×

Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

Are Mac Users Smarter than PC Users?

pudge posted more than 10 years ago | from the well-yes-duh dept.

It's funny.  Laugh. 987

arminw writes "Maybe not smarter, but according to MacNewsWorld they are better at expressing themselves than the average Slashdotter and certainly are better at handling the king's English than the average PC operator." Also, michael is better than CowboyNeal. Mathematical expressions of written style don't lie!

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Article text in case of slashdotting! (3, Informative)

Bold Marauder (673130) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717200)

By Paul Murphy
www.LinuxInsider.com,
Part of the ECT News Network
07/15/04 7:45 AM PT

I doubt it's possible to get a definitive answer, but as long as you don't take any of it too seriously you can have a lot of fun playing with proxies such as the average user's ability to read and write his or her native language.

My wife has a Dilbert cartoon on her office door in which one of the characters says: "If you have any trouble sounding condescending, find a Unix user to show you how." She's a Mac user and they were worse even before they all became Unix users too.

Or maybe not. But finding out whether the average Mac user really is smarter than the rest of us isn't so easy. Part of the problem is that even if you matched the admissions test results for a graduate school with individual PC or Mac preferences to discover a strong positive correlation, people would argue that the Mac users are exceptional for other reasons, that the tests don't measure anything relevant, and that it's unethical to do this in the first place.
In fact, it's pretty clear that this topic is sufficiently emotionally loaded that you'd get shouted down by one side or another no matter how you did the research; and that's too bad because a clear answer one way or the other would be interesting.

I doubt it's possible to get a definitive answer, but as long as you don't take any of it too seriously you can have a lot of fun playing with proxies such as the average user's ability to read and write his or her native language. This isn't necessarily a reasonable measure of intelligence (mainly because intelligence has yet to be defined) but almost everyone agrees that a native English speaker's ability to write correct English correlates closely with that person's ability to think clearly.
Measuring Written English
In other words, if we knew that Mac users, as a group, were significantly better users of written English than PC users, then we'd have a presumptive basis for ranking the probable "smartness" of two people about whom we only know that one uses a Mac and the other a PC.
So how can we do that? As it happens, Unix has been useful for text processing and analysis virtually from the beginning. In fact, the very first Unics application offered text processing support for the patent application process at Bell Labs -- in 1971 on a PDP-11 with 8 KB of RAM and a 500-KB disk.

By coincidence, Interleaf, the first GUI-based Document-processing package, was the first major commercial package available on Sun -- in 1983, well before Microsoft "invented" Windows and well ahead of the first significant third-party applications for the Apple Lisa.
During the 12 years between those two applications, text processing and related research became one of the hallmarks of academic Unix use. By the early eighties therefore most Unix releases, whether BSD- or AT&T-derived, came with the AT&T writers workbench -- a collection of useful text processing utilities.

One of those was a thing called style. Style is somewhat out of style these days but is on many Linux "bonus" CDs and downloadable from gnu.org as part of the diction package.
Style produces readability metrics on text. Forget for the moment what the ratings mean and look at the numbers. For comparison, here's what style says about the first 1,000 words in what is arguably the finest novel ever published in English: The Golden Bowl readability grades:

Kincaid: 18.2
ARI: 22.2
Coleman-Liau: 9.8
Flesch Index: 46.7
Fog Index: 21.7
Lix: 64.4 = higher than school year 11
SMOG-Grading: 13.5

Of course, that's Henry James at the top of his form.

Slashdot and Other Style
For a more realistic and interesting baseline, I collected about 2,800 lines of Slashdot discussion contributions and ran style against them to get the following ratings summary along with a lot of detail data omitted here:

Kincaid: 7.7
ARI: 8.0
Coleman-Liau: 9.7
Flesch Index: 72.4
Fog Index: 10.7
Lix: 37.1 = school year 5
SMOG-Grading: 9.8

Notice that these results apply to comments from Slashdotters, not to the text on which they're commenting. Look at the source articles and you get very different results because, of course, most are professionally written or edited -- although there is an interesting oddity in that ratings for files made up by pasting together stories posted by "Michael" are consistently at least one school year higher than comparable accumulations made from postings (other than press releases) by "Cowboyneal."

