OSNews

nice guide. I personally would like to own a mac but like most people like me they cant justify the price.

I'll eventually own one when i am better off as far as money.

My only gripe about osx is finder. If only i could replace it with gnome or KDE - i'd be in heaven

No, you don't need Gnome or KDE. What you need is Path Finder: http://www.cocoatech.com
That file manager rocks.
BTW, the new Finder for Panther, is pretty good too, worlds better than the previous Jaguar version.

Dell laptops and homebuilt desktops do me fine.

Please don't fall for the rumors - they are based on earlier speculation about a Mojave processor from IBM, based on the 750GX and incorporating a VMX implementation. However, no evidence to back up that this is what's in the iBook has been shown, and given that IBM has been putting larger L2 caches on the G3 line, I'd say it's almost certain this is a 7445.

I sincerely doubt Apple would call anything without VMX a G4; that's pretty much its defining characteristic. Instead we have a bunch of paranoid people getting their shorts in a knot because Apple chose not to advertise AltiVec here. Well, it actually makes sense - Apple needs to differentiate the iBook and the 12" PowerBook, and not advertising it as a speed machine too much can help.

Please, don't engage in FUD though without due evidence. If Apple says it's a G4, then it's a G4 until solid proof is delivered to the contrary.

look very nice...

No, I don't really want to own Mac. PC-hardware still envolves faster, has much better price/performance level and more choices. I'm a programmer, UNIX/Linux-pretty-fanatic-pro, and I'm pretty annoyed of "OS X" way of doing things - Somehow just disgusting that operating system assumes me to be stupid and retarded who doesn't know anything. Of course it's BSD at heart, but with screwed up fhs. Linux on x86 hardware gives most flexibility, choices and freedom... Of course those Powerbooks look extremy pretty But iBooks look like a cheap blastic toys...

and of course, a dual Opteron too.

And yes, why not? I want a dual G5 Power mac.

These babies could give a real boost in my home network (and a big burst in my account).

Well, serious, I don't think that apple prices are unfair (at least in USA) and no, don't try to compare apples with bananas (Dell). ( Ok, just kidding, no flame war ;-) )

Sure seems like one. I keep on thinking that Eugenia is making fun of those that have fallen influence to the Steve Jobs' reality distortion field. Either that or some kind of hybrid review/advertisement. Strange stuff in any case.

IBM Thinkpads work best for me.

From the looks of this campaign Apple sales are sliding again.

No, it is not a joke, NEITHER is an advertisement. It is an article that I felt like writing tonight, because Star Trek: Enterprise was airing a re-run, so I thought I should write something.
I truly believe that Apple now has more competitive prices, and people who were "closer" to purchase a Mac but they didn't decide it at the end, they might want to reconsider, because Panther is a GOOD OS.

The one reason that I think that most laptops suck is because they don't have the pointer-thingie(nipple) that only Thinkpads and I believe some dell laptops have. Since I can type properly I look at touchpads as absolute ergonomic brain damage.

... to SWITCH.

I've had the opportunity to use the iBook for almost a year now, and even though I've always been a PC user, when the G5 came out... I couldn't keep myself from bying it.
And yes it was expensive, but I know it will be worth it (I haven't recieved it yet.
I think Mac OS X is the best OS ever - perfect balance between the *nix environment and the simplicity (?) with Windows.

i've told my sister to not buy a mac because there is no compelling reason to do so.

last night, after seeing the ibook updated to a g4, i told her, if she wants to get a mac, get the ibook. not too expensive, and more than enough for what she plans to do. i do wish she'd get one, then i can play around with it, password-protect it, and hand her my thinkpad t30 =D

"The one reason that I think that most laptops suck is because they don't have the pointer-thingie(nipple) that only Thinkpads and I believe some dell laptops have. Since I can type properly I look at touchpads as absolute ergonomic brain damage."

I can touch-type, too. So what? What on earth does that have to do with the ergonomics of touchpads? They are certainly less obtrusive to typists than the trackpoint situated smack in the middle of the keyboard.

I think one of the things not mentioned about the iBooks is that up to now they seem to run more coolly than the 12" PBs; probably due to not having the casing operate as a heatsink. I wonder if having a G4 implanted will up the temperature somewhat.

Nice story. I switched this past July and I'm very happy with my PowerBook and OS X. The PB is wonderful to look at and a lot of fun to use. As long as Apple keeps making great hardware and the best OS I have ever used, I'll stay with them.

I'm really looking forward to Panther which should come this friday.

Oh, just go back to your hole and leave us alone. I am not a promoter for Apple, I have nothing to do with them. The part you don't understand is that for many years here at OSNews people are trolling to each other on how the Apple prices are high. Today, Apple prices are better than any other time, and that is something to celebrate, because I have eaten the trolling in the face all these years as part of OSNews. In fact, I am one of these people who still claim that some Apple products are stupidly expensive (e.g. the G5), but there are other products that ARE reasonable priced, and hence my article with the opportunity of the iBook and eMac new releases.

Do you get it now, or do I have to spell it to you in Russian?

I am personally thinking of buying the Dual G4 Powermac, I believe that it is a great value for the money/performance, and I wanted to make people who want to run Mac OS X more aware of intelligent purchases they can do without shaving money for expensive stuff like the G5 or the Powerbooks. I wanted to explain to people that you can purchase capable hardware with less moeny.
That doesn't make the article an advertisement, no one is paying anyone here. In fact, I am the one who will have to shove off $1600 to Apple to buy that PowerMac, not the other way around.

>Why spend top dollar on a Mac when you can get an open better Linux machine for less money?

Because Mac OS X offers a FAR better desktop experience than Linux and it does more, better (home video editing, elegant iApps, Watson/Sherlock apps, iTunes and the list goes on and on and on). Oh, and it "just works", I don't have to get pissed off with the system every 20 minutes about things.

So, get off your high horse, for now. Linux is coming along, but it is not offering the same quality desktop experience as OSX --or even Windows-- does.

An info taken from Theo de Raadt website :

" P5/120 PCI 32MB, 2GB:
OpenBSD/i386. Adaptec 2940 PCI SCSI controller, DEC-chip ethernet, ATAPI CDROM, and nothing else really worthwhile talking about. My main test machine. "

The first time I read the above specs, I was surprised. Then I realized that all the sysadmins and techies that I know don't spend a lot of money on computers, especially new and fancy ones.
I wanted to own a Mac years ago but couldn't, due to high prices. Now that they are affordable, that desire has disappeared, replaced with reality : most of my computing needs are satisfied by an old Pentium II (450 MHZ, 256 MB of RAM, 10 GB hard disk, Mandrake 9.0).
It's too bad for Apple they're just realising people buy computers in order to use them, not to put them in vaults and take them out (once in a while) to display them to amazed visitors.

The open choice is Linux on a Mac.
A dual boot is the sweetest option you can get:
www.yellowdoglinux.com -- an authorized reseller of apple hardware,
i.e. your warrenty is still valid.

This is the best of all worlds.
Mac iApps plus OS X Panther, Linux on a PowerPC, and VirtualPC for windows apps unavailable on either Linux or Apple.

Check out sony tr2. Small, fast, bright and long battery life. It's more laptopy that any other laptop on the market

First of all,

<<Rich Mac culties might want to realize not everyone lives in the USA, can buy one iBook instead of two x86 machines, and happily spends billions to blow up other countries and then billions more to fix them.>>

Is it just me or are those two sentences not connected?

By the way, one good thing about OS X is that it has ZERO viruses! And it has been around since March 01'

XP on the other hand, maybe 30,000?

You got the price thing right Eugenia. BUT I paid for 10.3 today - academic version - and the New Zealand price has dropped about 20% over what I was quoted last week. This is good. Now about $120 USD. Regarding h/w pricing in New Zealand, here is the low-down...

PowerBook 12" 800MHz...all prices in New Zealand dollars.....
$3400 bought in NZ
$3140 Australia
$2765 Hong Kong
$2652 USA

Yup, I could fly to the US and get one for the price difference. What a rip-off!

If anyone wants to bring me a PowerBook from the USA to New Zealand, I would be happy to accomodate them near Wellington for a few nights in return.

Won't Apple US ship overseas?

Whoops. That was supposed to be 1GHz, not 800MHz. Sorry!

Summary: G4 iBook good for its price, great notebook for satchels and backpacks. Would probably settle for a centrino laptop if buying bigger screen real estate (less travel).

The release of the 12" G4 iBook signals one thing very clearly, the 14" XGA (1024x768) notebook is dead.

With an altivec enabled consumer machine, Apple now competes with wintel notebooks in the above form factor still marketed with, typically low end, Celeron, P4 and P4-M machines. The P-M will soon triumph over its x86 rivals due to power consumption.

That form factor will only continue to sell as long as the Office users buy them. The future is going to be Pentium-M (Dothan) machines with centrino wireless. Why lug around the LCD technology of your last business laptop when 1400x1050 15" machines are competitively priced? Otherwise 14" is too big.

In my mind, there are 2 main markets left. Small and Large.

XGA <= 12" The powerbook, iBook, IBM X Series and panasonic toughbook (durable magnesium).

'til now the altivec has been something of an issue with OSX and iBooks; no longer. The IBM model has a crummy video card, but the option of a really light notebook 1.6kg vs. 2.2kg has some appeal. Does everyone need the option of watching DVDs and burning CDs in an Apple notebook? I'd be content with a lighter machine with which I could install CD based software over a network. Surely this is possible with Open Firmware?

Overall, the G4 iBook wins on price, and the fact intel haven't yet released linux drivers for the centrino chipset. Though quiz Apple on how much more the 12" Powerbook costs to manufacture now that the iBook has a superceded G4 CPU and uses the same DDR (PC2100 SO-DIMM, I believe).

Idle G5 speculation: By Christmas 2004 IBM will have a mobile G5 on a smaller die. This 64-bit chip will differentiate the 12" powerbook from the iBook. Not bad news for consumers, as around the same time a "G4" from IBM will be released the infamous Mojave 750VX, which will still be competitive at the low end of the market - good battery life, 1MB cache, IBM's altivec impl (hopefully more finely tuned than the current G5, which is rumoured to be worse the motorola's altivec).


