AngryHamster's Profile

  • http://angryhamster.com/
  • Mar 22, 2006
  • 19
  • 0

Latest comments made by: AngryHamster

  • "Eventually the consumer that just needs internet and email access probably wont even use a PC or Mac to do it. Though its been the end-all plan for a long time its getting closer." If you are referring to a network, thin client or dummy box I don't think we are ANY closer to it now than the other 72 times people believed it was right around the corner. Possibly in the coporate setting where it could be seen as cost effective move, but we are nowhere near being close to it for the average home user who is just now getting their heads around things like broadband. "My apps are where? Centrally located? Run off the web? Can I still play Doom?" The fact is the promise of so called "dummy boxes" is just that, a promise, and there is little reason to believe it is any closer to being found in the living rooms of the average computer user anytime soon.
    AngryHamster had this to say on Sep 06, 2005 Posts: 19
    Waiting for the New Pitch
  • Does anyone read before they throw their opinions around from the mountain top? People really need to learn hot to relax and stop being such a cynical bunch of SOB's. MyMac.com is doing a good thing. Try reading their plan for donation again before you start to condemn from your high horse what they are doing for these people in the south. If you have a reading comprehension problem have someone read and explain it to you. They are giving cash, they are doing a good thing. Save the cynical jabs for those who deserve it.
    AngryHamster had this to say on Sep 05, 2005 Posts: 19
    Mac Users Unite!
  • I was going to respond with the same Chris. I thought it was made pretty clear in the article inititally what the features of the software were. I don't think a tiny utility such as this one warranted a longer review. Maybe just a closer read by those that visit the page.
    AngryHamster had this to say on Aug 11, 2005 Posts: 19
    Keeping your desktop tidy.
  • Actually wouldn't the appeal be that this is done automatically for you after a user determined period of time? As opposed to the method you outlined which would require multiple clicks to achieve the same ends? Not saying you have to like the utilities but at least offer a reasonable reason why they offer no benefits. Maybe everyone doesn't want to spend the time command-H each app individually and like a bit of automation.
    AngryHamster had this to say on Aug 10, 2005 Posts: 19
    Keeping your desktop tidy.
  • Not sure I agree with Makeen on the asthetic qualities of desktop/portable alternatives to the PowerBook's or Power G5's, but I couldn't agree more when it comes to the ability to, and benefits of, right clicking. I still can't get over that some feel two handed operation (keyboard + mouse) is a more elegenat solution. Or those that feel that the presence of a right mouse button is confusing. But to each his own I guess. I haven't had a chance to test out the new Mighty Mouse but on it's surface it isn't exactly what I would look for when purchasing a new multi button mouse. Too close in design to Apple's included mouse which I have an intense dislike for. But I am glad to see Apple embracing new input alternatives. Let's hope the Mighty Mouse is mightier the second time around.
    AngryHamster had this to say on Aug 09, 2005 Posts: 19
    Mighty Mouse: Excrement Now Comes in White
  • The sad thing is I like MDN as a Mac news site. MacNN and MacMinute are also decent sites but I am not fond of their respective layouts (MacNN seems too "squished", if that makes any sense, and MacMinute is a bit bland on topics). So MDN is probably one of my most frequently checked RSS feeds, but purely for update purposes. The MDN "take" and commentary on the other hand can sometimes be infuriating and even worse they can be self defeating, turning off more potential users to the platform then on. Zealotry abound over at MDN. And if you are a long time reader you will notice that, like most Mac zealots, MDN's "take" is very rarely wrong, at least according to the writers of MDN. One would only have to witness their takes on the Intel rumors, pre announcement, compared to their very quick change of heart when it came down to smacking any dissenters who dared questioned the move post announcement. Can anyone say hypocrite? And sadly that attitude is primarily what enforces the idea of all Mac users as "Zealots". Casual outiders to the Mac community hear about this very vocal, very arrogant segment of Mac users and most want no part of it. Effectively turning off the potential to help someone out and turn them away from the ills of a poorly built and un-secured OS, Windows. Yet Zealots will throw temper tantrums telling you it's just that Windows users are stupid people who like viruses and defend Microsoft, that's why they don't switch. But anyone who is paying attention knows thats no true. That particular battle of words is between Mac Zealots and Windows entusiasts, of which there are a few believe it or not (Zealots won't believe it but magazines like Maximum PC do sell to somebody so it would be ignorant not to believe it). The rest of the computer users of the world just want some objective direction here. What is the best OS for them? These people don't read techie sites, they watch Peter Jennings at night and Katie Couric in the morning, they read the Washington Post, the New York Times or the NY Daily News on the way to work. They are going to base their opinions on operating systems and computing choices on the opinions of people they have grown to trust. So when Fortune magazine starts writing articles about how the right choice for a personal computer for your college bound child is an iMac you don't hammer the writer for some inane reason, like getting name of the command key