if you're developing a cross-platform app, and want to be able to run Windows, Linux and OSX on the same platform. Or if you develop exclusively for Apple's platform, as that's the only way to even access their SDK.

At work, I use Windows. At home, I use a custom Mac that I built. I have a pretty high comfort level with both OSes, though they both have some minor convenience features that I miss when I'm in the other. I think nowadays OS X has more of those than Windows does, though for most basic use they're pretty evenly matched.

mac vs. windows thread? a forum classic.

can't remember the last time I saw the compy debate ruffle any feathers. linux is god in my neck of the woods anyhow (gradschool ece/compsci/whatever). personal hardware largely irrelevant because srs bsns done on the local beefy boxes and/or supercomputers. Most professionals I've worked with (in scientific research software, IT) rock the setup: windows/linux tower + mac laptop. Maybe if I was in another field dominated by one platform or the other I'd find a way to snowball my preferences into a vitriolic rage-storm, but for the time being I'll just echo essel's chill response: regularly use both, differences in usability for me too minor to really complain about.

Especially the Mac vs PC debate is now moot, at least at a hardware level: Macs have ceased long ago being little special snowflakes in that respect (and even then, they were nothing exceptional). So all that's really left is the OS: Windows on one side, and yet another Unix derivative on the other, with TONS of UI sugar on top of it. Maybe the most user-friendly UNIX ever made, but still UNIX underneath.

It's ironical, in a sense, that the most "user friendly" computers actually function with a derivative of an OS which was considered fit only for hardcore IT/compsci/hacker types (and in fact, doing anything advanced on them requires facing the dreaded UNIX prompt).

The many flavors of Linux fall on a side of their own: far removed from Windows, closer to OS X in some respects, but with wildly varying degrees of user friendliness and binary compatibility between them (another sore point), ranging from the BSD to distro-specific builds, from raw hardcore CUIs to the most MAC-like GUIs.