Originally Posted by Mkane
Nvidia's Nforce chipsets are very solid performance chipsets that should be used by Apple. Then again I am talking to a lot of fanboys when I post to this forum so my points will be ignored because Apple all mighty does not use they chipsets therefore something must be wrong with them..oh yeah...they are not as good and Intel uses better hardware....I get it now!
That's rather irrelevent (oops, here I go with the misspellings! Stay tuned for more!), really. The Intel chipsets are reliable performers. One of the techniques that Apple uses to make Macs so stable is to limit the number of vendors from which they get their components. Think about the iPod. iPods use, in any given revision, only (ok, yeah, I know about the exception) one chipset for the motherboard, throughout the entire production line. Also, only one manufacturer for NAND. Apple could prevent supply chain limitations if they were to design another motherboard as well, which used chips from another supplier. Two sources of chips, less likelyhood of being constrained by shortages. But that increases the likelyhood of problems cropping up. If you have much experience with pc's, then I'm sure this will strike a chord with you, as you reflect back on all the times that you have upgraded your system, only to have new, and hiddeous conflicts arise, which require time and effort to weed out. With only the exception of Microsoft that I am aware of, most manufacturers and suppliers will work very hard to ensure that their products do not conflict with each other. So for Apple to use Intel products as much as possible is a very smart way to enhance stability. On the same token, if Apple were to use all nVidia chips, they would see (I think) an equivalent level of ... um... of non-conflicting... yeah. You get the point. Anyway, I suspect that from Apple's analysis, nVidia's products do not offer any material benefit over Intel's. So, all things being equal, go with the company you already have good relations with and who is already a supplier. Cost may also come into play.
So the question for you to answer, if you choose, is, "Why should Apple use nVidia?"
They are more than 2 months behind......and it effects more than gamers bud.
opinion. no one can argue against opinion, IMHO.
More fanboy spin....
I've found that every time I get irritated at someone and apply an angry lable to them, I realize later that I was just pissed to see in them faults that I see in myself. Mind the accusations.
DVDR's- in order to get lightscribe the Mac user must by an expensive external drive and the options are very limited when compared to the other side.
Why would you add lightscribe to a laptop? If you need it in the towers, you can get an internal. Same deal as if you have a comp made by some other random pc manufacturer. Not many that I've seen are providing LS capable drives as an option.
CPU's- ...but Apple needs to use more than just Intel.
See above, re nVidia, and please answer again, "Why?"
Software selection: this is a big one that usually draws out the dishonest name calling Mac fanboys! When compared to PC Macs software selection is very poor. I'm not saying that Apple software is bad but it would greatly help Apple "if" they would open OSX to 3rd party software makers. Yes...I know the spin reply will be,"but out software is better..blah blah blah" so spare me that spin. All software has bugs even mighty Apple's software.
It is very unclear what you mean. What are you talking about? Are you saying that Apple doesn't provide details of the guts of the OS so that developers can write programs? Apple provides an entire development environment for FREE with every Mac, called XCode. Microsoft charges hundreds to thousands of dollars for theirs (depending on version of Visual Studio.NET that you get). Apple is NOT the only developer of software for the Mac. Not even close. As of last year's World Wide Developer's Conference, there were over half a million hardware and software developers in the community of Apple developer's.
No SLI or Crossfire support for the video cards
Mac Pro actually DOES support SLI. It's hidden though, and current versions of OSX do NOT support it. If, however, you install Windows, and get an appropriate set of Windows compatible (read "Normal") video cards, then just do a simple driver update, and you're in business. Check the forums for details. I think the thread is titled, "IT TRUE, ONLOOKER!" or something like that. Also, I should point out that you can just get PC video cards, and plug them in. I think they won't work right, if at all, under OSX, but they'll work just fine when running Windows. So that should be your solution right there. Most of the appealing games (and almost all of the crappy ones!) are still comming out first/only on windows anyway, so that should be your choice for gaming platform. Very easy to set up a MacPro with BootCamp to run more or less like an XBox. Then you have the advantage of the stability provided by OSX as the primary system. Just pop into XP when you have a craving for carnage.
Honestly, I think most, if not all of your grievances would be satisfied if you just ran XP or <shudder> Vista (not yet though!) as a second os. Heck, you can even install Linux. You can install as many OSs as you want, as far as I know, and multiboot into whichever you feel the whim to use. Apple's harware is now effectively industry standard, and you can do pretty much anything you want when in windows. Except for opperate for more than 72 hours without crashing.
<j/k, I know they fixed that>
Mac's have become the most versitile computers around, in my eyes. The reasons NOT to get one instead of a PC are rapidly vaporizing.
Just so you know where I come from, btw, I grew up on Macs. I was very well versed in them at the time, and was considered by many (partly cause I told em!) to be a Mac Guru. In 2001, right after I got out of Basic Training, and as I was stationed in South Korea, I decided that it was time for me to learn how to use Windows, and to get a computer I could expand (I had an old PowerBook G3 at the time). I did my research and built a (then) pretty hard core PC. Over the next five years I continued to upgrade it regularly (which I loved), while at the same time learning the Ins and Outs of ME, and then of XP Home, followed by XP Pro. I became horribly frustrated. On my self built machine, I would guess that I experienced an exception (where an exception is defined broadly as a BSOD, full system hang requiring reboot, an unexpected termination of a program, a random error message, or a conflict between components or software), at least once or twice a day. Frequently more. This past fall, when preparing to go back to school, I bought a Fujitsu TabletPC, expecting that a fresh computer from a reputed company would be immune from the horrors of the past. Oops. I had it for LESS THAN three hours when I had my first Blue Screen of Death. The cause? I booted the computer for the first time, went through the necessary set up, and then installed MS Office Pro 2003. Rebooted, then began installing MS Visual Studio 2003. Crashed in the middle of the installation. (I think this is a competition between the different software teams at Microsoft, to see who can crash the other team's program the most!) I finally got it up and running, but the errors and conflicts continued to crop up (I think part of it is that I exercise my computers so much, and do so much with them, that I'm a heck of a lot more likely than most users to find problems during normal usage) and it kept getting worse and worse. I had to restore the factory image after less than a month and a half, just to fix the weirdness. Even then, as I VERY carefully installed software and tested the computer for stability between errors, it wouldn't stay clean. In fact, by the time I sold it, a few days before Christmass, System Restore wouldn't work any more. It refused to detect changes to the system.
This surely sounds like I'm tremendously error prone. The truth is simply that Microsoft's code base is so jacked up (I'm a programmer, so I'm qualified to say this (or so I'm told)) that it is a monumental task to get ANY windows based system bug free. And then, it is ususally only "Bug Free" within a limited set of uses. You can get it stable for one set of programs, but there will almost certainly be a plethora of new problems whenever you try to add functionality to it.
So I've got my new MBP comming to me, what I should have gotten in the first place, and I am looking forward to many years of blissfull non-agravation.
Ok, that's enough rambling. I think there was a point in there, but I've forgotten what it was.