Comments put in discussion groups aren't usually professional productions like news articles. You'd expect those to rate considerably higher; and they do. Here, for example, is the summary from running it against five articles taken from today's online edition of The Christian Science Monitor:

Kincaid: 10.4
ARI: 12.5
Coleman-Liau: 12.9
Flesch Index: 59.5
Fog Index: 13.3
Lix: 48.8 = school year 9
SMOG-Grading: 11.6

Lots of smart people have put effort into arguing that these readability scores are either meaningless or meaningful, a choice that apparently depends rather more on the writer's agenda than research. Most of the more credible would probably agree, however, that higher rankings are mainly useful as a rough guide to the writer's expectations about his or her audience but lower rankings do correlate directly with the writer's education in English and indirectly with intelligence.
So what happens if we treat the Slashdotters, a mixed bunch if there ever was one, as a median and then compare the ratings shown above with results from "pure play" Mac and PC communities?

The PC Community
I tried running style against text collected from various PC sites. The very lowest ratings came from text collected from an MSN forum host, but I only got about 600 lines because the forums suffer the Wintel design disease of requiring you to click for each new text contribution and I get bored easily.

Kincaid: 2.9
ARI: 1.9
Coleman-Liau: 8.0
Flesch Index: 89.5
Fog Index: 6.0
Lix: 21.5 = below school year 5
SMOG-Grading: 7.1

The highest PC-oriented ratings came from a sample of about 2,500 lines taken from reader comments hosted by PC Magazine:

Kincaid: 5.9
ARI: 5.9
Coleman-Liau: 9.0
Flesch Index: 79.3
Fog Index: 9.0
Lix: 32.2 = below school year 5
SMOG-Grading: 8.8

Notice that both sets score well below the level of Slashdot's contributors.

And the Mac Users?
So do Mac users differ? You bet. Here's the ratings summary based on about 3,000 lines of text taken from reader comments hosted by the Macintouch site:

Kincaid: 8.9
ARI: 9.4
Coleman-Liau: 10.0
Flesch Index: 67.8
Fog Index: 12.0
Lix: 40.5 = school year 6
SMOG-Grading: 10.7

Not only were these ratings significantly higher than those given Slashdot's contributors, and thus better than those given text from the PC sites, but the vocabulary was larger too. Without collapsing words to their root forms, but after removing punctuation (including capitalization) and numbers, the Macintouch stuff had 870 unique words to only 517 for the combined PC sites.

Overall, the results are pretty clear: Mac users might not actually be smarter than PC users, but they certainly use better English and a larger vocabulary to express more complex thinking

Mac vs PC- intelligence of the user (5, Interesting)

cbelt3 (741637) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717375)

Interesting correlation. I personally expect that this more relates to a correlation of age and artistic tendency than Mac vs. PC. While the apocryphal 'h4x0r' will be a Windows / Linux user, have few face to face social skills, and be a youthful male, the classic 'Mac user' is just an insanely cool bohemian dude who probably lives in a free wi-fi enabled coffee shop. My personal impression (after playing with Macs and PC's since they were born), is that the typical Mac user likes to use the tool for artistic / creative purposes, and the typical PC user does not. This implies a higher ability to obfuscate in a polysyllabic vein. Sesequepedalianism does not, however, imply 'intelligence'. If it did, Mary Poppins should have been running the bank instead of those old farts who could not say "Supercalafragalisticexpialadocious".

Pudge... (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9717203)

You already posted a Mac users are smarter story [slashdot.org] two years ago. Is this "We're Smarter" thing by Mac users necessary to make yourselves feel better about spending so much for your hardware AND your software?

Anyway, we all know that the really smart users run Gentoo, highly optimized for whatever hardware they're using!

Re:Pudge... (3, Funny)

RLiegh (247921) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717223)

Doesn't that only include Gentoo users who are running on a mac? ;)

Proof (5, Funny)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717235)

Well, for one thing we Mac users seem to be able to figure out how to register for accounts on Slashdot...

