Why I despise Apple (Page 9): I know. Been a Mac guy and Apple fanboy since 1990 and the Mac SE.

kb6kgx Loc: Simi Valley, CA

burkphoto wrote:

The aren't sold to be cheap. They're sold to perform well, and to integrate the entire Apple ecosystem of devices, sites, and services. Long time users know what we get for our money.

I know. Been a Mac guy and Apple fanboy since 1990 and the Mac SE.

Peteso Loc: Blacks Hills

I know Mac has loyal, feverish following. I would be interested in hearing opinions from people in business who, besides photography, are power-users with mainstream applications like word processing and Excel (including Excel’s, database engine).

bw79st Loc: New York City

Call Apple. I see there is an option in the Photo app to change file names by adding a prefix although I never use the Photo app so I can't vouch for what someone else says.

jlg1000 Loc: Uruguay / South America

Peteso wrote:

I know Mac has loyal, feverish following. I would be interested in hearing opinions from people in business who, besides photography, are power-users with mainstream applications like word processing and Excel (including Excel’s, database engine).

Or Autocad, or Dialux, or MSQL, or OrCad/Altium, or ABB, or CloudCompare, or...

lensmaster Loc: Chicago

MAYBE the simple solution is NOT TO USE NikonNX software to process your images, or view them since it creates a new file format.
Do you have Photoshop? Lightroom? ON1? All of them can create a JPEG format image, which is always cross platform (MAC/PC).

It is not APPLE's fault at all. You are selecting a processing application that you KNOW will create its own format. OR, why not install NikonNX on your PC? That installer is available on the NIKON site for Free.

Why you have not tried that is beyond me.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

Peteso wrote:

I know Mac has loyal, feverish following. I would be interested in hearing opinions from people in business who, besides photography, are power-users with mainstream applications like word processing and Excel (including Excel’s, database engine).

I can answer that. At least 80-85% of the client machines (and maybe more) are Windows and, ALL the servers are Linux with an occasional Windows Exchange server. In the many hundreds (maybe thousands) of data centers I’ve visited, I’ve seen exactly ONE with Apples as servers and storage (NASCAR in Charlotte, NC) since all they do in the building is video editing. You see Macs in Video editing, photography and advertising applications, and a fair number of Apple laptops especially by people who fly a lot (weight and battery life), But by and large, Windows is the predominant machine in most business, medicine and education. Likely the reason is cost and the fact it’s an open system with a huge variety of SW applications. Another trend: the vast majority of enterprise/commercial accounts are running VM (virtual machines on servers) and using a major cloud service for disaster recovery.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

leftj wrote:

Yep. Windows belongs on the junk heep of computer history.

It’s been at the top of that heap of computer OS/HW success for about 40 years, outlasting all the great Unix companies like Sun, Dec, DG, etc and a zillion other OSs such as OS2 from IBM. Apple has always been near the bottom. Why? The last of the closed systems, offering simplicity for the non computer illiterate at a cost of 2x with no upgrade path except a forklift.

DebAnn Loc: Toronto

knutte wrote:

Why would you even use a Windows PC after the Mac?? Once you go Mac, you never go back!

That's really not true. I've used both and so have several graphic designers I know. They have no problem going to PC. Anything you can do on a Mac you can also do on a PC. That's why the premium software programs are available for use on both of them.

leftj Loc: Texas

TriX wrote:

It’s been at the top of that heap of computer OS/HW success for about 40 years, outlasting all the great Unix companies like Sun, Dec, DG, etc and a zillion other OSs such as OS2 from IBM. Apple has always been near the bottom. Why? The last of the closed systems, offering simplicity for the non computer illiterate at a cost of 2x with no upgrade path except a forklift.

Shows how little you know about Apple.

kb6kgx Loc: Simi Valley, CA

leftj wrote:

Shows how little you know about Apple.

Seems to be a common point among most of the Apple-haters. They really don't know that much about it, or have ever had one, themselves.

chrissybabe Loc: New Zealand

TriX wrote:

It’s been at the top of that heap of computer OS/HW success for about 40 years, outlasting all the great Unix companies like Sun, Dec, DG, etc and a zillion other OSs such as OS2 from IBM. Apple has always been near the bottom. Why? The last of the closed systems, offering simplicity for the non computer illiterate at a cost of 2x with no upgrade path except a forklift.

First and last time I will use a smiley.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

leftj wrote:

Shows how little you know about Apple.

I started with IBM in 1964 and retired from Oracle in 2016, with many of the major IT companies in between. Also sold, architected and helped assemble the 5th fastest supercomputer in the world and designed and sold servers and storage to every US govt agency and national lab and defense contractor from Lockheed Martin to the Federal Reserve. And yes, I have owned and used both IMacs and MacBooks when they were company provided. I can give you a complete set of credentials including design experience if you like. Now, do you want to try to tell me something about computers or electronics?

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

kb6kgx wrote:

Seems to be a common point among most of the Apple-haters. They really don't know that much about it, or have ever had one, themselves.

You are mistaken (see above). For the most part, computer professionals who REALLY understand computers from the chip level are frustrated with Apple because:

1) it’s a closed system in a world where Open Systems is the mantra in the computer industry.
2) it’s difficult or impossible to get really down to the bottom of the stack and “close to the machine” (pros will understand what I mean). The same simplicity that unsophisticated users love is the limitation for many knowledgable computer users.
3) now more than ever, there is no upgradability except a forklift.
4) the cost is 1.5 x2x the cost of a comparable Windows (or Linux) machine
5) the never ending proselytizing fervor from many Mac users as is exemplified in this thread.

BebuLamar

TriX wrote:

It’s been at the top of that heap of computer OS/HW success for about 40 years, outlasting all the great Unix companies like Sun, Dec, DG, etc and a zillion other OSs such as OS2 from IBM. Apple has always been near the bottom. Why? The last of the closed systems, offering simplicity for the non computer illiterate at a cost of 2x with no upgrade path except a forklift.

I may be non computer illiterate or not but I found the mac is difficult to use.

jlg1000 Loc: Uruguay / South America

BebuLamar wrote:

I may be non computer illiterate or not but I found the mac is difficult to use.

It depends on what each defines as "use"

Running Photoshop on a Mac is easy...

Developing a driver to perform a time sensitive task is nightmare.

Developing an inference system which uses the GPU as CNN is impossible.