Cook: US-built Mac will be refreshed version of existing product

16781012

Comments

  • Reply 181 of 223
    rcfarcfa Posts: 1,124member

    Quote:

    The problem is when you look at the Mini or the Mac Pro there is nothing innovative in these boxes any more. 


     


    And there never was. Aside from early adoption of USB, Apple's FW, and now USB2, Thunderbolt, etc. Apple's hardware innovations were mostly about what to leave out, not about what to have that's different than the competition. There was a time in distant past, when there was such a thing as a CPU war, but that was lost a long time ago when it was clear that the three partners in the PPC CPU development had fundamentally different design goals.


     


    For all intents and purposes, Apple's hardware was for a long time a commodity PC, albeit with better workmanship, cleaner design, better component quality than low-end PC offerings, and less clutter. That's exactly what they were, and that's exactly what they are now.


     


    Apple's innovation was always in the software. Apple can sell commodity hardware at a premium price because of industrial design and superior software. That's pretty much true for all the devices Apple sells, and that's why all the people are wrong who say Apple isn't innovating.


     


    Except for these once-a-decade events when a new class of devices is introduced (personal computer, portable music player, touch-screen mobile computing devices), all Apple innovation is and has been about software. The iPhone is an iPod-Touch with built-in mobile radio, but it's essentially the same basic pocket computer. Just like it once was an option to get laptops with or without WiFi card, or laptops with or without optical drive. The iPad is a big iPod touch, or a big iPhone (depending if it has the mobile radio in it or not).


     


    So Apple sells three device classes: personal computers in a variety of form factors, "traditional" portable music players, touch-screen mobile computers. Traditional portable music players will slowly go away or become a niche product, because the touch-screen mobile computers can do it better.


     


    So Apple really, in all of its corporate history, only had three major hardware classes (plus their accessories, such as printers, AppleTV, etc.). The rest is software. And all the pundits who scream how Apple stopped innovating are the ones who swallowed Apple's marketing lines hook-line-and-sinker, because these people actually believe that the iPod touch, the iPhone, and the iPad are different products, when in fact they are just different form factors of the same product. 


     


    Apple's genius is in marketing (e.g. disrupting the stranglehold carriers had on handset manufacturers), and in software innovation.


    And of course, there are diminishing returns: the innovation from CLI computing to GUI computing was huge, but ever since, it has been refining that concept; still, the difference between the original Mac and e.g. OS X 10.8 is big.


    Same with touch screen devices and their OS. The big innovation was bringing them to market, now it's evolution.


     


    To expect that Apple "revolutionizes" a new market every few years is bogus. Apple didn't do it in the past, and they won't do it in the future. They may well break open new markets once every decade or so, and that's still more than anyone else does. And in the mean time, they keep innovating in evolutionary steps, and just like evolution: mostly to the better, but sometimes to the worse.


     


    I'm sure once the Ives' designed GUI shows up, as is rumored, it will get a lot of protesting and whining from the same people who now constantly clamor for novelty. I'll withhold judgement, because it could be better than Snow Leopard, or worse than Lion. Or it could be tolerable like Mountain Lion (which with a few third party additions like Total Spaces) is actually quite nice, even the Server version makes progress again in the right direction after the total Lion-Server disaster....

  • Reply 182 of 223
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member


    Originally Posted by rcfa View Post

    And there never was.




    Oh, come off it.

  • Reply 183 of 223
    rcfarcfa Posts: 1,124member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post





    Originally Posted by rcfa View Post

    And there never was.




    Oh, come off it.



     


    No, no need to. Apple had good industrial design, and there's some innovation there, e.g. moving the keyboards on laptops to the back, such as to create a wrist rest, and things like that. That continues, as the iteration to newer versions of laptops and iMacs shows. But in terms of computing, it's not like Apple ever had this "oh my god!" hardware if you disregard the nice, clean case, and the better workmanship. Apple did, and I mentioned that, things like FireWire and now Thunderbolt, adopted USB before most others, was the first to toss floppies and now optical drives. And again, I mentioned that. But that's not what people talk about. They'd consider it innovation if it would have 8x the frame rates in Doom than any other offering, or who knows what they expect other than what Apple is doing, because they always look at the hardware.


    Apple's hardware is nicely designed, reliable, but mostly boring from a purely hardware point of view. How clear that fact is, is shown by the reality that one can run Windows on a Mac, or turn a regular PC into a Hackintosh. Real innovation on the hardware side would cause massive incompatibilities. But who cares?


     


    The innovation was in the software, and that's what counts.

  • Reply 184 of 223
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member


    Originally Posted by rcfa View Post

    …it's not like Apple ever had this "oh my god!" hardware if you disregard the nice, clean case, and the better workmanship.


     


    Come. Off. It.






    Apple's hardware is nicely designed, reliable, but mostly boring from a purely hardware point of view.




     


    No, it's not! My stars.






    Real innovation…






    Hackintoshing is "innovation"? Not in any sane plane of existence.

  • Reply 185 of 223
    rcfarcfa Posts: 1,124member

    Quote:






    Real innovation…






    Hackintoshing is "innovation"? Not in any sane plane of existence.