Re:Proof (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9717281)

Registered and subscribed (a gift), thanks. How else do you think I managed to look up the old story before posting.

Re:Pudge... (1)

gid13 (620803) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717388)

Is it just me, or is saying "[insert OS here] users are smarter" equivalent to saying that that OS is harder to use? I mean, I consider myself fairly intelligent, but still... While I'd by no means consider this a complete indictment of Apple, I'd say it makes me think their famed ease-of-use might just be a myth. I mean I guess it's POSSIBLE that it could be more educational and easier at the same time, but I doubt it.

Flamebait (5, Funny)

Sloppy (14984) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717205)

Yeah, I'm sure this article is going to generate a lot of intelligent commentary.
Also, michael is better than CowboyNeal.
Somebody hasn't been following the polls.

Re:Flamebait (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9717296)

Or checking spelling either...

It must be true. (5, Funny)

Mz6 (741941) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717206)

Is it a slow news day today? Is there nothing else to post but something to start flame war between PC and Mac users? With that said... Everyone knows about those wimpy Mac users. While they may be smarter and have better vocabulary, us PC users get all the chicks.

Re:It must be true. (4, Funny)

daeley (126313) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717293)

PC users get all the chicks

Sure, y'all get 90-95% of them. But you know what they say about 90-95% of anything, right? ;)

Re:It must be true. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9717407)

PC users get all the chicks


PC users get all the chicks, and Mac users get all the
dicks!


Seriously, they should also do a study about gay pr0n viewing--I'm sure Mac
users would win that one too.

Re:It must be true. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9717337)

Most Mac users are looking at the opposite gender;)

Re:It must be true. (1)

strictnein (318940) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717363)

Most Mac users are looking at the opposite gender;)

That comment doesn't make sense...

I believe you meant to say "Most Mac users aren't looking at the opposite gender ;-o"

?

It's economics really... (5, Insightful)

TempusMagus (723668) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717207)

You could probably boil this all down to economics. People who come from families who earn more than $200,000 are typically better educated that kids who come from welfare families. The argument could be made that folks with enough cabbage to purchase a $2k+ Macintosh have greater access to funds that the poor schmo who can only buy some sub $800 PC system which, in my mind, reflects on their access to education. If you can afford a mac - you probably went to a real University instead of DeVry.

Re:It's economics really... (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9717297)

At the cost of things like computers (sub $5k, say) it really matters little what you earn, as opposed to what you choose to buy.

Most PC users I know bemoan the cost of a new mac, yet they'll gladly spend $25k on a brand new car that loses $5k of that value the day they drive it home.

That is, spend 20 minutes driving it home to sit in front of their $400 PC for the next 4 hours.

People choose their priorities.

Re:It's economics really... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9717350)

bullshit what a load of shit, I know nobody who can afford a 25 thousand dollar car let along a G5 with 30 inch cinema. I think ur a mac user whose trying to prove no point at all and justify your spending big money on being no different to anyone else

Re:It's economics really... (1)

alphan (774661) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717344)

Certainly there is this economics factor.

One should also consider the fact that an important fraction of slashdotters are non native speakers of English. This fraction should be at least more than mac users with similar reasoning.

Re:It's economics really... (0, Redundant)

lordmoose (696738) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717347)

He make good point.

Re:It's economics really... (1)

drb000 (761618) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717353)

DeVry is a 'real' University. It's not where you get your degree, but what you do with the tools and lessons learned.

Re:It's economics really... (1)

drb000 (761618) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717393)

And BTW, Devry costs more than a normal State University, so your argument is void.

Re:It's economics really... (1)

Randy Wang (700248) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717385)

Unlike such well known university drop-outs as the Good Mr Gates =)

Besides, what overly-rich bum would spend thousands of dollars on, say, a dual 2Ghz G5, rather than get a similarly powerful Pentium 4 for considerably less (depending on the specific setup, of course)? Even rich people have a reasonable sense of values.

And for the record, I've been a Mac-user since my family bought a Classic II fifteen years ago, and haven't changed since. Just for the record =)

Re:It's economics really... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9717405)

I can afford a mac. One of the reasons for that is that I've always been careful with my money. For example, I'd never pay $2k for a computer when a sub $800 system does what I need.

