First of all, I know that there will be a lot of differing opinions on this topic, I just want to get a sense of the pros and cons.

I'm in the market for a new Laptop and I'm willing to make the long term investment since I will be working on it for quite some time; my best guess is 3+ years at least.

So, I've been really getting sucked into the whole "Apple Fanboy" phase after getting my iPhone 4 in January and 4S on release day.

I haven't purchased a laptop. Ever. I've had a couple of netbooks in the past, but that was when netbooks were still cool. I used to be into customizing my own desktops to make sure I can play the games that I want (ie: Starcraft 2).

More recently, I've been getting into a lot of web design and photoshop and am looking to take it to the next level and go full time in January, after I graduate College.

Now that we have all the background info, here's what I'm torn against:


QUESTION LOCATED BELOW EVERYTHING UP TOP IS JUST BACKGROUND INFO. SKIP IF YOU WANT TO.

Like I said, I haven't been doing the whole Laptop thing, but there's one thing I know: I HATE the trackpad--a mouse is a MUST.

Now, I plan on using this computer for web design, photoshop, and also PLAYING GAMES. Nothing too demanding, something like SC2, D3(when it's out), Dota 2. I do want an all around experience, but I also want the perk of having frustration-free times. I get the BSOD occasionally on my Windows Desktop and it annoys the hell out of me.

Would it be beneficial to dish out about $1200 on a Macbook Pro or something like this:
http://slickdeals.net/forums/showthread.php?t=3566526

I've always been a Windows guy, but after fooling around with the Mac a little, I'm starting to like it. Will a Mac be easier in the longrun for me to accomplish all my work on in the future and satisfy my gaming needs? And will the Windows stay suckerfree in the the 3+ year length that I plan on using it for?


SD has been good to me for advice for helping me pick out gifts in the past, so I hope I can get some help with this too! Thank you so much in advanced! :wave::wave:

The question lies in how much eye candy you expect while gaming... gaming on a laptop always raises the cost, more so on a Mac (since you're looking at 15" models on up for discrete graphics). Everything else, just go with the Mac. Give the trackpad a chance, with the gestures and such, you'll find yourself using it more - the Mac has the best trackpad in the business. But keep a Bluetooth mouse linked to it too.

If you're fine with non-PC gaming, then just leave gaming on your 360/PS3 console, and you'll be perfectly fine with any Mac. I keep a relatively cheap gaming desktop around since I prefer the PC to a console... $500-600 type build that might get refreshed every 3 years or so.

OP,

I use both Windows and OS X. I support an office with Windows computers and an office with OS X computers, so I'm in a fairly unique position to see both systems work at their best and their worst.

At the moment, I find that computers running OS X and computers running Windows tend to both have similar reliability. Computers running OS X crash no more or less frequently than those running Windows.

Moreover, simple tasks are easy to accomplish on OS X (as they are in Windows), but OS X is NOT frustration free.

Will a Mac be easier in the longrun for me to accomplish all my work on in the future and satisfy my gaming needs? And will the Windows stay suckerfree in the the 3+ year length that I plan on using it for?

OS X will not make your work any more or less easier than using Windows. The Windowing and menu layouts are completely different and accomplishing the same task on both computers is different, but I wouldn't say either is any easier or harder.

I'm not sure what you mean by suckerfree, though.

I've personally been considering a Macbook Air when my Lenovo T400 goes south. Mostly, because I like the small form factor and because it seems like a big step up from the eeePC clones in terms of quality and it runs most of the programs I run on my Laptop currently (e.g. Netbeans, Photoshop, etc, though OS X doesn't have Maya).

The one big difference that you will encounter is that Windows will, essentially, require anti-virus software. I've personally been using Microsoft Security Essentials, which is free and relatively non-intrusive.

Finally, as to games, I don't know of the state of the art in laptop graphics cards, but you may be much better off getting an inexpensive gaming desktop for games and not bothering with games on a PC.

You will need a copy of windows to install on your mac to play your games since most wont have a mac version.

Like I said, I haven't been doing the whole Laptop thing, but there's one thing I know: I HATE the trackpad--a mouse is a MUST.

Now, I plan on using this computer for web design, photoshop, and also PLAYING GAMES. Nothing too demanding, something like SC2, D3(when it's out), Dota 2. I do want an all around experience, but I also want the perk of having frustration-free times. I get the BSOD occasionally on my Windows Desktop and it annoys the hell out of me.

Would it be beneficial to dish out about $1200 on a Macbook Pro or something like this:
http://slickdeals.net/forums/showthread.php?t=3566526

I've always been a Windows guy, but after fooling around with the Mac a little, I'm starting to like it. Will a Mac be easier in the longrun for me to accomplish all my work on in the future and satisfy my gaming needs? And will the Windows stay suckerfree in the the 3+ year length that I plan on using it for?

SD has been good to me for advice for helping me pick out gifts in the past, so I hope I can get some help with this too! Thank you so much in advanced! :wave::wave:

Buy a mouse.

Make sure you get something with a GPU that will do what you want, obviously. Mac's are not immune to spontaneous reboots or freezes.

You're going to get more value for your dollar in the PC market because there's more competition. Apple makes a hefty profit margin on their devices, but that aluminum case is insanely nice.

I have a Macbook and a Windows 7 Desktop, both have their pros and cons. However, on a day to day basis it's a toss up between which platform I prefer. I will say that OS X has needed less maintenance over time than my Windows installs. I've had my Macbook for 4 or 5 years now and I only did a fresh reinstall once in that time.

If you are going to be shelling out that kind of money I would suggest getting an SSD no matter what platform you go with. IMO getting a brand new computer without an SSD is a complete waste of money because my 5 year old Macbook will run circles around your brand new computer. I kid you not, my 1st gen Macbook is faster than the current Macbook Pro with standard hard drive in 90% of day to day operations.

it wont really matter what computer you get if you can't properly maintain it.

it wont really matter what computer you get if you can't properly maintain it.

What do you mean? Change oil regularly? rotate the tires?

Isn't an OS or file system usually doing most "computer maintenance" ?

Two suggestions in terms of Mac.

1. Either save a few more dollars and buy the low end Pro 15" which provides the 6750M video card. A pretty good, dedicated video card as opposed to the on-board HD 3000 found in the 13" Pro line-up. The step up is worth the extra $$$, if you're going Mac.

2. Wait and see what happens when the Pro line-up gets refreshed early next year (Spring-ish) with the newest Ivy Bridge CPU's. It's supposed to bring a huge increase in performance over the current generation of processors found in the Macbooks.

Of course you can probably find a Windows laptop with more bells and whistles for less than all this.

long term investment and computer doesn't go togather.

What do you mean? Change oil regularly? rotate the tires?

