PC or MAC ?

[3113]

Lemme ask, what are you writing on today and get those issues?

I have three programs. Open Office is the rare one. I don't use it much for writing at all, but there've been times I've needed it, so I've go it.

Word for Mac was one that I used to use (not so much any more), and often have to use because people like you to send them novels as Word documents. So even if I don't write up a novel in Word, I sometimes have to put it into Word for others (that's the program that gave me trouble on the two novels situation).

Scrivener is the one I really like using now, and it's much better when it comes to having more than one document up and allowing the writer to work on both. Interestingly, it's also the one that probably wouldn't work as well on an iPad as it takes advantage of the wide-screen aspect of laptops allowing the writer to look at and edit two pages side by side.

 

[Austin8]

I have three programs. Open Office is the rare one. I don't use it much for writing at all, but there've been times I've needed it, so I've go it.

Word for Mac was one that I used to use (not so much any more), and often have to use because people like you to send them novels as Word documents. So even if I don't write up a novel in Word, I sometimes have to put it into Word for others (that's the program that gave me trouble on the two novels situation).

Scrivener is the one I really like using now, and it's much better when it comes to having more than one document up and allowing the writer to work on both. Interestingly, it's also the one that probably wouldn't work as well on an iPad as it takes advantage of the wide-screen aspect of laptops allowing the writer to look at and edit two pages side by side.

I use Pages, do you not like it 3? I usually just export the doc to a pdf file format...

 

[Smarmy_and_Sappe]

They don't--what poses a problem is the actual word processing program which starts demanding a lot of memory when you bring up those 500 pages. I recently had two full novels up (each about 300 pages) and open. When I started making changes in them, the program asked to close one up--not enough memory! If I'd had just the novel up, it would have been fine, but as soon as it two that it had to juggle, it started using every bit of memory it could get its hands on.

The novels take up almost no room at all. And it's easy enough to put them on a memory stick if I don't want to use up space. But word processing programs can be really demanding.

Behold!

http://news.cnet.com/i/tim//2010/01/27/IMG_3365_540x405.JPG

That's the iPad with it's keyboard (which is also a dock to charge it). Here's what it looks like without the iPad:

http://i.i.com.com/cnwk.1d/i/tim//2010/01/27/IMG_3366_540x405.JPG

Now, when I write, I usually only have half-my screen in use (for the page I'm working on), so there shouldn't be a problem with having to write on the iPad vertically (rather than horizontally which would make it more like a typical laptop screen). But I'd still need to test out the experience--and make sure the writing program and tablet can manage novels.

So what's the point? You've spent more than what a netbook and some laptops cost, and depending on the configuration of the ipad, you may be close to an apple laptop. What have you gained, other than having the gizmo de jour?

 

[Liar]

I have three programs. Open Office is the rare one. I don't use it much for writing at all, but there've been times I've needed it, so I've go it.

Word for Mac was one that I used to use (not so much any more), and often have to use because people like you to send them novels as Word documents. So even if I don't write up a novel in Word, I sometimes have to put it into Word for others (that's the program that gave me trouble on the two novels situation).

Scrivener is the one I really like using now, and it's much better when it comes to having more than one document up and allowing the writer to work on both. Interestingly, it's also the one that probably wouldn't work as well on an iPad as it takes advantage of the wide-screen aspect of laptops allowing the writer to look at and edit two pages side by side.

Ehm. Allow me to rephrase. What's your current computer?

 

[3113]

I use Pages, do you not like it 3? I usually just export the doc to a pdf file format...

It's not that I don't like it, it's that I never got around to switching over to it. I'd probably be using it now except that Scrivener came into my life Right now it's the only word processing program for the iPad and I'd have no problem with that. I'd just like to know how the combo of the iPad and Pages do when it comes to novel writing. Quirky things can start to happen when the document stretches out.

For example, I was going through Word cutting and pasting chapters together into one long document. Everything was fine...until the document started getting past the 100 page mark. At that point it became a crapshoot. Sometimes I could paste in a chapter just fine, other times the font or spacing or margins were all out of wack.

Liar: Why dinn't you say so? I'm on a 13" Macbook Pro, 2.4 GHz, 2GB memory.

