A former Windows PC snob tells his tale of being seduced over to the Mac side. Though, as a gamer, he still needs and loves his Windows PC, he found space in his life for a powerbook, and opened up a door into a different way of using computers.
Post a Comment
OsX, in terms of home desktop, has a great appeal. So I am not surprised by this testimonial. However, what is surprising is that Apple has not ported OsX to x86, I think if they do they will clean house! That and focusing in iPods would make Apple a more mainstream company. THis could benefit both Apple and the consumers, getting a wider market that is. So far the constrain in Apple is the expensive Mac Hardware, if they break free of those shakles watch out, cuz they would be unstopable.
Go Apple!
Agree, the only reason I don't own one is the price.
That sounds good except one of Apple's strongest claims to fame is stuff just works....out of the box. If they port OSX to x86 they would immediately find all kinds of hardware that needs special drivers etc etc that won't work out of the box.
And Apple is a hardware company. They make money selling computers, not Mac OS X.
Porting to x86 would also lower the barrier to entry, which Apple do not want to do. Apple is a brand for people willing to pay the little extra for a complete experience that "just works".
I used to think the exact same thing...until I did some research and found that Apple computers and x86 computers are about the same price. Given, you can get an eMachine or walmart special for $400 these days, but when you compare performance, peripherals that are included and software that is included on a Mac to something equivelant on a PC the price evens out. Check it out for yourself. You'll see what I mean.
The reason OSX works so well, and there are so few hardware/software conflicts is because Apple controls both Hardware and Software. This simply would not be possible if the OS were ported to x86! If OSX were ported to x86 I'm guessing that there would be as many problems getting it to run (on the x86) as there are with Windows (all flavors).
It simply wouldn't be best for Apple to do this!
Apple needs to seriously consider porting OSX to x86 architecture. I for one, and most everyone I've talked to, has little interest in the G5. To be fair it is a nice chip, but I happen to prefer the AMD 64 bit series.
I think most people agree that a computer is next to useless without any applications... but if OSX were to be ported to x86 then it would have no applications... everything would have to be recompiled to run on the other version, it would be catastrophic.... a comparison would be if Longhorn had absolutely no backwards compatibility with previous windows versions... what's the point?
And in regards to hardware... there is a reason why the apple laptops are so popular... This "cellphone manufacturer" spent most of its time worrying how to design chips more powerful without increasing their powerconsumption.. the result is that the difference in power consumption of the processor between x86 and G§ chips is upto 10:1! That allows Apple to design their latops to no require so much power (batteries aren't light), and smaller (cooling systems are bulky).
Agree, the only reason I don't own one is the price.
are you basing this on fact? or just what everyone else says?
You are correct! Heck I'd venture to guess that at this point there is MORE software for Mac than there is for Windows...considering you can run both OSX and Linux apps on a Mac. Probably not a true statement, but I'd bet it's close. Plus (aside from games) having so many apps available from both platforms almost guarantees a good (if not better) replacement for whatever app it is you use on Windows. This of course applies to the Home user; things are probably different when speaking from a business/large corp point of view.
I was a DOS and Windows "guru" for years. I also used to sneer at Mac's, and would never even consider owning one. The only experience I had with one was the Mac I had to support at an old job.
My wife and I decided it was time for new computers, back in November of 2002. I was heavily into Linux and FreeBSD by then, and wanted the computers to be powered by something other than Windows. I had been reading quite a bit about OSX, and playing with the store demo units at the local CompUSA, so we decided to go for the 17" LCD iMac (800 MHz G4). We purchased them in the middle of November 2002, and they have been running great ever since.
We upgraded to Panther when it came out, and the only problem encountered was one kernel panic I experienced. Everything has worked flawlessly since then. We're talking over two years with the same computers and that is the only problem encountered. These computers run 24x7, the same as my Linux and FreeBSD machines. They are extremely quiet and run very cool. They may not be the fastest kids on the block, but with 768 MB of RAM in each one, they are more than fast enough for anything the two of us throw at them. Since we upgrade the os to Panther, I haven't been disappointed. Then again, neither my wife nor I are big gamers.
Would I recommend a Mac to a friend or relative? You betcha!
I belive that Apple is waiting for the operating system market to become a commodity market like hardware has. With free options rapidly developing from many sides, it is just a matter of time before the OS as a profit center is deminished. When this happens, Apple with have a clear upper hand over the compitition. Additionaly, Apple has little technical initative to port its flavor of Unix to the X86 with the new advances in the PowerPC field.
Apple should pour some money into making sure the world knows this simple equation: the cost of a Mac is the same as the cost of an equivalent pc, Windows XP, plus assorted apps. Whats more, by Microsoft's own marketting line, Mac software and hardware are fully integrated and made by the same company which is a big plus, right Microsoft?. On top of this, the Mac is a far safer platform from the kernel on up to the web browser. So why is Mac not on everyone's desktop? Marketting. If marketting is taken into account, the Wintel solution magically looks better.
sq
For all those whining about price, I just went to Dell and Apple to verify and sure enough you can get a 17" iMac for about $300 more than the cheapest Dell desktop when you configure that desktop to be as close as possible to the iMac.
Note I said "as close as possible"...the Dell still had a crappier video card and a slower hard drive; and the iMac takes up less space since it's an all in one.
So is it more, sure it's a little more, but you get what you pay for :-) The main point here is that it's not THAT much more (less than what most ppl probably think).
Jimi is correct Apple engineers, and markets the idea of "it just works." If they where to port to x86 they would have to do it on some form of proprietary hardware design, so they could control the hardware configuration. This would not meet the desires of most who are calling for OSX on x86.
In the bigger picture I think Apple is gambling that over time it will become less important to be x86 compatible. There are several issues I think they are looking at
1. Intel has stumbled with the the Itanium processor.
2. The success of the AMD 64 bit chip indicates that users are willing to look at alternate sources to Intel
3. IBM appears to have a chip family that covers the entire range of needs better than Intel. That is one basic architecture that handles embedded systems, personal computers, and high very end servers.
4. IBM has done an excellent job of positioning the PowerPC chip in the gaming market place.
Combine this with the fact that Apples units sales are climbing, I just don't see them marketing an x86. In fact it might be more likely that Microsoft will offer Windows on the PowerPC architecture.
Don
At Mac users, its ok though. I do like Mac OS X and yes, that its based on FreeBSD is definately a step forward. Burt just some Mac users and some of the machine designs just deserve to be laughed at.
If you think Apple would port OS X to x86 without putting in code requiring a proprietary boot chip found only on APPLE mobos, you're dreaming. Apple is a hardware company.
If you think they'd port it to support any old off brand cd-burner, soundcard, or video card you could slap in, once again, you're dreaming. This would completely defeat the hardware-software integration Apple is known for.
If you piss and moan repeatedly about the price of the hardware (despite the fact that the TCO has been demonstrated time and again to be comperable to a similarly equipped PC), what you're saying is, "I'm too good to buy used" 2000's Macs run OS X like a champ.
My backup desktop is a 1999 iMac350. Bought for $250 from a reputable eBay dealer back in '03. Invested another $50 for a 256 stick of ram for a total of 320mb. It's faster and more responsive under OS X than YDL.
My main desktop is a 2002 DP 867 bought as a refurb. I'm close to maxxing out the ram. Still has the original nVidia card in it. Other than some hellacious P-shoppery designed to stress the system, I've never bogged it down. It captures full frame DV without dropped frames -- even if I'm surfing the web. My desire for a dual g5 is a want not a need.
Both of them blow the doors off of the 2003 3ghz/1gb ram "Goatway" I'm using here at work. Oh, the Gateway cost about $200 less than an eMac, but boy does it show. Crappy integrated sound. Crappy integrated video with no dedicated video ram. Oh, and ANALOG VIDEO ONLY. An OS (XP Pro) that gets bogged on a regular basis. Mouse lag. Menus that take 3-5 seconds to open. In fact the sytem can get so bogged, that the screen won't redraw and programs won't close until 30 seconds after they've been told to shut up and go away.
In Q1 CherryOS will allow us to enjoy the spiffyness of OSX on our windows machines at 80% of the native speed!
lmao... sorry... I couldn't resist... that demo was supposed to come out in november the quietly slipped to Q1 2005...
I want a mac... I might buy one someday but I have to save my cash to do so
When I first got into computers...Mac fans were always ripping on Windows and holding up thier OS as the perfect thing. Then along comes OS X and these same people now tout this totally different OS as being perfect. Which is it? IMHO it is not Apple technology or Apple marketing that is holding the Mac back, it is the Mac fans who turn people off. Thus destining the Mac to less than 3 percent market share. And don't bring up "oh, but they are profitable" because they are making their money on the ipod and are marketing the Mac as as ipod accessory.
If you think Apple would port OS X to x86 without putting in code requiring a proprietary boot chip found only on APPLE mobos
you mean the one with Open Firmware in it? it's probably called Open Firmware because its proprietary (sorry for the sarcasm). AFAIK, non-apple PPC boards can run OS X (PegasOS comes to mind, but they do not advertise that functionality anymore).
instead of people whining for OS X on x86, people should be yelling for Windows on PowerPC instead of x86. both the p4 and amd chips have translators to RISC processors for the x86's burdened CISC instruction set, so why not skip the middle man and just move to RISC chips already. if anything x86 is the legacy that needs to be dropped.
nevertheless, i bought a 12" ibook this past weekend.
ok let's take a look at it.
Here is what you get for $2,099.00 CANADIAN
1.8GHz PowerPC G5
256MB DDR400 SDRAM
80GB Serial ATA
8x SuperDrive
Three PCI Slots
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra 64MB DDR video memory
56K internal modem
Now let's see what comparison I can make.
AMD64 2800+ (actually 1.8Ghz) --- 179$ CAD
decent abit mobo (kv8pro) ---129$ CAD
256MB DDR400 --- 55$ CAD
80GB SATA 7200 maxtor --- 89$ CAD
Pioneer 16x DVD-+RW --- 109$ CAD
MSI GF 5200 64MB --- 59$ CAD
56K modem --- 19$ CAD
good kb/mouse -- about 100$ CAD
decent case --- about 100$ CAD
Under 900$ canadian, not bad. Did I miss something?
the ibook was $999 with 1.2ghz g4, 256mb ram, 12" lcd, 30gb 4200rpm hard drive, and 802.11b/g wireless.
this is on sale this week at best buy:
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?CategoryID=cat01174&id=1093...
compaq laptop $699
athlon mobile xp 3000+
dvd/cd-rw combo drive
512mb ddr ram
60gb hd
802.11g wireless
15" lcd
sale in flyer:
http://bestbuy.dailyshopper.com/index.aspx?pagename=circularsmall&z...
$300 more, but i still got another mac, for whatever that is worth.
I build my own PC's, all have been built for $250-$400. All are still being used. I have a 100mhz box webserving (OpenBSD / Apache). I have a 700mhz Duron Fileserving of a Software IDE Raid. I have one box running windows for gaming. I use all CRT monitors that were bought for $150 or less. I have monitors I still use that are 10+ years old. I get mileage out of all of that stuff because it has options. And what used to be a desktop machine can turn into a webserver, fileserver, or cvs repo hoster.
And my Apple friends say the TCO is the same and I should look at them. It may be the same as dell, but it's not the same as me. A powerpc box with an integrated montitor? I never bought a pc one that way, why would I buy a mac that way. On top of TCO, I just like the option of upgrading later, or going headless.
-b
"And don't bring up "oh, but they are profitable" because they are making their money on the ipod and are marketing the Mac as as ipod accessory."
Huh? Apple's profits come from their Computers more than the iPod.
Anyway, as a person who seems to have their Mac-lust waning (I'm more interested in Linux now than OSX) there are just some things I can't avoid to say my opinion of.
1) Office 2004 Better on Mac than 2003 on windows? I don't think so, I always thought Office was very kludgy on Mac. Its slower, UI isn't as good IMO, and just doesn't feel as snappy as on XP
2) PC's being "obsolete" so fast. Come on, anything you do on that G3 can be done on a P3 - including running the latest Windows. Win XP runs just as well as past Windows do on the same hardware, just turn off the new eye candy and bam its got the speed of 2k and 98.
3) Yeah... PC hardware is usually pretty ugly, but Falcon-NW, Voodoo, hell even IBM ThinkPads look as good as PowerBooks IMO 
4) Running Linux apps in X11 really sucks. It is a train wreck mixing the two types of UIs... and its slow.
5) Linux on PowerPC is not too hot right now.... especially in PowerBooks. No Wireless or Display or Sleep drivers! 
6) Getting Windows to run well is pretty damn easy. Installing drivers is not hard at all, and if you can't make Windows stable and responsive relatively easy you are not a power user. There are things it could do better by default, but after a format it never takes much time to get it running optimally. Benchmarking? Please, you benchmark when you get new hardware.
7) PC Snobs? I don't think its right for a Mac user to say that or vice versa.
8) "Difference" ? Come on. There really isn't much difference anymore. iApps and Expose, maybe but just about anything done on a Mac can be done on a PC and vice versa with the exception of gaming as well :p
That said, I love Macs. OSX is very nice. I think its the best OS for a new user, and every time someone asks me what kind of computer to get I tell them to get a Mac. Easier to manage for the rookie and less for me to bother fixing. Thats not to say I haven't had to fix a ton of OSX Problems for my neighbor or friends with Macs. But the hardware is quality, well built, responsive as long as you have enough RAM (I Think OSX is pretty bloated in this regard).
It would be a sad day to see Apple go, I'd love for them to get more market share and success than they have now, but I'd love a Linux iTunes, and drivers so that Linux on a PowerBook doesn't suck so much, but I can't really expect that much either :p
My story is essentially the same as the author of this article. PC guy for my entire life, building, testing, fixing them, etc. I saved up a bunch of money for a Dell laptop, and was apalled at the build quality, fan noise, battery life, and heat. I sold it, and for another hundred bucks or so, I got a 12" Powerbook, my first Mac. Especially with IBM out of the biz, I can't imagine ever buying another brand laptop.
Im happy to see this has brought up some good discussions. By removing Macs hardware business your apps will not run like they do on their hardware platform. Steve Jobs enjoys the fact the Mac is almost error free and easy to use. Price wise yes and no. A powerMac 2GHZ duel costs about $200 more than a simular PC gaming system, but that Mac system will be useful for longer periods of time. What I dont like is Mac skimping on RAM and old generation video cards. I am impressed with the G5 and feel its their best chip yet. IBM will be releasing the duel core chips possiably the same time as Intel and AMD. I would suggest Mac for people who dont game much and do serious work in video editing and photography. I also believe that OS X is the best OS Ive ever seen so date as far as how simple it is and it's power. Now that Mac is making excellent hardware I think they should continue as they always have been. If Apple would ever release Mac OS X for PC, Windows would be in bad shape. That might be possiable anyway, check out Cherry OS. Has anyone tried that yet?
"Office 2004 Better on Mac than 2003 on windows? I don't think so, I always thought Office was very kludgy on Mac. Its slower, UI isn't as good IMO, and just doesn't feel as snappy as on XP"
I have run MS Office on both a Mac and a PC, and I can't say I've seen any huge speed differences.
"Running Linux apps in X11 really sucks. It is a train wreck mixing the two types of UIs... and its slow."
Funny, I've run XFig, XCircuit, XDvi, Gv, and the X11 version of Emacs on my eMac. No speed problems here.
it is called Open Firmware because the spec is open. Sun uses it as do all non x86 based systems.
