Im on a new G4 at work all the time, and scary enough im kinda starting to like it, am i insane for considering buying one? osx is nice

I would go Mac if it weren't for all the PC stuff I have. I think Mac becomes more appealing everyday.

I've never had a Mac, and also, never had a chance to really work with one until I got the job I have now. It convinced me to buy one. I mainly got it for photo/video stuff, but also to finally have one of my own that I could muck around with. Eventually I'll be getting a more powerful one, but this one is doing just fine for now. OS X is what really convinced me to buy one, without it I would've waited a lot longer, or not have bought one at all.

Mac's have came a long way.. Honestly, running w2k/cygwin/etc just to emulate a unix environment without actually running linux, I've thought about switching to the macs just to be able to get the shell prompt when I want it..
-m

I've found that without *NIX tools in Windows I can't stand using the command line. I keep coming up against limitations in the standard Windows tools.

Mac hardware is very nice though. I've considering getting a Powerbook but running Linux on it. (Okay, I've probably offended a huge number of mac users but anyway )

- Trevor

haha i feel beter now, i would never aboand my PC ever, but want one for video editing, and photoshoping and the likes.

To be honest, if you want the best hardware compatability and want to be able to run the latest games/software then you're going to have to run Windows on a PC. So get one of each

- Trevor

Ditto, and Amen.

oh i have a pc desktop, i don't play games, just do applications. but I'm typing this on my pc

i insane for considering buying one?


Just remember -- if you buy a Mac it'll be different from what you're used to -- therefore it can't possibly be any good!

tanstaafl.

My mom's work (National Geographic) decided to switch to Mac for apparently no reason whatsoever. They're design and layout people had always been working on them, but that's understandable. But my mom doesn't do any of that. She does editing and research, as does her whole apartment. What's more, they gave every single person in the office a freaking G4! And they're all running OS9!

a) why the hell does a person who's only doing word processing and emailing need a G4?
b) why not go to OSX when you're installing all brand new machines anyway?

It doesn't make any sense to me. All I know is, I tried hooking up my mom's printer to it, and the OS made it so unclear as to how to install a new printer, I had to have her call an IT guy. I'm sorry, but installing a USB printer should be pretty obvious. It wasn't.

So yeah, Mac is different, but I'm going to stay on familiar turf. For what I do I don't need a Mac.

>a) why the hell does a person who's only doing word processing and emailing need a G4?

If they didn't buy Apple monitors, then it may have been because no other Mac is sold without an integral monitor.

>b) why not go to OSX when you're installing all brand new machines anyway?

Because they probably wanted boxes that looked nice and didn't care about the OS. There are also a lot of mac zealots who hate OS X. As stated in an earlier post in this thread, it's different to what they're used to.

It will have OS X installed anyway (unless they removed it) so it just needs to be rebooted, although of course then the IT dept may not support it.


> I'm sorry, but installing a USB printer should be pretty obvious. It wasn't.

Mac OS 9 doesn't work like Windows.

a) why the hell does a person who's only doing word processing and emailing need a G4?

The one-time purchase price is a small part of what it really costs to operate a desktop computer. Even if it is a bit of overkill, businesses sometimes conclude that it is less expensive to support 100 identical higher-end machines that it is to support a mix of different (say 10 high, 30 mid and 60 low-end) machines. It makes them more interchangeable, for example.

b) why not go to OSX when you're installing all brand new machines anyway?

Good question. Is it possible that they are running a key app or apps that aren't supported on OSX yet?

Well, it's fairly common in any large corporate environment for software to have to be approved from the top down. Everyone runs OS Z until it's worth the expense to upgrade to OS Y. Makes support issues far easier to handle.

I've got a friend working for an un-named military installation who just got a new 1.8ghz machine running Windows 95. She says it boots very quickly.

Matthew

Well, it's fairly common in any large corporate environment for software to have to be approved from the top down. Everyone runs OS Z until it's worth the expense to upgrade to OS Y. Makes support issues far easier to handle.

Yup. It's easy to forget that when you are a single user who would really like Feature X.

