October 2, 2006
Intel Macs giving Macs a bad name?
Posted Oct. 2, ’06, 1:44 PM PT by Scott Silverman
Category | Troubleshooting
It may seem as if I just never stop talking about my MacBook Pro problems from this past weekend, but I must say, despite all the stress involved, it was a very informative experience.
The very first thing I tried upon the crashing of my MacBook Pro (after a few restarts, of course) was run over to the IT Services office here at Tufts University. They were in the process of closing for the weekend, so I received no tech support from them, but I did get into a short conversation with the Mac service guy there. He mentioned that he had been receiving a record number of Macs for service this year. Last year, he said, he hardly saw any Macs, but this year was very different. I brought up the point that Apple had just switched to Intel processors this year, and he agreed that that must be the reason.
The reason I bring this up is to ponder what this means for Apple as a computer company which touts the stability and no-crash-nature of their machines. Apple’s legendary statement “Macs don’t crash” may be losing some credibility as a cause of their Intel switch.
20 Comments
Leave a comment
Recent Entries
About MacUser
MacUser is your source for news, info, and opinion about Apple, the Mac, and the iPod. Our dedicated team of bloggers covers everything that is relevant to Mac users — and, okay, some stuff that’s not quite relevant, but is still a lot of fun.
Subscribe/RSS
- Blog Posts
- Blog Comments
- Podcast (RSS) (iTunes)
Tip us off!
- Email: macuser [at] macuser [dot] com
Recent Comments 
- the truth on iPod touch users get second classed again with the omission of new Maps features
- James Katt on Apple levels DMCA on iPodhash project
- AdamC on Apple levels DMCA on iPodhash project
- sf addict on Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes afoot at MacUser
- Paul Norton on iPod touch users get second classed again with the omission of new Maps features
- me on iPod touch users get second classed again with the omission of new Maps features
Categories
- Apple (234)
- Advertising (162)
- Events (235)
- Huh? (182)
- Humor (259)
- News (148)
- People (258)
- Rivals (405)
- Speculation (167)
- Steve Jobs (172)
- Stores (206)
- Apple TV (58)
- Business (451)
- Games (143)
- Geekery (460)
- Hardware (935)
- Accessories (79)
- Intel Macs (162)
- Ihnatko (18)
- Internet (463)
- Legal (244)
- MacUser (95)
- Macalope (8)
- Money (177)
- Music (344)
- Podcasting (100)
- Photography (74)
- Security (246)
- Software (1544)
- Updates (538)
- Tips (352)
- Troubleshooting (189)
- Video (403)
- Windows (219)
- iPhone (199)
- iPod (602)
- iPod Accessories (96)
- iPod Software (61)
- iTunes (128)
- iTunes Store (443)
Archives
- November 2008 (92)
- October 2008 (138)
- September 2008 (151)
- August 2008 (177)
- July 2008 (175)
- June 2008 (171)
- May 2008 (185)
- April 2008 (234)
- March 2008 (217)
- February 2008 (215)
- January 2008 (239)
- December 2007 (169)
- November 2007 (164)
- October 2007 (187)
- September 2007 (167)
- August 2007 (195)
- July 2007 (152)
- June 2007 (223)
- May 2007 (243)
- April 2007 (286)
- March 2007 (288)
- February 2007 (250)
- January 2007 (266)
- December 2006 (244)
- November 2006 (293)
- October 2006 (307)
- September 2006 (250)
- August 2006 (268)
- July 2006 (288)
- June 2006 (293)
- May 2006 (297)
- April 2006 (351)
- March 2006 (366)
- February 2006 (110)
- January 2006 (107)
- December 2005 (23)
Mac Publishing Sites
Links
Might it be because PC people don't know how to treat Mac OS X? I've had to help several people on the messageboards who don't know how to do what I've known for the 11 years since I was 5
Most of the "crash-proof" reasoning comes from the fact that OS X is a superior operating system than Windows. And it's true: software-caused crashes are indeed less of a problem on a Mac.
The fact that the increase in crashes correlates with a hardware change means that the software superiority Mac owners enjoy is still intact. Hardware issues are the root of these problems. It's important to keep in mind that this is the first run of a huge change in Apple's hardware configuration. To have absolutetly zero problems on the first run of products is unheard of. The problems will diminish as Apple becomes better at ironing out the kinks.
That's why you NEVER buy the first iteration of a machine. You wait until they revise them for the first time, by that time most if not all of the bugs would be worked out.
Maybe people are just buying more of them?
A lot of new users are coming over from the PC side and trying to run their Mac the way they ran their PC. My secretary complained that her new Mac was always crashing, until I showed her apple/option/escape. Since then she has not had a single "crash". The problem was not with the hardware, but with the third-party software that she was using. Now she's venting at the software venders---which I told her would clear itself up in time. It's still way better than when we used to run PC'c.
Oh well ... the Tufts IT guy said that must be the problem (quick someone get me the number for Dell).
Leave it to some nitwit from Tufts to write a story about how the entire Apple machine might be crashing down because neither he nor some other nitwit from Tufts could figure out how to solve a computer problem.
Don't blame Apple ... try switching to a real school.