Intel is replicating it with their bios replacement because open firmware is light years ahead of the kludge that is bios.
I think intel should have gone with open firmware, but then intel never goes with an industry standard.
I think the comparison misses the important thing; software like Panther and bundled ILife applications.
I used to hate the old 'classic' mac os. I just didn't get mac users passion. But then I saw panther and it totally blew anything I'd ever seen out of the water.
As with previous comments a mac is more an appliance than a computer. On windows, I still have to tweak and optimise which actually wastes a fair bit of my time. I found XP task switching to be slow and multitasking to be disappointing and no where as stable as people claim. In mac, the hardware is beaufifully designed and the user experience is between the software and what you can do (creatively) with that tool. For me as a previous PC user it's totally opened up my use of computers in all sorts of directions.
As for porting OSX to x86 architecture I think it's a no-go unless apple was seriously in trouble. Apple has built it's brand and business model around PPC chips. The x86 market is so competitive that it's really hard to make money these days. Apple at least, by being a 'prestige' brand can make some cash in a tough market. OS X on PC would mean the end of apple as a manufacturer (could not compete against Dell for instance) to being a Software company that makes ipods. It would also be an end to Apple's industrial design in computing- something that raises the game of PC manufacturers too and would be bad for users of computers everywhere.
"...it is the Mac fans who turn people off"
I agree. Mac enthusiasts are their own worst enemy sometimes. They may mean to come across as merely passionate about their computers, but instead they end up projecting a patronising, elitist attitude.
But the main thing I dislike about the Mac community is the unyielding attachment they seem to have towards Apple the company. Can you like (even love) a company's product without having to feel you owe them your loyalty? I don't think you'll find a more fawning, sycophantic user base than the Mac community. Apple aren't some saintly organisation who can do no wrong.
As much as I'm impressed by Apple's products, I don't love Apple the company. And I don't delude myself that Apple are some sore of benevolent entity either. Too many Mac fans do, unfortunately.
Why do you care what CPU you runs on? And G3 == P2 not P3 idiot
Completly agree.
I like Apple products. However, one I point out the price issues. Which like it or not it is an issue to many people. I get the snob attitude that Macs *have* to be expensive to keep the burds from buying, etc.
When I point to x86 port, I get the we have all we need in the PPC side, when in fact, you can have 10K apps, but the users are by far in the x86 side. A business needs users.
I figure if the mac fans like their Apple's so much, why not promote Apple expansion. Maybe, it is not so much the product that they like, but the fact that only a small minority uses it. This narrow mindeness is incompatible with bussiness. Mark my words as soon as Jobs, steps down, someone will make Apple mainstream following the lead of the iPods.
You don't hear much mac fans praising the iPod lately, perhaps becuase they are use by "others".
Anyway, interesting post.
They could always take a similar approach to x86 that Sun took. Apple could say, "Hey, our PPC version is easier to use, and fully supported. But if you want to play around with it on X86, here you go." Just start off with a limited Hardware Compatibility List and start building drivers and porting applications from there as demand (hopefully) increases.
BUT, Apple knows that your average person hates computers in general and really doesn't give a crap about learning anything new. Apple will never be able to take over the world now because most people just want to buy a Dell and surf the Internet. Apple's only hope for surviving in the computer industry is to hold on to their eccentric ways and keep their brainwashed fanboys happy enough to come back for more.
I have a hard enough time telling people to consider AMD or if they insist on buying a Dell, don't get the cheapest Celeron piece of crap they can find. Most people that actually like computers are pretty set in their ways, with the obvious exception of the author of the article. Certaintly not enough people are willing to switch to help Apple grow to any significant marketshare. The rest of the world just doesn't care.
I came really close to buying a G5 last year but just couldn't find a compelling reason to do it aside from the joy of tinkering with a new toy. I've already got Sun workstations for real work and Opteron systems for games & windows programs, so what could an Apple computer give me that those two platforms don't give me? I'm not saying I'll never buy an Apple, but I can't see myself giving up Solaris.
talk about a cop-out. there are a lot more windows fanatics than mac fanatics and I have to tell you I really could care less about either.
I make my purchasing decisions based on what my needs and wants are, not based on what some wack job thinks.
I guess you all dislike sports because of the fanatics, and you dislike cars because of the fanatics, and you dislike <insert anything you like> because of the fanatics.
every product and event has their loud obnoxious crazy fanatics.. the mac is no different, so unless you let other people influence how you live your life, I think you need to find some other argument... if did not work for the viability of Linux and it does not and will not work for the viability of the mac.
Apple will -
- N E V E R - N E V E R - N E V E R - N E V E R - N E V E R - N E V E R - N E V E R - N E V E R - N E V E R - N E V E R - N E V E R - N E V E R - N E V E R - N E V E R - N E V E R
- port Mac OS X to x86.
Why ?
No software producer would bother to produce and maintain two versions of the SAME application to the SAME platform. They would all drop the PPC version pr. auto.
It's really elementary, my dear Watson
yeah.. and the hassle to maintain them :-)
(I own a PC, and I will always own a PC... I just think they are more a hassle to run than a mac)
No software producer would bother to produce and maintain two versions of the SAME application to the SAME platform. They would all drop the PPC version pr. auto.
You mean like Oracle for x86(windows) and x86(gnu/linux)? Or Mozilla? Or SAP? Or Flash? Or StarOffice?
Yeah, that's crazy.
a lower end headless computer that costs around 800 bucks. something in between emac and imac. headless lets them shave some money off the price and put more power into it. most people already have a monitor. just switch out your windows box for one of these. this would make buying an apple a lot more appealing to many people who want to get a decent mac and not pay a lot (Powermac prices). the emac and imac all in one solution does not appeal to a lot of people.
Yes, I'm jealous of my brother who has a Powerbook. The machine is undeniably sleek and beautiful. However, my refurb Thinkpad running Debian + Gnome 2.8 works fine and I get all my OS and application updates for free. Plus his is far more likely to be stolen.
sorry, that was suppossed to say x86(windows) , x86(Linux), Sparc(Linux)
On windows, I still have to tweak and optimise which actually wastes a fair bit of my time. I found XP task switching to be slow and multitasking to be disappointing and no where as stable as people claim.
Somebody answer me this - do we have any Windows users on the board that can make this claim?
"Ya know, I used to run Windows, and it ran smoother than a baby's ass, and stable too. I had no problems with it at all. But then I got a Mac, and [i]damn[i] what a difference! I thought Windows was fine and never had a problem with it, but geez .. the Mac just totally blew it out of the water!!!"
In other words, have there been people with good PC experiences switch to a Mac and discover it's even better, or is the Mac just a PC with training wheels?
the emac and imac all in one solution does not appeal to a lot of people.
Amen. I've been saying it in several Apple threads here. And it's what is stopping me from buying an apple.
-b
Apple = 1 choice, 1 price, 1 button, 1 arrogant elitist attitude
Agree 100%.
Not only that for in terms of the emac, it is so underpower that the *eMac* was featured as *one of the top 10 WORST PRODUCT of 2004*:
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1735287,00.asp
Apple solutions to performance was to through better HardWare, but this didn't solve the problem becuase it is under-utilized hardware. G5 are 64bit CPU running a 32bit OS.
Apple at this point can:
a) Make OsX turly 64bit
b) Optimize OsX for 32bit and focus on OS performance on G4 to be competitive
c) port OsX to x86 (unlikely)
or better yet
d) pull out of the desktop altogether and concentrate on iPods the real star in the Apple line of products.
Apple needs to ignore the zealots and go main stream.
Go Apple go!!!
"In other words, have there been people with good PC experiences switch to a Mac and discover it's even better, or is the Mac just a PC with training wheels?"
You got it wrong. A PC is like a Model T Ford where you have to hand crank it. A Mac is more sophisticated but keeps the machincals hidden. In other words. You word ON a PC. You work WITH a Mac.
I can't believe I'm defending Macs, but you're just so wrong it's scary...
"Apple has a world of software chioces, if you consider 1 app to be a choice. You can buy an apple at any place and it's all the same price: retail price, no discounts. You can have 3 buttons on your mouse, but only 1 works."
Well it's kinda funny that Mum wanted a mouse for her iBook, and of course the one I gave her had a bunch of buttons, all of which seemed to work pretty well as soon as it was plugged in.
It is ridiculous that Apple stick with the 1-button only setup, but that doesn't mean more don't work.
Ya know, I used to run Windows, and it ran smoother than a baby's ass, and stable too"
Well, I ain't no Mac user, but I've heard only a handful of people make the above claim.
The jive about Macs and 1-button mice is the first indicator that a poster knows very little about Mac OSX. My 5-button MS Optical Intellimouse works just the same on my Panther and XP systems.
i've already got a decent pc and i can't rationalize buying another computer, not to mention having to buy a lot of software over again, and i'm not sure what kind of freeware market exists for the mac. i love my FileZilla and Virc, and Crimson Editor and XnView... anyone want to lend me their powerbook for a month?
Macs are NOT expensive!
Do your math. Just touch the plastic on your PC and a Mac. Even the plastic is much better, formed.... it's not just faceplate deep, like your PCs.
And in the long run, like couple of years, how many times do you have to reinstall Windows, change parts, spend time fixing....
Yes, you might build a working PC for like $400-$500 but what about the software? Are you putting in illegal copies of Windows and other stuff?
And why do these PC centric people, when they complain about how "expensive" Macs are, they always mention only the Top of the line, most expensive Macs?
I own both PCs and Macs. My trusty 500mhz G4 laptop is faster than 1.7ghz Dell laptop I have, and I don't have to spend an hour scanning for bad stuff every night.
I hate prebuilt computers, they're crap. Dell, HP, etc - they all suck. I can buy a better motherboard, case, etc and have a way better system than they sell for less than half the price. I can even use many of my existing parts if I want, and use my choice of many OS variants/brands that can co-exist and boot selectively on a single hardware box.
Apple has an anti-autonomy, anti-tinker dogma that is diametrically opposed to all rugged individualist types. The last thing I want is a hermetically sealed box that runs one OS and the warranty is voided if I unscrew the cover.
"And why do these PC centric people, when they complain about how "expensive" Macs are, they always mention only the Top of the line, most expensive Macs?"
Well, although I do not qualify as a PC centered person, I use MIPS and PPC myself. I must point out that previous post have made reference to the lower end of Macs, namel;y the eMacs.
IN fact, it was pointed out that their performance is so weak that the eMac was featured in the WORST PRODUCT of 2004:
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1735287,00.asp
Discussion then turn into free advice to Apple as to what kind of machine will allow *some* PC users to make the jump to Apple. If you like Apple doesn't it make sense to broaden their userbase?
We need to put asides the us vs them mentality and pursue a wider market and yes that includes PC users without a religious conversion into Steve's fan club.
For most people, computers are not a cult but simply a tool.
Cheers.
I guess you guys will never buy a laptop either, huh?
Since you can't replace the parts, or upgrade it, or have to install a new processor because your pentium 4 just burned up when the fans siezed due to excess heat.
Don't make stupid statments, Saying I won't buy an all in one unit. Then Don't, Apple produces Power Macs as well, and you can get at the parts inside if you want.
Apple has a really simple line. They have a few low end selections and a few high end. Unlike Dell who has a dozens of different models, and the differences are minor when you look at them but can add or subtract performace greatly.
"...it is the Mac fans who turn people off"
Give me a break, I have heard people say the same thing about Windoze and Microsoft.
Acting like Microsoft is the one and only and there quick to make fun of you just because you use a Mac.
Go back and read the posts about Mac prices. These are _NOT_ coming from Dell Users. Many of us build are own PCs. If we were DELL/WinXP non-tech users, would we be posting here?
I guess you guys will never buy a laptop either, huh?
If all in one solutions like laptops are so great, why don't you own all laptops? Afraid the screen will break and need an expensive repair? Not sure if you'll always use it as a desktop?
I have a laptop. 1. And it's the least flexible thing I have (upgradeable, etc). But it's the price I pay for portability.
Why would I pay the same price for a desktop because Apple won't make a headless machine for less than $1400?
-b
I love Macs, I've had the oppurtunity to use them off and on over the years, but sadly I have never owned one because of the price.
But yeah, anyway, I love Apple's hardware, and OS X is really nice, but if I ever get lucky enough to afford one I believe that I'd go with the dual-boot OS X /Yellowdog Linux, with Mac on Linux (MOL).
/2 cents
All the crazy math comparing apple & dell is just silly. Dells are too expensive too. There's no reason to spend more than $200. What kind of Mac can I get for that? A keyboard _AND_ a mouse?
Not quite. And not while the iPods continue to be such a hit.
Jobs will have the iPods fund the Macs. Many of us believe that Apple such naturally concentrate on the iPods because they are such a great product.
Macs are not bad. They have a great UI and their functionality is excellent. What is negative is the cult niche market mentality preventing Apple from going mainstream.
OsX is not well optimized for G4 (see my previous posts) and G5 is an excellent 64bit CPU, just outstanfding, running a lame 32bit Os, in terms of performance becuase the eye candy is impressive. (see my other posts for a postive proposed solution).
I hope Apple dumbs the snobs and goes main stream, both Apple and computer users around the world stand to benefit from such a move.
its amazing how little even people who work in the industry understand about apple.
1) apple is a software company
this is a huge misconception. they dont make macs to sell osx, they make osx to sell macs. the price you pay for the os is more to absorb some of the R&D costs then anything. same is true for itunes, it isnt there to make money, its there to sell ipods. the only way osx would EVER be ported to x86 is if apple completely and totally changed the way that the company has ALWAS done business.
2) Wintel is superior technology
again, a massive misconception. x86 runs twice as fast and consumes wayyyyyyy more power to accomplish roughly the same performance as ppc. by the same note, windows doesnt alwas win because its good, windows alwas wins cause its cheap and good enough, and runs on x86. this is why we see a new strategy from ms every few months on how to deal with linux, because microsofts strategy has alwas been to attack with the low price point. this is how they won over apple, look at the comments here to see my point, especially at the high end, mac and pcs are very comparable in price (mac being a bit more expensive). dont take my word for it, go look yourself.
3) no software
the *only* people who are right when they say this is gamers, and even then, modern games exist for mac, but it isnt a "gaming platform" like windows. there are many areas though where mac is a choice, and windows isnt even an option. look at high performance computing, or for the more hardcore scientific apps. this is the world where unix reigns supreme. mac is finding more and more of a home in the scientific community, and even with the alpha-geeks in the *nix world (you see more and more of the "open-source all-stars" showing up at conventions with powerbooks)
4) not productive/just eyecandy
apple has a long history of putting usability ahead of feature lists. apple literally wrote the book on HCI in the 80s when most "serious" software houses considered such things a waste of time (including microsoft). what the author said about the pc being a tool, and the mac being an appliance is dead on. microsoft has been stuck on the windows 3.1 usability paradigm, which is basically a graphical dos. the whole "work on one thing at a time" mentality may be familiar, but it is far from productive.
5) zealotry
"i dont use macs because of mac users". replace mac with windows, and it would still be a valid statement. replace mac with linux, and the same is definately valid. hell, replace mac with gentoo and it would still be valid. people love to form clics and clubs. its just human nature. if you havnt realised this, click on "os wars" in the forums on this site. i would say linux users are the worst for this, and mac and windows are about the same. the majority of people who own computers are completely clueless, there is no "one size fits all" or "best tool for every job" when it comes to computers. saying linux is ready for the average user is like saying using internet explorer is safe, or that apple is a viable gaming platform. people love to turn operating systems into a religion, why is beyond me.
