Thinking about Buying a Mac. Need Software Recommendations.

[General Brock]

If its possible, I'm sure someone will try it. Apple has been under MSFT's wing for a bit now. Bad habits are sure to rub off, even with Steve Jobs overwatching. I still can't believe Apple is considering using Intel over AMD chips.

Obviously, I am not a Mac user, just a wannabe, so that is probably showing too. The people I know who do use Macs seem to think it is invulnerable, to a degree I don't consider healthy.

[His Divine Shadow]

There is yet to be a reported case.

I love the "Spyware List" on their site.

Spyware List:

Macintosh Spyware

Coming soon is a complete list of spyware for the Macintosh that MacScan detects.

EDIT: Reading the about page, it looks llike it looks for stuff that act like keyloggers and spyware in case someone ever writes one

Given the attitudes here I am suprised people aren't. If I could I would.

[His Divine Shadow]

If its possible, I'm sure someone will try it. Apple has been under MSFT's wing for a bit now. Bad habits are sure to rub off, even with Steve Jobs overwatching. I still can't believe Apple is considering using Intel over AMD chips.

Thats weird.

[phongn]

If its possible, I'm sure someone will try it. Apple has been under MSFT's wing for a bit now. Bad habits are sure to rub off, even with Steve Jobs overwatching. I still can't believe Apple is considering using Intel over AMD chips.

When AMD produces a decent chipset and wireless connectivity then Apple might consider them. AMD's supply is also smaller than Intel's. In addition, Intel's next-generation CPUs look quite nice and may well compete favorably with the K8.

[The Grim Squeaker]

If its possible, I'm sure someone will try it. Apple has been under MSFT's wing for a bit now. Bad habits are sure to rub off, even with Steve Jobs overwatching. I still can't believe Apple is considering using Intel over AMD chips.

Thats weird.

Firstly Intels pentium 5 should be much more power efficient than the current junk, secondly Apple is hoping for Dell level discounts that AMD can't match for going to intel only processors.

[His Divine Shadow]

If its possible, I'm sure someone will try it. Apple has been under MSFT's wing for a bit now. Bad habits are sure to rub off, even with Steve Jobs overwatching. I still can't believe Apple is considering using Intel over AMD chips.

Thats weird.

Firstly Intels pentium 5 should be much more power efficient than the current junk, secondly Apple is hoping for Dell level discounts that AMD can't match for going to intel only processors.

Yeah well what I found weird was that he couldn't believe why Apple would chose Intel over AMD, I thought the reasons where well known.

[Praxis]

If its possible, I'm sure someone will try it. Apple has been under MSFT's wing for a bit now. Bad habits are sure to rub off, even with Steve Jobs overwatching. I still can't believe Apple is considering using Intel over AMD chips.

Obviously, I am not a Mac user, just a wannabe, so that is probably showing too. The people I know who do use Macs seem to think it is invulnerable, to a degree I don't consider healthy.

Intel sucks right now except for the Pentium M, but their roadmap is actually quite good. Their next gen products are much more power efficient, 64-bit and multicore.

[General Brock]

Intel sucks right now except for the Pentium M, but their roadmap is actually quite good. Their next gen products are much more power efficient, 64-bit and multicore.

Well, I know AMD has a rep for dropping the ball, but it has that indy cachet Apple likes to cultivate, whereas Intel does not, from a business point-of-view. According to the news that pops up on CNN Money and elsewhere, AMD is building a new factory in Singapore, and has a decent product line that is constantly improving. Its long-term prospects are as rosy as Intel's. AMD was first out with dual-core and 64-bit processing, I think.

It's been suggested Apple wants more MSFT compatablilty, and as Death suggested, maybe they want to score a deal on chipsets like Dell.

From where I am sitting, AMD and Intel leapfrog over one another in performance regularly. Overall Apple's decision seems based more upon business politics, or connections, not careful marketing and sound design. The Ipod and other products are making money for Apple now, less so the computers, and the only reason a lot of people seem to buy Macs, if they don't actually need a Mac, is because Macs have a trendy-looking shell.

AMD may or may not have supply problems right now, but even the mini Macs aren't exactly flying off the shelves relative to the PC clones. A Mac contract would have been a huge boost for AMD. For Intel, it firms up an already strong market position, and gives them rep points for being associated with Mac and is cadres of loyalists. I don't think AMD would have any trouble meeting the demand for hypothetical Mac AMD chipsets.

Also, many chip-savvy members on this board use AMD chipsets, and are well pleased by them, which is as sound an endorsement as any I can think of. Personally, I haven't felt good about Intel since I read about the PIII serial codes controversies, and I was already sort of iffy over something called a 'floating point bug' that screwed PII calcuating accuracy. I'm new to looking at chips, of course, however so far all I've been able to gather is that some AMDs run hot and might break down a little easier than an equivalent Intel, and that seems solveable by better designed cooling systems. AMD users seem to enjoy better features and functionality at a good price.