Isn't an OS or file system usually doing most "computer maintenance" ?
keeping the computer updated, making sure your malware detection software is cleared, clear out cookies/temp files on a normal bases, stuff like that

keeping the computer updated, making sure your malware detection software is cleared, clear out cookies/temp files on a normal bases, stuff like that

I don't do that on my Mac and have never done that.

keeping the computer updated, making sure your malware detection software is cleared, clear out cookies/temp files on a normal bases, stuff like that

If a user were to not follow your advice, their computer won't necessarily becomes less stable, regardless of OS.

I don't do that on my Mac and have never done that.
obviously im talking from a windows point of view and not a OSX point of view, but still if you don't watch what you do online, what you install, you'll find your computer getting sluggish with some sort of performance loss as the days go by.

If a user were to not follow your advice, their computer won't necessarily becomes less stable, regardless of OS.
they wouldn't necessarily be more stable too, regardless of OS
i personally am not one who believes you should have no malware/av protection, many people have gone to the "its not needed" route.
I also don't believe in say not updating windows on at least a monthly basis, but again lots of people don't do that

To each their own.

Either way, my comment to the OP was a computer won't get sluggish or "sucker" by itself, it depends how its uses/maintained.
If you're installing programs/drivers all the time without properly uninstalling them, you'll find your comp slowing down more.

aww hell I ran across my old Vic20 yesterday and a bunch of tapes for the cassette drive. You don't need any malware/av protection on that one, lol.

Why is it so hard to throw that junk out? Vic20, C64, Amiga 500, Amiga 2000, TRS-80... I even winced at the 486 and box of ISA cards going to the junk... Those were the good old days...

keeping the computer updated, making sure your malware detection software is cleared, clear out cookies/temp files on a normal bases, stuff like that

You do not need to do that stuff on a Mac. Especially the Malware detection software - MacOS does not run any.

To OP: Mac WILL NOT satisfy your gaming needs unless you also load up Windows (dual boot using Boot Camp). As for everything else, You can do eveyrthing on Mac that you can on Windows and visa-versa, it just generally takes a few less clicks on the Mac.

You do not need to do that stuff on a Mac. Especially the Malware detection software - MacOS does not run any.

To OP: Mac WILL NOT satisfy your gaming needs unless you also load up Windows (dual boot using Boot Camp). As for everything else, You can do eveyrthing on Mac that you can on Windows and visa-versa, it just generally takes a few less clicks on the Mac.
I don't do that on my Mac and have never done that.

OS X still needs updates and browsers are browsers everywhere, whether or not you have a Windows system or Mac.

As for games, Starcraft 2 runs fine on my Macbook Pro with integrated graphics.

You do not need to do that stuff on a Mac. Especially the Malware detection software - MacOS does not run any.

This is a common misconception, viruses and exploits do exist for OS X. The problem is also exacerbated by Apple's typically slow attention to whatever problem may exist. However, there is the consolation that they are far less common than the Windows variety, but they do exist.

OS X still needs updates and browsers are browsers everywhere, whether or not you have a Windows system or Mac.

As for games, Starcraft 2 runs fine on my Macbook Pro with integrated graphics.


Thank you everyone for all of your input and taking time out of the day to help me! Reps for all!

I'm getting the sense that navigation is a bit easier on the Mac, especially without a mouse, but that's about it. Windows OS is cheaper because of the competitiveness in the market, and I've always been a Windows guy, so I'll probably end up going with that, unless my Apple friend can get me the 25% employee discount she currently has(you get one a year) *grin*.

I suppose games isn't too big of a deal since I'll probably have to update my desktop soon anyway, since it's been 5 real-life years, which equates to 600 computer years.

Thanks so much for being such a good community. I hope in the future, I'll be able to help the same way. :hug:

Thank you everyone for all of your input and taking time out of the day to help me! Reps for all!

Here's a sort of intangible to consider. Resale values on Macbooks have traditionally been pretty high. Relative to Window's laptops that is. Assuming that trend continues, you may recoup some of those costs on resale with a Macbook vs. resale on a Windows laptop. Not sure it would wind up a wash though. Depends on the deal of course.

Anyway, any new laptop you get is going to feel great I'm sure. I ran a Compaq laptop for 7 years until I sold it a few months ago and purchased a Macbook. Never had any issues with it. Good luck, and have fun shopping!

I'm getting the sense that navigation is a bit easier on the Mac, especially without a mouse, but that's about it.

Without a mouse at all, meaning just with keyboard shortcuts? I find Windows is better in this regard. OTOH, I haven't met a trackpad as good as my Macbook Pro's. I prefer it even over Lenovo's vaunted TrackPoint.

Windows OS is cheaper because of the competitiveness in the market, and I've always been a Windows guy, so I'll probably end up going with that, unless my Apple friend can get me the 25% employee discount she currently has(you get one a year) *grin*.

Windows laptops tend to be cheaper when you look at cheaper, lower quality systems. Price starts evening out when you look at the Windows business systems (Lenovo ThinkPad, Dell Latitude, HP EliteBook), maybe even going a little in favor of Apple.

I find the construction and quality of my MacBook Pro is on par only with Lenovo's systems. Specifically, my Mac feels every bit as good as my work ThinkPad W520. And even then it's considerably lighter. I've had Latitudes and seen EliteBooks, and they're a step down, but still better quality than regular consumer laptops.

This is a common misconception, viruses and exploits do exist for OS X. The problem is also exacerbated by Apple's typically slow attention to whatever problem may exist. However, there is the consolation that they are far less common than the Windows variety, but they do exist.

Don't ever assume that a user won't get one either. My GF got the gay porn one which required you to enter in your system password for an unauthorized install!!! :facepalm2:

Without a mouse at all, meaning just with keyboard shortcuts? I find Windows is better in this regard.
:iagree:

Don't ever assume that a user won't get one either. My GF got the gay porn one which required you to enter in your system password for an unauthorized install!!! :facepalm2:
And let's not forget that malware earlier this year that was able to install without a user's password.

And of course there's another one circulating right now: http://www.tuaw.com/2011/11/18/devilrobber-now-improved-still-nasty-malware-threat/

You do not need to do that stuff on a Mac. Especially the Malware detection software - MacOS does not run any.
.
Tell that to all the companies that sell malware programs for Macs. (Eset, Mcafee, Norton, MacScan, etc)

Tell that to all the companies that sell malware programs for Macs. (Eset, Mcafee, Norton, MacScan, etc)

I work in and with dozens of companies with hybrid networks. None run anti-virus or anti-malware on their Macs. None have any problems with them. The companies selling the programs are going to tell you that you need them because they want to make money.