6) apple is a good platform for newbs, but windows is for the l33t.
this one is totally redicules, but widely believed. just because osx doesnt require hours upon hours of blood, sweat, and tears to aquire a decent level of profinciency doesnt mean that it is any less powerful then anything else. im a certified linux geek, and we have to deal with a very similar misconception among gentoo zealots all the time. what you gain from basic, or poorly designed interfaces is knowledge, not power. i would say the average linux user knows far more about his computer then the average windows user, and the average windows user knows far more then the average mac user. people are lazy, and if they dont find computers interesting they have zero desire to learn one command more then they need to know to get their job done. apple knows this, and have alwas made their machines easy to administer. windows on the other hand, was designed to be administered by a tech department. just because windows has zillions more options out in the open then mac, doesnt mean mac doesnt have them. it just means that you dont know where to look.
for the record, my last mac was a classic II. i use windows at work, and linux at home. my favorite operating system would probably be solaris. i am not an apple zealot (although i once was), i just perfer to base my opinions on fact and experience, rather then marketing and rumors.
She doesn't actually use it, she had the guts removed and made it into a house for her dog.
Ok all...I've been reading this great site for sometime now and finally decided to post a comment.
I've been a long time Intel/Microsoft, until about a year ago. I am sick of both of them. I have my main Windows XP machine strictly for gaming. I bought a Power Mac G5 in July and haven't looked back. I use it for email, web surfing, research, digital hub, etc. It rocks with my digital video camera for making home movies, etc. OSX is the best. Strong, safe, fast, efficient and a complete pleasure to look at and work with.
I just read:
Macintosh…The Naked Truth: ISBN 0735712840
and would recommend it to all.
This is a great article that I can totally relate to.
I also bought a 4G 20GB iPod and an Apple AirPort Express. Wow I love them both.
My next gaming PC will be an AMD based box sometime next year.
Oh and I also have a Linux Fedora Core 3 box running as well. I also dumped IE for FireFox.
My Mac, Linux and Windows machines can all see each other on my home network and share files and resources.
In short, anything I can do on the PC I can do better on the Mac and more.
It's all about the total computing experience.
I am the leading Mac zealot, enthusiast and evangelist!
Javiso
I made a similar transitions in hardware and attitude in 1997 or so. The "classic" Mac OS caught my attention, warts and all, because it was a superior end user solution. Sure it lacked all of the proper buzzwords. It did not have preemptive multitasking or memory protection, it was not a multiuser user system, and it did not have a Unix core.
But what does all of that matter when the system is down and the only way you can fix it is by spending half the day backing up your data and doing a clean install? What does it matter when you want to understand how your computer works, but the complexity is getting in the way? Have you ever noticed that a user of the classic Mac OS could resolve a software conflict? Yet a Mac OS X user, much like a Windows user, either lives with the problem or hopes that reinstalling everything will make it go away.
17-inch widescreen LCD
1.6GHz PowerPC G5
512K L2 cache
533MHz frontside bus
256MB DDR400 SDRAM
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra
64MB DDR video memory
80GB Serial ATA hard drive
Slot-load Combo Drive
those are the specs for 1299 imac.
I look at that and think.....thats about 300 bucks too much.
I mean a 64mb 5200 FX??...128 cards are only like 70 bucks anymore. If this was the older Imac, I can could see it...but this NEW mac...no way.
Especially for an all in one desgin. Also I think 1499 for there PowerMac is a krappy too.
I bought an ibook and though I liked the OS, I though, man would this scream on my Desktop. Then I sold the ibook cause IMHO, it ran slow (850mhz I believe it was).
When you call Apple you don't get routed to some know-nothing cubicle drone in a far-off land. You get people that know the system inside and out.
I don't recognize this at all. As soon as you ask questions that are slightly below the GUI surface, you get the answer that they don't support anything in the OS that doesn't have a GUI. They do this even though they use programs like apache httpd, that have no GUI, as a selling point.
Further the quality of their laptops is very poor. In my experience an Apple laptop lasts about half the time of an IBM Thinkpad (Maybee they will be more equal now after the IBM China deal, Sigh). And when they break down the Apple
service takes for ever to fix it. Times over a week is not uncommon.
Just like the auther I like the design, and the OS but they really need to improve quality and support.
Apple needs to seriously consider porting OSX to x86 architecture. I for one, and most everyone I've talked to, has little interest in the G5. To be fair it is a nice chip, but I happen to prefer the AMD 64 bit series.
A x86 port will probably never happen. Apple would loose their full control of their user experience, and they won't accept that.
The second best thing you could do would be to switch to Gnome on some free Unix clone. Many of the ideas in Nautilus is borrowed from Apple, not a surprice since it was first developed by a former Apple emploees.
600 G5 were used to restore Star Wars to its original quality. I've read the story on Apple website yet I can't figure out why so many computers in the first place. Also, why are they doing it now ? Is it because the required software wasn't available ?
I think Lucas is too greedy for his own good, after all, even used car salesmen don't spend millions just to clean and resell their old stock.
One neat thing about OS X is that it will fully integrate into a Windows network. In fact, when I login to my Powerbook I use my Active Directory credentials to login. This authenticates me with the Windows network and I can access all shares and printers just like I can with a Windows client. I see no limitations for me on my Mac in a Windows corporate environment.
Windows folks view their computers as tools. Mac users self-identify with their computer. Many of the above posts talk about annoying fans on both sides of the issue. This is true, yet remains less than the whole truth. Name a mainstream windows magazine that rips on Macs. You won't find it. Macs get covered in the PC magazines, usually glowing reviews. While at the Mac magazines, every article rips Microsoft/Windows/Bill Gates. Sure their are fanatics on both sides, but the Windows fanatics are nutty by any standard. While the Mac fans are the mainstream base. Even Apple gets into it. Apple is a niche player, instead of attempting to identify themselves by what they are not (Microsoft) they should spend some time identifying themselves by what they are (a good consumer electronics company).
And while we are on the subject: It takes a pretty poor tech company to make Real look good. Both Apple and Microsoft have managed to do so lately. Microsoft in the EU and Apple by breaking harmony.
You are not what you use. You can use whatever brand of computer you like, but when you wake up tomorrow you will still be a friendless geek.
"So let's fast forward to 2000 when I saw the first iPod. This is the best little gadget that Apple has ever made. My CD's are safe from damage and I can carry tons of songs everywhere I go. Now that I have one, I don't know how I could've lived without it. I'm in a cover band and I can bring up any song we need to learn without lugging all my CD's. My softening up towards Apple had begun."
Yeah, because making a portable hard-disk based music player was Apple's idea! Oh wait, no it wasn't.
Making a pretty, small, easy-to-use one was Apple's idea, yes, and that's why they sold piles of the things. But hard disk based portable music players existed years before the iPod. I tend to think of Creative's first hard disk player as the original, but I'm sure I'm wrong. Go ahead and praise Apple for popularising and prettifying the concept, but don't praise them for inventing it.
Apple like a religion?
That may be partly due to many Mac users having to justify themselves every time their preference comes up. I've had PC tech support people tell me that I don't understand computers or must be afraid of a command line. I've had PC gamers tell me that the Mac is a toy (and then they proceed to use their machine mostly for games). I've had years of people looking at me as if I'd just said "I use a Mac to look for child pornography."
So maybe after twelve years of that, people like me become a bit sick of it and don't always react so well. I suggest that few people would though. Is it a religion? No way. Am I sick of continually having to defend what is really just a personal preference? Absolutely. Am I tired of having to educate people just a little? Definitely.
These days I can't be bothered. It's my preference.
OS X on x86?
The only way that'll happen is if Apple hardware sales fall to near zero. Currently hardware is the most profitable segment for Apple (moreso than the iPod, despite popular, unfounded belief), and only a fool would kill off their major source of revenue.
And what will people run on OS X on x86? They won't be able to run Windows apps, except through a WINE-like layer which has yet to be developed. Major vendors like Adobe may not care to support apps on the new platform, since they already produce apps on x86 - they may just ask users to install Windows. Binaries will need to be compiled especially for the new platform, and this may see the introduction of the super-fat binaries (we say fat binaries with the PPC introduction, and they included 680X0 code and PPC code in the same file).
Are there any real benefits of OS X on x86? All I can see is that a (relative) handful of people want to dual boot OS X on their PC, alongside Windows. I don't see that users will switch en masse - there just isn't a good reason (Windows provides for most users). The OS would be pirated all over the place, and Apple would likely see a low ROI.
Just guesses, but I think they're not unreasonable.
The eMac?
It's come under a lot of criticism lately, but very little scrutiny. It's not meant for games or for high-end users. It's meant for computer labs, for non-computer people and for lighter tasks. It fills that niche (in Apple's lineup) very well. Sure the GPU is crappy. So what, if it's being used to teach programming, use Office or send email. Who needs a good GPU for that? The drive is only 40GB? Well, the OS takes 2-3GB, Office uses maybe 0.5GB, a suite of many apps may use another 5GB (being generous), so what's going on with the other 30GB?
The fact is, the target market of the eMac is not the sort of people who post in online forums. It's a good machine at a good price, and I disagree with that 'Worst 10' article on this and a few other points.
The iMac, however, is targeted at a higher demographic. The crappy GPU in that is almost unforgivable - it can't even play Doom3 (not that it's a worthwhile game, but it's a point of distinction). It needs a Radeon9600 class GPU or better. Otherwise, it's a great machine with a great processor.
As for Macs being toys for 'chicks'... It's hard to put into words just how poor that point really is. Given the underpinnings of the OS lie in OpenBSD (via NeXTStep), it's not far from saying that Linux is for 'chicks' as well. And where does idea come from that only women like aesthetics and are somehow more foolish than men? Sexism, elitism and fallacy, all in a nice little sentence.
Lastly there's the price argument. Comparing a Mac to a homebuilt PC is a pointless comparison, because you're comparing an entire company's infrastructure, support and quality to you and your phillips head screwdriver. It's only sensible to compare Apple prices against PC vendors like Dell. I believe Macs *are* more expensive, but then I don't mind paying that for the OS, the UI, the compatiblity with all my current apps and the development environment (which is free). The cost to switch to a PC is far more than the price of a high-end G5 tower in my case, as it involves re-buying just about everything and then learing the Windows APIs and re-developing all my code. I'll stick with my iBook.
At the end it comes down largely to personal preference. Use what you like, don't be afraid to try new things and try to be objective.
"the result is that the difference in power consumption of the processor between x86 and G§ chips is upto 10:1!"
Neat little 'up to' there. Design power consumption of Athlon XP-M chips is 35W or so, and I think Pentium-M is even less. I'd be amazed if G4 - let alone G5 - manages to consume only 3.5W . The only way you can possibly get that figure is to compare a slow G4 in power-save mode to the highest-end Xeon or P4EE, which can go well over 100W design power consumption. But those were never designed for laptop use, and the only laptops that include them are really 'luggables' designed as high-end workstation replacements to be lugged from power socket to power socket.
Apple is a hardware company. It makes software to sell the machines.
I work in central IT services for a large University, and we probably have more mac laptops that ia32.
Unix/Linux/BSD people like it, because it's pretty Unix!
Windows people fall for it. It's nice looking and just works.
The design it great, partiurlaly laptops.
I'm not sure what kind of techies the author knows, but the ones I know certainly ain't M$ fans, but have plenty of time for our friends at apple.
I read some of the comments on here. Yes, we all know techs would choose a PC platform running FreeBSD, BeOS, or Linux. What about the regular people out there? Think im gonna give a Linux box to my mother to use? Think their going to have a clue when she has to install a program in the terminal? Mac is for the people that want to turn on a computer and just use it. Basic learning only is required. Techs use Macs too, but for certain needs. If I met someone that didnt know much about computers I'd be showing them a Mac instead of a PC. I'm sorry if I insulted some tech that use Macs, I guess im just surrounded by gamers who see no point of having a Mac just to play Myst. I also heard their is no Half-Life 2 for Mac coming out. I'm ok with that, cuz I own a PC, but I cant help but feel bad for the Mac people. I assume using Direct X makes a huge different why not many games make the platform. Why would Microsoft give Apple a gaming edge? Guess they need to beg for more OPenGL games.
why buy mac when you can get windows for less money?
For everyone who thinks macs are expensive : say you earn $10 a hour. A mac is $300 more expensive than a pc, you own the mac 3 years (really short for a mac). In this case it needs to save you 10 hours of work a year or 12 minutes a week.
The price of a mac is not important, it's the TCO that matters, just like microsoft points out all the time 
"Do your math. Just touch the plastic on your PC and a Mac."
Heh? Plastic? My PC case don't got no plastic in it. It's aluminium.
regarding laptops - "Since you can't replace the parts, or upgrade it"
Actually, my laptop's had one RAM upgrade and two hard drive changes since I bought it. It uses external optical drives, so I can change those at will. This applies to most laptops, PC or Mac - just making a point.
Some of the most tech and security-savvy individuals use Mac OSX....unless you think Richard Clarke is 'a little bit slow' when it comes to technology :-)
"x86 runs twice as fast and consumes wayyyyyyy more power to accomplish roughly the same performance as ppc"
Pentium M is extremely power efficient and works at a much higher instructions per clock ratio than Pentium 4. Then there's the power-efficient Athlon XP-M and Via C3 processors. Pentium 4 is not all of x86.
"Lastly there's the price argument. Comparing a Mac to a homebuilt PC is a pointless comparison, because you're comparing an entire company's infrastructure, support and quality to you and your phillips head screwdriver."
I've dealt with big companies' infrastructures, support and quality. Now, where's my screwdriver?
"At Mac users, its ok though. I do like Mac OS X and yes, that its based on FreeBSD is definately a step forward. Burt just some Mac users and some of the machine designs just deserve to be laughed at."
OK, a lot of people use Windows. Don't you know that you NEED to. And you NEED Office. So you find a lot more variety in people that use Windows. However...
If you take Mac geeks, Linux geeks, and Windows geeks, and put them side by side... I'd say it's pretty much all geeks. Laughing is like calling the pot aclling the kettle black. Same with machine designs.
My point can be illustrated by that eMachines computer they released... Looked just like an iMac... and then phones did... and then console controllers did... On and On till bloody Irons did!
I do agree though with the original post in the sense that I will never own a C128-D that is not beige. It's just not natural.;)
Porting: There is NO reason to port OS X to x86, even tho such a port does exist and has at Apple for quite some time. Don't believe me, then why not check out Darwin and NeXT (some fishing on the net will show this and NeXT Step already existed for x86 AND OpenStep is based on NeXT and current Apple APIs). Many people, however, are right - there's no financial reason for Apple to sell OS X on x86. Most of their profit is from their hardware, so switching, obviously, removes a huge source of revenue.
The Mac is NOT almost dead either. The 'market share is dropping' argument is true, but most people mis-read this. The market share is dropping based on an increase of Windows shipments - and that's not particularly Windows shipments at Apple's expense. The Windows market is definitely growing faster and comparing the same number of Mac shipments to a faster growning Windows market is dishonest.