15" 1400x1050+ higher on some machines

Apple is competitive for its operating system. As a cross platform Java developer, I'd probably buy a centrino with more pixels. And wait 6 months 'til Intel supports Linux.

Sure, I don't know what I'm missing out with having not owned an OSX machine, but I can get a bigger LCD for nearly $AUS1000 less than the 15" AlBook. The overall quality of an Apple laptop is almost certainly higher. But for less I can get more pixels. Quantity of pixels vs widescreen Quality.

Goldstein, what happend to you?
I have read your posts in the past and had some respect for your opinions. But now? This post puts you in the nutter catagory.

Someone who reads OSNews ought to be interested in actually learning about other OS's.

I've compared prices here in the UK and I find that mac notebooks are no more expensive than the XP machines.

The thing that happens all the time is that people only compare processor speed and memory. But ibooks and powerbooks are also really good on the form factor. The 12'', the cheapest are really light and in the x86 world, that's something that costs a lot. plus, they've always had a very favorable battery life.

So I'll get one for the house really soon, once the offering is a bit stabilised.

I think they have agreements with their suppliers. In NZ there is a one-company monopoly on importing them and you must toe the line! If not, they get rid of you (and apparently did so recently with one parallel importer).

I take it you like Macs.

You can't please everyone, Eugenia. Some are just sour.

I'm going to get the e-mac for my dad. It'll be his first computer. As good as KDE has gotten, I just don't see it for him. (Honestly, it's going to be an effort to teach him to use the mac!)

The G4s towers have become very tempting price-wise, especially if you shop around for a factory refurb or open box. However, a year ago, I upgraded the cpu on my 3 year old G4 400, making it an 800. Perhaps I'll upgrade the videocard with http://eshop.macsales.com/Item_MailList.cfm?ID=5753&Item=APL661NV4M... (OWC, $75), when I buy Panther. That should keep it going for another 3 years.

Of course, what I really want is to replace my main computer, my TiBook, with the 17" powerbook. But this is just "rich mac cultie" lust. The Ti has served me well over the past year, and I suspect it will serve me for another three or foour years.

I guess that's my point. These Apple computers last, in my experience.

You Linux fanboys crack me up! Reality check time, No single OS is the right OS for every one. When will you people start to realize that fact?

I tried Linux RH 8 and 9, Debian and Lycoris. Linux was fun for awhile but that fun wore off. I got tried of things not working. I got tried of editing config files. I got tried of the endless security updates with RH. In my time with RH there were four kernel updates and countless other security updates.

I also tried FreeBSD and while I like it better than Linux, it still takes more effort to get a fully working desktop than I'm willing to put in.

I wanted a fully functional desktop but also have the power of unix and OS X gives me that.

> I take it you like Macs.

Don't we all wish to some degree that we were running OSX instead of dual booting windows and Linux(*BSD)?

The point of the article is whether their hardware/price ratio is compelling. If buying a portable I would consider a maxed out iBook and weigh, literally concerns over size in buying a 15" centrino. Particularly if as a developer I installed a free unix on said machine, seldom booting into Windows.

1) They're more expensive. There is no doubt about it. The G5 is fairly competitive for a 64-bit system, but then again, I'm not planning to buy an Athlon64 machine until I can buy a motherboard + CPU combo on pricewatch.com for $300. Computers are commodity items for me. I don't keep one around for more than a couple of years. Because of that, I don't need a fancy case, super advanced cooling system, features I'll never use (GigE, PCI-X, etc). I just need the highest gigaflops/dollars ratio. If you're careful about the PC hardware you buy, you can get away with paying very cheap prices without giving up any quality. I've been buying name-brand, but cheap hardware for years and I've only run into problems a few times. Meanwhile, the only Apple product I've owned (my iPod, which I love dearly) has already needed replacement.

2) I don't like OS X. They got rid of a lot of the well-tested usability features they had in OS9, and replaced it with eye candy. For god's sake, tabs look like buttons in Panther! OS X isn't fast. It feels very solid, because of features like double buffering, etc, but its not fast in the way BeOS (or even Win2K on modern hardware) was fast. Also, the kernel design is so baroque, that it leaves me with a dirty feeling. Lastly, there is a kind of schism between the GUI and UNIX (painfully reflected in the filesystem layout with the duality between names like /bin and /lib and /Library, etc) that you don't have in BeOS or Linux.

I really have nothing against Macs on principle. I think they're fine machines, and very appropriate for when you want to get work done, or need a very well-built machine (say a laptop). But Apple is never going to attract commodity PC buyers until they swallow their pride and sell commodity hardware.

I think Eugenia is wrong when she say "Bad points: ... no CPU cache.".
The Apple site state very clearly:
"# 1GHz PowerPC G4 processor with Velocity Engine
# 256K on-chip level 2 cache at full processor speed"

I'm writing here from an iMac, and fail to understand this quality desktop experience about Macs that everyone has been brainwashed into believing. It's pretty. That's all I will give it. But the experience is not entirely different from any other desktop experience I've used and definately not better. Macs overhyped, overpriced and overly restrictive. If you are a multimedia proffesional this definately is your platform of choice. If you are a home user, get KDE/GNOME/Linux. You are definately not missing out on anything.

Oh, and whoever said fonts on linux are ugly should try using a Mac. My GNOME fonts make Mac fonts look like they were created from a chicken scratching the ground. Maybe it's the LCD, maybe not, but these fonts are horrible and little. Oh, and is there a tool I can install that will give me workspaces (ala GNOME)?

My GNOME desktop provides me with a far better experience (this an opinion statement). Better fonts, workspace or what some people call virtual desktops, a media player that can play all media formats known to man( no quicktime can't), an array of great apps, some of which I can't find on Mac (can some tell me a good Jabber client for the Mac), flexibility. And believe it or not, I find GNOME easier to use than Mac. I would definately not purchase the Mac if I had money.

Why you should buy a Mac in order of importance?

1). You are a multimedia professional( Macs are good for video editing and image manipulation)

2). You have been a long time OS enthusiast with a keen interest in apple.

3). The Mac keyboard feels like you are in heaven. (The mouse absolutely sucks!)

4). You want an alternative to Windows, and you just hate Linux/*BSD.

Mac Myths
1) It is cheaper given their attention to quality hardware and aesthetic.

2) It is easy to use.

3) It has a flat learning curve.

4) The Mac desktop experience is better than Linux Multitude Desktop experiences or Windows.

5) It interacts nicely with Windows products.

That said, all these 'quality desktop environment mantra' about Mac is bull shit. I know ten people who would tell you that no desktop experience equals that of Windows. Desktop experience is absolutely subjective. And the Mac Desktop env isn't clearly not the best I've used, though it's much better than Windows. The Mac doesn't look like a home user platform to me.

It's unfortunate that what I regard as the best desktop environment is might be daunting to install for the average home user.

Hah, okay...someone mentioned IBM Thinkpads. I //love// Thinkpads, the only PC laptop I'd own. (in fact, I do - an aging Thinkpad 600 running Slackware) I like having three buttons (Linux use) and prefer the little nub to a trackpad. But that aside, the iBook is //much// more solid then it looks, the thing is very tough and "feels" more solid then any PC laptop I know of. I like. Ooh, and battery life. :-)

I don't think Apple's market share has dropped much, the growth has slowed in the recent past, but most likely not dropped. All the Mac users I've known for years remain Mac users, there are entire segments of the market - like graphic design - thats not going to switch to Linux anytime soon. As much as I like the Gimp, Photoshop is it - and theres no open source replacement for Quark or In Design yet thats even worth mentioning. Don't like Macs? Don't read magazines, or listen to music (most of the groups I listen to tend to be Mac fans, music created on Macs, etc - Trent Reznor of NIN fame used a Mac Plus on the making of "Pretty Little Hate Machine", and that was in the late 80s!), or watch t.v. - Final Cut Pro now dominates, doesn't it? Rich culties indeed. Name any sort of app as powerful as FCP in Apple's price range with its capabilities. Considering how Macs dominater with the printing press industry, stop reading books too. While your at it, throw away any media you have - its like tainted by Macs. :-P

I tend to agree on the monoculture bit, but no one screamed at BeOS users about monoculture, or Amiga users, etc. I've never understood the anti-mac sentiment thats long existed, its wacky. Irrational even. Of all closed platforms I like Apple, their //much// more open then MS will ever be. Mac OS X can be slower then other platforms, but its not due to the underpinnings - Quartz is heavy, but newer Macs and plenty of RAM help tremendously. Apple intends OS X to last another two decades, at the time of 10.0 the hardware hadn't yet caught up to the capabilities of the O.S. - now it has. The G5 is *the* platform to run OS X on, look at those XBench scores - the things snappy and very responsive. Bandwidth helps.

So yeah, I like Apple - their one of my three favorite computer companies (the other two are Sun and SGI), not too many others innovate like they do. Color me a cultie. :-) And leave the politics out, okay?

Again, I find myself in awe. Am I seriously the only person reading this that runs windows, Linux and Macintosh? I tried, oh how I tried, to run linux as a desktop, and it still blows. BSD/Linux make kick ass servers, but I simply lack the patience to deal with LotD. Many of the drivers either suck, or need some serious work - to wit, video drivers.

Windows is the de-facto OS, so having it around is helpful for many things, though with VPC, I use the windows machines in my house less and less. It is noce to be able to buy whatever you want off the shelf and know that you can slap it in your x86 box. However, Windows is insecure, malware and virus laden, and overall not worth much except to game on IMO. Out of any system I run, my windows boxen take the most effort to keep alive. Period.

Mac OSX is an absolutely excellent desktop with BSD "underpinnings" and a somewhat screwy unix-like filesystem. It is however, more or less unix. Add to that projects like Fink, and it really makes a lot of sense to use Macs if you are in a unix environment. They tend to cost a lot in the US, and even more in other countries. You look like a dork whipping out your iBook at a coffee shop, but so does anyone who uses a laptop in a coffee shop -- macs just accentuate the fact. You have a very limited selection of hardware.