 

[Austin8]

It's not that I don't like it, it's that I never got around to switching over to it. I'd probably be using it now except that Scrivener came into my life Right now it's the only word processing program for the iPad and I'd have no problem with that. I'd just like to know how the combo of the iPad and Pages do when it comes to novel writing. Quirky things can start to happen when the document stretches out.

For example, I was going through Word cutting and pasting chapters together into one long document. Everything was fine...until the document started getting past the 100 page mark. At that point it became a crapshoot. Sometimes I could paste in a chapter just fine, other times the font or spacing or margins were all out of wack.

Liar: Why dinn't you say so? I'm on a 13" Macbook Pro, 2.4 GHz, 2GB memory.

Curious, Ive never written any thing that long before, Hmm, what about storing your doc on Time Machine? Then just keep on writing?

 

[Liar]

Liar: Why dinn't you say so? I'm on a 13" Macbook Pro, 2.4 GHz, 2GB memory.

Ok, a reasonably able machine. And you get memory allocation issues from handling a 500 page document in OO or Word? Huh. I've done bigger docs on crappier computers. Both PCs and Macs.

A memory priority problem perhaps? I'm told Mac OS doesn't always scale memory allocation dynamically. It makes the OS crash proof, but also a bit limited. You may have to get down and dirty with the nuts and bolts.

Not sure if these instructions apply directly to your Mac OS version, but it's worth checking out.

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/177756

 

[Goldie Munro]

All depends on what you want your machine to do - Mac for me anytime unless I want to game and then its PC but I wish it wasn't so...

 

[Austin8]

All depends on what you want your machine to do - Mac for me anytime unless I want to game and then its PC but I wish it wasn't so...

well me too Goldie, but I'm not a gamer, so a non issue here, but Ive always been curious about that, gaming being such a huge market share and all, may have to google and see what I can find. My son does play games and he always uses the pc.

 

[DeeZire]

Not really. You pay for an OS when you buy a brand PC too. And Apple don't innovate as much as they refine.

The idea of paying more for a superior OS is justification for buying Mac. Of course, PC folks will argue that point, but for the general user, the Mac OS is perceived to be less "tweaky" and more dependable than anything Microsoft has released. As an example, in the days before Windows XP, the Mac OS included device drivers, while Windows still required installation of the specific driver that came with the printer or scanner. It's these kinds of OS features that won over Mac customers before Windows finally caught up.

On the innovation front, here are two quotes from an article on Apple's approach to filing patents ahead of the competition.

In March 2008, Forbes Magazine ranked Apple No. 1 in the 10 most admired for innovation. The companion article, What Makes Apple Golden, explains: “Apple has demonstrated how to create real, breathtaking growth by dreaming up products so new and ingenious that they have upended one industry after another: consumer electronics, the record industry, the movie industry, video and music production.”

According to Research & Markets, “Apple has managed to sustain its innovation efforts with calculated, consistent increases in R&D spending and rapid-fire launches of new products and upgrades. What lies behind Apple’s success is not luck—the company has very deliberately focused its efforts on generating better ideas faster.”

More on innovation:

Apple has created great innovations beginning with the first Apple computer in 1976, Graphical User Interface (GUI) along with the popular Macintosh introduced in 1984, the reliable PowerBook introduced in 1991, the PDA named Newton that created a new industry of handhelds in 1993, the new millennium revolution beginning with the iMac in 1998, the new iBook hot on the heels of the iMac in 1999, the iPod that put an oomph in the MP3 players and essentially changed music as we know it in 2001, iTunes software and Music store service that changed the Music industry business model and made it easy for fans to listen and buy music piecemealed in 2003, iPod mini, iPod (U2 Special Edition) and iPod photo in 2004, iPod shuffle, iPod nano, iPod with Video and Mac Mini in 2005, the new iMac with Intel core Duo processors and the new MacBook with Intel processors in 2006.

Addressing Smarmy's question:

So what's the point? You've spent more than what a netbook and some laptops cost, and depending on the configuration of the ipad, you may be close to an apple laptop. What have you gained, other than having the gizmo de jour?