If anything, Mac shipments are growing. Granted, not at the rate of Windows, but nonetheless growing. One other thing that's not taken into account - and technically doesn't matter much in terms of dollars - is the cool factor. No one get's excited about their new Dell laptop. But bring out a new Powerbook and heads turn. This has a viral affect and Apple AND the business world know it. Otherwise, there's little reason for their stock to hover around $60.
As far as Mac is 'pay more, get less', I can say pay a little more, get less virii. The fact that most people acquise that spyware is a fact of life in the Windows world says quite a bit about Windows end-user 'TCO'. In the long term, and maybe even the short, Windows just plain costs more to deal with.
As far as switchers go, I don't really know anyone and finding it hard to believe that someone would switch from a Mac to Windows. There's just no reason. No reason at all. That's like saying someone who loves their Linux machine is gonna switch. While I don't believe people are leaving Windows in droves, I think the simplicity in the iPod provides a good window to the Mac world and people really see the value in something, yes, just working. For me, Windows is strictly for testing my company's development - which is all done on Mac and Linux boxen - and maybe a game or two. But with gaming consoles being much less virii ridden and just simpler to use, there's little reason to own a Windows box nowadays and if anyone will lose marketshare in the cloudy future, I forsee it being Microsoft.
For all those whining about price, I just went to Dell and Apple to verify and sure enough you can get a 17" iMac for about $300 more than the cheapest Dell desktop when you configure that desktop to be as close as possible to the iMac.
Thats just it - when you configure a PC to match a Mac sure you are in the same ballpark but you can configure PCs in many different ways and with options that you just can't get from Apple at the same pricepoint.
Thats where the whole perception of the mac being more expensive comes from.
Thats just it - when you configure a PC to match a Mac sure you are in the same ballpark but you can configure PCs in many different ways and with options that you just can't get from Apple at the same pricepoint.
Thats where the whole perception of the mac being more expensive comes from.
That's very true. I don't think Macs are necessarily overpriced, but if you have specific requirements then a Mac can be a much more expensive option.
For example, if you don't really care about raw speed, but need a dual headed display. You'd have to spend at least $1500 on a G5 tower, as all the cheaper Macs have built in displays. While you can easily get a decent PC with a dual headed graphics card for under $500. The same is obviously true if you need to be able to add a PCI card. Any dirt cheap PC has PCI slots, but you'd need to buy a high end Mac to have that option.
macs are expensive because:
1) u cannot just buy mobo+cpu to upgrade , u have to buy/sell whole pc.
2) With pc i have more choice of what hardware i buy/choose.
The costs of mac hardware are also too big.
3) The costs for mac software are astronomical and if u search software for mac u get this "pay for every little utility" feelig.
I also think apple would never port osx to x86 because it will lead to problems microsoft(no more office for mac, wich will damage mac's attractiveness), osx will just suck on pc because of lack of software and will only loose "just works(tm)" image. If i want to have a silent pc, i have always a choice. I can buy zahlman cooler which can even passive cool athlon cpu's. If this does'n go , i can buy pentium centerino mobo or via's solution. And i alsways have a choice and the flexibility. Also apple lacks of lots of software i use. In my opinion apple is for rich guys who use their pc for one special purpose. I i want i can make my pc to outperform the best of apple by just buying dual opertrons and the cost will be still less. Simple example: price for 2 opertrons mainboard starting at 120 euro http://www.geizhals.at/deutschland/?cat=mb940&sort=p , then a pair of opertrons about 200-300 e price range, i get ~700 and i can still use my old harware with it. And if i had to go fro apple, i would have to spend lik 3000. So for me and for many rational thinking people is apple just a waste of money.
We aren't apple.com over here, we don't need to be fooled by statements like this. I don't understand anyone who buys a Mac for many more dollars than a PC....an OS is and OS is an OS, people we have things like Gnome, KDE, that try to emulate OSX on a daily basis! What a marketer's dream though, the same thing that fooled people into buying XP over Windows 2k...
It probably feels faster, but that's because it's graphics are being rendered by a seperate graphics processor (Something Microsoft is doing in it's next release, and x.org is working to do well). However, if we start rendering video, or anything else CPU intensive he'll find that his Mac is much slower.
Unless that Dell is a 1.7 Celeron!
yes u r missin something an lcd monitor 200+ usd a dvd-/+r/w* drive 150+ usd windows xp pro os 200+ usd more windows tax 50+ usd real graphix^ card 300+ usd no firewire on that mobo 50+ usd wifi card -g 60+ usd and i think that fixes the comparision
HyBriD
*that pioneer dvd-r is no where near a superdrive!
^ oince again doesnt compare to an nvidia card
actually you're wrong... we openned my toshiba celeron laptop.. sure it sucks, but we think we can upgrade the cpu in it to a p4 desktop chip... soundcard can be upgraded to an audigy 2 zs pcmcia card, ram/harddrive both upgradeable in fact the only thing that's not upgradeable seems to be the graphics.. eh such is life. I hear that on alienware laptops the gfx are upgradeable... so i guess laptops are turning into pcs... except for their motherboards heh. networking is 100mbit onboard intel which works with linux/windows so no complaints here... just wish the damn trident video didn't suck so much 
He specced an identical gfx card to the Mac system. The LCD monitor was the big thing he missed. My DVD+-RW drive cost CAN$80, no reason to spend more at all (not even for dual layer, cos I can flash it to dual-layer if needs be, and besides a dual-layer disc currently costs way more than twice as much as two single layer discs). Why would you need Firewire when the PC has USB 2.0? Just because the Mac has it, doesn't mean the PC needs it. Windows is under $100 when buying OEM with a system, and Linux is free. Wifi card, yeah, if you need it, but it's not that expensive (more like US$40, shop around).
It's a very unusual laptop if indeed you can upgrade the CPU - on most laptops they're soldered directly to the motherboard to save space. Have fun soldering 400+ pins
I'm a longtime PC enthusiast; I am a part-time consultant and I just generally love tinkering with my machines. This has led me to see PCs for what they really are: Expensive toys. For people like me, they are analogous to the classic car enthusiast who moonlights as a shadetree mechanic for his buddies.
That being said, I am getting so tired of wasting 50% or more of my valuable time tinkering with my work PC, when I should be getting work done on it. And I'm not talking about just Windows; I do run Win2k for some essential programs, but I primarily run Ubuntu Linux, and I spend so much time tweaking the OS that I lose valuable work time. It doesn't help that I tend to focus intently on a problem, and I can't let it go until the problem is fixed. This trait helps when troubleshooting other people's machines of course, but absolutely kills my own productivity.
This is one of the many reasons I'm going to get a Mac soon. I need a machine that won't distract me with annoying hardware bugs and obscure software glitches. I'm tired of wondering why Ubuntu froze on my VIA/Duron system but but not on my PIII. I'm sick of Win2k choking every other time I try to burn a CD. I want tighter hardware and OS integration; I want to be tied to one company for tech support. I really just want to get some serious work done! And I have come to the conclusion that a Mac can help me do this.
Reading through this thread shows a lot of poorly constructed arguments based on a combination of myths and mistakes.
While I could deconstruct those points and issue a barrage of corrections, I'm more concerned about the way people will so freely issue authorative opinions about things they obviously (post facto) know nothing about.
Don't repeat things you've read elsewhere (like that abysmal "10 worst buys" article) - keep your mouth shut until you've verified the data first. Same for pricing, usage and other data points.
The claim that Macs are for people who are a little "slow" with technology is absolutely absurd. Unix is the leading edge operating system that runs the majority of the computing infrastructure in the world.
Yes, Macs used to be toys. Yes, it's confusing that Apple kept the same name. Deal with it and understand that Macs are Unix now. It's completely different now than it used to be, so all your old ideas need refreshing and updating.
Keep up, grandpa...
Apple outsources its tech support to Bangalore, India. A company called Transworks manages it for them. I know because I gave an interview for the same and got the job but later decided not to take it.
Here is what you get for $2,099.00 CANADIAN
1.8GHz PowerPC G5
256MB DDR400 SDRAM
80GB Serial ATA
8x SuperDrive
Three PCI Slots
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra 64MB DDR video memory
56K internal modem
Now let's see what comparison I can make.
AMD64 2800+ (actually 1.8Ghz) --- 179$ CAD
decent abit mobo (kv8pro) ---129$ CAD
256MB DDR400 --- 55$ CAD
80GB SATA 7200 maxtor --- 89$ CAD
Pioneer 16x DVD-+RW --- 109$ CAD
MSI GF 5200 64MB --- 59$ CAD
56K modem --- 19$ CAD
good kb/mouse -- about 100$ CAD
decent case --- about 100$ CAD
Ah, yes you did. Lets add a few things (Sorry, I cant quote prices, but I am sure this will help you be more informed next time you waste your breath on thiese forms). After all, just by what I see in your list, your hardware is useless without anything to run on it? right?
- Microsoft Windows (Home or Pro)
- DVD Software (That's actually worth a f*ing flip (see 'not bundled')
- Home movie editing software
- Sound mixing software for live instraments (that ='s Apple's GB)
- Photo software (that ='s Apples iPhoto)
- Calender Application
- Mail Application with Junk Mail filtering built in, ready to rock and roll.
- DVD Playing software (AFAIK, WMP still requires a soft-decoder codec to be (purchased &) installed to play DVDs)
- Oh, and how bout some good Anti Virus?
- What about Mr. Anti-Spyware/Adware?
- What about all the time you spend, just installing, configuring & maintaining these applications?
- What about the absolute frustrations of driver hell, because the modem was made by PC-Tel or PC-Chips... or whoever but the generic driver for the card BSOD's your machine.
And have all those applications, including a Music player work seamlessly together.
HELL, you even have to purchase software to burn an ISO in windows!
Sorry, dont even get me started with the linux OS. Even after 14 years of development, it's about as easy to configure as a novel server. You think a joe user could configure a novel server?
Oh, and I sure hope God's view of hell isnt anything like the fan noise you will put up with... that definatly wouldnt be somewhere I would want to be.
</rant>
Please play nice, at least give a some what statement, if you are going to speak. Especially about prices.
Go play your games.
One thing left out of this whole deal is the average user. Sure a Mac may be easier to use, but have you tried to teach a 40+ year old how to use OS X after being stuck in her ways with Windows ME? Sure the iBook ran smooth, sure Mail worked great with her address book, Safari did all of her bookmarking. But when a user thinks that her files are in Word and not sitting on her hard drive, it gets messy.
For the average user, you're much better off sticking with what's familiar and comfortable, even if it will cost them almost $400 to have someone diagnose their corrupt DirectX install and reinstall it, plus remove spyware, virii, etc.
I've worked on several people's PCs and even when I fix the problem, people are still stuck in their ways. If they want to have you fix the computer, they'll probably still go out and buy a new one, just to feel that they did something.
It's only geeks like us that really wonder if Apple or Wintel product is better for our personal uses.
Honestly, a Celeron 333Mhz can do just as much as a modern Pentium 4 3.0Ghz if all you want to do is everything but game and other CPU/RAM intensive processes. You just have to know how to configure it.
Personally, my 12" PowerBook is my main computer, and the only thing I keep my homebrew PC around for is noodling in Linux (which I could just as well emulate on my Mac using QEMU) or playing the few games that I enjoy that haven't had their engine open-sourced and ported to the Mac. Even then, there's always console gaming if you've got the itch.
- Microsoft Windows (Home or Pro)
OK, $100.
- DVD Software (That's actually worth a f*ing flip (see 'not bundled')
Why? I don't need it. I've never felt the slightest desire to create a DVD.
- Home movie editing software
Ditto. I don't even own a camcorder!
- Sound mixing software for live instraments (that ='s Apple's GB)
Ditto. I don't own a guitar, or a keyboard, or a drumkit, or indeed a microphone.
- Photo software (that ='s Apples iPhoto)
The GIMP will do for most use.
- Calender Application
Dunno. I'm sure you can get a free one, though.
- Mail Application with Junk Mail filtering built in, ready to rock and roll.
Sadly enough, almost everyone uses webmail these days. I don't understand it either. But anyway - Thunderbird.
- DVD Playing software (AFAIK, WMP still requires a soft-decoder codec to be (purchased &) installed to play DVDs)
Every DVD drive anyone's ever bought came with WinDVD or PowerDVD in the box.
- Oh, and how bout some good Anti Virus?
AVG, it's free.
- What about Mr. Anti-Spyware/Adware?
Adaware and Spybot, ditto.
- What about all the time you spend, just installing, configuring & maintaining these applications?
Eh. I can set up a Windows PC perfectly well in five hours and I'm nowhere near an expert (I run Linux). Ask Lumbergh or someone, they can probably do it in three.
- What about the absolute frustrations of driver hell, because the modem was made by PC-Tel or PC-Chips... or whoever but the generic driver for the card BSOD's your machine.
Useless inflammatory statement.
Fan noise? My PC runs quieter than a Playstation 2. It's really not that hard, especially when you're building your own box. Use a big case, two big, quality, slow case fans, and a slow 80mm fan on your heatsink. Perfectly good for any reasonably specced PC.
Ah, yes you did. Lets add a few things (Sorry, I cant quote prices, but I am sure this will help you be more informed next time you waste your breath on thiese forms). After all, just by what I see in your list, your hardware is useless without anything to run on it? right?
Yes, lets see...
- Microsoft Windows (Home or Pro)
Home cost me $80 back in the day, Pro is about $100 oem. Linux = Free
- DVD Software (That's actually worth a f*ing flip (see 'not bundled')Um... Windows Media Player, Media Player Classic both play DVDs perfectly fine, and are free.
If you mean ripping, DVD Decrypter = Free
- Home movie editing softwareWindows Movie Maker, Virtual Dub = Free
- Sound mixing software for live instraments (that ='s Apple's GB)
Audacity? http://audacity.sourceforge.net/
- Photo software (that ='s Apples iPhoto)Photo software? What the hell? People actually use that stuff? Anyway, Windows Slideshow, thumbnail view, Adobe's free PhotoGallery software?
- Calender Application
Rainlander - 100% free
- Mail Application with Junk Mail filtering built in, ready to rock and roll.
Hmm.. Thunderbird?
- DVD Playing software (AFAIK, WMP still requires a soft-decoder codec to be (purchased &) installed to play DVDs)
I didn't have to buy any codec to play my DVDs
- Oh, and how bout some good Anti Virus?
Um.. AVG 7.0 Free edition - www.grisoft.com - 100% free, fast, low resources. Smart users don't even need Anti-Virus
- What about Mr. Anti-Spyware/Adware?
Again, smart users don't have this problem, but even so Spybot and Ad-Aware are free.
- What about all the time you spend, just installing, configuring & maintaining these applications?
Um... yeah the whole 10 seconds it takes to double click ?
- What about the absolute frustrations of driver hell, because the modem was made by PC-Tel or PC-Chips... or whoever but the generic driver for the card BSOD's your machine.
Yeah... umm most people don't have these issues, installing drivers isn't exactly rocket science and anyone dealing with drivers in the first place (who buys a PC from Dell and downloads drivers EVER?) knows how to deal with issues.
And have all those applications, including a Music player work seamlessly together.
What? I don't know, most apps are pretty distinct, I don't see why my Media Player has to work with my Calendar or Email.
HELL, you even have to purchase software to burn an ISO in windows!
You do? Thats wierd, ISO Recorder was a completely free download. It even lets me burn them!