FWIW, I currently run win2k, winXP, Debian, and OSX.

I'll buy a mac when the os is released to i386 hardware, like it should have been a billion years ago.

Bad points: Not enough RAM in the cheaper model and also s-l-o-w RAM, expandability only through USB 1.1 or Firewire 400, no CPU cache.

1) There is CPU Cache; 256K L2 Cache ( Look inside the system profiler )
2) Most people don't need fast memory. I certainly don't notice any difference between running Eclipse on a P4 with the fastest memory and an eMac running using just the standard 133Mhz. Massive bandwidth is of only give any benefits either when playing games, which I don't, or editing videos, which I don't do either.

It would kill Apple, their primarily a hardware company. Besides, I like PPC. :-)

hehe i relly like the ppc platform and im switching most of
my computers to ppc hardware. i do have phanter installed but mostly to mess around but mostly i boot in to my gentoo enviroment, i must say that linux on ppc is relly nice.

and ordered the new G4 laptop, (12") it's exactly what i wanted in a mac and the price! woot..

5) I can't run any of my software
[...]
If I want my next system to be something other than a PC, I'd consider an AmigaOS or RISC OS system long before a Mac.

I'd be fascineted to know what software you have that runs on AmigaOS and/or RiscOS and _not_ OS X.

1. Games. I'm not into games like I used to. This the biggest reason why people still stay on the Windows Platform and why the Linux desktop user base isn't taking off.

2. Higher quality. I have had 7+ more PCs, 1 Amiga and 1 Mac. All but one of the PCs (the Tandy) have failed me. They are more trouble than they are worth. The Amiga power supply died of a power surge and was sold long ago. I sold the iBook because I want a more powerful one (Power Mac G5).

3. Better stuff. The first time I saw the iSight with my own to eyes my jaw dropped on the floor. The Windows side still has nothing on this thing.

My next PC will be an IBM compatible (Power Mac G5)

Why settle for an Honda Civic when you can get a BMW for a couple of $$$ more? I guess some people don't value quality. I do.

> My only gripe about osx is finder. If only i could replace it with gnome or KDE - i'd be in heaven
IMO, Finder is MUCH better than Konqueror or GMC
>PC-hardware still envolves faster, has much better price/performance level and more choices.
There is a big difference between Evolution and Speed Increase. Did you take Reliability and Longevity into consideration in your price comparison?
>But iBooks look like a cheap blastic toys...
Polycarbonate is what they make Bullet-Proof glass out of.
>Steve Jobs' reality distortion field.
Reality is a subjectiove thing anyway.

I'm ecstatic with the iBook I bought last year, it's just been Superceded, but after 12 months, is that really surprising.
Wouldn't it be nice to hook your Bluetooth Mobile Phone to your GNU/Linux Box, or not even have to reinstall printer drivers when you plug your USB printer into a different USB Port. or are you still only using Landlines ro call people, and have an old Serial Line Printer.

An info taken from Theo de Raadt website :

" P5/120 PCI 32MB, 2GB:
OpenBSD/i386. Adaptec 2940 PCI SCSI controller, DEC-chip ethernet, ATAPI CDROM, and nothing else really worthwhile talking about. My main test machine. "

The first time I read the above specs, I was surprised. Then I realized that all the sysadmins and techies that I know don't spend a lot of money on computers, especially new and fancy ones.
I wanted to own a Mac years ago but couldn't, due to high prices. Now that they are affordable, that desire has disappeared, replaced with reality : most of my computing needs are satisfied by an old Pentium II (450 MHZ, 256 MB of RAM, 10 GB hard disk, Mandrake 9.0).
It's too bad for Apple they're just realising people buy computers in order to use them, not to put them in vaults and take them out (once in a while) to display them to amazed visitors.

Well, for me the only reason to move from a PIII 550Mhz to an eMac with a 1Ghz PowerPC G4 was because it took ages for large projects to compile, apart from that I really don't need anything more powerful than what I have now.

As for Linus, it wasn't until recently when he was given a computer when his main work horse for development was not a particularly power machine.

People who develop and complete real work put system speed down the list right next to tail fins for the case and whether they can squeeze and extra 0.0000000000000000000000001fps by tweaking the BIOS.

I develop using Java and I certainly don't feel the need to spend the amount of money and time required to assemble a decent FreeBSD Workstation with Java setup and working with Netbeans.

I see alot of posts with the question of why one should buy a Mac and get MacOsX when you can buy a PC and run Linux. I have been a PC-person all of my life but a year ago I bought a Mac and the reason for this is the wonderful development environment.

I have always had a fascination with the NeXT development plattform, it seemed so much better than every other available and now that this plattform is available for a much more affordable price (compared to NeXT-workstations).

Cocoa is a really great API which has no real comparison on other unixes or windows. Other unixes have KDE which is quite great also but the problem with this is that is just one of maaany available, so even if you are running <preferred unix> with KDE your system if probably infected by gnome, xforms, tcl/tk applications as well.

I know, choosing your desktop system depending on how its development environment looks may seem a bit dumb for must users, but I do believe it isn't, the development environment very much decides the quality of the software created for the system.

(as a sidenote, I would really like to see an operating system built around KDE and only KDE, done right, this could perhaps begin to compete with windows and macosx)

People like DAIMONI really bugs my ass off.
"oOO, im a unix pro, therefore apple sucks.. apple is too damn easy for me!"

Windows is a lame alt. to OS X
Linux has too much child-diseases.
Unix is expensive, and its not a product that fits for the consumer.

So, OS X runs them over, twice.
A great core, with lots of oportunities. And a sleak nice GUI wraps it all in the best way.

There are too many freaks in here that are fucked up by the mhz-race. Get over it. Its proven that less is often MORE.

I've thought about getting a mac for home - in fact, I've pondered deeply about it.

When you consider what you get for the money, it all sounds great, but then you think - hmmm, for $1000, what kind of PC could I buy ?

The answer is of course a very powerful one that would in most cases be faster than the mac.

Then of course I have to remember what I use my home computer for and for the most part, it's gaming, 3d editing and watching movies/listening to music.

The mac can do all of these things, but gaming is not quite up there with PC simply because not all game dev companies make mac ports of thier games.

For now, if I feel the urge to 'mac' about, I can just use one of the imacs at work.

I have money invested in applications I use. Some of these applications can be run on the Mac without a problem. However, what about the software that can't? My concern is the software cost. Switching platforms, you shouldn't just compare the cost of the hardware...maybe someone should provide an article clearly defining what Windows, and for myself, Linux users have, and what the Mac platform provides for them.

I for one think this would benefit a switcher more than hardware specs about cache (though, that's important to some people).

I'd love to switch, honestly. I like OSX, but until more companies start releasing Mac versions of games i'm being held in M$-ville.

:(

Good article.

I can't belive that Apple would be SO stupid as to market something other than a AltiVec enabled processor as a G4. The amount of bad publicty such a move would generate.......it dosn't bear thinking about.

Yeah, yeah. Macs are slow. Macs are expensive. Apple should run on Intel. Apple should port OS X to Intel. Its not going to happen folks. Get over it.

I own an iBook G3 700mhz. Its slow. But it does everything I want. Except for video editing. Its painfully slow there. I develop on it. I run Tomcat on it. I run Apache. I run PHP. I run PostgreSQL. I run X Windows. In fact I have only two complaints about this platform. One, Apple doesn't support Ogg Vorbis in iTunes or on the iPod. And two, Open Office doesn't run natively on OS X.

I'm a Systems Administrator. I oversee about 10 Linux servers. I run Linux on my desktop at work. I love Linux. But OS X is just easier to use. Easier to configure. Easier to connect to networks. I just wish there was more open source native OS X software. I have a problem with all this $5 and $10 shareware that is so pervasive. It reminds me of the Windows world.

I'll never run anything thats Windows. It is the biggest piece of crap I've ever seen. Too many problems. Too many viruses.

I always have built my own computers at home. But I'm tired of that. I want something totally integrated between the hardware and software. Thats why I'm getting a dual G5 next spring. Yes, Apples are expensive. But look on Ebay at how much used ones are going for. In the long run, they really aren't any more than a PC. Try selling a 2 year old PC on Ebay. Its like comparing a Chevrolet with a Honda. The Honda is more expensive initially, but which car will hold its value better in 5 years.

> Dell laptops and homebuilt desktops do me fine.

Before you invest in Dell, you'd better read this:

http://www.newsforge.com/business/03/10/20/194207.shtml?tid=85

A cynic is someone who knows the price of everything and the VALUE of nothing

The entry level eMac costs 799$? Really? In some better world perhaps...
Here it should cost a little over 3000 in local currency, but it costs, surprise!, a little over 6000. That's right, two times more! And no customs exist by which you can explain this. It's all thanks to apple.pl
So, no thanks, I can have a MUCH more powerfull pc, with which I can do significantly more for half of that price (the price that the eMac should cost...)

As long as Apple won't get this it will not exist on the markets outside of the US. It never had also...

of ourse I can have a machine that can do same thing as eMac for 1/3 of it's price - and in a country where average monthly salary is significantly below that 1/3.
As I said, Apple is nonexistent.

To all you people who say macs are too expensive.

You can't run your wintel games?? Simple solution don't sell your wintel. I am planning on buying a powerbook, for power, size, battery life, and looks. I own a p4 2 ghz running windows. my computer before that is an athlon 550 running suse 8.2 I am only going to try and sell my Dec Alpha. Simple solution to all you money whiners don't sell, just take it one step at a time. I am not rich. I just barely get by living one month at a time. But I can afforad a mac, I am not a student so I don't get discounts.

Many of you have missed the point of Eugenia's article. Whether you like Macs/Apple or not, what she was trying to demonstrate is that Apple has now achieved a goal it was woefully short on - the price /performance of the Mac consumer models (plus the good deal on the G4 tower you can still get). To me, this is a story because it has been such a point of contention. She was not comparing Macs to PC's, she was commenting on Apple.