What you gain is the touch screen interface, and the ability to work without a keyboard if you so choose. Personally, I wouldn't buy a first gen iPad, but I'm sure by the time the 2nd or 3rd gen arrives, I'll be past the point of wanting one - meaning my very survival will depend on owning the over-priced deluxe version with all the bells and whistles.

 

[Liar]

All depends on what you want your machine to do - Mac for me anytime unless I want to game and then its PC but I wish it wasn't so...

These days a Mac is a PC. it's exactly the same hardware under the hood. The difference is a different OS. You don't need a second computer to play PC games, just a Windows license and a dual boot. Best of both worlds.

 

[Liar]

The idea of paying more for a superior OS is justification for buying Mac. Of course, PC folks will argue that point, but for the general user, the Mac OS is perceived to be less "tweaky" and more dependable than anything Microsoft has released. As an example, in the days before Windows XP, the Mac OS included device drivers, while Windows still required installation of the specific driver that came with the printer or scanner. It's these kinds of OS features that won over Mac customers before Windows finally caught up.

On the innovation front, here are two quotes from an article on Apple's approach to filing patents ahead of the competition.

More on innovation:

Well, allow me to disagree. Those quotes are pretty evangelical in tone, as so much of the Mac rhetoric, and not really based in facts. I can go through that list in the second quote and give you a line-by-line example of prior art on most all those "innovations".

The first Apple was truly cutting edge and hallmark of Woz's genius. And the imac was the first stationary consumer computer/screen combo (but there were industrial dittos earlier).

But the GUI wasn't their invention (Xerox). The PowerBook was neither a new concept (even Apple had laptoops prior) nor did it contain much new technology. It was the first portable with 256 color display though, with a handful of competitors releasing theirs only weeks later. Psion, the HP90 and HP100 and AT&T <can't remember the name> all preceded the Newton. The iBook was a run-of-the-mill laptop with a cool plastic casing. Audio Highay made the first digital audio player and Compaq made the first hard disk based one (like the first iPod was). Nor was Apple first with an MP3 player with color screen, or woth video playback. Apple bought the iTunes system and there were at least one more similar one already up and running. But they didn't have Apple's financial power to aquire the major music labels' catalogs. Mac Mini was the first commersia Mini ITX PC to reach the market, but the platform is an assembly kit made by Via. Further, the iPhone and the iPad have been around in other forms for years.

I don't begrudge Apple any of their sucess. They deserve every bit of it. Just because they didn't invent the stuff in the list above, it doesn't mean thay didn't do them way better and more user friendly than the predecessors. That's what makes success.

It just amuses me when fawning fans buy their narrative that they invented all this stuff.

Apple is like Madonna. Her sucess is based on being superb at catching on to emerging trends, adopting them and making them "hers" and bringing them to the commersial mainstream. That, and being a kickass, hard working entertainer.

 

[Smarmy_and_Sappe]

These days a Mac is a PC. it's exactly the same hardware under the hood. The difference is a different OS. You don't need a second computer to play PC games, just a Windows license and a dual boot. Best of both worlds.

Exactly. I often use the analogy of the Lexus and the Toyota, the hardware under the hood is virtually identical, it's just the package that is different.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

It just amuses me when fawning fans buy their narrative that they invented all this stuff.

Apple is like Madonna. Her sucess is based on being superb at catching on to emerging trends, adopting them and making them "hers" and bringing them to the commersial mainstream. That, and being a kickass, hard working entertainer.

"Fawning fans buying the narrative?" Pffft!

Just to let you know, not all of us are simple, advertising-led cherry fanboys as y'all are wont to believe. Some of us have known the backstory since jump street. Some of us aren't newjacks and have been working on the platform since the mid '80s. Some of us don't feel the need to prove anything because the product, performance and use speak for themselves. Some people just like to live with and work on good shit, is all.

If Apple/Mac is like Madonna, then Microsoft/Windows is a holy fusion of Phyllis Diller & Lady Gaga.

 

[DeeZire]

Well, allow me to disagree. Those quotes are pretty evangelical in tone, as so much of the Mac rhetoric, and not really based in facts....

Your point brings up the old axiom, "if a tree falls in the forest and no one's there to hear it, does it still make a sound?" Is an innovation an innovation if no one knows about it? Apple's rep for innovation is solid because, regardless of where their products originated, they managed to market them quicker and on a more massive scale than the competition, forcing everyone else to play catch up.