I work in and with dozens of companies with hybrid networks. None run anti-virus or anti-malware on their Macs. None have any problems with them. The companies selling the programs are going to tell you that you need them because they want to make money.
I don't use an anti virus program (with Windows) either, nor do several of my friends. Unfortunately, all that means is that we aren't prone and we know how to avoid them.
You theorize that Macs don't need AV or malware programs. If that is so, why is it that Apple themselves admit they do and have even put some anti malware program into their latest OS?
I'll be the first to admit that I am not an experienced Mac user, thus I can only go by what I read and observe from others. Had I not known that Apple themselves have introduced some anti malware into their latest OS, and have been officially quoted as recommending both AV and anti malware, I would have assumed what you said, that those AV companies are just trying to sell their products.

Doesn't hurt to be careful, you could still get PC infected files too and pass those on. OP, just get Sophos for free (home use) and call it done...

http://www.sophos.com/en-us/products/free-tools/sophos-antivirus-for-mac-home-edition.aspx

I work in and with dozens of companies with hybrid networks. None run anti-virus or anti-malware on their Macs. None have any problems with them. The companies selling the programs are going to tell you that you need them because they want to make money.

And I know notworks that do use antivirus for windows pc's. Windows (vista/7) / mac as an os are both very secure it tends to come down to user, no os can protect you if the user is dumb/ tricked etc.

, no os can protect you if the user is dumb/ tricked etc.
You can say that again.
At least 75% of the virus infected computers that I fix. all come from the same place, an online pop up that tells the users that their machines are infected. At that point, anything they touch on that page is an acceptance to download and install the virus/malware, and then it takes control, offering to fix the problems, after you pay X amount of dollars with your CC. (they don't actually even have any software to clean up their own mess)
For informed people, when that window pop up occurs, it's as easy as opening the task manager and getting rid of it. For the novices, we suggest that they do a hard kill on the machine.
The point of all this is to support what mrbobhcrhs said, in the hopes that those who are listening, become more informed and subsequently, more secure.

You can say that again.
At least 75% of the virus infected computers that I fix. all come from the same place, an online pop up that tells the users that their machines are infected. At that point, anything they touch on that page is an acceptance to download and install the virus/malware, and then it takes control, offering to fix the problems, after you pay X amount of dollars with your CC. (they don't actually even have any software to clean up their own mess)
For informed people, when that window pop up occurs, it's as easy as opening the task manager and getting rid of it. For the novices, we suggest that they do a hard kill on the machine.
The point of all this is to support what mrbobhcrhs said, in the hopes that those who are listening, become more informed and subsequently, more secure.
You can also add that you need an AV on mac/linux to help stop the spread of crap via usb sticks to other computers. While on linux there is only a few known viruses does not mean I cant download a virus and infect my windows machines.

I work in and with dozens of companies with hybrid networks. None run anti-virus or anti-malware on their Macs. None have any problems with them. APPLE The companies selling the programs are is going to tell you that you DON'T need them because they want to make money.

Apple gets malware, too.

I admit that there is Macintosh malware, but the number of active malware apps out there that can infect an unprotected Mac running the latest OS is very low, maybe under ten. On the Windows side the number is maybe 1,000?

I admit that there is Macintosh malware, but the number of active malware apps out there that can infect an unprotected Mac running the latest OS is very low, maybe under ten. On the Windows side the number is maybe 1,000?
I don't know that those numbers are correct, but if you went by market share, it would be normal to expect a 20 to 1 ratio, but more importantly, what is your point?
Is it that Macs don't need virus and malware protection?
If so, you might want to read the last few posts before yours.
If not, please explain what the point is.

I don't do that on my Mac and have never done that.

I admit that there is Macintosh malware, but the number of active malware apps out there that can infect an unprotected Mac running the latest OS is very low, maybe under ten. On the Windows side the number is maybe 1,000?

most mac users don't run the latest OS if they don't do any updates

also, 5.8% of macs are infected (http://www.dailytech.com/Apple+Orders+Technicians+to+Feign+Ignorance+About+Mac+Malware/article21693.htm)

while for windows users it's more like 1-2% (http://www.zdnet.com/blog/bott/how-prevalent-is-malware-on-windows-pcs/3148)

now, why those numbers? 90% of that is the user, and attitudes like yours that ignore the problem - what does that number mean? that there are less programs targeting mac users, yet they are much more effective then the windows counterparts, because of the users.

long term investment and computer doesn't go togather.
I've had my Macbook 6 years now I think? A lot of people keep their Macs longer than their Windows laptops. And no, I'm not a fanboy. I'm not even a boy :lol: I did end up upgrading my Macbook recently (but my other one still works) and my other computer is a PC I built myself.

I prefer Mac OS X, but that's just me.

You can easily use a mouse with any laptop, but the trackpad on a Macbook Pro is a dream to use.

This is a common misconception, viruses and exploits do exist for OS X. The problem is also exacerbated by Apple's typically slow attention to whatever problem may exist. However, there is the consolation that they are far less common than the Windows variety, but they do exist.
I challenge one slickdeals user to share their experiences with getting a virus on OS X. I can share many about getting viruses on Windows (mostly XP, and mostly when my parents and sisters were practicing less than desirable computer maintenance, none since I've had a Win 7 computer that I'm the only user on),

I've had my Macbook 6 years now I think? A lot of people keep their Macs longer than their Windows laptops. And no, I'm not a fanboy. I'm not even a boy :lol: I did end up upgrading my Macbook recently (but my other one still works) and my other computer is a PC I built myself.

I prefer Mac OS X, but that's just me.

You can easily use a mouse with any laptop, but the trackpad on a Macbook Pro is a dream to use.
well, I've got a HP from 1997, winnote from 1995, and some IBM desktop from even earlier. but all those doesn't mean much.

the HP only gets used when I play red alert., and I don't even use the other two.

most mac users don't run the latest OS if they don't do any updates

also, 5.8% of macs are infected (http://www.dailytech.com/Apple+Orders+Technicians+to+Feign+Ignorance+About+Mac+Malware/article21693.htm).5.8% according to an unsubstantiated blog entry. Yeah, sure

5.8% according to an unsubstantiated blog entry. Yeah, sure

care to find a better one? and that is from a quote from an apple employee

most mac users don't run the latest OS if they don't do any updates

also, 5.8% of macs are infected (http://www.dailytech.com/Apple+Orders+Technicians+to+Feign+Ignorance+About+Mac+Malware/article21693.htm)

while for windows users it's more like 1-2% (http://www.zdnet.com/blog/bott/how-prevalent-is-malware-on-windows-pcs/3148)

now, why those numbers? 90% of that is the user, and attitudes like yours that ignore the problem - what does that number mean? that there are less programs targeting mac users, yet they are much more effective then the windows counterparts, because of the users.


I think you're reading that 5.8% wrong. It's not 5.8% of all Macs. I took it to mean that 5.8% of the computers being serviced were infected...of course that number is going to be higher...they are being serviced.