I really feel like PC functionality has hit a plateau. Especially in the current economic environment, it seems like it would be much harder to justify PC hardware/software upgrades if you are running stuff that has been acquired in the past 2-4 years. For general business use, what situation would demand upgrading a 733 Mhz processor? For what purposes would OS9 *not* suffice?

For general business use, what situation would demand upgrading a 733 Mhz processor? For what purposes would OS9 *not* suffice?

Well if that's the case then the manufacturers of these things (and those who sell software for them) need to start sneaking in some planned obsolescence to protect their revenue streams. Nobody likes to release a product that lasts forever... Well, except our beloved empeg guys.

Seriously though, I think that Microsoft et. al release bloated code on purpose so they can help sell more new PC's with faster processors, which will be bundled with new versions of the O/S, which will be obsoleted by new versions of bloated code, which will sell more PC's, which will be bundled with the newer O/S, which will be obsoleted by....

Well if that's the case then the manufacturers of these things (and those who sell software for them) need to start sneaking in some planned obsolescence to protect their revenue streams. Nobody likes to release a product that lasts forever... Well, except our beloved empeg guys.

I probably should have said "for general use *today*'. There always will be some churn in components and software that will force businesses to upgrade. Plus, MSFT and others just stop selling software/OS versions, so you get driven into new software/hardware if you want to add new desktops. I just think that the cycle has gotten longer and slowed down. For a business with no growth plans, it may be *very* long.

Seriously though, I think that Microsoft et. al release bloated code on purpose so they can help sell more new PC's with faster processors, which will be bundled with new versions of the O/S, which will be obsoleted by new versions of bloated code, which will sell more PC's, which will be bundled with the newer O/S, which will be obsoleted by....

Yup. If this not absolutely intentional, they certainly feel the freedom to behave like this. And hardware/chip makers probably egg them on.

I've considering getting a Powerbook but running Linux on it.

Don't bother. OS X should cover all your Unix needs with the addition of an X Server. And they work so well, I have one loaded that gives me seamless integration, including the "Genie" effect of minimizing a Unix X app to the Dock. Running Linux on a Mac now is about as silly as running Linux on a Sparc machine. It can be done, but there is a better Unix built for the CPU sitting in the box.

To be honest, if you want the best hardware compatability and want to be able to run the latest games/software then you're going to have to run Windows on a PC

Games yes, software, no. While Windows has a ton of software, many of the programs do the exact same thing. I still haven't been able to run into an issue of specificially needing a Windows program in my quest to switch to OS X for all my non gaming PC use.

Gaming is getting better on the Mac though, so in a few years, I bet the majority of the games will exist on both platforms. Most hit games are eventually ported, but more and more are hitting the shelves ready for either platform.

Yeah. Nearly all non-gaming apps do seem to be coming out for OS X at the same time or a little bit after now that I look at it properly. I don't really play many games anyway so I guess it's a pretty small disadvantage. Who knows, I may some day swap over to using Macs

- Trevor

Linux on a Mac now is about as silly as running Linux on a Sparc machine. It can be done, but there is a better Unix built for the CPU sitting in the box.

Is Solaris really that good? I've heard it scales better than Linux on really big iron (say 8-way) but that Linux is overwhelmingly faster on 1- or 2-cpu kit. This was a while ago now, but I heard of a theoretical astrophysics outfit where they had one Solaris machine that ran the (actually quite good) Sun optimising compiler, and everyone else had Sparc Linux machines to actually run the programs on.

Peter

Well... I think Linux is faster on my Ultra but I'm not sure since my configuration is quite a bit different from when I'm booting Solaris and Linux. I haven't done any tests on it so I can't say for sure.
I'm not too impressed with Solaris x86 though. It really doesn't like some of the hardware I've got and freaks out a lot.

- Trevor

Solaris used to be quite slow, but that was many years ago. It's been reasonably fast since 2.5 and seems to have gained speed with each successive release.

Sun's compilers are quite good, but there's no way that I can think of to get a binary compiled for Solaris to run under Linux. Maybe there's some compatibility suite that I'm not aware of, though.