Re:It's economics really... (5, Funny)

Ignignot (782335) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717417)

Dont descrimnat! Us PC users can lern vocabularee gud an uther things gud to! Jus cuz us got no fansee buk lernin duznt meen us dum! Maybee them Mac users think they ar betur then us but they ain't! Them dont unnerstan what us has bin threw animore. Us have to grow up with onlee 100000 $ a years had a hard lief! Us maid stong cuz of that! Them liv in soft wile us gets hard!

Troll food: I'm hungry! (4, Interesting)

garcia (6573) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717208)

Ok, this is absolute troll food but I'm hungry:

For a more realistic and interesting baseline, I collected about 2,800 lines of Slashdot discussion contributions and ran style against them to get the following ratings summary along with a lot of detail data omitted here:

Kincaid: 7.7
ARI: 8.0
Coleman-Liau: 9.7
Flesch Index: 72.4
Fog Index: 10.7
Lix: 37.1 = school year 5
SMOG-Grading: 9.8
Notice that these results apply to comments from Slashdotters, not to the text on which they're commenting. Look at the source articles and you get very different results because, of course, most are professionally written or edited -- although there is an interesting oddity in that ratings for files made up by pasting together stories posted by "Michael" are consistently at least one school year higher than comparable accumulations made from postings (other than press releases) by "Cowboyneal."


Yeah, first off, I want to know what 2,800 lines he took. I would hope he didn't use a random method of comment gathering as anything under +3 is generally junk (and thus why it holds there). I want to know if he has taken a look at more recent Slashdot banter or comments generated since its inception. It's a well known fact that the signal to noise ratio has increased over the years (as is expected as the site grows in "popularity").

When he mentions that he wasn't performing this "study" on the text Slashdotters were commenting on, does that mean that he wasn't paying attention to the particular stories we were responding to? That could have a major impact on the results.

Yes, all of us Slashdotters are stuck-up assholes, but I seriously doubt that the higher rated comments are written at a 5th grade reading level unless you are looking at -1 to +5 instead of +1 and above (which I assume that most people read at).

Perhaps he posted this, knowing full well we would troll it, just to prove his point?

I guess if this hadn't originally been posted to MacNewsWorld I would I have found it extremely funny that the storey was posted by "pudge" instead of Cowboyneal...

Re:Troll food: I'm hungry! (1)

haluness (219661) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717275)

> Ok, this is absolute troll food but I'm hungry:


Come on! As you wrote, its basically a troll article (or else an article who just discovered the style program!)


Its not really worth a comment at all, though this thread will probably filled with pointless flames.

Re:Troll food: I'm hungry! (0, Flamebait)

Otter (3800) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717276)

Yeah, first off, I want to know what 2,800 lines he took. I would hope he didn't use a random method of comment gathering as anything under +3 is generally junk (and thus why it holds there).

Your level of understanding of statistical methodology: 5th grade

Re:Troll food: I'm hungry! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9717389)

your level of understanding in regards to proper grammar: 3rd grade. if you're going to try and make some stupid point against the parent at least sound somewhat intelligent.

|0NG |1V3 3FN3+ #|1|\|uX d0000dz!

Re:Troll food: I'm hungry! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9717410)

But at least I know where my shift key is.

Re:Troll food: I'm hungry! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9717424)

your level of understanding in regards to proving a point: 1st grade. if you're going to try and make some stupid point against the parent at least figure out how you'll sound respectable so people will actually pay attention to your point.

Re:Troll food: I'm hungry! (4, Insightful)

tcopeland (32225) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717291)

> instead of +1 and above (which I assume
> that most people read at).

Right on. Judging Slashdot by the -1 comments is a bit like judging a magazine by the articles it rejects.

Actually, even that's not fair, since it's much easier to post GNAA to Slashdot than it is to submit an article to a magazine...

Re:Troll food: I'm hungry! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9717328)

According to Word's Flesch-Kincaid report, this entire comment (with italicized quote) is reading at the 12th grade level.

