My Switch to Mac: Part 2, Operating System

First off: I am not partial to Mac. I actually like Windows very much, even Vista. In fact, I love Vista. Yes it might be slower than XP, but give it enough hardware to work with and it is actually a absolute pleasure to use. I have used it since it was released to developers as a Beta, and I have never looked back. But recently I purchased a new macbook, primarily for the hardware. I just believe Apple machines are better built and look really good. It might sound shallow, but for someone who works on a computer 10+ hours a day, I really dont want to vommit on my keyboard because my computer is so ugly. Case in point – my other machine is a Lenovo Thinkpad Z61m with 4gig ram and a decent fast Core 2 Duo processor. It goes like stink, but looks distinctly ugly. In fact a few people have asked me why I work on such a old computer, even when it was a month old. Doesnt say much.

But back to Mac OSX. I have used it for about a month now. First impressions – its fast. Much faster than Windows. Things actually react pretty quickly, boot up is quick and there is just a absolute feeling of speed, even with 2Gig RAM. Menus react quickly, pop ups occur instantaneously. Multitasking is much smoother – but my biggest issue with OS X is little niggles in the interface that a switcher has to get used to.

First off, closing something doesnt actually close it. You have to manually stop it by quitting. I find it a little quaint, and no, I believe it is a stupid principle to have everything running all the time in the background. Apple really has to identify this as a key issue for switchers.

The dock sometimes also doesnt always make complete sense. Some apps can be restored on screen by clicking its app icon, others you have to actually click on the window on the right side of the dock. I would like more consistency.

Also, the menu bar on the top takes some getting used to. I suppose it is not a worse system, but it can be difficult to use at first for a switcher.

However, most of these issues are negated by other great little features. Something as simple as expose makes a giant difference to yor workflow. Windows Flip 3D is eye candy, but doesnt actually carry much use. Expose is a much better system. Take notes Microsoft.

Unfortunately for Apple, most technical users cant be a complete Mac user in this day and age. I had to get VMWare Fusion, because there are too many apps I cant move away from.I had to install a XP virtual machine, because Vista was really sluggish. Even something as boring as Office 2007 is unparalleled on the Mac platform. I also run Office for Mac 2008, but it is absolutely shocking compared to 2007. Never thought I would say it, but I really miss the ribbon interface. I actually find myself opening most documents through the Windows version of Office. I would actually like to dabble with iWork, maybe its better than Office for Mac. In fact, I even think that OpenOffice will be better than Office for Mac.

If Apple is smart, they would consider making VM a built in feature of Mac OSX Snow Leopard. VMWare and Parallels is currently probably selling like hotcakes.

Overall I am very happy with the shift, but I am most definately not going to make a complete shift to Mac. VMWare is still my friend, and I will definately upgrade to a Vista or Windows 7 machine as soon as I can get 4 gig DDR3 memory. Laptop DDR3 memory is really expensive, so that will have to wait.

I find Mac OSX a very good OS, and I am sure it is a much better OS for someone new to computers. In fact, I wish my parents had a Mac, maybe I would get less tech related calls. I will revisit this topic over time, but for now I am not yet completely sold, but luckily I love trying out new software, so maybe over time I will change my tune.

My Switch to Mac: Part 1, Hardware

(Photos from AppleInsider)

About a week ago I got myself a new Macbook 13inch. Yes, it is absolutely one of the most beautiful computers ever made. Every single millimeter is well thought out and built to perfection. It feels rock solid, and is actually a perfect size for a laptop. I got the following configuration:

Intel Core 2 Duo P7350 2.0GHz (which is a low voltage part btw)
2 Gig DDR3 1067 MHz RAM
160Gig 5400 rpm SATA drive (would like to upgrade it to 7200 rpm however)
13 inch screen
Nvidia 9400M integrated graphics card (which impressed me hugely)

It comes in a box not much bigger than the notebook itself which very much resembles the iPhone’s packaging style. The notebook is held in plastic tray with all the manuals and software in a neat package underneath. The laptop is smaller than you expect, especially if you come from a 15.4 inch screen. The macbook has some heft to it – not that it is heavy, but it feels very solid in your hand. I would recommend a sleeve for it, because it flops around most laptop bags because it is really thin.

After coming from a Thinkpad (which is not bad at all) the macbook is just built to another standard. The hardware is stunning, there are small little quirks that you just come across and ask – “why doesnt everyone do this?!?!”.

Case in point – the power adapter – has two little hooks that flip out neatly giving you a place to wrap the cord around. Simple and so effective. The lid clips closed magnetically. Simple. The back of the machine is not awash with useless stickers. Simple again. The machine sleeps and wakes instantly in MacOSX. Why cant Vista be this simple?

The keyboard and trackpad takes a lot to get used to. The keys are completely flat, but they are firm to press and there is no sponginess like in some cheap notebooks. Must have something to do with metal grid in which they are placed. The trackpad has no buttons (or it is actually one big button). Its a “look at the monkey” feature – I dont see why its better. After a few minutes a switched it to tap to click in the system preferences. Like a normal trackpad.

