I use Linux exclusively. I did try OS X before (I have an iBook), but I just couldn't get into it. Linux users trying OS X have already commented on problems with window managers etc, so I won't repeat what they've said.
The real thing is that I just can't stand about OS X though isn't about practical like not being able to get a certain application or type of application working or anything like that (I do generally prefer the applications I use on Linux to their OS X counterparts though). It's simply that it's non-free, and the whole ecosystem of software for it is generally non-free. I know lots of Mac users and this doesn't seem to bug them or occur to them at all.
When I first turned on my iBook, I have to tell it more than once "no, I don't want a .Mac account". When I start iTunes, and possibly other applications (I just remember iTunes specifically), I have to click "I agree" to a license agreement. There are lots of really trivial bits of software which you'd get with `sudo apt-get install x` in Linux but the OS X equivalent is some sort of shareware crap... I found this to be particularly bad for tools that convert between file formats.
Am I just crazy or does this not bother anybody else that uses OS X?
It's simply that it's non-free, and the whole ecosystem of software for it is generally non-free. I know lots of Mac users and this doesn't seem to bug them or occur to them at all.
That's because the exchange for a lot of OS X stuff is: You pay a small sum of money in exchange for developers that work their asses off on making your user experience perfect. Delicious Monster, Cultured Code, RealMac, Blacktree, Panic Inc. - especially Panic Inc. Then there are the developers who don't make commercial Mac apps but who are part of the same developer scene: Coudal, 37signals, Neubix, on and on.
They're actually why I bought OS X: Once upon a time, I used Virb - designed by Neubix - read their blog, and slowly came across these other developers and their blogs, and fell in love with all these small development teams whose lives focus on developing their applications and making a profit. When I got my Mac, I started with a few of those teams' applications. Specifically, I bought Panic's Coda and demoed CC's Things. The experiences I get with those applications are stupendous.
Coda's the only thing I use that makes me love coding; without it, I get bored easily with the processes. I'd say it's absolutely been worth my $100 purchase. A hundred dollars for a code editor, FTP transmitter, CSS styler, a set of well-formatted reference books, and in-app browser testing? That's a damned good deal. And yes: I can do that for free, I could open emacs next to Safari, download free guides online. But it's worth my money not to ever have to bother with that stuff at all.
The license agreement... I don't find the license agreement at all frustrating. You click "Accept" once, then never see it again. MobileMe I got almost immediately: It syncs up everything I've got, gives me a nice email system, and it's worth the money I pay for it. I've seen the free alternatives, and they're not worth paying money for.
As for the "trivial bits of software", I've found I need very few applications to complete my Mac experience. I used the free OnyX to tweak my settings, I got Dropbox, and outside of Coda and iWork I find I rarely need anything else. I used to use Fluid.app to run web applications I liked, and that was free. Max converts every file format I need converted, excepting WMVs which I can convert using iTunes in a virtual simulator, and I need to convert WMVs very rarely.
Some people need free. Some people think that everything should be free. They're absolutely allowed to go that route. But most Mac users don't find it outrageous to pay developers for their time. A hundred dollars for a product is nothing, when that hundred dollars ensures never once having to look in a help manual to get something done or dealing with a crash or a slowdown or anything, really. It's similar to the thousands of dollars spent on the Mac itself. You don't pay that money for the RAM, or the screen. You pay that money because Apple tries to guarantee that things don't fuck up for you, and the impressive thing about Apple is that things really don't fuck up. I've been on my current set-up for a year and I've had five total crashes, each from weeks of multitasking processes without ever putting my computer to sleep. I have no problems that I can't find an app for. A lot of things on the Mac are so simple that I now have problems using Windows and Linux because they can't handle the functions that I use now. So no, that doesn't bother me, because for my money I get trust. Working with Ubuntu bothers me, because things don't feel like part of a logical whole. It's a matter of personal preference.
While I voted you up for interesting insights into another mindset, just one inaccuracy: 'You click "Accept" once, then never see it again.' - actually, it happens with every iTunes update. Even if you read the license the first time (and I don't), how many more times are you going to read it? So Apple can put in the license whatver they want?
Also I don't like your tone when you say "But most Mac users don't find it outrageous to pay developers for their time. "
It really isn't about that. I just don't want to tie myself to proprietary software. And something like apt is fundamentally impossible with proprietary software, unless you go the App store route (let Apple control everything).
Whenever I install a proprietary application that I have downloaded from some website I googled for, I feel as if my Computer has become unclean and untrustworthy.
Basically, the second half of your post is just nonsense ("Apple never fucks up etc."), but as I said, the first part was OK.
Even if you read the license the first time (and I don't), how many more times are you going to read it? So Apple can put in the license whatver they want?
It really isn't about that. I just don't want to tie myself to proprietary software. And something like apt is fundamentally impossible with proprietary software, unless you go the App store route (let Apple control everything).
Both of these are issues of trust. I don't think Apple will fuck me over with their iTunes user agreement. I do think the proprietary developers I purchase from won't stop making their stuff better any time soon. So far, I've never once felt that trust broken. I don't think it ever will break, because for Apple or especially a third-party developer to try and fuck its users over would be suicide. A two-man team can't afford to use their applications capriciously if their lifestyle is funded by app development.
Basically, the second half of your post is just nonsense ("Apple never fucks up etc."), but as I said, the first part was OK.
This is an argument that happens here once a week, and not just with my involvement, so I'll give my typical answer: Some people are the type that notices Apple's design expertise, and they're people who don't need explanations; other people don't care enough about design to ever notice, and that's completely fine too. Fact is, I think that my Macbook Pro with OS X is the best thing I've ever used in my life, and I love everything about it ferociously, but the things that make me fall in love likely aren't things that would interest you at all. Similarly, I don't feel your love for free software whatsoever. It's a difference of mindset that's completely cool.
That's essentially what I said, but you're nitpicking my use of the word "design". I hold that by how I define "design", Apple's design is the best out there, by several orders of magnitude. There is no user experience more painstakingly crafted. Apple makes it into an art form.
They certainly look the fanciest, and I admit to the quality of their recent hardware (but really only the recent one). But I'd argue that they also sacrificed some usability to the fanciness. I must even hand it to Microsoft that in some cases they added features that make it easier for power users, even if they don't look as pretty.
" When I start iTunes, and possibly other applications (I just remember iTunes specifically), I have to click "I agree" to a license agreement"
Side question: Is it possible to get and use iTunes without agreeing to let Apple spy on you? The EULA says I have to grant Apple the right collect assorted information, but with no definite restrictions or limits on what I'm allowing them to collect. This is nuts. I pay several hundred dollars for a Mini, and to use the software I have agree to annoying bullshit like that?
The real thing is that I just can't stand about OS X though isn't about practical like not being able to get a certain application or type of application working or anything like that (I do generally prefer the applications I use on Linux to their OS X counterparts though). It's simply that it's non-free, and the whole ecosystem of software for it is generally non-free. I know lots of Mac users and this doesn't seem to bug them or occur to them at all.
When I first turned on my iBook, I have to tell it more than once "no, I don't want a .Mac account". When I start iTunes, and possibly other applications (I just remember iTunes specifically), I have to click "I agree" to a license agreement. There are lots of really trivial bits of software which you'd get with `sudo apt-get install x` in Linux but the OS X equivalent is some sort of shareware crap... I found this to be particularly bad for tools that convert between file formats.
Am I just crazy or does this not bother anybody else that uses OS X?