Thinking ahead of the curve is innovative, marketing ahead of the curve is innovative, successfully opening up new markets (iTunes/iPod) is innovative. If you feel compelled to argue that Apple isn't innovative, I'd suggest that would be an innovative approach to logic.

 

[Smarmy_and_Sappe]

If Apple/Mac is like Madonna, then Microsoft/Windows is a holy fusion of Phyllis Diller & Lady Gaga.

I'm not a fanboy of any particular system. I generally respect your comments, but I think this was bit of cheap shot.

Microsoft does produce some fine software. MS-Office and XP are two solid products, and Windows 7 is proving to be a reliable and stable platform.

I build my own boxes and have since my first, an IMSAI 8080, and at least in my opinion, a lot of the problems with computers originates with all of the "junk software" that comes pre-loaded.

Okay, so if Apple is like Madonna, in my opinion, MS is like Southside Johnny and the Asbury Dukes, working hard, gettin' the job done, but not getting a lot of respect.

 

[Smarmy_and_Sappe]

Your point brings up the old axiom, "if a tree falls in the forest and no one's there to hear it, does it still make a sound?" Is an innovation an innovation if no one knows about it? Apple's rep for innovation is solid because, regardless of where their products originated, they managed to market them quicker and on a more massive scale than the competition, forcing everyone else to play catch up.

Thinking ahead of the curve is innovative, marketing ahead of the curve is innovative, successfully opening up new markets (iTunes/iPod) is innovative. If you feel compelled to argue that Apple isn't innovative, I'd suggest that would be an innovative approach to logic.

The problem with the Apple/MS argument is that one company focuses primarily on software and the other on hardware/software packages. It's bit like trying to compare Shell Oil with BMW.

 

[Liar]

Your point brings up the old axiom, "if a tree falls in the forest and no one's there to hear it, does it still make a sound?" Is an innovation an innovation if no one knows about it? Apple's rep for innovation is solid because, regardless of where their products originated, they managed to market them quicker and on a more massive scale than the competition, forcing everyone else to play catch up.

Thinking ahead of the curve is innovative, marketing ahead of the curve is innovative, successfully opening up new markets (iTunes/iPod) is innovative. If you feel compelled to argue that Apple isn't innovative, I'd suggest that would be an innovative approach to logic.

Aye, but people are always talking about the concepts and the technical devices, as if Apple came up with them. That's what I'm objceting to. A tree fell in the forest, and a handful of people heard it, but then Apple turned up with a chainsaw and posed for pictures.

They are world class (but not alone) when it comes to industrial process - the build quality of the devices and stability of the software. They are ahead of the curve in casing and interface design. They are unmatched in lifestyle marketing. And they have a brand strength like noone else.

In other words, they make really good gizmos and they know how to sell then. Ain't that enough?

 

[Liar]

Some of us don't feel the need to prove anything because the product, performance and use speak for themselves. Some people just like to live with and work on good shit, is all.

So do I. But I don't assume that's tied to a brand.

My office computer is an iMac. It's perfect there. Good perfomance, passive cooling and even a competitive price. Same computer performance, low noise and screen quality for a normal PC plus screen costs roughly as much. I need to use a couple of Win apps though, so i run Parallell Desktop on it, and barely notice the seams.

My notebook is a Lenovo Thinkpad T410i that I love to bits. Macbooks were my first choice, but they were either too heavy, too slow or too short on battery.

My home system is a custom built geek fest PC. Not because I'm that geeky, but because I do things on it that no brand PC or Mac could, wihtout me breaking and entering and modifying it to oblivion anyway. Mostly my recording equipment, which requires a specific setup.

 

[squarejohn]

I used PC for years. The only thing I didn't like about it was its instability. The frequent crashes became too much of a pain in the ass. I believe the crashes are due largely to the huge popularity of the Windows operating system. The last time I checked, 90% of users on the internet use the Windows operating system. It is the biggest target, so hackers and malware distributers, shoot at it, leaving the other operating systems mostly alone.