Many of you are too young to think about another thing - families. Most people who buy Mac consumer models are not OS fanatics like us. They are families with children. More than even people like us, buying a home computer is a big investment. If you want to have video cameras and digital cameras so you can preserve vacation memories and special occasions, you can't beat the Mac with the software in the box. That is a big selling point just in itself. And, if you join .Mac, any newbie can make a slideshow website on .Mac and share these things with other family and friends scattered around the country or world. And, because they come with AppleWorks and bundles like World Book, a family may not have to ever buy a single software program as all their needs are being met. When a family is trying to decide what kind of home computer to get, these are the important things. And, if it costs a little more, it may be worth it to them so they can easily do these types of things. Unfortunately, the public is not well informed of this type of thing either. All they know is "everyone" uses Windows and are terrified at the idea of using something else. It's too bad as choice and being informed is good.

No, I don't play games at all.

But I think I have to eat, buy new clothes sometimes or pay for appartment etc.
Nice to see that you apparently don't have to and can spend all your money on 3 times overpriced computer...

Well, right now I'm seriously thinking of selling my x86 machine-- In order to buy me a nice Mac. But I'm still trying to find out whether I can get enough EE for my little machine... Do hope so

Me wants a mac!

Well, I'd say that the point of the article is valid ONLY in the US. Here MAcs have unacceptable price/performance ratio.
I guess that Eugenia have left Greece far too long time ago...

And about second acapit of your post, Jay, that doesn't apply here - because in those 6000zl (or 1600$) for entry level eMac is basically MacOS X PL only. If you want programs for video edition, you have to buy it separately (luckily in that case price is very reasonable, but still...and anyway pc is much cheaper anyway; not to mention that most people have unlicensed copies of...everything.
Sad reality, but true - not only prices of Macs aren't adjusted to fit peoples salaries)

zima, that is unfortunate, it really is.

zima (IP: ---.rawicz.sdi.tpnet.pl) - Posted on 2003-10-23 12:19:57
The entry level eMac costs 799$? Really? In some better world perhaps... Here it should cost a little over 3000 in local currency, but it costs, surprise!, a little over 6000. That's right, two times more! And no customs exist by which you can explain this. It's all thanks to apple.pl
So, no thanks, I can have a MUCH more powerfull pc, with which I can do significantly more for half of that price (the price that the eMac should cost...)

Why should Apple try and work around your countries tariffs and protectionism. For an Apple eMac in Australia, low end, the price has dropped by $500 to $1349. IMHO, that is VERY cheap for a quality name brand computer.

Anonymous (IP: ---.147.119-193.newsouth.net) - Posted on 2003-10-23 12:02:58
> Dell laptops and homebuilt desktops do me fine.

Before you invest in Dell, you'd better read this:

http://www.newsforge.com/business/03/10/20/194207.shtml?tid=85

The sadest part is the fact that if you look at IBM's pricing for their ThinkCentre PC range, one questions why one would purchase from Dell especially with all the problems regarding technical support.

Microsoft is worse, imagine ringing up for an activation code just to end up with a person with an American accent who doesn't understand a person with a New Zealand accent? imagine then demanding to be put through to someone who can understand; Australian, Brit, someone who can understand English.

I am not surprised at the support or there lack of.

I don't think it is fair to say that we never see "advertisements" like this for, say, Dell machines. Whether you buy a Dell, another brand of x86 or build up your own is basically irrelevant - it's just a platform on which to run your favourite OS. But if you want to run OSX you HAVE to invest in Apple hardware (unless someone seriously starts to work on BasiliskII heheh) so this article was relevant to discussion of OS's.

It hasn't convinced me to switch (you really don't want to know what those things cost in South Africa, trust me), but lay off Eugenia, this time she's on target.

good post. I have to agree with Eugenia the price/performance ratio of apple's products is looking better. Just as importantly, the absolute prices of the products are also looking better (they are lower).

The improvement will bring more people into the apple world but its not going to open up the flood gates, which is obvious from the reaction of pc/linux fans here.

I encourage the PC crowd to observe the trends here. Apple is making itself more accessible and has been doing that for a while. They still can't go out and buy commodity garbage like you'd get for $350-450 in the pc world but i suspet they will continue to lower absolute prices and improve price vs performance ratio.

The pc fan boys are missing the big picture as usual. Apple is becomming more competitive and they are taking steps (slowly) to increase market share. MACs WILL get cheaper and cheaper.

and on another note. I suspect we've seen the true cause of hostility towards apple. Apple's pricing makes them like the attractive person that everyone lusts for but can't or won't date. Hence the bitterness.

Well, I'd say that the point of the article is valid ONLY in the US. Here MAcs have unacceptable price/performance ratio. I guess that Eugenia have left Greece far too long time ago...

And about second acapit of your post, Jay, that doesn't apply here - because in those 6000zl (or 1600$) for entry level eMac is basically MacOS X PL only. If you want programs for video edition, you have to buy it separately (luckily in that case price is very reasonable, but still...and anyway pc is much cheaper anyway; not to mention that most people have unlicensed copies of...everything. Sad reality, but true - not only prices of Macs aren't adjusted to fit peoples salaries)

I've just had a look at the apple.com.pl, that has to be the worst website I have ever seen, heck, Apple has put effort into their Russian, even, if their Ukrainien one is in a better state. So I can understand from what side. However with that being said, why should they adjust their prices and make a loss just so that the prices reflect the percapita income of Poland?

"t's too bad for Apple they're just realising people buy computers in order to use them, not to put them in vaults and take them out (once in a while) to display them to amazed visitors."

With bazzar statements like that, Apple must be doing something right.

Anyone know if Apple has improved the LCD quality on the latest iBooks ? The ones I've seen in the past weren't all that great - dim and washed-out looking. I believe Eugenia even mentioned this was the case on the 12" Powerbook she reviewed some time ago.

I might be willing to live with some of the limitations of the iBook, but a poor quality display would nix the deal...

The rumors that the new iBook does not have the AltiVec Velocity Engine are not true.

Check out:

http://www.apple.com/education/products/ibook/

In the right hand column, under "What's New" it states:

"Fast G4 processor. The PowerPC G4 with Velocity Engine delivers unparalleled processing power."

So, order up! As a recent convert to Mac from Linux, I can tell you that OS X is the finest operating system around and Apple's hardware is the best. Best decision I ever made!

if i was to buy a computer for my family to use it would be a Mac-G5 i will not buy another OEM PC with Windoze ever again, the only way i will get another PC is to build it and install Linux...

as far as OSs are concerned i would like to see someone take BSD and build a OS-X clone for x86 computers (either that or Linux for the PC), or just spend the extra dollars for a Mac...

"1) They're more expensive. There is no doubt about it. The G5 is fairly competitive for a 64-bit system, but then again, I'm not planning to buy an Athlon64 machine until I can buy a motherboard + CPU combo on pricewatch.com for $300."

It's you teethless, durty people who have the nerve to say Apple is too expensive. Yes I can buy a Kia Rio for 10,000, but its not a chevy, ford, or dodge - and i will have to fix it so offen, its not even worth having.

Guys, Mac's are not TOO expensive if you counter in the time you have lost because you have to fix your hardware every 30 days, or visit a support site because you got an invalid function in model <unknown> in iexplorer.exe and you are looking up memory addresses for pointless evil all day. Sorry, you guys need to lighten up a little, go by an Apple store. As a matter of a fact, the Apple store Oct 24th at 8pm (all of them) will be hosting an event for Panther. Go check things out, please - for the sake of the horrable computer industry. If you are not willing to spend more on your computer than a nice calulator - you deserve what you get.

Why should Apple try and work around your countries tariffs and protectionism. For an Apple eMac in Australia, low end, the price has dropped by $500 to $1349. IMHO, that is VERY cheap for a quality name brand computer.

No, you've missed my point or didn't read what I've said:
And no customs exist by which you can explain this. It's all thanks to apple.pl

There isn't any reasonable explanation for such high prices. Apple pl is adding all customs, VAT tax etc. to the price (before crossing the border) that is somewhere at little over 1200$, not 799!
Macs have unacceptable price/performance ratio mainly because everything else has reasonably, logically calculated customs and taxes, based on the REAL price of the thing before crossing the border.

Mac OS X likes a lot of RAM, it is a Unix after all.

I thought that BSD was, at best, one of the UNIX-likes. Has it actually passed the UNIX certification tests?

Yes, I'd love a dual G5 running a 2Ghz.

No, I can't afford to buy such a beast at this moment.

However... I recently tried to price out a comparable dual AMD64 system, and the prices came in about the same. Most notably however, I was able to beef the RAM up to 2GB on the dual AMD system for only about $100 over the price of the dual G5 w/only 512MB of memory!

Additionally, the AMD setup would have run a nice Raid 0 config for its primary drivespace, which would likely also boost performance over its G5 counterpart.

But money aside, the biggest reason I'm not in a hurry to save money for either platform is the fact that software still isn't out to really take advantage of either.

Yes, Panther has some 64bit extensions, but it's really a patched 32 bit system for now. Perhaps in a year we'll see some true 64bit OS's for the G5 platform.

Similarly, there are some 64 bit versions of Linux, but I've read quite a few horror stories of people trying to get their AMD64 systems up and running using them. Basically hardware support doesn't appear to be a strong point of 64bit Linux, which is understandable. This is a whole new platform, and won't likely be fully understood or supported for at least a year (like the G5!).

Windows64 is around the corner, which on one hand means that you can continue to run a lot of your existing software base (assuming you currently run Windows), and can slowly add in 64 bit applications as they're rolled out, but on the other hand, it means you're tied to the bugs and security holes that Windows brings to the table, as well as the fact that you'll have to invest buku dollars into a Windows license (it's worth noting that 64bit Linux is either free or much cheaper than it's Windows counterparts are expected to be).

Yes, you can probably download a warez version of Windows64, but based on the cracked copies of Windows Sevrer 2003, you won't be able to access the Windows Update mechanisms, which means either a lot of hunting for the patches when they come out (and it's Windows, so we know there'll be patches needed almost the day it comes out!), or you'll be forced to run an unpatched system, which based on the state of PC security right now, is probably not a good idea.