As for Securemac, well these guys seem legit and sincere. If there is Mac malware out there, it would not be generated by generic Windows hacks who can't help but fall into a gaping Windows exploit. It would more likely be from programmers actually knowledgeable about computers deliberately looking to filch data from industries dominated by the Mac. Most home users probably wouldn't be affected, since the targets would be more specific and operating at a more professional level.

[phongn]

Well, I know AMD has a rep for dropping the ball, but it has that indy cachet Apple likes to cultivate, whereas Intel does not, from a business point-of-view. According to the news that pops up on CNN Money and elsewhere, AMD is building a new factory in Singapore, and has a decent product line that is constantly improving. Its long-term prospects are as rosy as Intel's. AMD was first out with dual-core and 64-bit processing, I think.

Even with AMD's new fabs they can't match Intel's might in manufacturing, nor do they offer a "complete" solution. Multiple-core CPUs and 64-bit processing existed before AMD's K8, and Intel has had IA64 for years.

From where I am sitting, AMD and Intel leapfrog over one another in performance regularly. Overall Apple's decision seems based more upon business politics, or connections, not careful marketing and sound design. The Ipod and other products are making money for Apple now, less so the computers, and the only reason a lot of people seem to buy Macs, if they don't actually need a Mac, is because Macs have a trendy-looking shell.

That, and people are fed up with Windows. It might not be the most rational of decisions but for the moment, OS X is relatively secure. Also, Intel can almost certainly give Apple better pricing than AMD can.

I don't think AMD would have any trouble meeting the demand for hypothetical Mac AMD chipsets.

Are you sure about that? Furthermore, AMD barely dabbles in chipets while Intel consistently puts out quality chipsets. I can only remember the 760-series and 8000 chipsets from AMD while Intel continuously produces them.

Also, many chip-savvy members on this board use AMD chipsets, and are well pleased by them, which is as sound an endorsement as any I can think of.

Feh. That's no endorsement for a multi-billion dollar company.

Personally, I haven't felt good about Intel since I read about the PIII serial codes controversies, and I was already sort of iffy over something called a 'floating point bug' that screwed PII calcuating accuracy. I'm new to looking at chips, of course, however so far all I've been able to gather is that some AMDs run hot and might break down a little easier than an equivalent Intel, and that seems solveable by better designed cooling systems. AMD users seem to enjoy better features and functionality at a good price.

The serial code uproar was massively overblown (note that other systems had done this (IIRC, SPARC was a prime example) and virtually every computer already has a publically available unique id - your NIC's MAC) and the FPU bug was was on P5 core from nearly ten years ago.

As for Securemac, well these guys seem legit and sincere. If there is Mac malware out there, it would not be generated by generic Windows hacks who can't help but fall into a gaping Windows exploit. It would more likely be from programmers actually knowledgeable about computers deliberately looking to filch data from industries dominated by the Mac. Most home users probably wouldn't be affected, since the targets would be more specific and operating at a more professional level.

Much spyware/malware on Windows is installed with the consent of the user. Should OS X gain a sizable marketshare we'll see people going through every security wall OS X throws up before installation.

It doesn't help that most Windows users run as Administrator, either, or that most programmers seem to be intent on requiring Administrator access (%USERPROFILE% and HKCU exist for a reason!)

[General Brock]

Might in manufacturing didn't help Intel overcome a glut in the chip market; their better pricing was not entirely by choice. Sure, AMD was also affected, but their expendatures, if only by accident, were better in tune with market demand. I would agree that people are fed up with Windows, but most will put up with it if they need it for work and play.

Still, I don't know that AMD could match a resurgent Mac market. The fact that Intel puts out a lot of chipsets dosen't impress me as much as the fact that AMD but out only a few, and some went over really well, though. Dell never impressed me with its tradeoffs, although that probably is reflective of Dell designs, not INtel capabilities.

OK, so SDNet isn't going to swing the chip industry, I'll concede. The thing is, you are right, Intel can can continue to dominate from sheer momentum, and experience. We'll see with the PV how their corporate culture has matured, I suppose.

[Xisiqomelir]

*Video Players. I'm not entirely sure of Quicktime's compatability, but I need something that can handle Dual Audio OGM files, .AVI, AC3 .AVI, .MKV, and .WMV formats.

QuickTime with DivX 5.2.1 installed will play most AVIs just fine. If you're looking for Ogg and MKV (people actually use that?), VLC is, regrettably, your best option.

For WMV, you might want to spend $10 on the Flip4Mac WMV component for QuickTime. It's made Windows Media actually tolerable. Windows Media Player for Mac OS X is a god-awful mess, and I avoid VLC and MPlayer at all costs.

WMP is of course ghastly, but why don't you like Mplayer D?

[Pu-239]

What's wrong w/ VLC or Mplayer?

[Vendetta]

Mplayer, unless there's a version I'm not aware of, doesn't like HD windows media files. Plays everything else though.