Andy says that in the past about 0.2 percent of service Macs were suffering from some kind of malware -- "most always DNS trojans." Now that number soared to around 5.8 percent, mostly thanks to MacDefender -- a trojan that DailyTech previously reported on

The bottom line is that these people who have had problems with malware are installing it themselves...If you don't know not to install unknown software, then it probably doesn't matter what operating system you have.

I've had Macs for over a decade and have yet to experience any virus/malware/trojan. I've done my share of Downloading/Torrenting/P2P. I can't tell you the amount of virus' I've experience on Windows computers in that time. I just had to get a new HP at work because I came in on a Monday and my computer was infected. And on my work computer I don't have permissions to DL or install anything.

Most of the AV/Anti-Malware software for Mac's (and Windows for that matter) are system drainers. And anti-virus software is useless on OS X. Remember most of that software is to combat known viruses. And frankly, there aren't many known viruses in the wild for OS X. If a new virus is made to infect, the anti-virus software won't help anyway. If you are responsible in what you are Downloading and Installing it's almost impossible to get Malware.

I know Windows users sometimes get bent out of shape about the virus situation on Macs...any maybe as their market share rises so will these outbreaks. But right now, OS X is more secure. Period.

I think you're reading that 5.8% wrong. It's not 5.8% of all Macs. I took it to mean that 5.8% of the computers being serviced were infected...of course that number is going to be higher...they are being serviced.

Considering that would be the guy's only source of data then that should confirm that. So in the wild it could be 5.8% or it could be 0.0000000001%.

I actually got the Macdefender trojan almost a year ago and information was definitely scarce and Apple's site was no help. I honestly can't even remember how I got it at this point. The good part of it was that I stumbled upon the fix which was easy to do. At least on the mac you don't have to spend hours trying to remove malware.

5.8% according to an unsubstantiated blog entry. Yeah, sure
Those of us who prefer Windows machines over Macs, can't help but to notice that the Apple users are rather forceful and obsessed about proving to us that their machines are superior.
The reason Mac users run into so much resistance from Windows users, is because of the way they present their affection for the product, and it comes off as cult-like behavior to the rest of the world.
Wouldn't it be better to simply say "I prefer Macs", than say, "they are better" and not spend so much time trying to convert the other 95% of the world?
I know that I get tired of this repetitive argument of Mac vs PC, don't you?

Those of us who prefer Windows machines over Macs, can't help but to notice that the Apple users are rather forceful and obsessed about proving to us that their machines are superior.
The reason Mac users run into so much resistance from Windows users, is because of the way they present their affection for the product, and it comes off as cult-like behavior to the rest of the world.
Wouldn't it be better to simply say "I prefer Macs", than say, "they are better" and not spend so much time trying to convert the other 95% of the world?
I know that I get tired of this repetitive argument of Mac vs PC, don't you?


He's refuting with facts.

Those of us who prefer Windows machines over Macs, can't help but to notice that the Apple users are rather forceful and obsessed about proving to us that their machines are superior.
The reason Mac users run into so much resistance from Windows users, is because of the way they present their affection for the product, and it comes off as cult-like behavior to the rest of the world.
Wouldn't it be better to simply say "I prefer Macs", than say, "they are better" and not spend so much time trying to convert the other 95% of the world?
I know that I get tired of this repetitive argument of Mac vs PC, don't you?

I certainly wouldn't force anyone into purchasing a Mac if they didn't want to. However, this thread is about the difference between Macs and PC's. So, of course the virus thing is going to come up. And frankly, on this site, the hatred for Apple is just as passionate as the love is. PC users are just as defensive, as evidenced by those who have been trying to prove that Macs are just as prone to malware and viruses as PC's are.

And if you're tired of the argument, why even enter this thread? You couldn't figure out by the title that it would involve some type of debate? Come on...you want to prove us wrong just as much as we want to prove ourselves right. Difference is...at least I can admit it.

I also think it's a bit hypocritical for a guy who made a video trying to prove the Touchpad is better than the iPad to criticize the passion for Apple. It seems you've spent more energy opposing Apple than most of us spend defending it.

He's refuting with facts.
It really gets out of hand at times. I can't even mention that I like HP Touchpads over iPads without the whole Apple world coming down on me. I used to think it was funny, but after awhile, it gets to be boring & irritating.
There seems to be no way of having a non partisan intelligent conversation on the matter. It always turns into a war.
Just writing what I am writing now, I suspect I'll hear from a Mac fan, saying that it is the Windows fans who start that war, ugh.....

It really gets out of hand at times. I can't even mention that I like HP Touchpads over iPads without the whole Apple world coming down on me. I used to think it was funny, but after awhile, it gets to be boring & irritating.
There seems to be no way of having a non partisan intelligent conversation on the matter. It always turns into a war.
Just writing what I am writing now, I suspect I'll hear from a Mac fan, saying that it is the Windows fans who start that war, ugh.....


You're in an Apple thread. What do you expect? If you didn't want that, you shouldn't post in this thread.

Screw it.
It ain't worth it.
Y'all have a good time.

Screw it.
It ain't worth it.
Y'all have a good time.


This is an Apple vs. everything else thread. People have strong opinions. You seem surprised ??

It really gets out of hand at times. I can't even mention that I like HP Touchpads over iPads without the whole Apple world coming down on me. I used to think it was funny, but after awhile, it gets to be boring & irritating.
There seems to be no way of having a non partisan intelligent conversation on the matter. It always turns into a war.
Just writing what I am writing now, I suspect I'll hear from a Mac fan, saying that it is the Windows fans who start that war, ugh.....

Where exactly is there a war? There has been a debate in this thread, as the title would suggest.

And again...aren't you the guy who made a video sugggesting that the Touchpad was better than the iPad?? And you're saying the "whole Apple world comes down on you"? Dramatic much? You appear to be just as guilty as the Apple lovers you're targeting. If you can't stand the heat of a debate, stay out of the kitchen. I love people that come into these threads and then complain that it gets out of hand and leave in a huff.

Again...why click on anything that has Apple in the title?? Hypocrite.

Where exactly is there a war? There has been a debate in this thread, as the title would suggest.

And again...aren't you the guy who made a video sugggesting that the Touchpad was better than the iPad?? And you're saying the "whole Apple world comes down on you"? Dramatic much? You appear to be just as guilty as the Apple lovers you're targeting. If you can't stand the heat of a debate, stay out of the kitchen. I love people that come into these threads and then complain that it gets out of hand and leave in a huff.

Again...why click on anything that has Apple in the title?? Hypocrite.

Yes, yes he is. The video he made was false information as well. When I called him on it, he had nothing to say for himself. He isn't worth fighting with.

As far as the Touchpad, at the $99/$149 price point they were worth it, but since WebOS in a simulator on the ipad ran faster than on the native Touchpad, I think it is obvious that apples to apples the ipad is better so that at comparable prices (both $499), the ipad is a better choice, but that at the cheaper price point a touchpad was worth it.