wrong. You embrace the fact that the average user has heard about the benfits of an Apple PC from a mainstream journalist (whether you admire that persons journalistic talents or not), instead of some idiot who has preconceived and dated opinions about Apple and the Mac platform. Zealots can't, or won't, do this. They will scream about agenda, they will talk about Gates "paying off" the author of the article to get things wrong. They just can't let go of the fact that maybe an author who himself just turned to the Mac platform, as many recently have, got a few things wrong while ENDORSING the god damn platform because he too is learning the ropes. Sometimes you just want to take the Zealots and shake some sense into them. Like Chris Rock says "I'd never hit a woman (Zealot), never ever hit a woman (Zealot). Never. Ever. Hit a woman (Zealot). But I'd shake the sh!t out of em'"
    AngryHamster had this to say on Aug 04, 2005 Posts: 19
    Should The Mac Zealots Just Shut Up?
  • "I am now an AngryHamster zealot." Perfect! My cult is coming along nicely. Before today there was only one member, me, now I have two. Exponential growth! Soon...world domination Hey Apple, my cult is better than your cult na na na ;) I don't know Beeble, it seems you are the one in frequent clashes with Mac Zealots here. It may have to be the other way around, I may have to be a Beeblebrox zealot to stand a chance.
    AngryHamster had this to say on Aug 04, 2005 Posts: 19
    Should The Mac Zealots Just Shut Up?
  • Listen, bottom line, the zealots are annoying. Even to Mac users. I could only imagine how non-Mac users view them. Actually come to think of it I know exactly how non-Mac users view them, as I was one for quite some time, unbearable. They do more to hurt than to harm the effort to convert people to the Mac platform. No one wants to be berated for their choice in computing, but most people would love to get some advice on how to make better choices. The average user hates the fact that once their Windows box is stricken with some unspeakable horrors they have few knowledgeable people to turn to who will calmly and rationally walk them through fixing their problems. That same person doesn't want to be moved to a new platform by someone who has the smug attitude of a know-it-all who is never wrong and above the computing problems of the common man. Even if you believe yourself to be a member of this mythic community. The average user would love to not have viruses, adware, spyware, trojans, etc... They would also love to hear, calmly and rationally, that all their documents, email, pictures, peripherals, videos, etc, etc.. can be ported over rather seamlessly to a shiny white Mac. They would love to be reassured that they won't starve for software, as plenty of titles do exist despite some of the ignorant statements they may have heard in the past. That there actually is a large enough user base out there who are supportive of news users and willing to help recent switchers work through the inevitable learning curve. They rather not hear from an ignorant rambling zealot "there is no learning curve, only idiots from the unwashed masses can't see how intuitive and elegant OSX it, what is wrong with you, why don't you just KNOW how to do that, see what happens when you use a Windows box for too long - you become retarded, go back to your "Dull" you heathen". Seriously, who needs idiots like that? Yet this brand of Zealot is all over the place, particularly on the internet. These are the people who are so entrenched in being the underdog OS that they can' even deal like a normal human being with praise or acceptance. A prime example of this is MacDailyNews.com. They run one of the best laid out Mac news sites on the web yet reading the MDN "take" is more often infuriating than not. They act as if tech pundits like Enderle or Dorvak killed their puppy, even when those two write the occasional pro-Mac article. They delight in pointing inaccuracies in any Mac article, even written by mainstream journalists (see: non-techies). Instead of being happy with the recent tide of mostly pro-Apple/Mac sentiment they can't wait to bash the writer, or his viewpoints or even his prior viewpoints. And heaven help you if they detect even a tiny slight or dig at the Mac platform even in a overtly pro-Mac article. They will hammer you for that one slip up. They act as if only the Mac OS is the only persecuted computing platform, like pro-Windows articles never take shots at Microsoft right? Today you can swing by their site and check out them hammering probably their biggest supporter in the mainstream media, Walt Mossberg, all because he isn't necessarily in love with the "Mighty Mouse". You see they only like Walt's viewpoint when it jives with their own. If it goes against the grain well then you might as well call him Dorvak because that's how they are going to treat him Again, it is why there needs to be more pro Apple sites like this one whose writers are able to look at both sides of the coin, not just the coins stamped at the Steve Jobs mint. And they need to do it intelligently and with regard to the fact that not everyone needs to be evangical about their choice of computer. It's why AppleMatters is one of my favorite daily reads for all things Apple, even if the subject matter isn't always latest "press release" based. There are many computer users out there who do see it as a tool, and naturally anyone who relies on a tool to work really does want the best one. Informed Mac users and enthusiasts should be there to walk them through the decision process to show them that yes, Mac is THE best tool for the average user. It is not difficult and it will benefit all of us in the Mac community in the long term. The Zealots, well they should just stick to yelling and taunting each other. It seems to be all they are happy doing anyway.