At the same time, Linux will be overwhelmingly faster on old Sparcs. The resources required to simply run Solaris are just too great for anything slower than, say, a Sparc5 (a 1994 or so era machine). That's because Sun's OS changed from what was commonly referred to as SunOS, which was a BSD derivative, to what's commonly called Solaris, which is an SVR4 derivative, and they seem to have kind of tuned their machines in those directions. (Which is really a load of hooey, but it feels that way.)

Solaris x86 is great if you happen to have one of the four machines out of hundreds of thousands that it'll work properly on.

They don't seem to work very hard to make its hardware compatibility very good.

Sounds better than Darwin on x86...

Running Linux on a Mac now is about as silly as running Linux on a Sparc machine. It can be done, but there is a better Unix built for the CPU sitting in the box.

I don't know. I run MacOS X on my toilet-seat iBook, and it's close to too slow to use, not because of the CPU (466MHz G3), but (apparently) because it doesn't support the video chip in it very well.

I run Linux on my Beige G3 because I don't need multiple MacOS machines in my house and because I bought it for $75.

Hi Justin,

I did it around 5 months ago. I'm very happy I did it. I bought a iBook (one of the new Pearl ones). I couldn't help to fall in love with it's beauty and the OS X aqua graphics. I haven't had any single problem since then. Everything works great (am I lucky?). Of course leaving the Windows world is not 100% possible but I use my iBook for almost everything 97% of the time. There are much more software than you think for it. The Apple community is great and a much more possitive atmosphere than the windows one, apple users love their Macs and their software and our proud of them. Can you imagine a world without a Registry? Without DLL's? Withone [censored] Visal Basic software? Without bad programed Service Packs? Without XP? without ugly beige boxes? without virus? a world full of creativity and exclusivity? the list of adventeges vs windows is endless. Quantity does not mean quality! yes there is more software for windows but the quality of apple software in general is just better and does what counts at the end of the day.

Can you imagine a world without a Registry? Without DLL's...

Should I take the Aqua pill and see how deep the rabbit hole goes?

Should I take the Aqua pill and see how deep the rabbit hole goes?

ROFL, good one.

no question about it just do it!!!

i'm on a pc and macs seem very appealing to me. i would get one if it weren't for two things:

1) from what i understand, macs are not very easily upgradeable. i am a college student and i stayed under my budget by building my own computer...used some parts from my old one. you can't do this with a mac, correct?

2) i have all of my software for windows. its a big jump. but i understand there is an emulator in which you can run windows based programs on a mac? i haven't done much research so can someone confirm this?

the jump seems too hard...

1) Yes, Mac hardware is proprietary. Not much luck in swapping out hardware from one to another.

2) Yeah, there's a program called Virtual PC that can fully emulate a Windows environment. I think it can even do different OS'es (98, 2k, etc). As with any emulator, it doesn't run at full speed.

now that i think about it...what are all of the advantages of switching to mac? they're supposedly better for graphics and audio...video..etc., but i'm a webdesigner (running on pc) and with the speed of todays computers...is it really that much better to go with a mac for multimedia? i understand that they are a little more user friendly...but now that i have all of this experience with pc's, i got used to installing things and troubleshooting...it really doesn't seem that hard anymore to import video or audio. but i guess it could be tuff for someone thats not very computer savvy.

what are all of the advantages of switching to mac?

- A really really nice user interface. Scads better than Windows.

- The knowledge that you've finally freed yourself from the shackles of Microsoft.

But as far as "what can you get done", well, depends on what you need to do. If all you use is photoshop and a web editor, the Mac isn't going to be THAT much of an advantage.

hahaha shackles of microsoft. it really annoys me when microsoft thinks that they can try to mess with my computer without me knowing just cuz i have some of their software installed. i sure hope apple doesnt treat it's customers the same. so is mac better for programming then?

p.s. - i'm going into my first year in college (information and computer science). i'll be doing programming and much more. right now i'm strictly web programming (javascript, and asp) so i don't know enough about REAL programming.

I didn't realy beleive it until i watched an A-B photoshop test using comon photoshop operations, but a mac is far faster than a windows computer doing the same thing in photoshop. With the same two laptops, the PC was far faster doing 3d modeling, however. (this was a 500mhz mac vs 800mhz PIII laptop...) So, it does all depend on what you're doing, and how the programs are optimized...