I tried to get a touchpad at $99 to go along with my ipad2. Heck I tried to get 3 of them so everyone in the family could have a tablet.

As far as the Touchpad, at the $99/$149 price point they were worth it, but since WebOS in a simulator on the ipad ran faster than on the native Touchpad, I think it is obvious that apples to apples the ipad is better so that at comparable prices (both $499), the ipad is a better choice, but that at the cheaper price point a touchpad was worth it.

I tried to get a touchpad at $99 to go along with my ipad2. Heck I tried to get 3 of them so everyone in the family could have a tablet.

Exactly. For $99, you can't beat it. It was a functional tablet.

Hell, I DID buy 3 to go with my iPad 2. And I sold all of them. It never came in handy and never served a better purpose than my iPad does. There's no arguing that it's a great deal at $99 though.

I would only recommend a Mac if:

1. $ is no option
2. You prefer the interface and layout of OSX over Windows.
3. You're ok with installing a Windows partition on the Mac (for gaming purposes)

The malware/virus factor shouldn't be a problem. Just run a half way decent AV program and keep Windows reasonably up to date, you'll be fine.

Unless your luck is really bad (zero day exploit) or you did something really stupid ("you just won a free ______" :facepalm:), your PC will probably never get infected.

Unless your luck is really bad (zero day exploit) or you did something really stupid ("you just won a free ______" :facepalm:), your PC will probably never get infected.

You can get infected by visiting a legitimate website with an infected banner ad... didn't slickdeals get hit a while ago? No need to click on anything

You can get infected by visiting a legitimate website with an infected banner ad... didn't slickdeals get hit a while ago? No need to click on anything

A good AV on a fully patched computer should catch drive by downloads unless it's a zero day exploit.

If your AV doesn't trigger, chances are you're just watching a video (until the user interacts with the flash object). In which case, best thing you can do is physically disconnect from the internet or end the browser process.

Gotta love scareware...

I guess its the nature of the site that it attracts cheapskates amongst those looking for deals - you often get what you pay for... a Touchpad at any price, or a Playbook now too, is really just throwing money into the graveyard of dead devices with no future. Android is horribly fragmented so there's no comprehensive upgrade for all Android tablets released at any one time, so that basically leaves the iPad, and Kindle Fire, as the only truly viable tablet choices (if you value continued software updates/support over the useful life of the product).

The bottom line is that these people who have had problems with malware are installing it themselves...

MacDefender was installing itself, at one point with absolutely no user intervention whatsoever, thanks to a confluence of idiotic Apple default security policies.

MacDefender was installing itself, at one point with absolutely no user intervention whatsoever, thanks to a confluence of idiotic Apple default security policies.

Can you provide reference for this? They did get a bypass for the password prompt, but it still took a user allowing the installer to Continue. Wondering if there's a variant that was totally transparent ie. the user never sees any screens to indicate this was happening.

Again...why click on anything that has Apple in the title?? Hypocrite.

It's not worth it, just ignore him.

I would only recommend a Mac if:

1. $ is no option
2. You prefer the interface and layout of OSX over Windows.
3. You're ok with installing a Windows partition on the Mac (for gaming purposes)


You forget about the general stability of Unix. That aside, if you are going to be buying a machine for gaming, you are likely going to be buying a higher-end machine anyway. A basic machine with integrated video just does not make a good gaming machine. Also, you are likely going to want to get rid of the machine and get a better one in 2-3 years.

If you agree with those assumptions then a Mac really does not cost more. The price difference between a high-end PC and a Mac gets made up and them some when it comes to the time to sell it. Forinstance a used MacBook Pro Core 2 Duo 2.4GHz 200GB 2GB DVDRW from Ocotber 2008, which is 3 years ago, goes for $800 on eBay. That same machine was about $1100-1200 new. How much does a PC laptop depreciate in 3 years? More than $350 would be my guess.

Mac Pro machines and even Mac Minis also hold their value quite well. Mac Minis from 2007 go for $250-$350, which is about $250 less than they were 4 years ago.

That means that the total cost of ownership for a Macbook Pro or a Mac Mini is about $60-100 per year.

W

Mmm, I would hesitate on buying a mac for primarily web development. Depending on how you manage your sites, then you will be likely be using VMs to test server configurations/updates (unless you are dumping all your system administration on someone else). I probably get a kernel panic once a day on the Mac from running various VMs, ESX, or attempting to do too much on the thing at once.

Also if you ever end up doing any network testing then you will most likely need to dual boot into windows or linux. I was never able to get GNS, OPNET, or any simulated network tools to work 100% correctly. I probably spend more time on my Mac in other OSes than I do in the native OSX.

Mmm, I would hesitate on buying a mac for primarily web development. Depending on how you manage your sites, then you will be likely be using VMs to test server configurations/updates (unless you are dumping all your system administration on someone else). I probably get a kernel panic once a day on the Mac from running various VMs, ESX, or attempting to do too much on the thing at once.

Then you need to return the machine to Apple, because if that's really all you are doing, you have a bad machine. It should never crash, period, and if it does, you should have someone analyze the dump file to figure out what is wrong.

Also if you ever end up doing any network testing then you will most likely need to dual boot into windows or linux. I was never able to get GNS, OPNET, or any simulated network tools to work 100% correctly. I probably spend more time on my Mac in other OSes than I do in the native OSX.



How flexible.

Then you need to return the machine to Apple, because if that's really all you are doing, you have a bad machine. It should never crash, period, and if it does, you should have someone analyze the dump file to figure out what is wrong.

How flexible.


You are funny. According to what I can glean from var/logs and the interwebs it is a common Lion issue for it to be unstable with virtual environments. Several coworkers have reverted back to Snow Leopard, but I just boot into a more useful OS. As far as flexibility, any computer could boot multiple OSes. I'm not sure what your point was.

You are funny. According to what I can glean from var/logs and the interwebs it is a common Lion issue for it to be unstable with virtual environments. Several coworkers have reverted back to Snow Leopard, but I just boot into a more useful OS. As far as flexibility, any computer could boot multiple OSes. I'm not sure what your point was.

Yes, Lion seems to be having seizures when working with virtual machines. I also returned my laptop to SL so I could use virtual machines without kernel crashes. Parallels seems to be causing the most problems, even to the point of screwing up the OS boot.

You are funny. According to what I can glean from var/logs and the interwebs it is a common Lion issue for it to be unstable with virtual environments. Several coworkers have reverted back to Snow Leopard, but I just boot into a more useful OS. As far as flexibility, any computer could boot multiple OSes. I'm not sure what your point was.


And when you analyzed the dump file, what driver or process was to blame?


