From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

And I didn't even beg for money! Last Sunday at my brother in laws BBQ,
my father in law was telling me about the new intel powered imac
commercials he has been seeing, I did some reading on the web during
the first part of the week, then on wednesday, I made a two hour round
trip drive to the apple store, tossed down my $2000.00 in cash, and
walked away with a brand new 20" imac core duo, with Harmon kardon
soundsticks, and a memory upgrade, plus a new cover for my ipod video!
I bought the computer thinking I could load Windows on it, and do most
of my work and gaming over there, and play with the OSX side, well as
luck has it, I WILL NOT BE LOADING WINDOWS. The game I play most WOW,
works fine. In the first evenening I was able to configure connectivity
to my work VPN, remote desktop into my windows machine at work, email, limewire, everything I need is there, no need for Windows at all.

Oh and just for a little background, I am the IT manager at a $50M a
year company, that runs solely on Windows desktops, and an IBM i-series (AS/400) host system. I have been an AS/400 engineer for over 15 years.

Jerry (lovin the mac)

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

Congrats. I made the switch a few days before bootcamp. Then soon as
bootcamp was released, I put Windows on. That was two weeks ago. I
haven't used Windows since, so this morning I repartitioned and got rid
of Windows. =D

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

jerryeveretts wrote:

And I didn't even beg for money! Last Sunday at my brother in laws BBQ,
my father in law was telling me about the new intel powered imac
commercials he has been seeing, I did some reading on the web during
the first part of the week, then on wednesday, I made a two hour round
trip drive to the apple store, tossed down my $2000.00 in cash, and
walked away with a brand new 20" imac core duo, with Harmon kardon soundsticks, and a memory upgrade, plus a new cover for my ipod video!
I bought the computer thinking I could load Windows on it, and do most
of my work and gaming over there, and play with the OSX side, well as
luck has it, I WILL NOT BE LOADING WINDOWS. The game I play most WOW,
works fine. In the first evenening I was able to configure connectivity
to my work VPN, remote desktop into my windows machine at work, email, limewire, everything I need is there, no need for Windows at all.

Oh and just for a little background, I am the IT manager at a $50M a
year company, that runs solely on Windows desktops, and an IBM i-series (AS/400) host system. I have been an AS/400 engineer for over 15 years.

Jerry (lovin the mac)

Welcome to Macintosh! There are many, many, Mac users who could relate
an experience like yours. I am absolutely /amazed/ at the number of professional Windows IT managers who use Macs at home.

Speaking of home, csms is your home when you need help. We have our
share of nutsos, cynics, and the like, but also a good supply of people
who are willing and able to help.

Davoud

--
usenet *at* davidillig dawt com
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

You know, it seems like a nice machine, make no mistake, it does not
game as well as my Windows machine, which I gave away. I had a Intel P4
3.25 HT, with 2 GB Ram, SATA RAID, and a Geforce 7800GS Graphics card,
running through a 21" Dell Trinintron CRT. Like I said, it doesn't
game nearly as well, but applications might seem a bit quicker, with
the exception of MS Office 2004, which seems to be a bit slow to start
up.
however, after using it for two days, it keeps suprising me. I was
quite pleased to see a Unix command prompt, as well as all the usuall assortment of unix tools. It really feels a LOT like a Unix workstation
running a graphical shell, like Solaris or something.
All in all I am very please, and quite looking forward to the weekend
to really get to know it.

Jerry

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

jerryeveretts wrote:

You know, it seems like a nice machine, make no mistake, it does not
game as well as my Windows machine...

Maybe when Parallels becomes a mature program...

...but applications might seem a bit quicker, with the exception of
MS Office 2004, which seems to be a bit slow to start up.

MS Office hasn't yet been updated to a Universal Binary. It's
performance will be right where you expect it to be after MS releases
the UB.

I was quite pleased to see a Unix command prompt, as well as all the usuall assortment of unix tools. It really feels a LOT like a Unix workstation running a graphical shell, like Solaris or something.

That's how it should look, because, from the point of view of a Unix
user, that's what it is. Except that, in addition to all the Unix apps
it can run things like Photoshop, MSOffice, iPhoto, the video apps, and
all the other stuff that has no equivalent in the Unix world. This
double identity -- Unix workstation + elegant off-the-shelf software
machine -- is one reason it's ao popular in physics and other research
labs

Davoud

--
usenet *at* davidillig dawt com
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

Smart move.
I thought I never wanted to see a command prompt again after a career with
DOS, but now I do most of my stuff in Terminal. The true power of OSX is its smooth integration with *NIX servers.

-- Gnarlie's Applescript page:
http://Gnarlodious.com/Apple/AppleScript/

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

Gnarlodious wrote:

I thought I never wanted to see a command prompt again after a career
with DOS, but now I do most of my stuff in Terminal. The true power of OSX
is its smooth integration with *NIX servers.

For you. It is my impression that the majority of Mac users rarely,
perhaps never, see the Terminal. I'm talking about the traditional Mac
user base, which is still there. For us the true power of OS X is
stability during image manipulation, video editing, audio editing, web
page creation, and the newer stuff like iPhoto, iTunes, GarageBand, and
the like. It seems to me that if one's main objective were smooth
integration with Unix servers one would buy a computer much less
expensive than a Mac.

Davoud

--
usenet *at* davidillig dawt com
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

In article <C065BDE4.18034%gnarlodious@yahoo.com>,
Gnarlodious <gnarlodious@yahoo.com> wrote:

I thought I never wanted to see a command prompt again

Try using what they call GUIs over on the Unix side. They sent me
screaming back to writing shell scripts to compile my FPGAs. On the plus
side, I don't have to open Exceed, and can do much of my FPGA work via
telnet or a simple xterm.
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

On 2006-04-14 21:51:08 -0700, Davoud <star@sky.net> said:

It is my impression that the majority of Mac users rarely,
perhaps never, see the Terminal.