Matthew

yeah...its just that i have a AMD 1800XP at home...how much faster can a computer really get? i just don't see how a mac can be that beneficial with the kind of power that is available today. maybe mac's are more reliable...correct? (ps - my computer has never froze)

With the Mac, you're less likely to crash. Admittedly, you could probably configure your Windows machine just right for what you do with it that it probably treats ya pretty well. But, there's those occasional crashes that make ya scream.

I haven't been playing with OS 10.2 too long, but it seems VERY stable.

Now, when it comes to programming, I would probably consider recommending the OS X to you because of the fact that it's built on top of a UNIX kernel. You could actually mess around with programming on your own computer, without having to rely on using your school's servers. Trust me, it's definitely nice to be able to work at home, rather than being cooped up in a computer lab in the school's basement where you don't know if it's night or day.

Macs can crash, too. Assuming you've got your system in a stable configuration, you're using a decent and stable version of Windows (such as Windows 2000), and you don't pile a lot of crap software onto the system, then a Windows box can be just as stable as a Mac.

I've got a close friend who uses and supports both PCs and Macs for his company's high-end audio editing software, and he says that a properly-configured windows computer is no more crash prone than his mac systems in his experience.

Of course, for his main audio-editing work, he uses a Mac by choice...

thanks for all of your input guys...

my conclusion:
a mac would be fun, but the pcs upgradeability (is that a word?) will keep me running windows. maybe when i get money for a venture like that...i'll finally get a mac (they definately look cooler!)

oh yeah...about the audio work...i have been working with audio for a few years and from what i hear...your best bet with audio would be a dual processor pc. it makes perfect sense. i've heard mac's are great too but i've heard the dual processor can get you even further.

from what i understand, macs are not very easily upgradeable

They are in some ways. All recent desktop Macs, (IE the PowerMacs) have had PCI slots allowing migration of your devices that might be there. They use IDE drives now, and used SCSI in the past. (I actually just upgraded a Mac LC computer from a 40meg drive to a 9.1gb drive. Not bad for a 11 year old system) They also use standard PC memory now. And in most cases, 3rd party companies release CPU upgrades, extending the life of many Macs by quite a bit. For example, I can upgrade my G4 Cube running at 450 to a 1ghz machine.

The problem though with the CPU upgrades is that they tend to be pretty expensive because they don't make and sell a ton of them. But overall, a Mac can be as upgradable as a PC. There just aren't as many spare components around since Macs don't have a huge portion of the PC industry.

i see...thanks for all the help. so i guess you can upgrade macs...it's just a lot harder to find parts and they're more expensive. makes sense. thanks again.

I wouldn't say that. I put a 512mb PC133 SODIMM and a 512mb DIMM in my G4 iMac. Nothing special, in fact, I have another one of those 512mb DIMM's in my PIII. The SODIMM and DIMM only cost me $215 together. I took the original 256mb DIMM and put it in one of my other PC's. Mac's have come a long way to become less proprietary. (Mind you, this all coming from someone that would have never even THOUGHT of owning a Mac a little over a year ago.)

what are all of the advantages of switching to mac?

- A really really nice user interface. Scads better than Windows.

I'm sorry, but that's subjective. I used a Mac for a good while, and I simply prefer the Windows UI. I'm one of those multiple mouse button people.

Also, as I've said in another thread, if an OS makes it difficult to install a USB printer (didn't USB start on Macs?), then from my point of view, it's not easy to use. But again, that's how I feel.

I say if you're quite confident about your knowledge of a Windows OS, and the advantages of switching to a new computer are that minimal, don't bother.

But I'd also say that it depends how old, on average, the parts in your current PC are. You say you're doing video capture, so it can't be too old otherwise you'd have crap video. What kind of machine is it?

> I'm one of those multiple mouse button people.

Multi-button mice are fully supported by the OS, they just aren't supplied as standard.