You're blaming Apple for what appears to be a problem with Parallels / Fusion. That's not Apple's fault.

And when you analyzed the dump file, what driver or process was to blame?


You're blaming Apple for what appears to be a problem with Parallels / Fusion. That's not Apple's fault.

A lot of it has to do with USB device mapping to virtual interfaces, and attempting to use tuntap interfaces on multiple virtual networks. Anyhow it's a known problem if you google around that almost all network and desktop virtualization on Lion is kind of buggy. I've had problems across fusion, parallels, virtual box, esx, and xen apps. I'm not sure why you take offense to that.

I think it's funny you think it's not Apple's fault that stuff like libcrypto, com.apple.core, and some of their standard c libraries have bugs. Almost every OS has the problems at some point. I would just hesitate buying an expensive machine just to run *nix on it for work.

A lot of it has to do with USB device mapping to virtual interfaces, and attempting to use tuntap interfaces on multiple virtual networks. Anyhow it's a known problem if you google around that almost all network and desktop virtualization on Lion is kind of buggy. I've had problems across fusion, parallels, virtual box, esx, and xen apps. I'm not sure why you take offense to that.

NOW I'm interested - how are you doing anything with ESX and XenApp under Lion? Please share your secret.

I think it's funny you think it's not Apple's fault that stuff like libcrypto, com.apple.core, and some of their standard c libraries have bugs. Almost every OS has the problems at some point. I would just hesitate buying an expensive machine just to run *nix on it for work.



You don't think it's an issue that with the bad kernel drivers from Parallels and VMWare, Lion crashes, but without, it doesn't?

NOW I'm interested - how are you doing anything with ESX and XenApp under Lion? Please share your secret.

You don't think it's an issue that with the bad kernel drivers from Parallels and VMWare, Lion crashes, but without, it doesn't?
With fusion you can run ESX servers on the mac to do virtual environment testing. I don't think it's magic. I said xenapp, but I meant their specific citrix web plug in.

It's a problem with the vendors and the Apple developers not talking together enough to fix these issues. I don't think its fair to blame only one group. It takes them working together to address all of that before an OS candidate is released.

Either way I don't think a Mac would be a good environment for web development if you do anything beyond just programming basic sites. If you have to do any of the administration it can be tricky. That was my point.

With fusion you can run ESX servers on the mac to do virtual environment testing. I don't think it's magic. I said xenapp, but I meant their specific citrix web plug in.

So basically, it's down to Fusion and Parallels and poor quality of drivers and poor testing. And somehow this is Apple's fault.


Do you blame Microsoft when poor ATI drivers cause a BSOD in Windows?

It's a problem with the vendors and the Apple developers not talking together enough to fix these issues. I don't think its fair to blame only one group. It takes them working together to address all of that before an OS candidate is released.


I'm not sure that's being fair to Apple. Do you really expect them to hold up release of an OS because Parallels and VMware can't code fast enough?

Either way I don't think a Mac would be a good environment for web development if you do anything beyond just programming basic sites. If you have to do any of the administration it can be tricky. That was my point.



Why is administration tricky on the Mac?

Can you provide reference for this? They did get a bypass for the password prompt, but it still took a user allowing the installer to Continue. Wondering if there's a variant that was totally transparent ie. the user never sees any screens to indicate this was happening.

Yeah, you're right, there was still an installer dialog. However, that it was allowed to install without a password is bad enough. That there was an installer dialog isn't a testament to Apple's security or anything, just that they didn't stack an exploit to avoid that (which does exist).

With fusion you can run ESX servers on the mac to do virtual environment testing. I don't think it's magic. I said xenapp, but I meant their specific citrix web plug in.

You're running ESX inside Fusion? That's still Fusion doing the virtualization then and it's Fusion's fault.

And how is a web plug-in crashing your whole system? This I've got to see.

Mmm, I would hesitate on buying a mac for primarily web development. Depending on how you manage your sites, then you will be likely be using VMs to test server configurations/updates (unless you are dumping all your system administration on someone else). I probably get a kernel panic once a day on the Mac from running various VMs, ESX, or attempting to do too much on the thing at once.

Why would you be doing all of that configuration testing right on your laptop? I have servers at work dedicated just for VM hosting so I can build and test system configurations.

So after all of this discussion I went out and bought a MacBook Air 13" today. Love it :)

So after all of this discussion I went out and bought a MacBook Air 13" today. Love it :)

Awesome! Report back in a while and let us know if you're still loving it. They are sweet little suckers, though. :bounce:

I'm a Mac And I'm a PC and it doesn't matter what OS you have


Disclaimer: Mac user

Awesome! Report back in a while and let us know if you're still loving it. They are sweet little suckers, though. :bounce:

I can give you some feedback immediately. My last MacBook was a 2009 MacBook Pro 13" Core2Duo 2Ghz with a third party 128GB SSD and 4GB RAM that work had given to me.

That being said, this screen (1440x900) is much nicer than the 1280x800 than you get in a 13" MBP. It *seems* larger, more like a 14" than a 13" (technically 13.3). I have a Dell with a 15.4" 1440x900 screen and it does seem slightly smaller but not prohibitively so - the size is enough to handle 1440x900 well.

It has been a while since I used multi-touch and while I have gotten quickly used to the two-finger scroll, I changed secondary click back to right-click instead of the default double-finger click.

What I have set up: Default install plus MS Office, Growl (support them and buy for $2), mysql, Smarty (PHP caching templates), Firefox, Dropbox, iStat menus 2, Cyberduck.

Speed: Wow. I expected a Core i5 1.7 to be faster than a Core2Duo 2.0 and it is a bit faster, but the surprise is the drive. I am working on a web project that, in setting up a new project, needs to load up an old database, then upgrade it to v2. The v2 upgrade has taken as long as a minute on an old pentium-based server, 10 seconds on an i5 server with software RAID 2TB drives, 6 seconds on an I7-based hackintosh with a 2TB drive (WD 2TB). On this machine it was basically finished as quickly as the web page saying so could be refreshed.

Weight: That is where this really excels. It weighs almost nothing. I am told that so-called "Ultrabooks" will be "the thing" at CES this year. I will actually be reporting from CES for CMEOnline, so we shall see, but for now, this is the lightest usable machine I have ever tried.

Is it worth $2k? $2k being $1599 plus tax plus 3year square trade warranty with accidental add-on ($350 - 20% coupon) and $10 for a thunderbolt to HDMI external monitor cable. I guess time will tell. Realistically the Dell Vostro that I fitted to be able to be like a MacBook Pro a few years ago with the same 3-year cover-everything warranty ran about 20% less, but that was not this light.

On the other hand for about $300 less you can get an Acer Ultrabook with a slower CPU and smaller drive. If you are a Windows user, that is probably a better bet, but I have not had a chance to try one of those out yet. It is even on sale at amazon for $1199 for black friday (discounted now) http://www.amazon.com/dp/B005UBT7PS .