Long story short, if I were to buy now, the G5 would probably get my money due to the fact that you're getting hardware + your OS with it, and it'll be supported by Apple.

In a year, which is the earliest I'm considering adopting a 64bit systems (I just upgraded to a 800mhz 3Ghz P4 less then 6 months ago!), I'm hoping and expecting that 64 bit Linux will be the option for me.

Right now, in my opinion, you're paying a lot for the hardware, and simply hoping for full software support. If I'm going to spend 3 Grand or more on a new PC, I expect to get not only a great hardware base, but also software to fully exploit my investment.

I've just had a look at the apple.com.pl, that has to be the worst website I have ever seen, heck, Apple has put effort into their Russian, even, if their Ukrainien one is in a better state. So I can understand from what side. However with that being said, why should they adjust their prices and make a loss just so that the prices reflect the percapita income of Poland?

I don't want from Apple PL to adjust the prices down - I want them to not adjust/manipulate them up! The rest you have in my previous post...

oh, and what's so horrible about www.apple.pl? I don't see much difference with ru or ua...

The time was right. I am typing this on my new G5 and so far I am very happy with it. As for price, on the high end the MACs are no more expensive than the Intels/AMDs.

One of my biggest gripes was the Apple supplied mouse. After two days I decided to try my wireless Trackman. While the system was running I unplugged the old mouse, plugged in the wireless, and presto, the mouse was working.

I have ownes several Dells, built my own machines and had a couple of off the wall brands. So far I like this one the best. If you can afford to switch and have the desire to try something different you are right. The time is now.

havin shopped my first mac from Greece (it cost me quite a bit) i have to say that macs are great.

they have a high price, but are not worth junk after 1 year.
they dont need upgrading every year.
conclusion: in the final run they are cheaper.

OS: the operatin system is just great. easy to use, very stable.
what more can any1 want ? linux is good, but far too complicated for newbies. and even professionals should prefer OS X over linux. (but u can still run linux on mac if thats the problem)

performance: when i have 10 apps open on my mac and im doin 5 things at the same time, without being afraid that my DVDrecordin will get an error.. then i guess the mac is faster.
and easier...
and nicer...


anyways, for those bein open-minded, and for those of u with a MACshop near u, or a friend with a mac, i suggest u have a look at them... and if u like it, and have a few extra money.. buy one.. i can guarantee u that ur life will be much nicer after this

I don't want from Apple PL to adjust the prices down - I want them to not adjust/manipulate them up! The rest you have in my previous post...

Have you ever heard of currency fluctuations. IMHO, wait till Poland joins the EU and adopts the Euro, then by a Mac, you'll find then the price will be alot cheaper.

oh, and what's so horrible about www.apple.pl? I don't see much difference with ru or ua...

Hmm, I don't know, the fact that they're advertising a 6 year old computer on the front of the website just as a quick hint on how much they really can't be bothered updating their Polish Apple Website. That could be one clue. The other would be the terrible navigation, where are the prices? why isn't there a link from the front page to any of the main products, that is, iMac and eMac?

Wow, talk about a well timed article. The eMac price cuts have just tempted me to get one, though I'll probably wait a couple of days to check out my money situation and cool off a bit.

Key reasons for leaving my Linux P-III 733:
1)
Third party support for Linux is poor (Not linux's fault, but annoying even so) Palm, Cameras, mp3 players, webcams, web plugins etc are a pain sometimes.
2)
I keep breaking things by mixing apt repositaries.
3)
I don't like having to use GTK 1, KDE or especially 3rd party widget apps in Gnome.
4)
OS X and the iApps just look better integrated and smoother to use than the Gnome equivalents.
5)
My girlfriend (not a technical person) keeps moaning at me when something changes (well ok, breaks) in Linux 'cos I've updated something.

Please note that I will be keeping my PC to continue using Linux (I don't want to dual-boot the mac).
Linux is cool.

""Well, I'd say that the point of the article is valid ONLY in the US. Here MAcs have unacceptable price/performance ratio. ""

From the article...

"But for some specific reasons --mostly higher prices, especially out of US-- most of the people don't take the big decision to try out Macs."

She know this, and says it in the article. Next time, read the article beyond the headline.

I don't believe that this latest action by Apple will do anything to add to their lagging sales. Having frequented the Apple store in Soho, with the intention of wanting to like Apple computers I have come away, ultimately disappointed with their products (I am not a person easily impressed by the latest fads (e.g. ipod)).

As other people have pointed out in the past, Apple has a serious lack of an affordable (sub $1000) line of desktops. With their new G5 series the situation has worsened with the least expensive unit costing $2000. Unfortunately the emac line fails miserably to do what it intends.

The emacs are *not* a substitute for a desktop computer. Putting aside for the moment the slow speed of these things, someone who wants to buy a "cheap" computer is most likely going to want to upgrade soon afterwards. These weren't designed with that possibility in mind (unthinkable when technology changes so fast that your computer is outdated before you get out the door or before Apple brings out the model you just purchased with better hardware at a smaller price). Also, the CRT's that are put into these models are of extremely *poor* quality. They have poor resolution, display Apple's already bad fonts poorly and have poor color saturation. Of course, next to these Apple's LCD models look fantastic.

Their line of iBooks suffer from display problems as well. Compared to the latest offerings by other hardware companies, notably Sony, the displays look like cheap LCD's from ten years ago. They lack the ability to view them from different angles and wash out if you don't view them at a very precise angle. Apple's fonts, which are the worst I have ever seen on any computer, are that just unbearable on these. The vertical components of letters (think l,t,p or d) just seem to disappear making text hard to read. Turning off the font smoothing seems to help but all that is left are jagged edged fonts. Nor does this adjustment affect all the text (e.g. see menu bar). One only has to look at Windows XP to see how font anti-aliasing should be done.

Perhaps OSX 10.3 will address some of these issues. I hope so. But personally I think Linux has the momentum right now not Apple.

It really doesn´t make sense.

* Linux user represent like apple user 2% of the population. Unlike windows, Linux is not a choice by default, they install it because they like it. For most of these people, Linux is clearly superior to macosX. Plus, Linux is free as in speech, and apple will never be able to compete on this side.

On the other hand you have 96% of users who installed windows, most of them even don´t think that another serious alternative windows. In their eyes, one computer = one PC = the fischer price look of windows XP = Word and Excel.

Guess where you can find most switchers ?


* Apple can earn money with linux users .
because unlike Microsoft, it produces hardware, and the ibook and ipod are appealing.


* Free software saved you ass.
I used a Mac in 1996-1998 and Apple´s OS was damn slow evolving. The main things which made macosx possible are
- NextSTEP
- the talent for GUI apps of apple guys
- Free software (bsd,gcc,samba,gnu tools, and a damn lot
of others)
So without free software, Apple would just have died, and you would be using Windows at this very time.

Plus, look at http://fink.sf.net : along with Apple´s apps and classic mac apps (Photoshop, ...) , free software solves the #1 Apple issue, which alwas was the lack of application.

Will IBM sell the 970 on their own like how they sell the Opteron? From what I have read, the 970 is a descendent of the Power 4. The reason why I ask is if Apple were able to make an Xserve (with SCSI) - they would the cheapest seller of 64-bit system! Look what Virginia tech got for 5.2 million ... 1100 DUAL 970s and rank 3 on top500.org

For your information - I've read whole article.
The thing is, that almost nobody with who I'm talking here have noticed this, and I have to convince them that the prices are not alright everywhere even thought that Eugenia said this (but just barely...)...perhaps this is due to the fact that what you quoted is the one and only, not very marked out, sentence dedicated to the issue

Where do you get lagging sales from?

you look at their investtment sheets latly? how about their quarterly report?

apparently not.

ass coocoocachoo said, when Poland enters the EU, you will see huge drops in prices due to the fact that it is easier to do high volume business in the EU than it is in 30 diffrent countries.

the best thing to happen to that continent has been the formation of the EU. talk about simplification of business dealing.

Have you ever heard of currency fluctuations. IMHO, wait till Poland joins the EU and adopts the Euro, then by a Mac, you'll find then the price will be alot cheaper.

Sure, go ahead and state right away that I don't know about the obvious - but it is you that don't know about something: for maaany years currency situation has been like this here:
1$ = 4zl
ALWAYS
Only for over half a year this had taken slight modification: 1$ = 3,9 zl. And it's stable that way. $ to Zloty is perhaps one of the most stable rate of exchange there is.
And by no means this "fluctuations" can explain why Apple pl is adding customs and taxes to the Macs as if they were ~+50% of their real price - and that situation was also present for many, many years.

About EU - I hope, or rather KNOW that you're right, but that's many years from now - joining EU next year won't mean instantly being in Euro zone.


Hmm, I don't know, the fact that they're advertising a 6 year old computer on the front of the website just as a quick hint on how much they really can't be bothered updating their Polish Apple Website. That could be one clue. The other would be the terrible navigation, where are the prices? why isn't there a link from the front page to any of the main products, that is, iMac and eMac?

ROTFLMAO (my apologies, I couldn't help myself - I'll explain right away...)
The iMac deal you are seeing is a special offer - used before in leasing, fully working computers with warranty (and cheap I must add - one of the rare reasonable offers at apple.pl)
And as for not pointing to new offers - first, it points to something big and something that's happening RIGHT NOW - new Mac OS X (about which the ua site, which you've said is better, forgot). Secondly: it points mostly to special software offers (one of which is with G5...) and attractive for bussineses G5 leasing offer. There's not a big point in advertising "popular" models on the site (which they do nonetheless, but now they think that new OS X is more important apparently)...because here they are bought only by people who are very well aware of them...

And I assure you, navigation is very intuitive - the thing that not for you, because you don't understand Polish is...non issue - this site is not intended for people outside of Poland.

Check this out at http://ptech.wsj.com/archive/ptech-20031023.html

"If You're Getting Tired Of Fighting Viruses, Consider a New Mac"


By WALTER S. MOSSBERG

Putting aside for the moment the slow speed of these things, someone who wants to buy a "cheap" computer is most likely going to want to upgrade soon afterwards.