> Maybe people are just buying more of them?
Without knowing some more info, we really can't interpret the increase seen by the mac support guy. Maybe more people are using them, maybe they're not made as well, maybe people are mistreating them more. (perhaps since they now have the feature where the HD detects a fall and parks the heads, so they're seen as indestructible).
To Randy
That makes sense. I suppose that the market share argument doesn't hold up when it comes to viruses and malware, but an increase in market share could very well forecast an increase in shoddily constructed software. But I really hope that's not the case.
According to a report released just today, overall Mac market share has gone up over the past year (of the Intel transition) from around 3.5% to 4.5%. That's a lot of users who are brand new to the Mac experience, and more likely to go to a tech support centre than solve the problem themselves.
There is nothing about the Intel chip that makes it more crash-prone than the older Mac processors. IMO this anecdote is just a factor of a brand new product line (the first iteration of any brand-new hardware design is more prone to problems, this has always been true with the old processors too), combined with some substantial market share gains which means more newbie Mac users than ever before.
> Apple’s legendary statement
> “Macs don’t crash”
Huh? I'm not aware of any such statement. Would you mind citing a source for this?
Macs most certainly crash. They always have and they always will. So will Suns, Crays, DEC boxes, IBMs, and every other computer ever. Anybody who ever says any kind of computer doesn't crash is foolish.
Trevor
I really shouldn't even respond to such a statement of pure nonsense and immaturity, but I must say this:
If you had actually read my post, you would have learned that I actually did end up solving my own computer problem. Please if you find a need to insult someone's integrity, at least do so with even the slightest bit of insight and decorum. Your comment not only makes no sense, but is entirely inaccurate.
I'm not a Mac Pro user but I own a MacBook. I have to admit that it's the worst computer I ever had. Despite the crashing and hardware malfunctions, I love its size and speed. I'm totally confused with a new notebook computer line from Apple. I hate it; yet, I love it.
Ditto to the thread post. I monitor MacFixIt every day and I have seen much more problems since Intel arrived in the Mac World, but I also think it will settle down for the better. That said, much of the problems I see are from those who want to run Windows on their Mac and have the software conflicts that go along with it.
Here's the answer to this mystery:
Many software manufactures have had to make quick changes to their software so that it could now be compatible with the universal binary code, (unlike older software versions which used rosetta).
For this reason, there are many programs that are not that stable at this moment, but rest assured that next year, there wont be many "mac crashes" as there has been this year.
Again, it is not Apple's fault; we should instead blame the software manufacturers.
The Apple Store's must atleast be open on saturday mornings.
Have you been there ?
If you would you prolly seen your problems vanish in just a few minutes at their Genious Bar or Support Desk
Btw
have you tried something yourselve, even if only booting from the OS X DVD & trying the Disk Utilities
&
What do you think caused the crash (besides the fact it uses Intel - surely this aint the primar reason if it is somehow involved at all)
>> Huh? I'm not aware of any such statement. Would you mind citing a source for this?
> I think you get my point. As a Mac user, I hope you know the reputation Macs have among the average consumer. If you don't, well then I'm afraid there's not much I can do for you. (Most other people seemed to understand what I was getting at.)
Scott now you're being churlish and unfair. You made a claim about Apple's "legendary statement" that Macs don't crash and when a reader asks you to back that up by quoting it ... you can't. Instead you blame him for not reading your mind and seeing that you meant "Mac users' statements".
If you meant that, you should have written it.
Inaccurate writing that results in a technical falsehood is NEVER the readers fault, and it's very poor form -- you should be ashamed for both your lapse of good judgement AND your attitude to people who simply point out the facts.
Scott, I think the problem is that Apple is shipping all new hardware. They might look like previous Macs, but the insides are totally new to accomodate Intel's processors.
Apple's track record for new products has been spotty in recent years. Which is why I usually wait a few revs before I buy.
So the question is, are Intel processors the problem? Or is it because, for the first time, Apple has released all new products in the course of 9 months? I tend to think it is the latter.
I communicated above that Apple implies their computers are more stable than PCs and don't crash. It seems some won't believe this statement without proof. I give you two links:
Straight from the source.
Straight from the world.
Honestly, if those two links can't prove to you that Apples have been marketed to have a reputation that they "don't crash," I don't know what will.
EDIT: Oh, maybe this will.
yes. apple has been saying that macs don't crash for ages. and it is true. my powerbook G$ has NEVER crashed in the one year and a half that i have owned it. my old iBook crashed once or twice for lapse of memory (it only had 256mb in it). the poerbook not only has a higher clockspeed but also has 1.5gb of memory so it never misbehaved so badly i wanted to throw it agaisnt the wall like the windows computer at work does... same goes for my iMac G4 1.0ghz with 768mb of memory. but i admit i only use it for internet because of it's humongus 17" screen (my powerbook is only 12"). overall, i didn't rush to get a new mac, even though you guys keep on touting how amazingly fast they are. first i wanted to wait for leopard, second i didn't want to get all the malfunctions you guys have experienced (random shut downs, and all). oh wait, i just got a new battery for my PB. hehehe go apple.