Hell, Then I have daemon tools to mount disks for free, gimp, open office, mozilla, filezilla, dbpoweramp, gimp, inkscape, 7-zip, gaim, miranda, trillian, syn... iTunes and much more for free.
My XP system cost me $10 for Pro (EDU), MS gave me VS.Net 2003 Free, Office was $10
But even when I paid for home, it cost me $80 for OEM home, if I wanted Pro it was just a little more, and tons of free, quality software, kept the price at that. Plus there is the whole Anti-Trust issue which doesn't even allow MS to bundle much with Windows.
I'm pretty damn satisfied with Windows and Linux. OSX is great too. I fail to see how any of the modern OS's is bad except for Linux and usability at times. OSX is a great deal, and it all works nicely, but I can get the job done pretty much equally well with Windows for the same price as an OSX upgrade.
I can't track down the original comparison, but I wouldn't flog that horse if I was you - the PC comes to CA$839. I think the $1200 remaining could probably cover all the software you mentioned and then some.
That being said, I maintain that there are Linux distros that are pretty bloody easy to use (Mandrake/Xandros/SuSE etc) that will cover practically all of that, and leave you with your $1200.
If you want to stay with Windows, I'd list a bunch of software but AdamW's just done that very well.
Calendar app: Sunbird springs to mind. It's still back at 0.2, but may get there in time. As he said, I'm sure there are others.
The modem thing: If you're running Windows, it'll work won't it. Don't be silly.
If you're running Linux a lot of them work now anyway - and it's not like modem use is _that_ common any more.
You assume that everybody buys a computer for home-theater and home AV-editing. I can reduce your set of software to buy to almost nothing and have it more than usable for me, much less for the web-surfing and e-mailing Grandma who would be perfectly happy with IE (or Moz) with Outlook Express (or Thunderbird). The Grandma admittedly might need the AV or spyware software, but most people who take minimal precautions and use common sense (no pr0n or warez, and turn popups and ActiveX off) can probably get away with a firewall (free, see Sygate or Zone Alarm basic). Now, as for the requirements:
Windows: If buying hardware, you can (legally) get the OEM version; shouldn't be more, and is probably less than the OSX OEM price factored into a new Mac.
CD/DVD Burning Software: Nero is very worth buying, IMHO, but for the adventurous, DeepBurner looks like a promising free alternative.
DVD Playing Software: The OEM software that came with my computer is good enough for me, thank you very much. It plays DVDs; what else do I want of it?
Home movie editing software: A very specialized audience, as with most of the software you mentioned. People will probably need one or two of them, not all. I don't even have a camcorder, nor does any of my close family.
Sound mixing for live instruments: Again, very specialized. For the dedicated multimedia buff, Macs probably *are* better; that's one of their (very few) specialties.
Photo software: For everyday needs, plenty of freeware is available. For more advanced needs, see note about specialized software.
Calendar: Plenty of freeware available.
Mail: Outlook Express, as distateful as it is to me, is perfectly adaquate for a lot of people. Thunderbird is great for those willing to take the minimal effort to download free software. And I use only webmail, as I suspect many others do. Don't know why you even put this in the list.
AV: There are several free, or cheap at the very least, AV software products available, albeit not the easiest to find. This is only needed for the Grandma and warezing crowd though; I haven't had a single virus in all my years of computing.
Anti-Spyware: Ad-Aware. Free, and industry-leading. 'nuff said. (And Spybot Search & Destroy if that's not enough for you.)
There. With all the software costs being cut down to $100-$250, there should be plenty of money left over to buy a real modem (for those who haven't joined the broadband revolution...yet) and a decent mobo with a good fan. Macs are wonderful for many things, and have indeed come down a lot in price. But cheaper than a PC? I think not, especially when you want something other than what they offer in their lines. (Like the duel-headed low-spec computer mentioned earlier, or an otherwise ordinary machine with a killer graphics card, or some such thing.)
- What about all the time you spend, just installing, configuring & maintaining these applications?
Eh. I can set up a Windows PC perfectly well in five hours and I'm nowhere near an expert (I run Linux). Ask Lumbergh or someone, they can probably do it in three.
Personally, I've never timed it, but I suppose it takes me 3-4 hours to set everything up. Even if I did have a Mac, I'd probably bypass the shitty default apps (*cough* iTunes *cough*) and go for something better. Even in Windows, I don't use the default apps. As far as setting up Windows itself, not counting the apps and the first trip to Windows Update, it takes me about 15-20 minutes to configure Windows how I want it.
- What about the absolute frustrations of driver hell, because the modem was made by PC-Tel or PC-Chips... or whoever but the generic driver for the card BSOD's your machine.
Answer is simple - don't buy crappy hardware. Notice I said crappy, not cheap. My 16x dual-layer DVD burner cost me $73 new, and it works flawlessly.
- What about Mr. Anti-Spyware/Adware?
Again, smart users don't have this problem, but even so Spybot and Ad-Aware are free.
He's right - this software should never really be needed. Anyone who thinks they need this software should not be using Windows, because Windows is not an OS for clueless people. As I've said twice already in this thread, if you need a computer with training wheels, go buy a Mac. If course, you're going to pay more for one and get the same performance as a Wintel box in the hands of a competitent user, but hey .. that's the price you pay for being cluelesss. Hell, you're probably smarter than the rest of us who started without training wheels and had to learn things the hard way, so don't think I'm putting you down. I'm equally clueless when it comes to car audio, and raped every time I need to install something new.
Sound mixing for live instruments: Again, very specialized. For the dedicated multimedia buff, Macs probably *are* better; that's one of their (very few) specialties.
Actually, they're about equal. Most professionals who don't have a religious bias will tell you that Macs used to be way better, but now you are better off just using what is more familiar to you.
This started off as a move away from windows for me. Started by trying Linux - Suse, Debian and settling on Slackware. Was happiest with Slack, despite all I read how difficult it was and unfriendly! I found it totally opposite. Stuck with it for 1 year, and then someone offered me a G4 Powermac for next to nothing. Today 6 months later, I have a 450mHz Power Mac with a gig memory, dvd-writer (straight out of the pc-box), OS X and I have never been happier with a computer before! Unix and OS X in one box. Brilliant, all that Linux knowledge is not lost - yet I also have a brilliant GUI. Crashes? Virus? Reboots? - forget it - nothing.
Yesterday, I gave the last bits of my windows stuff away. Finished with that stuff.
One of few articles i enjoyed reading.The author has a sence of humour and is objective in the points he makes,leaves no room for flame bait.
Every DVD drive anyone's ever bought came with WinDVD or PowerDVD in the box.
That is simply not true. I can get an OEM or refurb DVD drive for around $20, but it comes with no software. Perhaps you meant "Every DVD drive anyone's ever bought retail boxed..."
In your defense though, most brand-name systems that come with DVD drives pre-installed also come with either WinDVD or PowerDVD or something.
The reason OSX works so well, and there are so few hardware/software conflicts
These are two different matters. OSX works well because it is well designed. Hardware conflicts are a different issue.
is because Apple controls both Hardware and Software. This simply would not be possible if the OS were ported to x86!
Why not? Just recommend or demand that people use a specific video adapter (nvidia or ATI chipset for example), and a specific model of this or that (e.g specific ethernet card, specific audio card).
Who said it should support all crappy hardware PC people buy? Just the more popular. Only give some specific drivers with it. If a company wants its product supported, it will have to write itself some drivers, and have them pass some tests.
If OSX were ported to x86 I'm guessing that there would be as many problems getting it to run (on the x86) as there are with Windows (all flavors).
If you tried to run it with every crappy Radio Shack like peripheral, yes.
On the other hand, Linux runs fine with a great majority of peripherals, even with auto-loading of drivers etc (Knoppix, for example).
the drive I bought for this system was OEM and cost CAN$80 or so, as I mentioned. It came with a copy of PowerDVD.
My god, someone tells about his experiences in switching his OS and in no time this comments section turns into a bitch fest.
I have an ibook with OSX, a toshiba with Ubuntu linux, a fileserver running Debian (Testing) and a gaming rig that runs windows XP. Each of these setups has their advantages and flaws.
Just because someone prefers to build his own machine from scratch and maybe pay less by doing so, doesn't mean the rest of the world should do it too. This obviously counts for the other statements too, just because someone feels comfortable paying a bit more for a prebuilt system with, what they feel is, a good software package, doesn't mean everyone should run over to their nearest Apple Store and get a Mac.
Just be happy with what you have and leave it at that. Why does this always have to turn into one huge dick measuring contest?
The key to this entire thread is the value of individuals getting hands-on exposure with Mac OSX to obtain an informed preference compared to XP. It's obvious that a number of posters here have a negative Mac opinion gained through tribal wisdom....not daily use. As someone who uses and admins both platforms every day, I think Panther is a viable option for the vast majority of end users who are not computer enthusiasts or geeks, but just need to minimize the time spent in maintaining/protecting their computer in order to maximize their productivity/enjoyment on their computer.
Too expensive, too slow, going out of business, should be ported to X86, no games, less software, blah, blah blah................!
I've been hanging around forums, reading dribble like this for 6 years, and it's always the same. It never changes!
Even though the internet is loaded with information, that dispells all these myths, they still keep denying that a Mac is a reasonably priced, very stable, very reliable, easy to use, energy efficient computer, with a longer than average life expectancy.
I'm on Mac #2 right now, for 6 1/2 years total on the platform, and it doesn't bother me any more, that people hate Mac's, because in the real world, there exists a great deal of ignorance and denial, from people going about there daily routines.
They only see what's shoved in their face, when they walk into a store, or on a website, or on TV.
I've had a number of people, (average users), express their concerns to me about Windows, ask me about Mac's, and I answer their questions, point out and explain the ficticious beliefs, that have been passed onto them by other uninformed people, I explain the cost which is actually less than an X86 box, I invite them to my house for a test drive, and give them permission to beat it up, or do anything that they would be scared to do on their Windows box.
One in about forty, actully took me up on my offer, the others listened to their teenage children, or the neighbour who builds his own, or the salesperson at Best Buy, and you know what, the only one that's actually enjoying their computer, and having a relatively trouble free experience, is the guy who bought a used G3 iMac, and after a year, he wants another one, a G5 iMac.
I recommend a Mac to any open minded individual, who may not want to build their own, or are fed up with the alternative.
OS X will never be ported to X86. Most of it is low end stuff, and Apple won't build a low end box. IBM has dumped X86, in favor of PPC, because the latest PPC processors can be used in laptops, servers, desktops, it is efficient, reliable, runs cool, better profit margin, blah, blah, blah................, I'm done.
Happy Holidays
I must say with lines like: "You could run Panther on a G3 and they were made in 2000!" I'm a bit mystified how he claims to be so technically adept. After all an x86 box from 2000 could also run Windows XP, and at a much lower overall cost than the 10.0 - 10.3 upgrade treadmill. (I still like macs and OSX, but I do not care for Apple's annual "upgrade" merry-go-round.)
Macs holding their value: Macs, generally, when compared to manufacturers susch as Dell, HP, etc are usually of higher quality design(packaging & electronics). Additionally, Apple has been slow at providing real upgrades to their machines, after all for a long time the only thing upgraded were the processor "speed bumping", and usually pretty pathetic bumps. It really has only been in the last few years with the addition of 1G ether, Airport Extreme, change in memory sub system, and the G5 that upgrades have really changed. (Of course in the last few months we're back to speed bumping upgrades again.) Bottomline: most of the time, and for long enough the basic specs of macs don't change fast enough such that old hardware is immediately devalued. In addition to this MANY people do not run games(if you can find any ones worth buying for the mac) and hence don't really need the "speed bumping". Even those who do not play games and could use the speed bumping, most of the time the bumps are too little to appeal, and justify the overall upgrade cost. Apple hardware is generally very well designed and lasts FAR longer than equivalent x86 machines, or so has been my experience with my own machines, and a comparison of x86 & mac labs in a large university setting. In other words this all tends to add up: start with a much lower overall sales %age every year, add in that many people do not upgrade because they either perceive no real value(real or imagined) in an upgrade(new machine), add in upgrade(processor, etc.) from third parties and this all tends to limit the number of macs available on the used market.
e.g. Personally I still have a mac IIcx, Powermac 7500, 2 iBooks, 1 Powerbook, and G4 tower(plus a Newtom MP 2100) which I have no intention of selling. The 7500, Powerbook, and G4 tower are all upgradeable, and have been upgraded. The G4 is even likely to be upgradeable(possibly) one more time(at reasonable cost/performance) if Motorola can manage to keep upping their G4 clock rates, and if the various upgrade vendors continue to support the machines
The biggest achille heel to owning macs today, IMNHO is the annual upgrade merry-go-round. Sure most of the big vendor apps will run on 10.1(or .2) - current, but look at the VAST majority of shareware and smaller ISV apps that will ONLY run on the latest and "greatest" version of OSX. At least this upgrade round, Apple appears to still be producing security upgrades for 10.2, but they SHOULD also still be doing so for 10.1 as well. It's either this or Apple needs to go a minimum three year upgrade cycle. This would have several benefits: there would actually be "features" worth upgrading for(looks like 10.4 from my view is the first worthy paid upgrade since 10.2, and ~3yrs by the time it finally gets out), and most people would be much happier not having to shell out an additional $129 every year to keep their apps current.
If Apple does not go to a 3 yr upgrade cycle they really need to start honoring the system upgrade coupons like they used to in the pre-OSX world, and not the oh you bought a machine 30s before the next version release so you get a reduced cost(or free) upgrade.
#1 x86 is a hacked up architecture with so many layers of kludges is REALLY needs to die. Power and PowerPC are much better architectures, and much more cost/processing power/energy usage efficient.
#2 don't kid yourself if Apple built an x86 OSX and x86 hardware it would be cost NO less than current hardware, it would only mean a slightly larger profit margin for Apple on hardware
#3 I wouldn't expect said hardware to be able to run windows or any other OS without contortions, as dollars to donuts, Apple would continue to use openfirmware(not x86 BIOS) and most likely other custom hardware support chips and sound
#4 Bottom line: There is zero advantage in an x86 OSX, and the move to the G5 pretty much tells me that this isn't going to happen, which is a VERY good thing.
Traveller (IP: ---.wp.shawcable.net)
I explain the cost which is actually less than an X86
Would be nice when you would present a reliable reference fit.
Anonymous Coward (IP: ---.dialip.mich.net)
The biggest achille heel to owning macs today, IMNHO is the annual upgrade merry-go-round. Sure most of the big vendor apps will run on 10.1(or .2) - current, but look at the VAST majority of shareware and smaller ISV apps that will ONLY run on the latest and "greatest" version of OSX. At least this upgrade round,
People who can afford to buy a Mac aren't concerned that much about what things cost, they just buy what they like best or need professionally.The annual upgrade doesn't really matter,people who bought propietary Linux are facing the same.
Five hours to set up your box? Is this non stop time? Or do you take a lunch break? You do understand that's almost a full shift at work, just to setup a computer? Out of the box, all my Mac systems have been using the internet, playing OR making DVD's in min. (Usually takes about 5 Min to enter your name for the first time.
I forgot to ask you, durring your setup... Do you install your AV before you plug it into the internet? Do you turn on your firewall before you plug it in to the net? Do you actually download the patches for your system, put them on CD and run them before your computer even thinks of touching that CAT 5 or RJ11 wire? How long is it for average windows computer's to get infected when unpatch on the net? Last I heard was ****4**** min! You have to be joking if you think the average user understands how to even download the patches and put them on CDs. And are knowlegable to disconnect there computer from the 'virus wires' before they apply these patches? Give up, you are not the average user. Your knowlege to 'get it working' is mind blowing for the average user.