Would I get the Acer? No - and not just because it is a Windows machine. Why? No way to drive an external monitor. I use my laptop(s) at conventions, both to display PowerPoints when I am lecturing and at booths when I am showing, so no way to drive an external monitor is a fatal flaw to me.

W

What I have set up: Default install plus MS Office, Growl (support them and buy for $2), mysql, Smarty (PHP caching templates), Firefox, Dropbox, iStat menus 2, Cyberduck.

I have a feeling you might like menu meters (although I've never tried iStat menus).
http://www.ragingmenace.com/software/menumeters/

I can give you some feedback immediately. My last MacBook was a 2009 MacBook Pro 13" Core2Duo 2Ghz with a third party 128GB SSD and 4GB RAM that work had given to me.

That being said, this screen (1440x900) is much nicer than the 1280x800 than you get in a 13" MBP. It *seems* larger, more like a 14" than a 13" (technically 13.3). I have a Dell with a 15.4" 1440x900 screen and it does seem slightly smaller but not prohibitively so - the size is enough to handle 1440x900 well.

It has been a while since I used multi-touch and while I have gotten quickly used to the two-finger scroll, I changed secondary click back to right-click instead of the default double-finger click.

What I have set up: Default install plus MS Office, Growl (support them and buy for $2), mysql, Smarty (PHP caching templates), Firefox, Dropbox, iStat menus 2, Cyberduck.

Speed: Wow. I expected a Core i5 1.7 to be faster than a Core2Duo 2.0 and it is a bit faster, but the surprise is the drive. I am working on a web project that, in setting up a new project, needs to load up an old database, then upgrade it to v2. The v2 upgrade has taken as long as a minute on an old pentium-based server, 10 seconds on an i5 server with software RAID 2TB drives, 6 seconds on an I7-based hackintosh with a 2TB drive (WD 2TB). On this machine it was basically finished as quickly as the web page saying so could be refreshed.

Weight: That is where this really excels. It weighs almost nothing. I am told that so-called "Ultrabooks" will be "the thing" at CES this year. I will actually be reporting from CES for CMEOnline, so we shall see, but for now, this is the lightest usable machine I have ever tried.

Is it worth $2k? $2k being $1599 plus tax plus 3year square trade warranty with accidental add-on ($350 - 20% coupon) and $10 for a thunderbolt to HDMI external monitor cable. I guess time will tell. Realistically the Dell Vostro that I fitted to be able to be like a MacBook Pro a few years ago with the same 3-year cover-everything warranty ran about 20% less, but that was not this light.

On the other hand for about $300 less you can get an Acer Ultrabook with a slower CPU and smaller drive. If you are a Windows user, that is probably a better bet, but I have not had a chance to try one of those out yet. It is even on sale at amazon for $1199 for black friday (discounted now) http://www.amazon.com/dp/B005UBT7PS .

Would I get the Acer? No - and not just because it is a Windows machine. Why? No way to drive an external monitor. I use my laptop(s) at conventions, both to display PowerPoints when I am lecturing and at booths when I am showing, so no way to drive an external monitor is a fatal flaw to me.

W
Asus ultrabook has mini HDMI out i believe.

a few things:

if you're using a windows pc (you should really have two accounts). one that's a user and can install software and one that's not and is a regular user. this will prevent a LOT.

if you're using a macbook - i'd install linux or windows (honestly). and i'm not just saying that because i work for microsoft. linux/unix is where i got my start... and for me osx just never "did it for me".

MacOS handles all that stuff for you - it handles the root / user password abstraction.

if you're using a macbook - i'd install linux or windows (honestly). and i'm not just saying that because i work for microsoft. linux/unix is where i got my start... and for me osx just never "did it for me".

Why would you spend the money on a MacBook then run Windows/Linux on it? Wouldn't the Acer be a better and cheaper choice? Also, you could call Acer and get support. pple is going going to give a heck of a lot of support if you do not have MacOS on the machine.

Asus ultrabook has mini HDMI out i believe.

OK - more research, the Asus Zenbook UX31E-DH53 with the 256GB SSD is about the same machine as I got but at $1326 vs the $1599 for the Macbook Air. Since it probably comes out of the same factory, it is probably the way to go for a Windows/Linux machine.

It does only come with Windows Home Premium, so add in the cost to upgrade to Ultimate ($80 at Amazon) to compare Apple to Asus. Apple = $1599, Asus=$1406.

OK - more research, the Asus Zenbook UX31E-DH53 with the 256GB SSD is about the same machine as I got but at $1326 vs the $1599 for the Macbook Air. Since it probably comes out of the same factory, it is probably the way to go for a Windows/Linux machine.

It does only come with Windows Home Premium, so add in the cost to upgrade to Ultimate ($80 at Amazon) to compare Apple to Asus. Apple = $1599, Asus=$1406.
why would you need ultimate??
If anything, Pro would be more than enough

noone "needs" windows 7 ultimate, its features compared to the pro edition doesn't offer anything normal consumers or even business consumers will need.

why would you need ultimate??
If anything, Pro would be more than enough

noone "needs" windows 7 ultimate, its features compared to the pro edition doesn't offer anything normal consumers or even business consumers will need.

BitLocker. Anyone who does any business work on their laptop and has anything even mildly confidential and does not encrypt it is breaching their fiduciary duty to their company. In many industries that can get your company sued and/or fined and in any industry you should encrypt your work data.

a few things:

if you're using a windows pc (you should really have two accounts). one that's a user and can install software and one that's not and is a regular user. this will prevent a LOT.

if you're using a macbook - i'd install linux or windows (honestly). and i'm not just saying that because i work for microsoft. linux/unix is where i got my start... and for me osx just never "did it for me".

linux I can kind of see...but windows?? LOL

One of the reasons I'm typing on a Mac right now is because I absolutely can't stand windows. It's bad enough I have to use it all day at work...but when I get home OS X is a breath of fresh air.

And it's cool if OS X never did it for you...that, and along with being a microsoft employee, probably means that Macs aren't for you. No biggie.

BitLocker. Anyone who does any business work on their laptop and has anything even mildly confidential and does not encrypt it is breaching their fiduciary duty to their company. In many industries that can get your company sued and/or fined and in any industry you should encrypt your work data.

do business on your business laptop that has ultimate installed.

do business on your business laptop that has ultimate installed.

But do it without encryption. That means if you take credit card and have customer info or worse yet work in the medical field and have patient info on it and lose it, you can expect anywhere from tens of thousands to millions of dollars of fines. Is it worth saving $20?

Why would you spend the money on a MacBook then run Windows/Linux on it? Wouldn't the Acer be a better and cheaper choice? Also, you could call Acer and get support. pple is going going to give a heck of a lot of support if you do not have MacOS on the machine.