> Also, as I've said in another thread, if an OS makes it difficult to install a USB printer
> (didn't USB start on Macs?), then from my point of view, it's not easy to use.

That was under Mac OS 9, where it won't prompt you to install the driver - you need to do that yourself and for legacy reasons, the approach to managing printers is very different to what you'd be used to under Windows.

Most people here are talking about Mac OS X, which tends to keep a huge set of drivers for USB printers and sets up and configures it without even showing any dialogs.

USB didn't start on Macs, just Apple took up the torch and lead the industry (althogh you could argue they just got into it a couple of months before the rest of the PC industry was due to launch all their USB kit and took the credit for being pioneers).

> from what i understand, macs are not very easily upgradeable.

Also bear in mind that Macs hold their value better than PCs. Whereas even a brand-name PC is just viewed as a box of parts, a Mac is always considered as a whole, so you can sell a two-year old desktop Mac and get around 50% of what you paid for it and for laptops, more like 50-60%.

I've got a PowerBook G4/400. I paid £2000 for it in 2000. It is currently worth about £1000 (any takers?). Few PC laptops would hold their value so well.

That said, it isn't as convienient as being able to just replace the motherboard and processor. But Apple realise that a lot of their customers are non-geeks, who if they were PC users, would just junk their entire PC (monitor, printer, scanner and all) when it gets to three years old and go buy another cheap bundle deal from somewhere dodgy like Gateway.

Multi-button mice are fully supported by the OS, they just aren't supplied as standard.

Well lets just say that they should be. I tried using the one button mouse they supplied my mom with at work. I mean come on, the whole mouse is the one button? talk about carpal tunnel.

That was under Mac OS 9, where it won't prompt you to install the driver - you need to do that yourself and for legacy reasons, the approach to managing printers is very different to what you'd be used to under Windows

Okay, that's probably true. But then setting it up was difficult because the printer setup was buried in an unintuitive location, set apart from the rest of the settings.

I sure hope OSX is all that everyone's saying it is. As far as 9 goes, I disliked it very much.

But I have taken the leap and promoted the ipod, just like most people here. My dad received his this week and can't get over how nice and small it is.

> talk about carpal tunnel.

The idea is that it's designed to prevent that very problem. Since you can click with your palm, one finger or all your fingers, it reduces repetitive strain. RSI is why they haven't put a scroll wheeel in their mice either.

Apple sticks to a single button mouse because in test after test, complete computer illiterates find it easier to grasp the conecpt. Add to that the fact that Mac OS is designed with a single button mouse in mind and it isn't such an issue.

*Goes to apply for marketing job at Apple*

thanks for all the info guys. i think a mac would be a fun and interesting switch, but i've spent too much time on pc. i've learned how to replace everything and have familiarized myself with the OS. sometimes the ease of mac scares me also. they make their things TOO easy and take away all the cool options computer dorks like me want to take advantage of. once you are confident with PC, i see know reason to switch unless your bored...which i could see myself doing

my boss just got an ipod and it's amazing. i give mac 10 pts. for presentation.

That all makes sense, but just because it's designed for use in one way, doesn't always mean it's better that way for everyone. I'm not implying you meant this, I'm just saying. I didn't like it much.

But I can see where you're getting at with the mouse thing. I would argue, however, that being able to click with your palm or your whole hand isn't all that great. it's quite slow.

another question.

let's say i get an ibook. is there a way to network mac and pc? i know that's pretty outrageous but i'm curious...

I think Samba will run on OSX.

wow...i'm impressed. i think when i get a laptop...it will be an ibook

>let's say i get an ibook. is there a way to network mac and >pc? i know that's pretty outrageous but i'm curious...

Is there anyway? yes of course connect the iBook directly to the PC with network cable (patch) give his IP address and they are connected. That's the way I do it. You don't need any extra programs, and OS X 10.2 (Jaguar) has even better support (I have OS X 10.1).