Sorry in the real world only cash-strapped geeks buy a cheap computer and then soon after start upgrading parts.

Are you saying that people buy a $999 machine and then a couple of months later start adding parts $100 or even $50 bucks at a time breaking open their box each time and toying with their computer?

Normal people?

Bull. Most normal people buy a box and buy all their office stuff once. They use it till it is antiquated or they see a really neat new computer they want more. They ditch the computer and software and then buy a new one. I am talking office staff, managers, soccer moms and basically 99% of the bloody population.

I like linux too but these normal folks are going to have a steeper learning curve even lindows type setups.

“Their lagging sales” is from their consistent decline in market share over the last 10 years. The latest numbers battered about is now 3%.

When evaluating a company one must do so over a longer period of time than by just using the last quarter's report. A good quarter or two doesn't reverse a long-term trend. It remains to be seen if their latest line will stop the decline. Besides Apple now seems content at deriving a portion of their income from other ventures than the desktop - namely consumer electronics called the ipod which itself is a dubious business due to low profit margins and intense competition.

3 yrs ago I switched from windows 98 to mac os 9 and haven't looked back. Though I'm going to build a AMD system soon. I think OS X is the best OS on the market right now.

sorry coo.

Does anyone have anywhere they would recommend to purchase ram. I'm looking for something a little cheaper than crucial if possible, but still reliable...

Thanks!

Check this out at http://ptech.wsj.com/archive/ptech-20031023.html

"If You're Getting Tired Of Fighting Viruses, Consider a New Mac"

By WALTER S. MOSSBERG
AH AH AH !
I read this one, and it is very bad.
If mac users love illusions like this (an island of serenity), then I expect worms for MacosX causing serious damage to come earlier than you think.

The argument : (crakers will write virus for windows because they can hit more people ) is a fake :

Who wants to write the first serious worm for macosX and to become well-known ? There is an oppurtinity, they think they are safe.

have you ever taken statistics?

or any basic math class.

if youhad, you would not have pointed out such a foolish number.

what has happened over the last 10 years? the computing market has expanded globaly.

that means the market increased and Apple's sales did not go up to parity the rise in market size.

that does not mean they push fewer machines out the door than they did 10 years ago, infact, they have increased sales significantly due to the increase in market size.

laging sales would mean that they are not selling machines and are in finacial trouble.....neither is true and it has been FAR more than the last few quarters that they have been profitable, they have been in the black since the origional iMac first hit the scean.

"Sorry in the real world only cash-strapped geeks buy a cheap computer and then soon after start upgrading parts."

Where are your statistics to back up your statement? Why do you seem to dismiss the idea that people aren’t buying them because of lack of an upgrade path (whether or not that is the buyers intention).

"Are you saying that people buy a $999 machine and then a couple of months later start adding parts $100 or even $50 bucks at a time breaking open their box each time and toying with their computer?

Normal people?

Bull. Most normal people buy a box and buy all their office stuff once. They use it till it is antiquated or they see a really neat new computer they want more. They ditch the computer and software and then buy a new one. I am talking office staff, managers, soccer moms and basically 99% of the bloody population."

Present your proof. Perhaps those people who you believe are ditching those antiquated computers would have kept them longer if they were upgradeable.

"I like linux too but these normal folks are going to have a steeper learning curve even lindows type setups."

I didn’t say I liked Linux.

you are kidding yourself if the mass market upgrade more than their Ram.

either that your you only know powerusers/geeks.

I know lots of normal people and none of them would dream of craking open their computer to rip out a part. sure, some pay for upgrades at compUSA, but if you keep doing that, you end up losing mor emoney than if you had gotten an iMac.

I'm pretty annoyed of "OS X" way of doing things - Somehow just disgusting that operating system assumes me to be stupid and retarded who doesn't know anything.

After years of using (should I say "putting up with") Windows and Linux, I bought a Mac last July. Best choice I've ever made, and I'll never go back to Windows.

I have to disgree with the above comment, as an avid Linux user, I've not found OS X to treat me like I'm stupid in anyway. The interface is very intuitive, with exceptional drag-and-drop support (which I love), unlike the Linux system in which many things are counter-intuitive.

"Are you saying that people buy a $999 machine and then a couple of months later start adding parts $100 or even $50 bucks at a time breaking open their box each time and toying with their computer?

Normal people?

Bull. Most normal people buy a box and buy all their office stuff once. They use it till it is antiquated or they see a really neat new computer they want more. They ditch the computer and software and then buy a new one. I am talking office staff, managers, soccer moms and basically 99% of the bloody population."

I don't have facts or figures to back this up but it seems true to me. I just asked the 30 people in my class if they upgraded their computers within 6 months of purchase and 2 did. We are 4th year IT management students, and I would suspect that we would be more likely than most to upgrade, but we haven't.

People who would buy eMacs would be more likely to be your average computer user in that they would not be too worried about what is in the box, or how a CPU operates, but more interested in the fact that they can access the web and do the stuff they want to.

Having said that, I would not be likely to buy a eMac, for the reasons stated ie.. no real upgrade path. But that's not to say that I would need to upgrade in the first place.

I think we do need to remember that people who are interested in technology (like us?) are not the majority when it comes to computer users. I think if you look at the success of the "flavoured" iMacs you might agree that cute designs and colourful cases matter more than performance to quite a few people, if not 99% of the computer using public.

Your joking right?

Bob the manager next door looks at breaking open his box and messing with the cords with the same sort of awe and mystery as the idea of breaking into their TV to replace the tubes.

I did not say that people are not buying macs because of the lack of an upgrade path. Some people make their decision based on this even if they have never upgraded a computer in their life. I just said that most people never upgrade their computers even if they buy on the low scale.

Perhaps those people who you believe are ditching those antiquated computers would have kept them longer if they were upgradeable.

All the Dells and Compaqs and Gateways I have seen my friends and family ditch over the years were upgradable. The thought of upgrading the mother board or even in many cases the memory does not pass through their heads at all.

The idea of adding a new hard drive for more space is a scary experience to most of the population short of the geeks in the world.

“you are kidding yourself if the mass market upgrade more than their Ram.

either that your you only know powerusers/geeks.

I know lots of normal people and none of them would dream of craking open their computer to rip out a part. sure, some pay for upgrades at compUSA, but if you keep doing that, you end up losing mor emoney than if you had gotten an iMac.”

I don’t know what the percent of people that upgrade is, but I do know the issue comes up when people shop for computers, which can affect someone’s decision.

Do you people ever get tired of turning *every* single mac thread into exactly the same flame war as always? Seriously, get a grip already, different people have different preferences, accept that and move on.

The bottom of the line macs are a joke, they need to be at speeds over 1.5ghz, after all the top of the line pc cpu is over 3ghz and anything under 2ghz sells for next to nothing.

jobs is happy raping people over hardware and too gutless to take on microsoft. screw apple until they smell reality and put out some comparably priced (to pc's) systems.

mambye it is becasue Unix and UNIX LIKE OSs use the idea that if the RAM is there and can be utilized, use it!!

less swaping is needed with that meathod than is withthe meathod of "save memory, don't allocate any more than the program needs at this instance becasue you never know, swaping out if you need toload another program? no, just swap all the time so you don't have to do it when you load a new program"

the foot print of a user land program has nothing to do with the way an OS manages memory.

the Unix way allows the end user to see benifits from adding more memory, the other way does not.

"Admit it, you do want to own a Mac."

No. Not really. Nothing against them, I simply have no interest in owning one whatsoever.

I've sat down and used many Apple machines before. Apple II, Powermac, G3, G4, OS 7, 8, 9 and X. Cube, iMac, iBook, you name it. Nothing wrong with them, but I just can't get excited about any of Apple's products.

Some of the software is nice. Some of it is pretty. Same goes for the machines and the cases. But it isn't about money or stability or applications -- I just don't care about them one way or another!

Maybe not having a strong reaction to a computer makes me strange. Oh well.

You should go buy a Mac!

No. Not really. Nothing against them, I simply have no interest in owning one whatsoever.

This is cool. This is the most rational response I have ever heard from someone on this site lately regarding NOT wanting a Mac. It also reveals something very important that a lot of people are missing.

People like different things.

I don't like Windows. It is not about sticking it to MS or anyone else. I just don't like Windows or the Windows way of doing things.

So, what do I do? Being a unix engineer the choice is just too simple. I use linux.

This guy does not like Macs. That is cool. He is not going into some long and IMO worthless diatribe on cost/power/apps analysis of the Mac versus the PC or OS X versus XP or anything else.

He just does not like them.

Why is that line of thought so hard for some people out there to understand?

"after all the top of the line pc cpu is over 3ghz and anything under 2ghz sells for next to nothing."

Does that go for the 2-GHz Opteron? Or does the Mgz myth only apply to Mac vs. PC?

You Windows and Linux guys and girls are hilarious. You obviously have some deep psychological problems that Eugenia has touched on somehow.

For those of you Linux people that say KDE or GNOME has a better interface than OS X. That is also very funny. And you say that OS X is limiting? Also very funny. My _favorite_ thing about Linux (and I play around with a couple computers with Linux) is how bad they are at correctly finding a configuring hardware drivers. Then there is the issue with them not being close at all (this actually includes Windows) at detecting digital cameras and video cameras and being able to import and edit picures and video).

As for applications including games. No you can't get everything. But NOBODY plays EVERY game. If you do you don't have a life and I have to wonder where you get all your money from. There are PLENTY of games out there for Macs in all the styles/genres of games.

The excuses for Windows and Linux users about Macs being too expensive is just so lame. It's the difference between BMWs and Chevys. BMW does not try to sell more than anyone else. They cost more than Chevys because they are built better. RAW speed, smashing the gas pedal down and getting the highest straight line speed is not an indication of which vehicle is the best. The same is true about computers. It's the usuable speed and the applications that best use that speed. The more time you spend working on your computer to keep it running fast should be deducted the speed rating of that computer. Then you would have a much better idea of usuable speed that a computer has.