I'm a software engineer, and I only open the terminal about once a week or so.

-jcr

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system


"jerryeveretts" <ifreeley@gmail.com> wrote in message news:1145032570.547555.142340@t31g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...

You know, it seems like a nice machine, make no mistake, it does not
game as well as my Windows machine, which I gave away. I had a Intel P4
3.25 HT, with 2 GB Ram, SATA RAID, and a Geforce 7800GS Graphics card, running through a 21" Dell Trinintron CRT. Like I said, it doesn't
game nearly as well, but applications might seem a bit quicker, with
the exception of MS Office 2004, which seems to be a bit slow to start
up.
however, after using it for two days, it keeps suprising me. I was
quite pleased to see a Unix command prompt, as well as all the usuall assortment of unix tools. It really feels a LOT like a Unix workstation running a graphical shell, like Solaris or something.

That's because it is.

All in all I am very please, and quite looking forward to the weekend
to really get to know it.

Jerry

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

jerryeveretts <ifreeley@gmail.com> wrote:

however, after using it for two days, it keeps suprising me. I was
quite pleased to see a Unix command prompt, as well as all the usuall assortment of unix tools. It really feels a LOT like a Unix workstation running a graphical shell, like Solaris or something.

you are :-)
Apple is the world's biggest Unix vendor.

If you are interested in much more Unix stuff for your Mac I suggest you
take a look at http://www.pkgsrc.org


--
Georg Schwarz http://home.pages.de/~schwarz/
georg.schwarz@freenet.de +49 178 8545053
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

Davoud <star@sky.net> wrote:

Gnarlodious wrote:

I thought I never wanted to see a command prompt again after a career
with DOS, but now I do most of my stuff in Terminal. The true power of OSX is its smooth integration with *NIX servers.

For you.

And me. And quite a lot of others.

It is my impression that the majority of Mac users rarely,
perhaps never, see the Terminal.

That's probably true. But just because that's a majority doesn't mean
there aren't plenty of us others. If you want to start down that line,
the majority of computer users don't ever see a Mac. In the scientific
and engineering comunity, the Unix base of OS X, along with all that
implies, is *THE* reason why a lot of folk such as myself have switched
to Macs. There are a non-trivial number of us. You are probably right
that we are not a majority, but we are a pretty substantial minority
these days.

It seems to me that if one's main objective were smooth
integration with Unix servers one would buy a computer much less
expensive than a Mac.

I assume that this isn't your objective (not much of an assumption, as
you explicitly say the same) and that you therefore have never actually researched the question. I have. Quite a lot, actually. And I now have
Macs, as do many of my co-workers. I don't know where you are going to
find these mythical Unix computers much less expensive than a Mac.

Suns? Yeah. Sure. I've had Suns. Still have a bunch of them out at work.
We've spent literally several million dollars on them (not each, though
there are some of the bigger ones around half a million). Cost is the
main reason I moved away from Suns; other factors contributed, but cost
was a big one. Suns are not cheap; if you think they are, you've been
listening to too many sales folk lines.

Linux boxes? Yes, they can be cheap... until you add system integration
costs. I've done system integration, having built quite a few Linux
boxes, both at home and at work. I know well what I'm talking about. One
of the things you are paying for with a Mac is a good job of systems integration. A good job of that doesn't come cheap; it has real value
and costs real money. You certainly can put together a cheap Linux box, particularly if you are doing it as a hobby so the value of your time
doesn't get added in. Get a well-integrated and supported one, and
you'll find it not so cheap.

And then, in the workplace, the capital cost is almost negligable
anyway. It is dwarfed by the costs of things like sysadmin, network infrastructure, etc. If I recall, our desktop systems at work cost
somewhere around $250 a month, for systems that we nominally keep for 3
years. You can do the arithmetic and figure out about how much of that
is the initial hardware cost, but in case you don't want to bother, the
short answer is "not much of it".

We've got all 3 of the above-described systems at work - Sun's, Linux
boxes, and Macs. Plus a few odds and ends of other Unix systems in
special places (an HP or two; still one old Dec Alpha system around
somewhere, but I don't think the IBM RS 6000s are still here). And, of
course, a bazillion Windows boxes. Nobody, but nobody has ever said
anything along the line of "why don't you use some cheaper Unix system
than a Mac". They would probably get a funny look if they said that,
because it just wouldn't make much sense.

--
Richard Maine | Good judgement comes from experience;
email: last name at domain . net | experience comes from bad judgement.
domain: summertriangle | -- Mark Twain
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

In article <1145032570.547555.142340@t31g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
"jerryeveretts" <ifreeley@gmail.com> wrote:

You know, it seems like a nice machine, make no mistake, it does not
game as well as my Windows machine, which I gave away. I had a Intel
P4 3.25 HT, with 2 GB Ram, SATA RAID, and a Geforce 7800GS Graphics
card, running through a 21" Dell Trinintron CRT. Like I said, it
doesn't game nearly as well, but applications might seem a bit
quicker,

Load up the RAM on the iMac to two Gigs; that will give you better performance.

with the exception of MS Office 2004, which seems to be a bit slow to
start up.

Office 2004 is a PowerPC application (OK, a set of apps), and therefore
has to run under Rosetta on the Intel Macs. The next generation of
Office will be Intel native (Universal binary) and should make Office
2004 eat dust.

--
Stop Mad Cowboy Disease: Impeach the son of a Bush.
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113