Re:Troll food: I'm hungry! (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9717381)

It's a well known fact that the signal to noise ratio has increased over the years....


I hope you meant to say the S/N has DECREASED - there is far more noise, far less signal.

Holy Fucking Flamewar (1)

Ads are broken (718513) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717209)

This is the flamebait-iest story ev4r!!!!!1

Michael smart? (5, Insightful)

strictnein (318940) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717210)

Trying to (admittidly jokingly) determine which group is smarter by their message group posts? And using SLASHDOT posts as a base? Considering 3/4ths of all posts on slashdot are "Yu0 @r3 the SUXORZ F3G!" or "GNAA Ownz U!" (complete with beautiful ASCII art).
In reality, it's a pretty funny article. Good read. Best quote from the article: ...there is an interesting oddity in that ratings for files made up by pasting together stories posted by "Michael" are consistently at least one school year higher than comparable accumulations made from postings (other than press releases) by "Cowboyneal."

Greatest ever troll headline. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9717215)

See subject.

FAIR AND BALANCED (0, Redundant)

Saxton (34078) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717216)

Hrum, someone that writes for a linux publication probably will give a very balanced opinion on this subject. No, they'll probably just provide troll food. Heh. I mod this article -1 TROLL FOOD

No! (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9717219)

No, there not!

Sincrly,

PC User

No (5, Funny)

pete-classic (75983) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717224)

Two words: Ellen Feiss

-Peter

Re:No (5, Funny)

daeley (126313) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717246)

Two words: Dell Dude

Re:No (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9717255)

Four words: Your Mom (or Dad)

Re:No (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9717307)

One word: Michael

Mac users smarter and more articulate? (4, Funny)

presearch (214913) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717227)

Duh!

Re:Mac users smarter and more articulate? (5, Funny)

spellraiser (764337) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717396)

Better talking does not equate smarter! I'm deeply injured by that insidiation. On behalve of every one like me, I would like to make known: Plees have regard for speeking-impared peoples. And also riting-impared. This is an outage!

Oh yeah (5, Funny)

MoxCamel (20484) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717228)

I'm a Mac user, and I spent roughly twice the money an equivilent PC would have cost me. Many of the software titles I'd like to run are only available on the PC. In fact, I also own a PC so I can run those programs, bringing the total cost of my Mac up to about three times the cost of a single PC.

I had to buy a BMW because Apple doesn't make speakers yet for my iPod.

PC users. What a bunch of dumbasses.

oh yeah you fail it (1)

kewsh (655090) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717352)

SPAKURS [amazon.com]

Better expressing themselves... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9717241)

They're better expressing themselves because gays are often more in touch with their femenine sides.

I say no (-1, Troll)

Fizzlewhiff (256410) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717245)

Mac users can't grasp things as simple as right click and totally wig out when they have to open a command prompt to do something like ipconfig. God help them when their disk drive fills up too. Not as smart.

Re:I say no (2, Informative)

blinder (153117) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717415)

have to open a command prompt to do something like ipconfig

LOL! would that be ifconfig???

oops :-D

I'm not so sure... (5, Insightful)

green pizza (159161) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717419)

Mac users can't grasp things as simple as right click and totally wig out when they have to open a command prompt to do something like ipconfig. God help them when their disk drive fills up too. Not as smart.

I dunno about that. The typical Mac users (including and sometimes especially artists) I run across typically read at least one of the thick "Mac Bible" type reference books and love to show off all the little tricks they know. Times have changed since Mac users were just a group of folks too scared of DOS and not quite wealthy enough for a Sun, SGI, or Apollo workstation. Today Mac users have different reasons for using the platform (anti-Microsoft, unix roots, something new/different, strong DV25 media support, etc). Even the casual browsers in the mall Apple Stores seem to posess clue.

It seems to me that more and more of the clueless personal computer users/owners generally just buy whatever they use at work. Generally a Dell or Compaq. (It's funny trying to talk someone out of buying a Compaq--they often argue that they can't buy a Dell as they've never used one before and wouldn't know where to start!)