The screen is stunning. Very bright, instantly on due to the LED backlighting. OK, the resolution is not great, (1280 x 800) but for a 13 inch screen I doubt I want more. Bigger problem is the way to connect a external screen. The new displayport plug is silly, and I find it stupid that I should buy a whole adapter to connect it to another screen. I honestly dont see the problem with DVI, why go and change it?

Battery life is great, in MacOSX I get about 4 hours+, but in Vista (fresh SP1 install in Bootcamp) it is a completely different story – got about 2hours 15 minutes. Goodness, didnt know a OS can make such a difference?

One big problem is that the machine runs on DDR3 1067 MHz RAM, which is expensive to upgrade at this stage. I know its fast, but it is ridiculously expensive compared to DDR2. The machine only comes with 2Gig RAM, which I would like to increase so that VMWare Fusion would work a little smoother. (Must be pointed out though that the RAM gets a 5.7 rating in Windows Experience Index, which is quick).

Graphics from the integrated Nvidia card is really impressive. Granted, I am not the greatest gamer – I use my Xbox for that – but the machine played games quite well, provided you dont set the detail to the highest settings. Spore played awesomely.

I have always been a Vista fan (I actually believe its a wonderful OS, and yes, Windows 7 is going to run on the same kernel, haters/sheep…), but Mac OSX is actually OK so far. My next post I will talk about how that is going.

Talking about Vista, here is Windows Experience Index for the Macbook 2.0GHz Late 2008 version:

Processor: 5.0
Memory: 5.7
Graphics: 5.6
Gaming Graphics: 5.4
Primary Hard Drive: 5.9

Talk about impressive for a laptop. Overall I am very happy with it, albeit its little trackpad quirks. It truly a pleasure to work on. About that – I still have to learn to use Mac OSX effectively.

(Photos from AppleInsider)

iSkin Revo2 iPhone 3G silicone case

When I got my iPhone I bought a cheap little simple silicone sleeve which did not really protect the phone fully. The screen was exposed, and the silicone started to stretch somewhat which led to the case starting to fold over the iphone corners.

So I decided to take the plunge and buy a decent case for my expensive toy. I decided on the iSkin Revo2, (the black one) which was quite pricey at R400 ($40). The overall feel of the case is much better, and the silicone has much higher quality look. It also looks really good. It is also quite stiff silicone, and the front of the iPhone is much better protected. The earpiece and home button area is decently covered. The screen can be covered with a clip on hard plastic cover, which I doubt I will keep on using. It can be removed and clipped on the back but it is not an ideal solution.

The dock connector and earphone port is covered with decent clip on rubber pieces which simply fold over when they are in the way. A screen anti glare film is included, but I havent had a chance t use it yet, seeing as I have a film on already.

Overall the phone is very well protected without adding unnecessary bulk, which is in my opinion all I want from a case.

Would I recommend it? Yes, but take at the look at the just released iSkin Fuze. But it does look expensive as well…

Stuffed

After Walt Mossberg’s recent plea to PC makers to refrain from installing trial and bundled “crapware” on new machines, Apple has been quick to pounce on this little (big) problem. I recently purchased a new Thinkpad, a machine which traditionally had a reputation of being very task orientated. Even though the “Thinkvantage” suite is essential to certain hardware’s functions, it is still poorly designed and sometimes slows the machine down to a crawl… I would really appreciate more control over the initial power up phase of a new machine… I mean how many people have to realize at some point that Norton Antivirus is actually a pile of junk?

I thought the new Get a Mac ads are lame – until the absolute truth of this ad hits you… But the Apple guy is still a pompous prick.

Classic – go check it out at www.apple.com/getamac

iTunes update and the madness ensues

At last Apple has updated iTunes for Vista – the application runs smoother, has less rendering errors and sports an awesome new full screen cover flow mode. The application still has a few errors, and includes an absolute lack of Aero use. Apple still says it has a few Vista “niggles” which will be ironed out in the next release… Of course the OS X version is spotless.

Us early Vista users had to sit and wait for a decent upgrade – while Apple blamed the issues on Vista. Or perhaps it wasnt that simple right? If you think about it, many people have become so reliant on their PCs as a source of entertainment that they are willing to hold out on upgrading to a new fancy OS just so that their music keeps playing without issues. Makes you think about Apple’s current position – with so many millions of iPods about and people investing decent money on their music libraries, the shine of a new OS loses its luster if its not going support your music player on the subway the next day all that well. Apple is currently in the position of having such a big and supportive following that it can actually tell its “users” to please hold off on Vista for a while while they are “fixing” iTunes. Please.