    AngryHamster had this to say on Aug 04, 2005 Posts: 19
    Should The Mac Zealots Just Shut Up?
  • I need a "check all that apply" box to sum me up. But I would consider myself to be a MAHWAW (but even worse because I am a Windows Sys Admin), turned switcher, turned Power User, turned Mac Entusiast. I added the Mac enthusiast level as I can't call myself a zealot, I'm sorry, but to me a zealot is someone who loves the platform as much as I do but is close minded and somewhat indignant when it comes to those who suggest there might actually be some things that need improvement. I am able to discren that Jobs DOES change his mind and go back on things he has said in the past. I am baffled by those who haven't picked up on this yet and while I produly display the Apple stickers that come with my new products there are times Apple makes a decision that doesn't sit well with me, and I have no problem griping about that. Zealots tend to be a little too crazed and unreasonable in my opinion. But listen I own 'The Cult of Mac' as well as 'Revolution in the Valley' and they are produdly displayed on my coffee table for all the "unwashed masses" that come to visit can see. So I am not immune from the zealot label fromt ime to time.
    AngryHamster had this to say on Jul 22, 2005 Posts: 19
    What type of Mac-Head are you?
  • Is it just me or does anyone else here feel Kidventus is answering the question Chris is posing in his article but doesn't realize it? In its simplest form Chris is asking whether or not Apple, and their installed user base, really want to increase and expand their market share. Or do they/we want to remain a niche player? It is an interesting question and I think there is some merit to both sides of the coin. Kidventus by stating, "Apple will always think of themselves as a Lexus or BMW of the PC world and Lexus does not sponser Rush Limbaugh or NASCAR. They do put ads in the New Yorker though " has basically answered the question. And that answer seems to be a clear cut no. After all, as much as we would all like to, not everyone can drive a Lexus. If you position yourself as such then by your approach you are effectively eliminating any chance of truly expanding at an exponential rate (which is exactly how Apple would need to expand to even begin to dent the 90%+ share of the market MS posses). I thought Chris had a novel approach in suggesting Nascar (I never would have thought of that but in tapping into the "average American", it's popularity, and deep ties to sponsorship make a good deal of sense), albeit not one that the "Lexus of Computer Makers" would make. But if you actually read what he suggested you would discover he was contemplating the best way from Apple to embrace the entire market, not just the "rich to upper middle class, college educated, liberal to staunch conservative, segment of the population. Clearly Apple's EXISTING method of advertisement encompasses product placement in film and televising, placing full page ads in magazines such as the New Yorker and Wall Street Journal, and paying radio evangelists to spout off on the Apple name whenever possible, is aimed at the more well off consumer. But the question is it that the ONLY segment they/we want to focus on? Or simply do you advertise for the Mac and Tiger like you have for the iPod and iTunes? And if not are you essentially sending the message that you are content as a niche player? I think in the long term the move to Intel demonstrates that Apple indeed wants to break free of segmenting it's user base. But the question put to us by way of this article wasn't if you approved of the suggested methods, it was if you approved of the suggested target. If you only want to see ads in the New Yorker than apparently not.