Of course you won't get this. Ostriches love to stick their heads in the sand. Apparently you do too.

Well, you've forgotten about people that like Macs, want to own one (well...actually I have one, but that one doesn't count - just an old Quadra 650) and could accept the normal price of 799$ + taxes & border customs, but have somehow harsh time accepting that Apple.pl adds those taxes and customs to the "real price + 50%"...

Too bad Mac articles always ends up attracting trolls and cheap PC b@st@rds. They remind me of the crazy liberals who shun people for thinking differently to impose their radical and dangerous beliefs onto others.

I'm lucky enough to be forced to work on a Mac, and there's no way I'd spend my hard-earned money on this junk.

Somewhat OT - Do you know if macsales ship to Europe (Sweden to be precise)? Does the GF4 MX card requier som unique American voltage (watt, or whatever you call it), or can you buy the card and plug it into a European machine without it frying the whole thing?

My Linux/Win2k dual boot is fine with me.

@Donald
They remind me of the crazy liberals who shun people for thinking differently to impose their radical and dangerous beliefs onto others.
Cooool
Another troll in the troll with absolute no connecttion with the subject.

Hey people do you know that 90% of the posts here get kicked even in Slashdot ?


PS: don´t forget to use your right to vote in 2004. Dude, where is your country ?

linux/win2k dual boot.

i truely believe its the best x86 setup

but i believe macs are better

No wonder the world is a mess with aggresive and unreasonable people who are so ready to flame others just because of their preferences

This article merely points to merits of the Macs and also the comparisons between the different model. It does not condemn Linux or Windows system.

Anyway the way I see it, the Macs look like one heck of a system cos it can run linux and Windows too. If I want to run GNOME or KDE I can do it on a Mac. If I wanna run Win2K and XP, I can do it on a Mac too

This is what i call REAL freedom of choice. Am I the only one getting it?

First, Eugenia's article is fine, and balanced. I disagree with about half of what she says, but that's O.K.

Second, Mac has several advantages that justify the price difference with x86 machines. These include better engineered hardware systems and a superior OS.

Third, Mac owners have not had to deal with uninvited visitors on their computer. Windows home users I know have a bunch of strange programs on their computer that frequently pop up advertising messages, spy on their internet usage and sometimes do very malicious things.

Regards,

Mark Wilson

I believe the phrase you were looking for is "fair and balanced".

I do have to admit that I want a Mac.

I have since OS X came out. So far money has been in the way, but something inside me keeps pushing me towards getting a Mac. Although not to replace my PCs. Life with just one platform would be far too boring. So I won't be a switcher, just an adder?? lol

Macs seem to have a LOT to offer. I know I feel like I'm missing out on a wonderful part of the computer world by not having one. Perhaps OS X would win me over and I'd "switch".

I'm also tired of Microsoft, but I feel that Linux isn't quite ready for me to switch to it. OS X looks like a far better option than a Linux desktop.

So that's where I stand... I think I'll try to save up for one of those new G4 iBooks.

Thanks for the great article Eugenia!

And to those who think it's an ad for Apple, think about this... If she wrote it about Linux, Windows, or any other OS there would be people who claim the same. It's not a holy war, it's just an article.

i don't want a mac. they are overpricey and slow compared to what i could buy for pc money. i could get aircraft carrier of a dell for the cost of a puky little ibook.

" i could get aircraft carrier of a dell for the cost of a puky little ibook."

I take it you're refering to the size and weight.

Rowel you hate Macs thats why you spend all your time commenting on Mac articles. I also doubt that the issue is about speed. If a Mac costs $200 you still couldn't afford it.

I also doubt you can carry your aircraft carrier a city block.

I think macs look and work great. I want one I want a nice shiney Mac.
I use windows and linux, and altho out of the two I prefer linux for everyday use, and windows for games. with a luvverly mac i get my unix fix and great games and programs to use.
Only shame is you can't really self build a mac, i had visions of a monster machine zapping people who looked at it wrongly. :-)
Well, here's to the Mac, long may they reign.

How does Virtual PC run on these new iBooks? I have to be able to practice C# (not run games) and I will need to be able to program in Java (which I assume I can do on OSX). I am just graduating and will be losing my school provided leased laptop.

How well does Virtual PC currently work for those tasks on older iBooks? Is it bearable?


dPa

I don't think I'll ever get a desktop Mac because I can't build it myself. I do like the PowerPC architecture though. I'm also quite attracted by their laptops... Maybe I'll get one sooner than I though.

However, I won't ever cry "I'VE SWITCHED!!!" loudly and proudly if I ever get one like some people do. I think that's lame and doesn't make you that much different from Windows trolls or Linux/BSD zealots. Come on, it's just a computer, not a religion...

older G4 systems.

and yes, you can do Java just fine in OS X, infact, Xcode makes it a realy nice Java environment.

I appreciate the review - and have been looking at apples because dual booting is a serious pain in the ass! and having a professional gui ( backed by a company ) with a unix underneath is a big plus for me.
joe

"Go ahead and mod this post, as long as you read it first."

I'll do it for Eugenia.

The main grip people historically have against the Mac are "Overpriced and under powered"
So when the 970 out, It was appropriate for OSNews to report on the Mac catching up with PC world in speed. With the price of Macs coming close to their PC counterparts as far as price/preformance is concerned, it is equally appropriate to report on that.

I can't sneak one piece of a computer at a time through my door making my $6000.00 computer look cheap. (Sure fire way to buy hardware WITH the wife's approval.) With my PC I watch for killer deals and then buy them. Sure it may add up, but it's more affordable to upgrade one piece at a time. I don't think you can do that with MAC... As in buy new motherboard, processor... I know video cards and such you can, but the real performance boost comes with a new MB and processor.

Of course there are cheaper x86 PCs and laptops than there are Macs. But the difference is diminuishing, and if you compare PBs or even iBooks with say Sony VAIOs (which probably are aimed at similar target audiences, ie hooked on design, media-centric, included software, ...) Macs might even be cheaper.

That said I now seriously consider buying an iBook 12 or a PB12 instead of a VAIO TR. #1 reason: VAIOs are even more overpriced (compared to US prices) than Macs over here (Germany).

Philotech

I really wouldn't mind getting a G4, we have the dual 1.2 at school(i think they are 1.2 or 1.4, honesty can't remember). The machines run great and Mac OS X(jag) runs fine.

Soon I will be able to test out the G5's, because for production 2 we use Final Cut on them....So I will probably want a G5..ha

You didn't have much bad to say about the mac. I don't think your articles are bad, they are good, just it seemed to me you alwyas had trouble with any unqualified positive statement on the mac. Looks like you've proven me wrong here.

Part of the problem here is not that Apple is so great - it's that MS is so bad. If they had real competition on standard intel hardware - and linux just doesn't count because of the lack of apps - then Apple wouldn't be so vastly superior.

So to all the people that get pissed when you here us say this - the mac is vastly superior - direct that anger at MS. That's the source of the problem.

It's you teethless, durty people
>>>>>
WTF kind of phrase is that? I don't even understand what you're trying to say here.

who have the nerve to say Apple is too expensive. Yes I can buy a Kia Rio for 10,000, but its not a chevy, ford, or dodge - and i will have to fix it so offen, its not even worth having.
>>>>>>>>>
Thank god its not a Chevy, Ford, or Dodge. Amerian cars suck. I refuse to buy them --- paid quite a few $$$ more for my first Volvo, plan to do so again when I get an RSX next summer. We had a Dodge that needed more repairs in its first 3 years than our old Toyota did in its 10 year service life.

Guys, Mac's are not TOO expensive if you counter in the time you have lost because you have to fix your hardware every 30 days
>>>>>>>
Bullshit. Out of five or six machines I've owned, I've had a grand total of *1* crappy machine, and that was my Dell laptop, which was too bleeding-edge for its own good. In my other machines (going back to a decade-old 486 that's still running) my one hardware failure (a fried modem) was the fault of my not grounding myself when taking it out.

, or visit a support site because you got an invalid function in model <unknown> in iexplorer.exe and you are looking up memory addresses for pointless evil all day.
>>>>>>>>>
Only if you use Windows. The only time my Linux machine crashes is when I tell it to (playing around in the middle of the 2.5 development series).

Sorry, you guys need to lighten up a little, go by an Apple store. As a matter of a fact, the Apple store Oct 24th at 8pm (all of them) will be hosting an event for Panther.
>>>>>>>>>>
I go by the Apple Store all the time. They're one right here in Lenox Mall in Atlanta. I got my iPod there. When it died after 3 months of use, I had it replaced there too.

Reading anything Macintosh related on this site is a waste of time.

After you read the nonsense article you get to scroll through 100+ replies that basically say "Windows Sucks!" without any concrete information on anything.

The reasons why I have no intentions of buying a Mac are:

1. I use my Windows PC for gaming a lot, and the Mac won't run PC games.

2. There is tonnes of software that does practically everything you'd ever need on Windows.

3. If I was going to buy a PPC box I'd buy a Pegasos because it runs cool OSes like MorphOS, and it is far cheaper.

Linux has a solid core.. yessir.. No matter how pretty you make Gnome and KDE, it's just not as usable as OS X and the Finder.

The Linux zealots just don't want to fess to that.

Part of the problem here is not that Apple is so great - it's that MS is so bad. If they had real competition on standard intel hardware - and linux just doesn't count because of the lack of apps - then Apple wouldn't be so vastly superior.

So to all the people that get pissed when you here us say this - the mac is vastly superior - direct that anger at MS. That's the source of the problem.

Of course, the Mac is so superior and only used by the knowledgeable elite of the society while the peons are enslaved by the malicious Microsoft. They can't understand how it's so good because they are too dumb... Bless the holy Jobs, the Lord and Savior of computing!

Linux has a solid core.. yessir.. No matter how pretty you make Gnome and KDE, it's just not as usable as OS X and the Finder.

That's subjective. Personally, I find that GNOME is useable enough for me and suits my needs. Sure, it still need a bit of polish, but it's still good enough to be a good desktop.

The Linux zealots just don't want to fess to that.