Re:I say no (4, Insightful)

Masker (25119) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717426)

Feeding the troll

Mac users can't grasp things as simple as right click

Kinda hard to "right click" with a one-button mouse. Anyone who buys a 2-button USB mouse for a Mac can certainly "grasp" right-clicking; I did, and so did every other Mac user I've ever seen with a two-button mouse.

and totally wig out when they have to open a command prompt to do something like ipconfig

On Mac OS X, you don't need to use ipconfig, and that's the point. Use the Network Preference Pane, which is painless.

What you need to realize is that to most people computers are a means to an end, not an end unto itself. As a developer, I'm sometimes happy to tinker around with my work Linux machine, but mostly I just want to get something done and not have to tediously and endlessly tweak RedHat 9.0 to do what I want. I'd rather use Mac OS X and just get things done.

Re:I say no (1)

MrLint (519792) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717436)

I throw down the Unix shell challenge to you good sir!

I choose grep at 10 paces.. prepare yourself!

Me smart, too (1)

jfengel (409917) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717248)

The article begins, "I doubt it's possible to get a definitive answer".

I doubt it's possible to get a meaningful answer. Yeah, yeah, I know, it's supposed to be funny.

Oh really? (1, Funny)

shadowmatter (734276) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717250)

Then how come when I put a two-button mouse on my grandma's Mac, and she tried to use it, her head exploded?

- sm

As a Mac user and Apple employee (4, Funny)

Twid (67847) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717254)

As a Mac user and Apple employee, I would just like to say:

LOL U SUK LINUX GRAMMOR N00B.

Sincerely,
- Twid

They may be Intellectually smarter... (0)

EvilMagnus (32878) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717256)

...but they clearly don't have any financial sense!

I mean, those Macs are 50% more expensive than a functionally-equivilant PC...

/. bashing (1)

MisanthropicProgram (763655) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717257)

I stopped reading the article when I saw that the purpose was just to bash us.

And... (1)

MisanthropicProgram (763655) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717370)

I wonder how that program he uses measures some of our inside jokes and spellings. Like pr0n for porn? Or hax0r?

well, for $2000 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9717260)

i can be a snobby mac user also.

Are Mac Users Smarter than PC Users? (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9717268)

yse

Confirmation (2, Funny)

jhtrih (218203) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717269)

Dude, this is just confirmation of what all Mac users know. The computer for the rest of us is now the computer for the best of us.

Please, kill the author... thank you. (4, Insightful)

Bones3D_mac (324952) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717287)

Wow, even as a Mac user, I find this thread annoying simply for the impending flame war that will inevitably erupt. Don't we have anything more worthwhile we could be discussing than just another lame Mac vs. PC debate?

Those who are truely intellegent... (5, Insightful)

wbav (223901) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717294)

Don't limit themseleves to just one platform. Each has its uses. Personally, I use linux, win xp, and a Mac from time to time.

I mean, if you don't use them all, how can you really say one is better than the others?

Re:Those who are truly intellegent... (1)

wbav (223901) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717334)

Well carp, apparently I can't spell. I guess it's true, better to keep your mouth closed and be thought a fool, than to open it and remove all doubt.

Re:Those who are truly intellegent... (2, Funny)

strictnein (318940) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717403)

Well carp, apparently I can't spell.

Yes, you can't spell. Unless you were talking to a fish.

no kidding? (1)

zorcon (111485) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717299)

Imagine that, overpriced computers wich often resemble a piece of art and only garner 3% of the home computer market, appeal to folks who are smarter and speak better english. It's just so unbelievable.

This probably has something to do with l33t not being a part of the king's english.

King's English? (1)

pjt33 (739471) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717394)

I want to know which king the article's author thinks is ruling England.

Mac's cost more (1, Redundant)

idlemind (760102) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717301)

Mac's cost more so the average mac owner is likely to have a better economic status. More money usually means better education.

Comparing Apples to Banana Juniors (1)

Joe U (443617) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717303)

For a more realistic and interesting baseline, I collected about 2,800 lines of Slashdot discussion contributions and ran style against them to get the following ratings summary

What he didn't mention was what level he was browsing at.