Want to know my background?
Computer tech for a small compter shop in Dallas, Tx for over 3 years. I know the computer, I know the people behind the computer. I was once where you are now, a mac hater. 'Gay people use macs' Am I the exception? I am happly married (to a female). Now, I use UNIX from Apple. It's simply UNIX done right. Not half a*sed.
"...and you know what, the only one that's actually enjoying their computer, and having a relatively trouble free experience, is the guy who bought a used G3 iMac, and after a year, he wants another one, a G5 iMac. "
I hear ya.
I am glad the G3 resulted in a good computing experience for your friend.
However, tell him to hold on a bit before buying an expensive G5. The hardware is great, an awesome CPU the G5 is. But do tell him to wait until OsX is truly 64bit, otherwise he will be paying a premium for expensive under-utilized hardware.
Why buy an expensive G4 emulator when you can get a G4 cheaper? A G4, could provide an excellent economical choice, and yet give access to the excellent UI and trouble free computing experience that Apple is now for.
Want good service, do not over tip when service is so-so.
Cheers.
This is a search from Linuxinsider.com. Query = "apples to apples"
The results turn up cost and speed comparison/explanation.
http://www.linuxinsider.com/perl/search.pl?query=%22apples+to+a...
Love him or hate him, Walt Mossberg thinks Macs are well priced.
http://www.forbes.com/technology/feeds/general/2004/12/09/generalma...
More?
http://www.mackido.com/Myths/cost.html
http://www.macobserver.com/article/2002/06/13.9.shtml
http://forgetcomputers.com/~jdroz/pages/03.html
http://www.ro3.com/advantages/tco.html
http://db.tidbits.com/getbits.acgi?tbart=07890
I could go on and on.
I would ask you to present evidence that we are on a perpetual upgrade, and think nothing of dropping the dough for a new OS every year.
As far as I know, it's completely voluntary.
I'm using 10.2.8 and waiting for 10.4 good buddy. (get it? CB talk)
If you're geeky enough for Windows, then take your old PC and make it live again.
You don't have to buy a Mac.
http://directory.google.com/Top/Computers/Software/Operating_System...
http://ftp.knoppix.nl/os/Linux/distr/
http://dmoz.org/Computers/Software/Operating_Systems/
It doesn't take a genius to use a search engine.
Don't worry, we're both waiting for 64 bit.
I'm hoping it will happen before May 1/05, as I have sold my house, and am leaving on a year long vacation/adventure, and I've opted for a G5 iMac as opposed to a laptop.
I'm going to photograph and document the journey, and write my memoirs, and produce some music that I've put on hold for along time, and I figure this could a great travelling machine, that will serve my needs.
I'll be living in a small trailer, and have access to power most of the time.
Just me, my new Nikon 8800, my guitars, a new iMac, sleeping bag, bicycle, truck, trailer, Big Green Egg, and supplies.
Sounds like a great plan/adventure.
Best of luck!
I've been playing with Darwin for X86 for close to a year now, and on an old Pentium III 500.
Also, the comment about being able to run Window$ on a PPC. I have a NT4 disk that will install and run on compatable 486, Pentium, MIPS R4x00, Alpha, PowerPC, and Pentium PRO. This is printed right on the disc.
I've used computers since the late '70's. I actually used the original Apple that was mounted on a piece of plywood. The IBM PC would be introduced years later. That's when my interest really started in computing. However, when my newly built Pentium 4 motherboard went south, I went stright to Apple. This was after reading the many positive reviews about their new Mac OS X operating system. This was November 2002. At that time I purchased an iBook. Eight months later, I purchased a Powerbook G4, their real nice! I still use my PC's, but only with FreeBSD, the most responsive and stable OS I've used. Of course my $60.00 flea-market special G3 tower runs 10.2.6 24/7, my longest uptime on it to date is 244 days. I think that about say's it all.
search from Linuxinsider.com. Query = "apples to apples"
The results turn up cost and speed comparison/explanation.
http://www.linuxinsider.com/perl/search.pl?query=%22apples+to+a.....
[Macintoshes Are More Expensive, Right?]
The PCs come with some variant of Microsoft Windows XP and varying levels of discount on Microsoft Office. Thus, Office Professional costs $359 on the low-end Dimension, $319 on the OptiPlex and isn't offered with the Precision bundle.
Oddly, Office Professional for the Mac includes a PC emulator, and the package most comparable to the "Professional" PC edition appears to be called the Standard Edition. It sells at $399 for all Macs.
There is more under the horizon than Apples and Pears.I build all my PC's myself.It saves me money and i know for sure what's going into the case.It sounds perhaps odd but i know what's working and what isn't,i don't need a vendor to do the research what basicly comes to:browse some good hardware sites on a regularly basis.Who says one would install windows?Allthough MS office and exchange server are very good products,there is more than windows at MS,more than 80% wouldn't need the upper 20% of the additional features the latest professional version of MS Office has.In this case one could install FreeBSD or Linux right away.Only disadvantage of Open Office i could think of is less compatibillity with outlook or exchange server.A user at home or the average office could easily go from Office XP to Open Office which is by the way free.A good OSS spreadsheet program would be Planmaker or Open Office-Calc.Basicly it only comes down to the costs of hardware,hardware i choose.There isn't any (new) Apple that costs less than a x86 PC that's being selfmade,especially at the low-end.There is plenty of professional sotware for both MacOsX and Windows XP,from graphical,CAD/CAM,to dvd authoring sofware.Some windows tools are better than Linux tools,and free of cost also.BeSweet,dvd-decrypter,Gordian-Knot,NeroVision (propietary).One could easily bend public opinion slightly to a different direction by twisting a little with figures and slick talk.
Accept Dell's rather warmly endorsed package of the basic upgrades needed just to run XP comfortably, and the price difference falls to $190 (24 percent).
Who says one is going to buy an Dell PC?Perhaps one assembles his own PC.You said it's cheaper (allways).Thats not true.There are zillion of motherboard and other hardware stores.Even my mother can assemble her own PC these days.I could buy an Pegasus,and pretend i made my own Apple but that would most certainly half the fun than if i would buy a real one.
****ATI Radeon 9600 XT******
128MB DDR video memory
56K internal modem
Dell
Precision 670 $4,009 2 x 3.4Ghz Xeon
512MB
160GB SATA, 7200 RPM Hard Drive
8X DVD+RW/+R
128MB PCI x16 (DVI/VGA) *****ATI FireGL V310*****
Who's comparing Apples with Pears now? One graphics card is middle class consumer segment card (ATI Radeon 9600 XT) the other (ATI FireGL V310) is a middles class professional segment graphics card.To much articles deal with the assumption that one would most certainly would install and use Office clerk packages like Spreadsheets,Word and so.Some people have t0 3D draw moleculair structures of DNA or other proteine buildings,do some serious game devellopment,make extrordinary graphics designs,do some dvd-authoring,develop new blades for jet-engines etc.
Apples to apples, and Macs are cheaper than PCs
Who fools who now?What's the other Apple?Someone more stupid to spend even more for less?In my opinion an Apple to Apple comparison would be a applycation to application comparizon,like the one Apple displays on all of his websites, yet in this case games allso have some points to spend to the grand total as have AMD CPU based PC's .
Take all the possible (proffessional)-end-user apps and see how the behave on the different platforms under variable conditions.One parameter in the averall equation is performance while playing different demanding games both SP and MP,performance while using professional software like CAD/CAM software,Graphical design software ,etc.
http://www.forbes.com/technology/feeds/general/2004/12/09/generalma.....
While admitting Apple's small marketshare is one reason few viruses attack the platform, Mr. Mossberg also acknowledged the UNIX-based OS is "harder to penetrate" than Windows.
Another statement being made without proof.Where is the reference fit?Besides that there is more than MS and Apple to work and play with than MS and Apple.Perhaps your search engine is broken,you might try google, it's everywere fast.I could go on and on with all the links you presented.They are crap sites and full with religious/commercial FUD,just like the anti MS sites.
More?
This one i like to give from one of your links:
http://www.mackido.com/Myths/cost.html
Machines real value is not measured in how much it costs, but in how much the user can use it, and how quickly and easily.
Money is allways a factor,perhaps not for some spoiled rich kid ,etc but for the vast working majority in reality money is a parameter in the overall equasion.And there're plenty of OS's to bewilder and have it's certain value or use,depends on how u want to put it.As firewall i could choose for OpenBSD with a redundant double pf firewall with ALTQ.I might choose MS SNA server 2005 to connect mixed client subnets to some mainframe(s) or other networks the clients can't communicate with directly.Apples real strenght is with graphics design and game development,everything that majors in creativity.Taste is personal but i like the designs Apple make,they are not that ugly.Perhaps some are a bit clumsy,like the new i-mac G5.I can't afford to buy one but an all in one solution incl monitor isn't practical.If the monitor is broken you have to throw the whole thing away.Let me assemble one myself for $1600,heh.I will smoke that mac.Serious, some retired examples could suddenly buy something expensive and a lot of cheep without a brain thought it is/was l33t to have one.Only since MacOSx you can do some serious development.Real professionals create on the mac.It's absolutely a tool worth considering for the job at hand.So is windows,Linux,FreeBSD,Trusted-Solaris,OpenVMS,for other for other purposes.Conclusion: an self assembled PC is allways cheaper but not allways an option.
Five hours to set up your box? Is this non stop time? Or do you take a lunch break? You do understand that's almost a full shift at work, just to setup a computer?
Yeah, 3-5 hours to set up. Of course, apps have to install, so I don't sit in front of the machine the whole time. After the initial setup though, maintenance is about 15 minutes per month, and I can run off that single install for 2 years or more.
Out of the box, all my Mac systems have been using the internet, playing OR making DVD's in min. (Usually takes about 5 Min to enter your name for the first time.
Last I checked, OSX doesn't come with Cubase, Reason, etc installed, so there's no doubht I'd have to spend at least an hour setting it up. Not a big deal either way.
I forgot to ask you, durring your setup... Do you install your AV before you plug it into the internet? Do you turn on your firewall before you plug it in to the net? Do you actually download the patches for your system, put them on CD and run them before your computer even thinks of touching that CAT 5 or RJ11 wire?
I have a hardware router/firewall (they run about $30 these days), which will protect me from those worms that infect a computer without the user doing anything. I also have service pack 2 slipstreamed into my XP install. Assuming I didn't have either one, I'd install a software firewall before going online. Anti-virus programs aren't really necessary for the initial setup.
How long is it for average windows computer's to get infected when unpatch on the net?
Assuming they don't have a hardware firewall? Not long.
You have to be joking if you think the average user understands how to even download the patches and put them on CDs.
I can set things up for an average user and show them how to get the patches - I recently taught a grandma to do it a couple of months back, and how to lock the firewall when she's away from the computer, no biggie. But as for setting it all up, yeah you're right ... these people should be using Macs.
Computer tech for a small compter shop in Dallas, Tx for over 3 years. I know the computer, I know the people behind the computer.
Surprised you have this much experience and still asking all these questions. These are certainly valid questions for a newbie, but for a computer tech, this stuff is elementary.
I was once where you are now, a mac hater
I don't hate Macs - I just don't need a computer with training wheels.
Anyways, my whole point.... If you are going to compare an Apple to your 'build yourself' by prices. EVEN IF YOU DONT INTEND TO USE THEM, simply price it with at least = software.
The people who belly ache about 'I never ever wanted to make a movie with my computer, I dont even have a camera'. It doesnt matter, your prices are completly unfare to judge a product with.
Personally, I think the reason why you dont even have the eurge to make or edit a video, or play live band instraments in to your home computer is cost of the software & hardware. When you have the ability, and the ease of use with Apple's suite, I bet you would turn your eye.
</Piss>
Macs are hardly just computers with 'training wheels.' That's, of course, a back-handed compliment considering that my wife's 75yr old mother runs an iMac without need to stay on top of virus dats and spyware apps...just a waste of time when 95% of end users neither want nor NEED to spend time on this stuff. That said, there are plenty of computer experts, geeks and dweebs who love what they can do under the hood with Panther. Yes, there is a place for XP among those users who have invested mucho dinero in specialized software. Beyond that, however, it can be easily asserted that the Mac computing environment is just as friendly and safer for most users. It doesn't take a techie to set up an OSX system....most would see this as a good thing!
"On windows, I still have to tweak and optimise which actually wastes a fair bit of my time. I found XP task switching to be slow and multitasking to be disappointing and no where as stable as people claim. In mac, the hardware is beaufifully designed and the user experience is between the software and what you can do (creatively) with that tool. For me as a previous PC user it's totally opened up my use of computers in all sorts of directions. "
Absolutely right. Other than a great interface this is the biggest difference a user will see between OS X and XP. Well that and the flood of spyware an vriuses on PC's that are not even an issue on the Mac. My AMD 3800+ with a gig of ram is great hardware that use a medicore operating system. Constant slowdowns, weird things happening when switching between apps etc. Yes I defrag and all that. Microsoft is a company that produces things that are just barely good enough while Apple is a company that is never satisfied with any aspect of their products and is constantly improving them. Which would you rather use. As far as putting Mac OS X on AMD or Intel chips this will never happen and there is no reason for it too. The Power PC archictecture has great momentum and is certainly looking better than Intel. Those who brag about putting together their frankenstein cheap PC's and comparing them to a G5 have just never used a G5 or a Mac. In fact that s true for just about everyone who slams Macs. They don't know the slightest thing about them and have never used them. You have to wonder why they bitch about them so much. Feeling insecure in your mediocre PC/Microsoft world?
I don't hate Macs - I just don't need a computer with training wheels.
Neither do i,it's not perse training wheels but more a matter of having the freedom to be part of something such as development of the actual OS/app you are using instead of using.Be part of something or use something.MacOsx is good as developer platform as Linux is with multimedia.Good but not the best of breed.On the other hand Linux as developer platform is the same as MacOsx deals with most creative expressions digitalized.Although you can do on windows XP professional allmost everything what's feasable on MacOsX.However XP is getting old rapidly and loose promises about Longhorns release dates aren't going to make up for it.Besides that some apps don't work well with SP2.A lot of apps run very smoothly on w2k ,perhaps it isn't as necessary as most people think to migrate to XP/w3k.OSS atractiveness is the opportunity to be more involved if you desire to,and real progress is more in the open.Most people want a working piece of equipment for games,multimedia,light office use and want to start working with it in the least amount of time as comfortable as possible.Remedie: stay away from servers regardless what OS is installed,use a preinstalled MacOsX or windows PC,and put it an a vault every night if there is valuable info on it.In all other cases it doesn't realy matter which OS you run if at least you have fun and do with it what you want it to do .
Anonymous Coward (IP: ---.dialip.mich.net) wrote:
#3 I wouldn't expect said hardware to be able to run windows or any other OS without contortions, as dollars to donuts, Apple would continue to use openfirmware(not x86 BIOS) and most likely other custom hardware support chips and sound
This also happens in the x86/Windows only world. Several years ago I bought a new Compaq Presario 1200 notebook. It came with Windows 98SE. About 7 months later when Windows 2000 Pro came out, I rushed out and got it with the intention of putting it on my notebook. After struggling to get it installed (it kept rebooting during the early parts of the installation) I found that none of the components, other than video, were supported in Win2k. No problem, I hooked up my trusty old external modem and went to Compaq's support site. Strangely enough, I found that there were no drivers for Win2k available for the sound, modem, USB and PCMCIA. Well, I thought, I'm still under my year of free phone support, so let's call Compaq!