    AngryHamster had this to say on Jul 21, 2005 Posts: 19
    If Apple Shares the Joy is it a Good Thing?
  • I like how the reasoning for a one button mouse went from being less confusing to "ergonomically superior". I wonder whats next, easier to clean perhaps? Sturdier design? After all one less button to break right?
    AngryHamster had this to say on Jul 20, 2005 Posts: 19
    What OS X Could Learn From Windows
  • Wow, so you mean to tell me this thread didn't solve the neverending debate on two button mice and key placement? Damn, and I had such high hopes. ;) Of course I am just kidding, I never expected this single thread to somehow resolve what has not been settled for quite a long time now. But I thought it was a good thread and everyone managed to stay pretty civil about it, which believe it or not is a stark contrast to how these conversations typically end up. I guess we are just left a little more aware of each others preferences, but still without a clear consensus on the matter. That is of course unless Steveie boy decides to go the way of the two button, that will be sure to get everyone right in line.... ;)
    AngryHamster had this to say on Jul 20, 2005 Posts: 19
    What OS X Could Learn From Windows
  • I agree Hadley. The fact is on many Mac focused websites Mac zealots are harder on those who have an opinion that differs from the Apple company line than Windows trolls are on Mac users in general. It is like ferocious animals eating their young. Zealots are long time users, deeply dedicated to the platform, who will think nothing of tearing apart recent switchers or even less fanatical Mac users if they voice their concerns or suggestions about the platform. These are the people who will tell you why something will NEVER happen in the Apple world, and when it does will explain why it HAD to happen for Apple to grow and compete. The recent Intel switch and the upcoming Video iPod being two examples of this. “Steve said this” and “Steve said that”, what gets me is the people who worship Steve the most seem to get him the least. He says what he has to say at the time to protect the thinking of the Apple company. For a great example of this check out todays Joy of Tech comic http://joyoftech.com/joyoftech/joyarchives/709.html If he announced a year ago that the video iPod was the natural progression in the world of portable media Mac zealots would be going crazy spec’ing out possible video iPods and explaining how someone needs to do it and who better than Apple. But because Steve said video on a portable level does not work Zealots will bash anyone who suggests otherwise. A good example of this is how many times I read “but who wants to watch video on a 2” iPod screen”. What? It’s like they are so locked into the Apple way that the possibility that Apple could build a bigger and higher clarity screen into the iPod (along the lines of the PSP screen) is beyond them, it is completely discounted. It’s crazy. The 2” screen is why video won’t happen? If you have ever thought this yourself you need to seriously think outside of the white Apple box for a second, because I will tell you right now that’s exactly what the engineers in Cupertino are doing. How else do you think they stay on the cutting edge. Do what’s next expected, make it great, make it Apple. A very simple mantra. Thank god most Zealots don’t work at Apple or else they would be waiting for Steve to allow them to think. I mean everyone knows the “insanely great” great story of how the Mac came to be right? It had nothing to do with sticking to the company line. If it did you would be waiting for Lisa X, and who knows what that would look like. Anyway, point is there are 16 million OSX users. And it is not 16 million person cult. There are zealots, enthusiasts and users. I like to think Apple Matters is written by Apple enthusiasts who write from the perspective of an Apple user. The Zealots are the ones who do the flaming and the poo pooing but it is the regular user out there that understands no matter how good something may be there is always a way for it to be better. And than god for that or else we would still be on OS 9. That’s what this article is about. Computing on a whole would be better if Windows users realized they can learn a thing or two (or 9 million) from Apple users and the same is true of Mac users who could learn a thing or two (at most 10) from Windows users. Relax, we still have the best OS on the planet. But there us no harm in making it better.