Using this line of reasoning, I switched to Mac. It was like going to sleep on Earth and waking up on Mars. It wasn't starting from scratch, but it often felt like that way. I had to wean myself off Windows while becoming famliliar with the Mac. Now I'm comfortable using Mac. In four years it has crashed twice.

I still use Windows for some things on the same machine, and when I do, it crashes as often as not.

 

[Handley_Page]

Liar:
Forgive my asking, but have Apple stopped using Motorola CPUs these days ?

3113:
I'm very surprised to hear someone with a 500 page file in one lump, let alone run two of them together. I seriously suggest acquiring another 2MB RAM. I think your problem is to do with internal allocation of RAM.
Can you use the optical drive (DVD/CD whatever) as a RAM disk ?

 

[Austin8]

Liar:
Forgive my asking, but have Apple stopped using Motorola CPUs these days ?

3113:
I'm very surprised to hear someone with a 500 page file in one lump, let alone run two of them together. I seriously suggest acquiring another 2MB RAM. I think your problem is to do with internal allocation of RAM.
Can you use the optical drive (DVD/CD whatever) as a RAM disk ?

hey Hp, my Mac has a 2 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo processor

@ GB 1067 Mhz DDR3 memory

 

[3113]

I seriously suggest acquiring another 2MB RAM.

Most of my documents run about 300+ pages. That's average for the novels I write. So I had a 300+ page lump open and was working on creating a second 300+ page lump when Word gave me problems. And yeah, you're probably right that knocking the computer up with 2MB more RAM would help.

Word tries to do everything for everybody, and I'm not surprised with all it's options and such that it's a memory hog. I don't fault it for that, but it does make it unreliable. The book I'm working on now is an older one, done in Word, and so I'm working in Word again, but I do like Scrivener which is made for Mac and can handle me having several 300+ page books open easy--but then, that's what it was made for. Just writing long stories and such. Not for also doing all the other things Word does.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

I'm not a fanboy of any particular system. I generally respect your comments, but I think this was bit of cheap shot.

Microsoft does produce some fine software. MS-Office and XP are two solid products, and Windows 7 is proving to be a reliable and stable platform.

I build my own boxes and have since my first, an IMSAI 8080, and at least in my opinion, a lot of the problems with computers originates with all of the "junk software" that comes pre-loaded.

Okay, so if Apple is like Madonna, in my opinion, MS is like Southside Johnny and the Asbury Dukes, working hard, gettin' the job done, but not getting a lot of respect.

Don't get me wrong, now. I have lots of respect for Windows and I'd imagine those of us on Team Mac who've been using computers for our respective biz since climbing out of the cradle also give them the dap they deserve. I was doing CG on MS-DOS systems back in art school side-by-side with Macs, I wouldn't dare throw salt on that legacy. And they can still set-claim worldwide majority market share. That's not going away.

But the wholesale trashing and dismissing of Mac stuff and Mac users as fanboy-driven, shiny gadgetry that's all chassis and no bite gets stupid and old. There's a fun and jovial side to the them-vs-us snowball fights and I can get into that sort of bareknuckle wrasslin'...but then sometimes it gets really snarky...and when you read between the lines, there's this raging undercurrent of jealousy bitchery over the success of the eggheaded geek in class who grew up, got cool and brought sexy back without losing his/her brains, talent and savvy in the process.

Now, when people throw salt against Macs — and that's perfectly o-tay, I got no problem with passionate opinions — I will stand up for them (as well as criticize them), not only because I've been using the platform since the days of the Lisa, but because they compliment my work and lifestyle perfectly and I wouldn't be working and living good without them. And it has zilch to do with fanboy otaku shit and everything to do with knowing how to work them. This is the majority of Mac users. Skip the commercials, forget the celebrity cachet, scratch the showoffs...real people are using Macs that work extremely well to do real work. The brand doesn't let them down for what they do...so they support it and tell their friends about what works.

And those friends tell their friends. And so on...and so on...and so on...

Oh, if we're still playing the analogy game, then Apple is Blade Runner and MS is Star Wars.

 

[rgraham666]

Oh, if we're still playing the analogy game, then Apple is Blade Runner and MS is Star Wars.

I'd say the Mac is Star Wars because I always smile when I use it. Windows is Blade Runner because it always makes me cry.