You are able even to plug a Firewire external Hard drive formatted with FAT32 into the iBook and it will read and write on it as it would be his own formatted hard disc. No problem at all. Do you want to plug the ibook in a MS Domain Network? No problem, plug it and you are on the network. My iBook is problably one of the best buys I've ever made. I recomend it to anyone. It work perfectly with the empeg using jemplode. There are really no excuses not to use OS X. Do you want to install an application? no problem just drag and drop the files on the hard disc and the application is installed! no registry, no DLL's! just work. Do you want to uninstall it? no problem just delete the folder, does it! gone! no registry keys problems or old dll's making problems. Do you want to boot from a CD or external hard disk or an iPod! no problem copy the boot files to them and it will boot from them. Guys all your excuses against using a Mac are absolute ridiculous. OS X is just a superior well thought and user friendly OS years light ahead of Windows. There are so many features that I still don't understand why do we have to convince you that OS X is better than windows but it should be the opposite.

Samba is built in.

take away all the cool options computer dorks like me want to take advantage of

<sarcasm>
Boy, yeah, that Unix underpinning really limits the tweaking you can do on the thing.
</sarcasm>

On the other hand, you'll have to actually do more than point-and-click to figure out how to do that stuff. Which makes your argument sound like the argument Unix people have had against Windows. But that's another subject entirely.

Samba is built in.

Yes, and it rocks.

Prior to 10.2, you needed a client like DAVE in order to connect to a PC.

You DON'T need DAVE to connect to a PC. You DON'T need SAMBA either. You don't need absolute anything just the IP address or the PC name and the share name. As opposite to Windows PCs where you need a Microsoft Client to connect to their own MS networks. In OS X you don't need to install any extra client. About the twieking....I really don't know what do you mean with it, maybe you could tell that to the Linux and OS X community, they may laugh in you face.. Guys, I notice here that you really know very very little of how capable and well thought Mac OS X is. Jaguar is even able to connecto to anything without any kind of configuration everything runs automatically and WORKS as opposite to Windows. I don't want to insult anybody here but It's a pitty to see how narrow minded and arrogant some windows users can be when they speak about something as being worst that they don't even know! Many things which are new for windows users now have already been used for years by mac users. Is it so hard to ask you to open your minds a little bit to something new?

There hasn't been any Apple or Mac bashing in this thread. There have been misunderstandings and people not aware of all the features present in various versions of Mac OS, but your comment about Windows needing a separate client to connect to a network is in a similar vein.

I won't defend Mario's bizarre aggression, but you do need to install a client on Windows in order to look at other Windows shares -- the Client for Microsoft Networks, which comes with the OS, but you often have to specifically install it. So there is some extra work involved, even if it's a tiny little bit.

I appologize if I sounded like i was bashing Macs and their religion. I was merely commenting on how incompatible their whole world is with mine. I also never said a thing about OSX. The comments I made about OS9 I feel were very justified.

I'm not the type of user who needs to switch to a Mac. That's just the way it is. Live with it.

Have fun.

> but you often have to specifically install it.

My point was more that he was not seeing that modular and easily configurable network support is a major feature of Windows, in the same way that others were not seeing the capabilities of Mac OS.

Fair enough.

(yeah, I know, I'm behind on the threads...)

> I'm one of those multiple mouse button people.

Multi-button mice are fully supported by the OS, they just aren't supplied as standard.

To expand on this, Mac OS X is very similar to Windows in how the mouse buttons work. Right clicking results in a context menu similar to Windows, and 10.2 even adds the Open With option. Moving from the PC to Mac at home to me is seamless for most of the interface. The Dock/Taskbar differences still get me from time to time, as well as the occasional Mac OS 9 behavior in X.

Okay, that's probably true. But then setting it up was difficult because the printer setup was buried in an unintuitive location, set apart from the rest of the settings.

This is where I think Apple still has some work to do. I foten find myself bouncing around between System Preferences and the Utilities folder to accomplish a configuration task. With Windows XP, everything is at least linked from the Control Panal somewhere.

they make their things TOO easy and take away all the cool options computer dorks like me want to take advantage of.