*shrugs* you're right... but if someone's already made their mind up about buying a mac because the hardware is superior [quote my brother-in-law], then there's nothing you can do to save him any money... lol

linux I can kind of see...but windows?? LOL

One of the reasons I'm typing on a Mac right now is because I absolutely can't stand windows. It's bad enough I have to use it all day at work...but when I get home OS X is a breath of fresh air.

And it's cool if OS X never did it for you...that, and along with being a microsoft employee, probably means that Macs aren't for you. No biggie.

lol. well, i never liked osx (even when i did linux/unix/trusted solaris/digital unix).

BitLocker. Anyone who does any business work on their laptop and has anything even mildly confidential and does not encrypt it is breaching their fiduciary duty to their company. In many industries that can get your company sued and/or fined and in any industry you should encrypt your work data.
thats what truecrypt is for.
besides, if you're buying a laptop for work use, i'd assume your company's IT dept will put their software/etc on it. They would most likely put their windows 7 enterprise on it.

thats what truecrypt is for.
besides, if you're buying a laptop for work use, i'd assume your company's IT dept will put their software/etc on it. They would most likely put their windows 7 enterprise on it.

You are assuming a large company if you are assuming Enterprise. I (for instance) am a consultant and buy my own hardware. As for Truecrypt, I was trying to do, as much as possible, an Apples to Apples comparison. Ultimate is the closest to Lion.

Also, by clients are, by and large, single practitioner doctors or ones in small groups. They do not have Windows Enterprise either. I am lucky if they know what a computer ishalf the time :( To meet HIPAA standards they need to have encryption. Which do you think is easier
for a doctor - Built-in encryption for $20 or having to deal with TrueCrypt after-the-fact?

It really does depend on your scenario of course, but for me, Ultimate is generally the better candidate by far, although when I work with someone who has technical savvy, I tell them to use TrueCrypt.

W

BitLocker. Anyone who does any business work on their laptop and has anything even mildly confidential and does not encrypt it is breaching their fiduciary duty to their company. In many industries that can get your company sued and/or fined and in any industry you should encrypt your work data.

or you can use bitlocker with pro, or use a better encryption program like true crypt, Bit locker is crap and more of a hassle.

or you can use bitlocker with pro, or use a better encryption program like true crypt, Bit locker is crap and more of a hassle.


How would you do enterprise management of true crypt? There's an advantage to having it made by Microsoft. :)

or you can use bitlocker with pro, or use a better encryption program like true crypt, Bit locker is crap and more of a hassle.

You are talking from a technical standpoint, and technically I agree with you, but you are not taking into account that much of the world is governed by silly regulations that politicians decide upon. In those cases, BitLocker has been accepted for longer and is looked upon far more favorably. As for more of a hassle, I respectfully disagree - I find BitLocker to be slightly easier to explain to my clients.

How would you do enterprise management of true crypt? There's an advantage to having it made by Microsoft. :)
Well true crypt was an example, but made my ms would be a flaw in my book. beyond being a pain no way to bypass bit locker to do a wol to push updates is a big pain. Add in a number of issues with pins stop working, it not encrypting, bla bla bla.

Well true crypt was an example, but made my ms would be a flaw in my book. beyond being a pain no way to bypass bit locker to do a wol to push updates is a big pain. Add in a number of issues with pins stop working, it not encrypting, bla bla bla.


Being from Microsoft is a massive benefit, because I know I can use GPOs to manage the entire thing, I can call one number for good support, and I have one company to escalate to in case of an issue.

I can call one number for good support, and I have one company to escalate to in case of an issue.

Have you tested this theory out? If their support for bitlocker is anything like the support for their softswitch you'd have better luck googling (which is what I'm sure their support does)

Tell me more about Microsoft's softswitch.

Tell me more about Microsoft's softswitch.

It's the MS Lync thing
Doesn't respond to OPTIONS pings (when their support said it should)... only seems to work with TCP (when every other SS can work with UDP)

or you can use bitlocker with pro, or use a better encryption program like true crypt, Bit locker is crap and more of a hassle.
How is BitLocker crap? Is the encryption substandard? No. Is the user interface difficult to work with? No. Does it lack enterprise management features, like roaming accounts and key recovery? No.

Or are you just trolling?

It's the MS Lync thing
Doesn't respond to OPTIONS pings (when their support said it should)... only seems to work with TCP (when every other SS can work with UDP)
Because one person's support experience on a relatively new product is indicative of the support experience on entirely other, more established products, right? ;)

And he's got a point. Truecrypt does not compare to Bitlocker in an enterprise scenario. The closest would be PGP's offerings, which are crap (not the encryption, just every other part).

Because one person's support experience on a relatively new product is indicative of the support experience on entirely other, more established products, right? ;)

You'll notice I didn't claim it was the same. I merely asked if he'd tried the support he appeared to have confidence in.

Bitlocker isn't what I'm seeing true enterprises (ie. real big business) go with - even though they already have Windows 7 Enterprise being rolled (Bitlocker was lousier in Vis-crap). Its just not what security side trusts enough, plus there's often older Windows versions still in production that must continue to be supported.

PGP Whole Disk Encryption and Check Point Full Disk Encryption are used instead - with Check Point FDE being the lead choice.

You'll notice I didn't claim it was the same. I merely asked if he'd tried the support he appeared to have confidence in.
I know, I was just yanking your chain. ;)

Bitlocker isn't what I'm seeing true enterprises (ie. real big business) go with - even though they already have Windows 7 Enterprise being rolled (Bitlocker was lousier in Vis-crap). Its just not what security side trusts enough, plus there's often older Windows versions still in production that must continue to be supported.

PGP Whole Disk Encryption and Check Point Full Disk Encryption are used instead - with Check Point FDE being the lead choice.

PGP's interface is a big steaming pile... I really don't know why enterprises choose it. My company even warns me not to lose my password, since their recovery servers have been known to lose the recovery key after it's been registered. You can absolutely forget about recovery for external drives. And it's also been known to ruin some people's systems (either making them unbootable, or extremely slow).

BitLocker seamless for me at home.

PGP's interface is a big steaming pile...

None of them are really elegant I guess... the Checkpoint offering is clunky when getting systems registered/linked to a user's AD account, and they insist on watching and ensuring every single bit of empty space is encrypted before a system is transferred to the user.

Not sure if recovery is much of a concern - the policy is for everyone to save to the network, not locally... if the machine goes toast, its done and your own fault.

Not sure if recovery is much of a concern - the policy is for everyone to save to the network, not locally... if the machine goes toast, its done and your own fault.

Unfortunately that wouldn't work for me. I write software and need the local storage. And my company insists on poor password policy (see signature for example :lol:) so it may be my fault, but that doesn't make it right. :(