Now comes the fun part. The nice young gentleman who came on the line promptly informed me that Compaq does not support any OS other than Win98SE on this particular laptop. I asked if they planned eventual support for the $300 OS I bought, and he very adamantly declared that it would never be supported. So I'm stuck with a laptop that crashes every other time I check my email, I asked? He didn't like that question too much; he suggested that I "upgrade" to an Armada if I wanted Win2k support. Obviously that was the end of that conversation. I sold it soon after.
If you think they are custom tailored and just work as you could only dream of you are fooling yourself.
Those firewalls are a first line of several lines in defense. And it gets much more diverse dependent upon what services you run from your network to the Internet or within your own LAN infrastructure.
"I have a hardware router/firewall (they run about $30 these days"
Why kind do you recommend? Where'd you get it?
Did you try MS support?Would be a phenomena if it would turn out you pocess the only laptop on which you can't install w2k/w3k.Big mistake of Compaq in either case.
As I said, I'm not a Windows user, someone who really uses it could do it quicker (that five hours was a real-world time, reinstalling XP on a machine whose hard disk failed, and I spent a lot of time faffing around with stuff a Windows user would've known). Do I install AV before connecting to the internet? Nope, I connect to the internet and download the AV program before anything else. No vulnerability there. Firewall before connecting? Yes, of course (XP SP2 does this by default, I believe, as well). Patches before connecting? In a way - I'd use an XP SP2 CD to install right now, if I were making a new machine. Which I may do tomorrow as a Christmas present, as it happens. The four minutes figure, or whatever it was, was for an XP SP1 box without a firewall; an SP2 box behind a firewall is not the same thing. I don't know if XP bought-from-a-store-today would be SP2, and I'm not about to go and drop a hundred bucks to find out, but if it is, a lot of the stuff you suggested is not necessary.
Of course, any pre-built PC you buy would be on the internet and burning DVDs out of the box, and you can pay any small computer shop to build you a system for a small premium (hint: a lot less than the nearly-$1000-difference between the two systems that were specced up at the start of this discussion, figure adjusted for OS and LCD monitor from the original figure). As for me, I rather enjoy building machines, so I'll carry on doing it.
Those firewalls are a first line of several lines in defense. And it gets much more diverse dependent upon what services you run from your network to the Internet or within your own LAN infrastructure.
If you can switch the router to :configurable only via serial cable what can happen other than feasable when having fysical access at site?A ddros attack can't be stopped with the best (hardware) firewall on the planet.I have disabled snmp/ftp/web based use/management on my perimeter hardware firewall,one can only configure it with a serial cable, on site.Still the masterpassword is not the default 1234 but a >20 chars containing all possible charracters.It's delivered with a default working policy: you block everything going inside and allow everything that is only initiated from the lan.I sharpened that to block everything both inside and outside and open only what is necessary to initiate from the lan side.Still the OS can maybe catch spyware as pinguins phishies but line 1 is ready,i think.
There's an outfit in the UK called Time Computers. They sell middle-range computers with a bunch of years-old software. They take the original RRP of the software, add it up together, and proudly proclaim that you're getting a £1,000 software value! or whatever. So if I were to compare one of THOSE machines to a Mac, would I have to inflate the price of the Mac by adding in the separate prices of buying an encyclopaedia, a bunch of games, a medical dictionary, a route planning program and whatever other crap is included in the Time bundle? No? Well, that's exactly what you're suggesting we should do to compare a PC to a Mac. Just because Apple throws a bunch of software that you're likely never going to use into the box (how many people *honestly use* Garage Band?) doesn't mean we have to slavishly match every feature on a competing PC.
Actually you can build your own Mac, if you buy a second-hand PCI Powermac, you can add memory, change/add hard disks etc etc......it is so much easier to work on than a PC. I love the way the side drops down with the motherboard.
I don't hate Macs - I just don't need a computer with training wheels.
(how many people *honestly use* Garage Band?)
Ouch... I do; count one.
Does anyone else see the irony in the observation that the primary reason for getting a Windows PC is the games? (Even Dvorak commented on this in his column a while back.) The Mac has been brushed off in the past for being a "toy computer." Now, it seems the real differentiator between Mac and PC is ... games. Which is the toy computer now?
Actually the colored I-Macs and PowerMacs came out in 1997.
The first I-Pod came out in November 2001, unless you were Moby, you would have seen a prototype.
Thats Correct Andre, the i-macs did come out and 1997 and thats the same answer to the question when did Apple start making the RJ-45 connector standerd it was the same year they released i-mac. As a Mac lover would recall it was those hockey puck looking mice. I really didnt like those. When I use a Mac I reffer a scroll mouse with two buttons anyway. I found it strange to hold on to that limitation of a single click mouse. If anyone remembers there was an article on Max PC Mag with a G5 2GHZ verse an Intel PC. Of course they judged the Intel one to win. They also said they thought it was the benchmarking software for the Mac that was not optimized for the G5 yet. At the time the bus was not as ramped up as it is now. It would be interesting to see when Tiger comes out another match with Intel again.
" It would be interesting to see when Tiger comes out another match with Intel again."
Or better yet when OsX is truly 64bit, for now is a 32bit OS running on an under utilize 64CPU. Frustrating considering that the G5 is such an excellent design.
For now XP/AMD have the 64bit desktop down before Apple.( I am not counting SGI, HP et all because we are talking home setups, or consumer as oppose to industrial)
G5 technically known as IBM's PPC970, to know what is so great about it start here:
http://arstechnica.com/cpu/02q2/ppc970/ppc970-1.html
The article seems to assert that the strength of the 970 is highbandwidth for good multiprocessor performance, lots of execution slots(wide and deep design), and dual Altivec compatible SMD units. Doesn't even address 64bit. Notes that it will be discussed in the next article.
Version Tiger which will be released in March 2005 will be a 64-bit OS for people with G5. People without them the G4 will still work with it, cuz it uses different libraries. The Apple design at present uses a seperate bus for each processer. So if it's the 2GHZ model we are talking about 1GHZ per processer. Thats alot of bandwith. The intel models bandwith on duel Xeons at present use the same bus for both processers.
"Version Tiger which will be released in March 2005 will be a 64-bit OS for people with G5."
That would be great if they deliver. Current hype has not produce an actual 64bit OS. But I wikk believe it when is out. In the mean time, is just a promise, after false claims.
For now is a 32bit OS running in a 64bit CPU in emulation mode.
Anyway, time will tell, just like it did before.
And once again, as you still don't seem to get the point, the G5 CPU is not emulating *anything* when it's running 32-bit code. IT EXECUTES 32-BIT CODE NATIVELY. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THIS YET? What do we have to do to make you understand this? Does it involve the sacrifice of anybody's firstborn?
BRAVO for the iMAC!!!
This is a great platform for code development. Installing X11 allows the use of OpenOffice. The HW platform supports Linux.
The use of Bochs allows access to x86 emulation.
If one is looking to get away from WINTEL this is the platform to do
so.
Unless games get ported to OS X then a PC is still required for some games.
"This also happens in the x86/Windows only world. Several years ago I bought a new Compaq Presario 1200 notebook. It came with Windows 98SE. About 7 months later when Windows 2000 Pro came out, I rushed out and got it with the intention of putting it on my notebook. After struggling to get it installed (it kept rebooting during the early parts of the installation) I found that none of the components, other than video, were supported in Win2k. No problem, I hooked up my trusty old external modem and went to Compaq's support site. Strangely enough, I found that there were no drivers for Win2k available for the sound, modem, USB and PCMCIA. Well, I thought, I'm still under my year of free phone support, so let's call Compaq!
Now comes the fun part. The nice young gentleman who came on the line promptly informed me that Compaq does not support any OS other than Win98SE on this particular laptop. I asked if they planned eventual support for the $300 OS I bought, and he very adamantly declared that it would never be supported. So I'm stuck with a laptop that crashes every other time I check my email, I asked? He didn't like that question too much; he suggested that I "upgrade" to an Armada if I wanted Win2k support. Obviously that was the end of that conversation. I sold it soon after."
did you bother checking first to see if the os was compatible with what you already owned?
did you buy the os from compaq?
did you seek support from the seller of the software?
if you bought a retail copy, you got support from ms, did you call them?
if you bought an oem copy, you got no phone support and should have known that in advance.
i had a beige g3 that was declared fully os x compatible by apple. but oh the hoops one had to jump through to get it installed. had to be in a new, first partition of 8gb or less on the hard drive. ooops, the floppy drive was not supported. nope, the onboard scsi wasnt supported either. nor was the dvd daughtercard. apple had to end up settling out of court for that deceptive marketing that led to a class action lawsuit. said it would work but it didnt.
did compaq tell you that your laptop would work with win2k?
""I have a hardware router/firewall (they run about $30 these days"
Why kind do you recommend? Where'd you get it?"
http://www.circuitcity.com/ssm/Belkin-Wireless-Router--F5D72304-/se...
$19.99 for 4 port router with wireless 802.11b/g to boot....they are in fact on sale for as little as $9.99 on a pretty regular basis these days....use pricegrabber or dealnews.
only games that dont play nice on consoles these days are first person shooters (try aiming with those joysticks compared to a mouse) and real time strategy (again try playing with a joystick compared to a mouse).
now if one could pop in a of the shelf mouse and keyboard this problem would go away (ps2 comes with usb ports, xbox uses usb with funny plugs). maybe one can?
after that the only thing a computer can do that a console cant do is edit files. hmm, only reason for that is the lack of apps...
man im getting confused here...
""Version Tiger which will be released in March 2005 will be a 64-bit OS for people with G5."
That would be great if they deliver. Current hype has not produce an actual 64bit OS. But I wikk believe it when is out. In the mean time, is just a promise, after false claims.
For now is a 32bit OS running in a 64bit CPU in emulation mode.
Anyway, time will tell, just like it did before."
some of you missed the news piece right here on osnews:
http://osnews.com/comment.php?news_id=9220
" 64-bit Support in Tiger Is Only for Server Processes
Posted by Adam Scheinberg on 2004-12-21 14:55:49 UTC
In the new article "Developing 64-bit Applications" of the "Tiger Developer Overview Series" published on ADC, Apple states that the Cocoa and Carbon GUI application frameworks will not be ready for 64-bit programming. Even the kernel will be compiled in 32-bit address mode and will be provided in only one version for all the machines. The only 64-bit system framework which will be provided in a "fat" format will be libSystem which command-line applications, servers and computation engines will be linkable to. The 32-bit GUI clients will be capable however to communicate with the 64-bit server processes by using several IPC techniques."
brichpmr
Macs are hardly just computers with 'training wheels.'
I beg to differ. Seems like the only people using Macs are ex-PC users who could never make a PC work right. Not saying that's a bad thing, but for people who know how to operate a PC properly, Macs are virtually useless. We can spend about half as much as a typical Mac user and have our computers run just as smoothly. However ...
Does that mean I'm putting down people who use Macs? Absolutely not. As a parallel, I know shit about car audio. If I wanted to learn how to install a satellite radio in my car, I could've done so and wouldn't have had to pay someone else $85 to do it for me. Of course, that doesn't mean I'm less intelligent than he is, just means that he took the time to learn something I personally have no interest in. Same with Mac users - if you don't want or need to put up with Windows and all its shit, then go buy a Mac. You'll pay more, but you won't have to endure all the headaches I've gone through to make Windows run as smoothly as I have now. Does that mean Macs are better? Well, they're easier to use, but if you put a Windows and OSX power user side-by-side, I'm not sure one would be any more functional than the other.
netpython
Neither do i,it's not perse training wheels but more a matter of having the freedom to be part of something such as development of the actual OS/app you are using instead of using.Be part of something or use something.
Sounds like religion to me *blech*
Although you can do on windows XP professional allmost everything what's feasable on MacOsX.
Agreed ...
However XP is getting old rapidly.
How is it getting old rapidly? It runs the same apps it always has and will continue to do so. Give me XP, Directory Opus, and Perl, and I'm a pretty happy guy.
getting old rapidly and loose promises about Longhorns release dates aren't going to make up for it.
Who gives a shit about Longhorn? I don't. Longhorn is irrevalent as far as I'm concerned until it ships.
Besides that some apps don't work well with SP2.
No issues here so far.
Those (hardware) firewalls are a first line of several lines in defense.
For me, those hardware firewalls serve the purpose of keeping those Windows worms off my ass. That's about all I use them for.
Rodin
"I have a hardware router/firewall (they run about $30 these days"
Why kind do you recommend? Where'd you get it?
I dunno .. I got mine about 2-3 years ago when they were still $90. THey have dropped much in price, but I dunno what the current 'best' model is.
Anonymous
> I don't hate Macs - I just don't need a computer with training wheels.
So you are telling me that unix is for kiddies and DOS is for adults?
Well, I have both on my PC, so what's your point ?
"I don't hate Macs - I just don't need a computer with training wheels."
It's funny I always feel like on training wheels when I'm on Windows. Every time you have these reconfirmation dialogues "are you sure?", "really?", "you mean it?" and then being patronised by these braindead Wizards having to jump from one question and answer game to the next, if you try to setup even the most simple thing.
I always feel like shouting "I know how to setup that bloody computer, now would you Mr. Wizard bugger off and let me do my work, puhleeeze?!!"
I've never been as anti-Apple/Mac as the author of the article, but I have been in the computer industry for awhile. I (my company) manufacture good custom PCs that compete with Dell, Gateway & Alienware units.
Just today we were speed testing a unit that we're submitting for review in a major Ziff Davis publication.
Specs on unit...
A8N-SLi Motherboard
Athlon FX-55 processor
1GB (2x512mb) OCZ low latency memory
2x BFG 6800 GT (PCI Express...Ultra's are still only AGP)
2x 74 GB Western Digital 10,000k Raptor hard disk
1x 250 GB Maxtor 7200 Diamondmax hard disk
Audigy 2 ZS Gamer sound card
600 Watt Thermaltake Power supply
Killer Case...
Logitech MX 1000 Mouse
Logitech Elite Keyboard
This is currently as good a unit as you're going to see that isn't liquid cooled. I personally did the homework on each of the components to ensure we had a killer submittal unit.
I love it, and I love well made PCs.
That said, when I purchase my next computer it's going to be a dual G5 2.0 ghz Powermac.
Why? Because using a Mac is just different than it is using a PC. It feels different.
Is it better? Subjectively, I'd say yes. It's better for "me".
Is it quantifiably better than the PC we configured for our magazine review? Definately not. Our machine is probably faster at most task, has newer technology and is arguably more upgrade friendly.
Still, Apple makes a fine system themselves and (this is the real selling point) they make an OS that is designed specifically to make that hardware look more attractive than it's "numbers" could do.
I know that when I purchase my Mac I'm going to be making quite a few sacrafices (I may never end up playing Middle Earth Online), which includes having to buy all new versions of software I currently own for the PC (GoLive, Wordperfect, Office, CorelDraw, Photopaint, Quicken) but I simply don't care.