I have more power to tweak things under OS X compaired to Windows XP. And generally Apple dosen't skimp on options. Mail for example is a very simple client, but has some amazing options rarley seen elsewhere. iTunes is another example. It's simple enough to let someone rip a CD and not have a clue about compression and such, and advanced users can tweak the MP3 encoder, or even replace it with LAME.

this is why I say this: There is no such thing as a user friendly computer interface, no matter how intuative it is, now matter how hand-holding it is.. you MUST have some knowlage of how the computer functions. it's not userfriendly, it's user familiar. to me, the CLI is friendly, it allows me to type any command I want, any way I want. it doesn't bother me with interuptions, or excessive "are you sure?" boxes. the problem is, for most users that I support.. CLI is scary because they arn't being told what to do by the interface. this bothers them, the don't know why they use computers unless someone tells them why. some of my older users who came from the DOS days like CLI better, because they know exactly what they want out of a computer.. for it to get their work done easier, and keep track of their files. they are familiar with the CLI.

I have other users that have no concept of virtual space, they don't understand how files can be sorted in a directory structure, they think I deleted their email if i minimize their email client to check their network connectivity. computers were spawned from mathematics, and for some people, abstract mathematics are beond what they are willing to comprehend.

from a technical standpoint, MacOS X is young, it's fairly good, but I still consider it very beta, and it's updates are no better than microsofts. (atleast the recent microsoft updates within the past year) the hardware is sub-optimal, and slightly over priced.. even with my university department discount, some of their hardware is more expensive than the stuff we get from sun. and atleast sun has a track record of doing stuff decent. I would be verry warry of using a mac for any kind of server task.. even tho I know an ISP that has probably a dozen iMacs and G4 towers that they do mail/web from.

they think I deleted their email if i minimize their email client

Ah, yes. The 12:00 flashers. I know a few of those.

'The only intuitive interface is the nipple, everything must be learned how to use.'

I wish I could remember who said that quote - I end up using it all the time when one of the pilot types complains about one of the engineering tools we use and he has to relearn the interface all over (when he hasn't used it for a few months).

well i got my iBook, and i have to say i love it. the airport is awesome. Im still loyal to my Pc thou. and my Empeg of course

iToo got an iBook (last week) and love it.

I still use my iBM Thinkpad running Win2K, but must say that I enjoy using the iBook much more. Now I'm searching for a good wireless, multi-button mouse for it, since I have never liked the touch pad controls (nor the single button in the case of the iBook). I'm hoping an airport card which supports bluetooth and 801.11b will be introduced, followed by an optical, four button w/ scroll, bluetooth mouse. Any hardware developer's listening?

Two questions for the mac experts out there --

(1) What is the best way to backup my 30G iBook hard drive? Could I use a 20G iPod to do a selective backup, and then use the remaining space on the iPod to store its music files? How about an external firewire DVD burner? Any recommendations?

(2) What is the best GPS hardware and software to run on my iBook? After the Cincinnati meet I have got the GPS bug, and am looking for something which I can use to guide me to the next meet.

Thanks in advance for the help!

(1) What is the best way to backup my 30G iBook hard drive? Could I use a 20G iPod to do a selective backup, and then use the remaining space on the iPod to store its music files? How about an external firewire DVD burner? Any recommendations?

Play with Disk Copy, and its ability to create image files. Last time I backed up my Cube, I created one on my Linux box, dragged all my files into it, then reloaded the machine with Jaguar. Putting all the files inside a disk image like that preserved all the Mac specific file conventions.

GPS, not sure. I haven't really looked, because I figure my Garmin V is pretty PC independant. For the rare occasion of map loading, Virtual PC and a USB->Serial converter should work.

...drug all my files into it...

``dragged''

Oops... you missed this one Bitt?

...and it's ability to create image files.

The only GPS software for MacOS X that I'm aware of is MacGPS Pro.
http://www.macgpspro.com/

Don't let them pick you apart like that Drakino ... fight back. Thanks for your advice on backing up. I'll take your advice and disk image a full backup to the large drive in my desktop PC. I may still "have" to get the iPod for those critical data backups while traveling ... or atleast that is the way I'll present it to my wife.

So MacGPS Pro and a Garmin receiver ... now which receiver to buy. I'd like the voice guidance of the Street Pilot III, but without the size and cost. The "V" may be the right way to go.

Thanks for your input!