If I’m not wrong, hardware and software companies had about a month to adjust their products after the RTM candidate was made? What was Apple doing then? Choosing a poor time to announce a yet to be released phone? Apple is using the popularity of iTunes and iPod to curb Windows users to upgrade. If it wasn’t for Windows, the iPod would still be some overpriced pretty toy. This sounds like the makings of a evil empire…

Bad move Apple…

UAC and me

Vista’s much touted UAC feature is certainly once of those great examples of a feature that is well meant but is terrible in execution. The fact that I have to authenticate whether a certain action should occur on the computer is a great preventative measure yet somehow I cant help but see its flaws.

I am really impressed by the way Vista proactively tries to help you out if you have a compatibility error – for example, the first time I ran VLC it bombed out. Now on XP, I would have had to figure that out myself. Vista does that for you, connecting to some troubleshooting database or something, and there you go. The very next time I started up VLC, it automatically disabled the desktop composition engine. Great.

Now why cant they utilize this with UAC? I mean, if a executed code could be declared safe on some well administrated database, why cant they help me out?

You are coming to sad realization: Cancel or Allow?

Readyboost Benchmark

I tried looking around for a Readyboost comparative benchmark test, but I could not find one. I decided to attempt this myself. I tested Readyboost with normal everyday apps to see if they load faster. This is my current system:
Centrino Duo 1.66 GHz, 1 Gig DDR 533 RAM, 100 Gig Fujitsu SATA 8 meg cache HD, and a ATI Mobility Radeon X1400 with 128meg VRAM.

I ran the test with Vista running Aero and no background apps like Skype or so running. It is a fresh install of Vista with only my apps installed. This includes things like Office 2007, Dreamweaver, Picasa, Google Earth, iTunes etc. A pretty bog standard setup. I am using a 1 Gigabyte Apacer card which has its full capacity assigned to Readyboost. I first did all the test without Readyboost, with a full restart between each different test. Thereafter, I used Readyboost. 2 Attempts are made with each app to see the effect that Readyboost might have if the app is already loaded into RAM.

Booting into Vista Enterprise (not using Readyboost):
Attempt 1: 1:38
Attempt 2: 1:34
Attempt 3: 1:32
Attempt 4: 1:30

Booting into Vista Enterprise (using Readyboost):
Attempt 1: 1:32
Attempt 2: 1:29
Attempt 3: 1:31
Attempt 4: 1:30

Small effect, shaved about a second off booting time. I measured this by creating a notepad document that loads up last in the startup procedure.

Dreamweaver 8 (not using Readyboost):
Attempt 1: 13.2 sec
Attempt 2: 3.1 sec

Dreamweaver 8 (using Readyboost):
Attempt 1: 14.5 sec
Attempt 2: 3,1 sec

Weird. I thought this might be wrong, but retested, and indeed it loads slower with Readyboost. Once in memory though, it loads in the same time.

Outlook 2007, using a 1200 meg PST file (not using Readyboost):
Attempt 1: 8,35 sec
Attempt 2: 3,3 sec

Outlook 2007, using a 1200 meg PST file (using Readyboost):
Attempt 1: 7,95 sec
Attempt 2: 3,3 sec

It seems Readyboost does help if there is a lot of data to be loaded. Not much though. Im starting to become dissapointed.

Google Earth (not using Readyboost):
Attempt 1: 9,76 sec
Attempt 2: 5,8 sec

Google Earth (using Readyboost):
Attempt 1: 12,64 sec
Attempt 2: 6,47 sec

Another slowdown. And yes, I checked it again.

iTunes (not using Readyboost):
Attempt 1: 9,40 sec
Attempt 2: 4,93 sec

iTunes (using Readyboost):
Attempt 1: 12,5 sec
Attempt 2: 4,9 sec

Shut down (not using Readyboost):
42 seconds

Shut down (using Readyboost):
41 seconds

Very dissapointing. But there could be many reasons that my results were this inconclusive. I was using a 1Gig SD card, which is not small, but it was the same size as my RAM. Microsoft recommends using 1 and half to 2 times your RAM. So in conclusion, if you want to use Readyboost, you HAVE to make sure you use at least double your RAM amount for RB. Boohoo.

And I was so excited by this little idea.

UPDATE: Thank you for everyone who gave feedback on this post – indeed there seems to be some type of slowdown because I used a SD card. In the meantime I purchased a Readyboost capable flash drive (Kingston Datatraveller R) and there does seem to be a small improvement in general everyday apps. Small disk accesses like loading thumbnails etc do load much faster. While I do like the whole idea behind Readyboost, I would prefer if Microsoft made a better effort with implementing it. If the SD card made no improvement to my speed in Vista, why does it inform me that I can use it to “speed up my system” in the first place? Clearly this aspect needs to be fixed somehow.

Another aspect of Readyboost I do not appreciate is that it takes too long to activate after a boot up. If you boot up Windows with the readyboost drive installed, it takes a few minutes to kick in. Surely, there must be some performance advantage if it was the first background service to be activated by vista? Then other services could benefit from faster load times?