So, I expect something like this:

'*BSD is dying scores a high ranking, while GNAA and GOATSE only got a 3. And the text art caused finder to explode.'

Question.... (2, Insightful)

cephyn (461066) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717304)

How do I mod the article post as Troll or Flamebait?

Better question... (5, Funny)

ThatsNotFunny (775189) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717306)

Are Mac users smarter than PC users? I'd rather know: Are Crack users smarter than PCP users?

That makes sense to me. (5, Insightful)

the_rajah (749499) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717309)

Simply put, Mac users are, for the most part, academics, artsy or literary types who have spent a lot more time in rhetoric and literature classes while slashdotters spent their time in geeky technical (useful) pursuits. Writing style is not the main interest of the /. crew, although some argument could be made that better style can result in better communication.

"Do the Right Thing. It will gratify some people and astound the rest." - Mark Twain

Typical Mac user has changed over the years (5, Insightful)

green pizza (159161) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717314)

At one time, the typical Mac user bought his machine because he was scared of DOS and the rest of the PC world. Today Mac users have other reasons. Many buy into the digital media goodies (FinalCutPro, iDVD, etc). Some like the unix aspect. Some are anti-Microsoft.

Granted there are still "oooh, it looks sexy" Mac users, but those are quickly becoming the exception, not the rule.

BTW: take a look at some of the Mac books at Barnes and Noble or Borders, almost half of them are thick, serious unix books!

Hold up a sec... (0, Redundant)

Pendersempai (625351) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717322)

Before you submit that flesh-rending flame you're mentally preparing, recognize that this study only demonstrates correllation. Perhaps it's only because Macs cost more, people who can afford more expensive things tend to be richer, and rich people tend to have better educational backgrounds.

None of it means that using a PC in any way CAUSES you to be dumb.

(although I do use a Mac... heh heh heh...)

Better question: are Mac users insecure? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9717323)

It certainly seems so, as anyone who posts something remotely critical of Apple will get a lot of replies, defending the Apple Way of doing things.

MacNewsWorld, eh? biased maybe? (1)

SkankhodBeeblebrox (581971) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717327)

You don't think a site that reports almost exclusively on Apple/Mac related items could be slightly biased in their findings? :)

Pleeeeze... (1)

Chuck Bucket (142633) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717329)

If anyone has spent any time on Macslash, you know that this isn't true. Most Mac folks that have been Mac folks for a long time, have no clue or interest in running anything Unix related on or with OS X. Pll that are running OS X that come from a Linux background are much more adept, and less apt to only do things via a gui that has 'lickable' buttons.

CB#$

Thatsa lotta words. (2, Funny)

vilms (106676) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717330)

Just to get to "Yes".

Smarter? (1)

ralphart (70342) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717338)

Gee, most of the Mac users I know are graphic designers / marketing types. Smarter? Maybe cleverer, but smarter???

Someone once told me the Mac mouse only had one button because Mac users couldn't figure out any more than that (whoops, there went my excellent karma).

I'm a mac user and I hate these articles. (5, Insightful)

thecombatwombat (571826) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717340)

This is dumb, and it's come up before.

Yeah, the average mac user probably is smarter than the average pc user. The 4% of mac users are also in the upper 4% of the income scale. Guess what? Well educated smart people tend to have more money than others, your average BMW owner is probably "smarter" than your average kia owner.

Looking at this in any way that's supposed to matter is just elitist. Moving on . . .

Re:I'm a mac user and I hate these articles. (1)

eaddict (148006) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717432)

Well educated smart people tend to have more money than others How do you explain Paris Hilton?

Sigh... (5, Funny)

belgar (254293) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717348)

...once again, I despair at the Mac zealots making the rest of the Mac community look like asshats. Good thing that doesn't happen in the Linux community, as well. Whew!

Slashdot section? (1)

Otter (3800) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717357)

I'd be curious to see a breakdown by Slashdot section. I'd guess Apache and Developers would score highest, or maybe Books.

Unfortunately, the Mac section would be dragged down by the "Blue and Wihte G3? I geuss Mac users only no what color thier computar is!!" comments.