No, they just have different tastes. I know many people that would take Openbox or Blackbox over OS X any day.

If you compare design qualities and marketshare, Apple deserves all the praise it can get, so good job Eugenia.

Greetings from a very, very happy Mac OSX user.

"after all the top of the line pc cpu is over 3ghz and anything under 2ghz sells for next to nothing."

"Does that go for the 2-GHz Opteron? Or does the Mgz myth only apply to Mac vs. PC?"

hey, mr head in arse, the 2ghz opteron or athlon64 run at the equivalent speed of a P4 (or apple cpu) of 3.2ghz.

apple's mhz myth was that their cpu's were so much faster than intel's at the same clock speed. turns out, now that everyone's benchmarked it to death, that is false. apple is about that same performance at the same clock as the P4.

so apple's 1 ghz emac, $799, is equivalent to the walmart pc's selling for $199. screw apple for price raping. os merits aren't even considered until these prices are close. the emac should sell for $399. then we can talk os. but until then, no $ale! if jobs had any guts or brains he would have moved the hardware to the athlon64. but he didn't because he has no vision beyond making "purty" boxes.

apple's mhz myth was that their cpu's were so much faster than intel's at the same clock speed. turns out, now that everyone's benchmarked it to death, that is false. apple is about that same performance at the same clock as the P4.


I guess that "everyone" doesn't include barefeats.com does it?

And I believe Arstechnica concluded that G5s were about as fast as a P4 that was at 33-50% higher clock.

so apple's 1 ghz emac, $799, is equivalent to the walmart pc's selling for $199. screw apple for price raping

Putting aside the fact that your statement is false....rape is something done involuntarily. No one is holding a gun to your head, telling you to drop your panties, and sticking a Mac in there.

" apple's mhz myth was that their cpu's were so much faster than intel's at the same clock speed. turns out, now that everyone's benchmarked it to death, that is false. apple is about that same performance at the same clock as the P4. "

So a 2GHZ G5 is equal to a 2GHZ P4. Where did you see this?

Thanks for comparing apple to the forced sodomy of a woman. Someone had to take the PC vs Apple analogy beyond the current "BMW vs Toyota" standard practice, and you have done a fine job.

rape is something done involuntarily

I should have said:

"being raped is something done involuntarily"

People (and most recently rubber chicken) have claimed that Microsoft or Apple has raped them because of the cost of HW/SW. That is a silly comparison.

"Someone had to take the PC vs Apple analogy beyond the current "BMW vs Toyota" standard practice, and you have done a fine job."

ONLY at Osnews.com do you get this kind of glib verbal thrust and parry.

I think some PC users are kidding themselves when they say PC's are "more" upgradeable. When time rolls round to upgrade (especially for the average user), the procs have different slots/configs (p3 to p4, p4 to p4c)or different fsb speed and the memory is too fast for the mobo or a different slot altogether (edo to dimm, pc100, 133, ddr, ddr2100, RDRam etc...). So you cant say its any different on the PC side. I still agree the price is high, but the build of the machine differs when the price does. Also, please people stop comparing whitebox or the cost of PC parts. Think about this, if you were building a quality PC to sell to someone, would you be selling for the price of the parts, especially since you put the effort into supplying an operating system of high calibre and all the apps that one could need in day to day life?

I recently got a quote for a dual Xeon 3GHz box for about $4k. Then I found that a dual G5 2GHz box that is at least as well equipped is $3k. So from my perspective, the only price range in which PCs are less expensive is in the bottom of the line econo-box category in which I, for one am not interested.

Am I missing something?

TomEM

umm, no, the real performance boosts happen when you add a faster hard drive and more memory.

Why did Apple cripple the iBook and only allow for 640MB memory?

They don't even support a 1GB SoDIMM on a machine is brand new?

Did all the dotcom MBA's end up at Apple?

640MB ought be enough for anybody... Oh, wait. Wrong company.

I don't see that as a big issue as most laptop users won't use that much. Anyway, the iBook is their "lowend" laptop. Get a PowerBook if you want more. I believe you're making an issue out of a non-issue.

Great, you should get a dual G5 then! However, keep in mind that more than 99% of users ain't interested in machines that are so expensive. The "econo-box" category is the most lucrative and probably the most significative right now.

The point is with a PC, I can economically upgrade the MB and processor and reuse components such as the CDRW, DVD drive, etc. With a Mac, I cannot purchase a new MB and processor. Therefore I must buy a new machine. Therefore PC's have more flexability.

I agree with Zima about the exorbitant prices of macs outside of the USA, at least in some countries.

I can pick up a PC for the same price as in the USA, but a mac is often twice as much - I guess it's supply and demand ?

Again and again I notice that people are nagging about price, the only explanation I can give is that they never had the experience of what real value is, (You are not willing to pay a decent price for something that ain't worth much), so if you are content with less then stay with Windows, if you want more, be willing to pay more. Choice is about differences. (Think different, remember.)

Matthew, I'll emend something, because I have the impression that your post is in large part in response to bb_matt post and...and you didn't quite get the message.
He didn't mean that he must pick up a Mac for twice the price of a PC if he wants one, he meant that he must pick up a Mac for twice the price of a Mac (in the US)

This is just for information purposes - there are three companies I can think of off the top of my head that offer a wide variety of Mac processor upgrades: Powerlogix, Sonnet and GiaDesigns. Also, I believe DayStar offers some for some select models.

MOST LUCRATIVE!!!

ROTFLMAO

you have no clue about the way the computer business works.

the econo-box computer has razor thin margins and barly is worth producing. the only reason to make them is so you can bring inthe customers and the sell them up to a machine that is inthe "sweat spot" of profit margines which is in the 800 - 1500 range.

you get margins of og 10 - 20% in those modles.

I had convinced my mom not to get a mac to replace her 75MHz PPC mac from '91. I told her I could build a PC that cost less with the same features as the Mac she wanted....guess what, she wanted an iMac (the new kind)

I have been building since Pentium 133 s were top of the line 400 dollar chips, and I put this sucker together with name brand parts from Asus, Nvidea, creative, maxtor, etc.

it cost 300 dollars more than the iMac and she was pissed at me, not to mention she did not like the fact that the computer and monitor took up more room than the iMac would have, oh, and she got hit by that last round of virus attacks and had to take her computer in to get it fixed (she lives in New Mexico, I am in Michigan) she has spent more on this machine than she would have if she had gotten a mac, and there is no way I will be able to convince her to get a PC next time (and the next time will be soon becasue she is sick of this machine already)

that is nice for people like you and me, but for folks, who constitute 80-90% of the market, who can't put a PC together, let alone upgrade an easy part like the hard drive or RAM, flexability is not anything they need, or even think about until they are told about how good it is by some one like you or me.

Seems like all people can nag Apple about is price and their prices could stand to be lower but certainly the value is their which you will never perceive if all you are fixated on is price.

Apple continues to drop their prices and their will be a point where PC resellers can no longer drop their prices. Next year don't be surprised to see a $699 eMac. Even at that price people will complain.

How much is a PC reseller making off of a $300 - $400 PC? Can you rely on these companies to stay in business if all they compete on is price? You can't win forever as a loss leader. What will these companies do if they can no longer lower prices? Innovate? Innovate what? They don't do that now? Losing money on a sale is not a good business model no matter what and at the low end of computing their is ZERO loyalty especially if the brand is bad. People are always looking to move up not move into another trailer park so to speak.

"Admit it, you do want to own a Mac."

Not really. Closed hardware + closed software? Thanks, but no, thanks.

rehdon

PC Upgrade Versus Mac
By hcuar (IP: ---.ph.ph.cox.net) - Posted on 2003-10-24 05:37:54
The point is with a PC, I can economically upgrade the MB and processor and reuse components such as the CDRW, DVD drive, etc. With a Mac, I cannot purchase a new MB and processor. Therefore I must buy a new machine. Therefore PC's have more flexability.



Partially wrong... as far as I know you can buy more RAM memory, a CDRW drive, a Samsung SyncMaster (just plug in the adaptor), a Logitech Quickcam, etc.

Let me remind you that most people doesn't upgrade their PCs...
Latest versions of Windows ask for more resources (even more!).
There are few people that actually upgrade their PCs and use FreeBSD, Slackware Linux or other OSes. I guess that many open source software gets faster in every release.
Many PC users just buy new PCs instead of upgrading. Windows loves latest hardware.

I've only used MacOS 9.x. and I guess that Apple has changed a lot since they released Un*x-based OS MacOS X. When buying a new laptop I'll decide between having an iBook (MacOS X) and a PC-laptop (FreeBSD). What I don't like of the latter is that I'll probably have to boot into Windows to use some components like the modem.


n0dez

Is it Time to Own a Mac?
By rehdon (IP: ---.cisi.unito.it) - Posted on 2003-10-24 17:33:36
"Admit it, you do want to own a Mac."

Not really. Closed hardware + closed software? Thanks, but no, thanks.

rehdon


It's not that closed!
You can actually install Yellow Dog Linux, Debian Linux, Slackintosh, NetBSD, OpenBSD,... on a Mac.

PC is somewhat opened... OEMs make it closed as there is only Windows, Windows, Windows and more Windows... there are still many things that aren't supported under other OSes like Linux and FreeBSD.

So which architecture is closed?


n0dez

If you want something that isn't mainstream then maybe you would want a Mac, but other then that it's still an equivalent to Fisher-Price's "My first computer". Yes they have come out with a more powerful OS but for most Mac users they still want to see animal pictures on the keyboard instead of actually getting down to a command line.

As far as cost let me give this scenario that I came across last week. Nice new Imac G4, so pretty and flashy, lightning strike, BAM no more operating USB ports. $700 for new logic board. If that had been a pc, drop a PCI USB card in and your good. $12 vs $700 for something as simple as USB ports. It doesn't make sense. It was fun trying to explain that to the owner of a paralyzed pretty G4 that sure looked cool sitting on his desk doing nothing.

If people want a Mac thats cool, but all the hype about Mac being so much better then PC's is just as silly as the one button mouse that Mac rode in on.