I use to own an old 3400 Powerbook back in the day that I truly loved. Even with the cruft that was OS 8-9, the laptop was still a joy to use. I also owned a Mac that was able to run the BeOS on PowerPC before Be committed to the Intel/AMD platform. As you can tell, I have a history with Apple and the Macintosh.
I also have a history with the Commodore Amiga. The Amiga 1000 was my very first computer. Loved it. Then I moved to an Amiga 1200 all in one (sans the monitor) unit. Loved that more than any hardware I've ever owned.
I guess I try to identify with the computer hardware I purchase because I know I will spend so much of my life using that particular tool. Based on what I've used on the PC, and what I've seen on the Mac (OS X is finally mature enough to be considered a REAL operating system) I know where my next computer expenditure will end up.
I'm about to be a Mac Addict again.
:-D
I beg to differ. Seems like the only people using Macs are ex-PC users who could never make a PC work right. Not saying that's a bad thing, but for people who know how to operate a PC properly, Macs are virtually useless.
BS. I would hope most would not stoop to making opinionated, generalized statements as if they were fact.
I'm currently using a Dell C840 Latitude as my main computer. Before that I was running an Athlon XP 2200+ system running XP Pro (with a dual process MP motherboard). Before that I owned a BX dual processor motherboard for 3 years.
In all that time I have never had any real down time with my computers and I've used them quite extensively. Am I a tech? No. But if I'm having driver problems or hardware conflicts I can pretty much troubleshoot it until the problems gone. I purchased the BX unit from Premio PC and I built my 2200+ unit all by my lonesome.
I still KNOW that my next computer purchase is going to be a Powermac G5 and the only reason I'll feel I'm missing something will be because I won't have Middle Earth Online to play. I definately won't be less productive on the Mac than I would be on a cheaper/yet more powerful PC.
I'm making an educated purchasing decision not based on "not knowing how to operate a PC properly" but based on "the Mac is going to feel different in a way that is more appealing to me that a standard PC I could build OR buy".
It's pretty simple really.
netpython:
Neither do i,it's not perse training wheels but more a matter of having the freedom to be part of something such as development of the actual OS/app you are using instead of using.Be part of something or use something.
Sounds like religion to me *blech*
True,science is my religion.
Do you actually download the patches for your system, put them on CD and run them before your computer even thinks of touching that CAT 5 or RJ11 wire? How long is it for average windows computer's to get infected when unpatch on the net? Last I heard was ****4**** min! You have to be joking if you think the average user understands how to even download the patches and put them on CDs. And are knowlegable to disconnect there computer from the 'virus wires' before they apply these patches? Give up, you are not the average user. Your knowlege to 'get it working' is mind blowing for the average user.
Actually this problem is trivial to avoid and it's very simple to safely attach an unpatched XP machine to the internet to apply all the latest updates. I don't read them, but I would imagine (and certainly hope) the "solution" is in every other "Help me" magazine column published.
Just turn on the builtin the firewall on before connecting, or connect through a NAT ADSL device (which a large proportion are, by my understanding). Go directly (and only) to Wndows Update and install the latest set of updates.
But do tell him to wait until OsX is truly 64bit, otherwise he will be paying a premium for expensive under-utilized hardware.
No matter how often you carp on with this idiocy, it will not become true. A 64 bit OS offers very little to the vast majority of consumers. You only benefit if you have applications that need to individually address more than 4GB of RAM - which are pretty thin on the ground outside of few very specific enterprise computing scenarios.
In short, any typical consumer is going to utilise their hardware just as fully whether they're running a 32 bit OS X or a 64 bit OS X.
Why buy an expensive G4 emulator when you can get a G4 cheaper?
Because a G5 is a substantially better machine and it's not in any way, shape or form running as "G4 emulator" any more than a Pentium 4 running old 386-era code is operating as a "386 emulator".
tobaccofarm (IP: ---.dsl.concepts.nl) wrote:
Did you try MS support?Would be a phenomena if it would turn out you pocess the only laptop on which you can't install w2k/w3k.Big mistake of Compaq in either case.
I wouldn't have gotten any support from Microsoft because this was a 3rd party (Compaq) driver issue. Compaq apparently used custom controllers and had written their own drivers for the peripherals in question. I did try searching the Web for drivers for Win2k with no luck. Also, this wasn't the only laptop with this issue; as far as I know all previous Presario laptops had the same issue.
P.S. Sorry for posting anonymously before. I was at home (IP: ---.cpe.ga.charter.com) and my wife was talking to me while I was typing. I forgot to fill in the Name and Email fields. Now I am at work (IP: ---.23.123-221.newsouth.net) and ironically I am not as distracted.
anon (IP: ---.chvlva.adelphia.net) wrote:
did you bother checking first to see if the os was compatible with what you already owned?
I didn't have to. Microsoft's requirements were something to the effect of "Pentium or equivalent 166MHz processor, 64MB RAM, CD-ROM Drive, VESA 2.0 Compliant video card". The laptop met every specification. I had no reason whatsoever to suspect incompatibility. In fact, part of the promotional material for the Presario series was that they would be compatible with "the next version of Windows". I found out after I sold the laptop that they meant Windows ME, which was really just crippled Win98 with more bundled software. Perhaps it was my fault that I assumed Win2k to be a "next version" of Windows, but I still feel that I was misled.
did you buy the os from compaq?
Nope, retail box.
did you seek support from the seller of the software?
No, because they were a chain store that would have directed me to Microsoft or Compaq.
if you bought a retail copy, you got support from ms, did you call them?
No, because this was clearly a driver issue and it would have been a waste of time. I know this because of an earlier unrelated incident with Windows 95 when it first came out.
if you bought an oem copy, you got no phone support and should have known that in advance.
As I said, it was retail. I would have been stupid to pay full retail price for OEM.
The point of my post wasn't where I could get support from, but rather that Apple isn't the only company that locks software to specific hardware and vice-versa.
Wow another Mac article and exactly the same trolls come out, you guys really must lead interesting lives?
You know when you go on about how Apple must port OS X to x86 it really does just sound like PPC envy!
10 years of using Linux as my primary OS, just over a year now since I switched to OS X. I've seen the future of the UNIX desktop and believe me there aren't any penguins in sight!
Darius wrote:
I beg to differ. Seems like the only people using Macs are ex-PC users who could never make a PC work right. Not saying that's a bad thing, but for people who know how to operate a PC properly, Macs are virtually useless. We can spend about half as much as a typical Mac user and have our computers run just as smoothly. However ...
Wouldnt necessarily agree with that. Ive been using computers since before the XT. Ive used and/or supported every version of Windows there has ever been, DOS from 2.2, OS2 v1.x and 2.x & Warp (I think those were the verions - long time ago), various flavours of Linux and other *NIX's. I work as a high-level engineer for a Solutions Provider which is primarily a MS / Compaq shop.
My main PC at home has dual booted with whatever was the latest/greatest Windows and some other OS for years (BeOS, QNX, Debian, RedHat, Mandrake etc). I used Gentoo as my primary OS for a number of months as an experiment. None of my experiments provided me with a Windows-alternative that I was completely happy with, they all had deficiencies in some area or another.
I still have my various PCs at home (all home builds) and use them for the occasional game, messing about with Gentoo and things like downloading my dive computer log data. However, my main home computer is a PowerMac G5. Its a pleasure to use and doesnt take any admin to look after. I use my computer at home now, not tinker with it and I enjoy coming home to use it after working with Windows and Linux servers all day.
My partner has also gone from hating computers to using the Mac frequently, with very little help from me. For example, she managed to get a number her CD's, import them into iTunes and then burn herself a compilation CD for her car. All the various bits of s/w were there in XP to do that, but there is no way she would have been able to do it.
So it keeps both of us happy, there is a very user friendly GUI at the front end, with a secure, robust OS at the backend and a powerful cmd line for when I want it, as well as a reasonable dev environment and numerous scripting languages like Perl, which I use frequently. And did I mention that I dont have to do continuous admin on it to keep it that way!
OS X initially doesnt feel as rapid in its response, but it keeps that same level of response generally no matter how hard you work it. XP on the other hand starts to really strain and labour.
The mac, even though I wanted one, was a very hard decision to lash out the money on. Basically 4x the price of what I was used to spending to build a home pc. The iMac and eMac werent options as not enough upgradability for me (ie Graphics cards) and I already had a very nice 19" CRT which I wanted to carry on using, so it was the PowerMac. It just irritated me that I had to go with a highend Mac to get the flexibility I was used to having with components in the world of PCs.
Do I regret my decision?? Not at all. Im probably still not as efficient working on the Mac as I am in other environents, but its still by far the best computing experience Ive had. Do I wish they would do a cheaper headless Mac, most definately!! Are Apple perfect?? Nope, but they generally seem to do a better job with their s/w than other companies. The whole experience has a sort of 'feel' about it that you just dont get in the PC world.
Presently I work in a Computer Repair shop/ISP. My job is to repair customers computers. I have been at this job for approximately a year now and I can say that in that time I have had a few macs into the shop. We are NOT Apple Certified, nor Microsoft Certified anything, but nobody cares anyway, they just want their machines to work correctly.
Over my 15 years in the IT industry (don't ask why I work as a repair guy right now), and more specifically this most recent year, I can't count how many Windows PC's I have repaired, on the other hand, I can count on 1 hand, ok maybe 1 hand and 1 finger extra how many macs I have had in the shop. The first one in fact was a Mac SE!!! Still in use for someone's business, because the application they used for their business just worked correctly since day 1.
The latest macs I have had in the shop were
1) an eMac which I was VERY impressed with. The customer was having problems with VirtualPC and didn't know what to do. I updated the app and it was working again, total time, less than 30 minutes.
Additionally, I can say that the eMac running WindowsXP through VPC was FASTER than my 1.5GHz WIntel (well WinAMD to be specific) box that is my work computer.
2) an iBook with a screen problem. Turns out Apple had a replacement program for this particular model. Total time ~20 minutes.
Compare those to a standard procedure for a typical Windows box that is brought in
1) Delete all Temp files
2) Run MSConfig, turn off all the CRAP in there
3) Run regedit, go to HKLM->Software->Microsoft->Windows->CurrentVersion->Run * and get rid of all the CRAP in there that is not needed and not seen in MSConfig
4) Install Spybot S&D, update spybot S&D, Scan for problems, delete problems
5) Install AdAware SE, update, scan, delete
6) Install SpywareBlaster, update immunize
7) Launch Norton AntiVirus or other installed virus software, update (if subscription is current) scan, delete infected files. If subscription not up-to-date call customer, ask if they would like a new version installed, install new version, update, scan, etc.
8) goto http://housecall.trendmicro.com and run their online virus scan since it sometimes catches things that norton and mcafee miss, delete.
9) Repeat steps 4 & 5 (sans install)
10) Go to Windows Update and install all relevant updates, this usually includes SP2
11) make sure that machine is working properly and put on completed shelf
Typical billable time for this: 1-1.5 hours, actual time about 4 hours depending on speed of machine, # of problems, etc.
About 50% of hte PC's that come in have some hardware problem in addition to the above 11 things I have to do to them. Failed Fan, failing Hard disk, blown motherboard, bad floppy, bad CD/DVD, bad RAM, no network card/built-in ethernet forcing me to either use a TrendNET usb fast-ethernet adapter (which I love for the shop) or to open the machine and install the venerable RealTek 8139 which works 99.9% of the time.
The PC's are basically nightmares every day. I ended up creating a batch file to perform most of the 11 steps for me, so that saves ME time not waiting around to click a button to continue, but still it is annoying to say the least.
So we can figure that at a shop rate of $50/hr the average MAC person is spending $27.00 after tax, while the average PC user spends $81.00, to me the TCO squarely favors the Mac and additionally, the mac runs un*x...
Now to be fair, I should tell you I have the following machines at home (in use):
1) Powerbook G3/500 Pismo 640M RAM (failed LCD, so I hooked it to a CRT)
2) Mac LC II running netBSD ( http://www.netbsd.org )
3) Mac Quadra 840av running netBSD
4) Power Computing PowerWave 604/150 running YDL4.0 ( http://www.yellowdoglinux.com )
5) 200MHz Gateway running FreeBSD 5.3 ( http://www.freebsd.org )
6) 2 Sun SparcStation 2's that I need parts for but will probably run Solaris(?)
7) Mac Quadra 610 that was running netBSD
Many of you may wonder why I run the various BSD's over some Linux Distro. It is because I like the BSD's more than Linux. My machines do various serving tasks and they just seem to perfrm better than linux for me....
So what's your point? You work in a computer repair shop and you're disappointed when people bring in faulty computers. You're not going to see all the Macs, Windows, Linux machines that work for people with no probs are you? As the % of people who own Macs is small compared to Windows / Linux should you not be expecting the proportion of faulty machines to be similar to % used? If you get the same problems with the PCs all the time why are they nightmares? You should be able to fix them in your sleep by now.
ok let's take a look at it.
Here is what you get for $2,099.00 CANADIAN
1.8GHz PowerPC G5
256MB DDR400 SDRAM
80GB Serial ATA
8x SuperDrive
Three PCI Slots
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra 64MB DDR video memory
56K internal modem
Now let's see what comparison I can make.
AMD64 2800+ (actually 1.8Ghz) --- 179$ CAD
decent abit mobo (kv8pro) ---129$ CAD
256MB DDR400 --- 55$ CAD
80GB SATA 7200 maxtor --- 89$ CAD
Pioneer 16x DVD-+RW --- 109$ CAD
MSI GF 5200 64MB --- 59$ CAD
56K modem --- 19$ CAD
good kb/mouse -- about 100$ CAD
decent case --- about 100$ CAD
Under 900$ canadian, not bad. Did I miss something?
Yeah you are, you are missing really good fans to make it not sound like a rocket engine, firewire/firewire 800, the fact that the MOBO you mention supports only up to 2GB of RAM (useless for 64Bit), and all the QA, support, and design work that comes from buying from a real company.
Lets face it, most people don't build their own computers. And even if they did, you'd have to factor in the cost of support and the OS.
"The latest macs I have had in the shop were
1) an eMac which I was VERY impressed with. The customer was having problems with VirtualPC and didn't know what to do. I updated the app and it was working again, total time, less than 30 minutes."
Funny, that eMac that you were VERY impressed with was featured in the top 10 WORST products of 2004. See for yourself:
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1735287,00.asp
Apple has good machines, but many agree the eMacs are not good. Better is the iMacs and the PowerMac line.
The G4 in particular are good machines. THe specs on the G5 are great, however, if you buy one you are buying an expensive under-utilized hardware, becuase although the G5 is 64bit CPU OsX is only 32bit OS.
Read it here:
http://osnews.com/comment.php?news_id=9220
"Apple states that the Cocoa and Carbon GUI application frameworks will not be ready for 64-bit programming. Even the kernel will be compiled in 32-bit address mode and will be provided in only one version for all the machines."
-From the OSNews article.
Cheers.
I usually run out and buy technical mags, because I love to hear the research that's being done in the IT industry. I just bought the new issue of Linux Mag with Linus Tolvalds being interviewed. He was asked what computer or platform he uses. He said he uses a duel G5. He says he enjoys how solid it is. He basically formated Mac OS X off it and installed his own Linux OS. If its good enough for Linus thats saying something. I agree that the G5,x86 and Arm platforms are the way to go. Apple hardware is a pretty solid platform, but for me I rather keep Mac OS X on there. It's good that everyone has there own opinion otherwise, we wouldnt have so many choices. Use according to your needs. :-)