Higher IQ = More money. (1)

asdfasdfasdfasdf (211581) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717360)

I guarantee you there's a correlation of IQ to $$$ success. Mac is, no doubt, for people who have more money. I know that if I had more money, I'd have a Mac too, but dollar-for-dollar it's a terrible value. For the "money is no object" set, I'm sure it's great.

Maybe not *smarter*... (1)

FatSean (18753) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717365)

...but definately more bitchy and vindictive...there is something feminizing about Macs and Mac Users.

Smarter? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9717367)

Anybody that would pay twice the price for half the functionality is clearly not smarter. Next topic.

I'm a Betamax user (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9717374)

...so I must be the smartest of all.

Rush Limbaugh is a Mac user. (1)

1shooter (185361) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717376)

Could it be true? Shirley you jest. Yes, I called you Shirley.

son of troll.. (2)

joeldg (518249) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717379)

that is what this article should be called..
a troll article written about a troll article.

yea yea yea..
perl people are smarter than php people.
java duuudes are smarter than the whole world
and now, a mac user thinks they are smarter than a PC user..
bla bla bla bla..
apparently a lot of people don't remember usenet when it was worth a damn and the old beige-toaster argument about the mac users and their babbling about how they are "better".. ...
this is not news, it is a troll.

w00t! Lez bring dwn the avrge sum more! (1)

agent_stretch (697570) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717380)

Maybes the scorez sux0r so much kuz n0body carez to wright g00d englush! And what does this say about our countries 5th graders? I really hope they can write a lot better than most slashdot posts.

Are Mac UsersSmarter than PC Users? (0, Redundant)

MacJedi (173) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717386)

Yes.

The funniest part (5, Funny)

hikerhat (678157) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717390)

The funniest part was where they said slashdot articles were professionally edited. I guess that makes me a brain surgen because I can clip my toenails.

Having both. (2, Interesting)

subzerorz (769341) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717400)

How about having both PC and MAC?

How to get the Mac experience without buying a Mac (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9717402)

  1. Buy a really nice PC.
  2. Install the Linux distro of your choice.
  3. Install VMWare
  4. Run Windows XP inside VMWare
Tada! Nice GUI on a strong Linux base. If won't run all of your games, and it may be a bit slow, but we are trying to make it Mac-like.

mac users and communications (4, Insightful)

basho3 (660338) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717404)

The cause here seems pretty obvious. A large proportion of Mac users are communications professionals and creative types. We make our living writing and communicating, while PC users are a more representative sample of the population. The Mac is also a premium product (a slight premium, please, let's not rehash that battle again!) and people who buy it are likely to have more disposable income and education. But ... as an enthusiastic Mac and Unix condescender, I have to admit I'll be adding this to my little toolbox! ~grin~

What do you expect? (2, Funny)

GOD_ALMIGHTY (17678) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717408)

<cheap-shot>It's all style over substance</cheap-shot>

We should just rename friday (2, Funny)

falcon5768 (629591) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717411)

To flamebait friday... between this one and the Bobbie Fisher one, I think the UN is going to be sanctioning Cowboy for attempting to start a war!

I doubt it. (2, Funny)

GMFTatsujin (239569) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717418)

MacNewsWorld is obviously in error. A study commissioned by Microsoft shows that Windows users are obviously superior, not only in linguistic acuity and dual-button mouse skills, but also in lower total cost of ownership. Windows users are also more innovative. It's true!

On MacNewsWorld's part, I suspect... I suspect... Damn. What's that thing they call it when you hire your own family to work for you?

Neopolitanism. That's it. I suspect *that*.

More coherent brain functioning (0)

voxelman (236068) | more than 10 years ago | (#9717427)

Back in the '80s when the Macintosh was first introduced I knew a psychologist that claimed that subjects using the Macintosh interface exhibited more coherent brain functioning than subjects using the PC interface. This was probably pre Windows though.

this is just what we need, not! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9717430)

if we're to improve pc / mac user relations.
what a pice of tripe. I'm a mac user, who uses pc's out of need at work. let's stop this dericive bs and just admit that each user perfers his/her os better than the next user's preferance.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?