    AngryHamster had this to say on Jul 20, 2005 Posts: 19
    What OS X Could Learn From Windows
  • An as for the keyboard layout proposition, which has been lost in the shuffle of this discussion somewhat, I am not saying that it should necessarily be Apple that makes the change. It doesn’t need to be Mac users who have to adjust their muscle memory to accommodate new key positions. In fact I agree that the command key is in a more comfortable position on a Mac layout than the Windows control key. All I said earlier is I agreed with Chris that it would be nice if the layout was standard across both platforms so as to make the required dual computing many of us have to do (Mac at home, Windows at work) a bit easier to deal with. And I suggested that in the interest of promoting Window users to switch maybe it should be the Mac that rearranges their keys. Now I don’t blame Mac users for not wanting to relocate the command key and being resistant to being the ones having to make the concession. But I wholeheartedly agree that it would be nice if there was a standard layout and we all know that the idiots running the show at Microsoft will never volunteer to make the change. So I just thought we would be the “bigger” installed user base and take one for the team. We all know this won’t happen, there will be no standard, and dual users as well as switchers, will continue to have to learn and use two layouts when going about their daily computing. But wouldn’t the world be a nice place if this wasn’t the case? That and a solution to world hunger is all I want for Christmas Santa.
    AngryHamster had this to say on Jul 20, 2005 Posts: 19
    What OS X Could Learn From Windows
  • Ha! That was great Beeblebrox. Listen my biggest problem with this whole thing is like so many approaches that Apple takes some Mac zealots believe anything outside of the Jobs proscribed method of computing is "confusing" or "complicated", that is of course until Steve reverses course and decides that the new way IS the best way then suddenly every Mac zealot can’t stop talking about how smart the move is*. * For proof of this phenomenon see the Intel Switch. Now IBM is the bad guy and Intel is the knight in shining white armor sent to rescue us. WTF? How did that happen? See but there is a difference between a Mac zealot and a Mac user. This article, in my opinion, was written from the perspective of a Mac user. Someone who loves the platform, would never consider going back to the crap known as Windows, yet is not beyond seeing that there could be things done better. The Mac zealot, is unwilling or incapable of seeing that this is a possibility and will use any and all examples, excuses, theories to prove this to be the case. A two-button mouse makes sense. You love the idea of the iPod being a one-handed device (that is you can perform just about every operation with a single hand) yet you feel like mouse use is better complimented by using it in conjunction with a keyboard. Not only that but you think this is easier? Easier than flicking the middle finger of your mouse using hand? Now you can give me examples of extreme cases, as some of you have, where the person has no idea what they are doing and can't even grasp the basic functions of a single button mouse. Listen, I know these people exist, but if it is that bad then I am going to go out on a limb here and say I can guarantee you that the mouse isn't the only thing that has them confused. If you can't teach a person to left click instead of right click there are going to be quite a few parts about computing they find quite baffling. That doesn’t mean that the habits of this subset of people should dictate your overall approach to the rest of your user base. What if I said I know lots of older people who use Macs. And they can’t see that well in their old age. So to compensate we are going to turn on the Accessibility features of the screen and keep the display on constant zoom. And because this is “easier” and less confusing we are going to disable the option to change your screen back to standard resolution specs natively. But if you are “one of those” who insist on this you can buy a third party software solution to allow you to change it. Listen we are just trying to make it easier for the “average” user. Apple considers old people are our average users, deal with it. How would you like that? And while I am all for trying to get these people on a Mac and working at least a minimal proficiency level you'll have to excuse me if I am not thrilled with the idea that Apple's product decision are based on them. You don’t base a design on the least common denominator because you are going to frustrate more users than not. I would prefer Apple focused on that middle ground user. Not a power user, no expert, but someone who can surf, check their email, listen to some music, own an iPod, can't be bothered with worrying about viruses and spyware but can handle the very clear differences between a left click and a right click and move on with their lives. Maybe they even know a keyboard shortcut or two. Using someone who barely understand the concept of a mouse and it's functionality as a reason why not to include a two button mouse is a bit extreme. We might as well find everyone who can’t grasp the idea of a Application folder and Finder and do away with the whole computer all together and give everyone a pencil and paper. Sound extreme? Well if we are going to use the most extreme examples to argue against something like a mouse than what’s to stop someone from doing so with every other aspect of the computer. The two-button mouse, for an average computer user, is NOT confusing. Over 90% of the computing public (ya know, Windows users) manages to do it everyday. By your own admission these are the "unwashed masses". Why can they handle it but enlightened Mac users cannot? Come on, it’s a two button mouse. It would make plenty of existing, new, and potential users happy. Would it kill you guys to admit that it might just be the best course of action? Geez.
    AngryHamster had this to say on Jul 20, 2005 Posts: 19
    What OS X Could Learn From Windows