     


    Would you stop misquoting me? I cited Hackintoshs as an example why Apple hardware is NOT innovative in a fundamental way, because if it were, the OS wouldn't be able to run on a run-off-the-mill PC.


     


    And you have yet to cite one example in which Apple *hardware* was fundamentally innovative, aside from the things that I mentioned that I consider refinements of industry standard hardware.


    Apple has innovated tons of things, but it was always on the software side. GUIs: are software, WYSIWYG: is software, ColorSync, Typography, etc. etc.: software. 


     


    Heck, even tablet computing has been around for a long time before Apple, and again it was their software that was the really innovative aspect. The hardware is good, the design is great, but all that are evolutionary changes from what the industry has been doing.

  • Reply 186 of 223
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member


    Originally Posted by rcfa View Post

    …Apple hardware is NOT innovative in a fundamental way, because if it were, the OS wouldn't be able to run on a run-off-the-mill PC.


     


    That's just so completely wrong.





    And you have yet to cite one example in which Apple *hardware* was fundamentally innovative, aside from the things that I mentioned that I consider refinements of industry standard hardware.



     


    There's that phrase, "I consider", where you get to magically dismiss anything I might bring up under your own super secret criteria.







    Apple has innovated tons of things, but it was always on the software side.





     


    Always, huh. Take a gander at any hardware they've ever made, maybe.


     


    Stop blinding yourself to whatever you've decided isn't the case.

  • Reply 187 of 223
    rcfarcfa Posts: 1,124member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post





    Originally Posted by rcfa View Post

    …Apple hardware is NOT innovative in a fundamental way, because if it were, the OS wouldn't be able to run on a run-off-the-mill PC.


     


    That's just so completely wrong.



     


    And you still haven't cited an example. It seem's you're chicken about that, because if you would bring an example, one could have a real discussion as to why that does or doesn't qualify for fundamental innovation; looks like you're afraid to have that discussion.


    Point being, if there had been such a fundamental innovation, it would be just as obvious as saying: "Desktop publishing", GUI, etc. which did shake things up and changed entire industries.

  • Reply 188 of 223
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member


    Originally Posted by rcfa View Post

    And you still haven't cited an example. It seem's you're chicken about that…


     


    Actually read my post, please.

  • Reply 189 of 223
    rcfarcfa Posts: 1,124member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post





    Originally Posted by rcfa View Post

    And you still haven't cited an example. It seem's you're chicken about that…


     


    Actually read my post, please.



     


    I did, let me quote:


     


    Quote:


    That's just so completely wrong. There's that phrase, "I consider", where you get to magically dismiss anything I might bring up under your own super secret criteria. Always, huh. Take a gander at any hardware they've ever made, maybe. Stop blinding yourself to whatever you've decided isn't the case.



     


    Hardly a list of any innovation, much less of fundamental innovations, as if "any hardware they've ever made" were fundamentally innovative.


     


    I think you don't understand what "fundamentally innovative" means. "Fundamentally innovative" are things that are game changers. The new iMac is hardly a "game changer" compared to the old iMac, for example. It's an evolutionary improvement, with an industry standard PC at the core of its computing engine, with evolutionary changes in packaging, industrial design, and manufacturing. The world of computing is not upended by this *device*, or for that matter any Mac.


    Just like a Mercedes may be better than a Ford, a new Mercedes isn't a "game changer" in the automotive industry. The new Tesla may qualify; but Apple's computers are Mercedes to the PC world's Fords, but they are no Teslas.


     


    Here what might be a Tesla: a 128-core 64-bit ARM base Mac that despite being 10-times the speed of a typical high-end PC uses only half as much power.


    Or a machine with 64TB of DRAM-speed carbon-nanotube storage with an architecture that makes no differentiation between "internal" and "external" memory.


    Or a Mac with a quantum-computing module, or a holographic parallel laser light computing engine, or ...


     


    Waiting for intel's next chip generation and then updating the machines with what can be done with the same chips that everyone else uses is not game changing, it's evolutionary.


     


    You may note that Apple doesn't use other people's software to drive its products, because in software they can innovate. Maybe given Apple's cash piles and power, they may actually start to truly innovate at a hardware level. Maybe they will buy up Nantero and dump a couple of billions into research there, then own the key patents and leave everyone in the dust, maybe they are working on some super-secret technology that will leapfrog intel and the rest of the industry by several generations of innovation... 


    ...but so far, this hasn't happened, not in hardware. It did happen, in software, multiple times.


     


    It's OK to be an Apple fan, but that would require to properly assess the company's strengths and weaknesses.

  • Reply 190 of 223
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member


    Originally Posted by rcfa View Post

    Hardly a list of any innovation…


     


    It's blindingly obvious that you didn't even bother reading it. That's funnier than it is sad, luckily, but it's embarrassing for you either way.






    "Fundamentally innovative" are things that are game changers. 




     


    Ah, so like moving the keyboard back in the body and giving people a palm rest. How about the click-wheel on the iPod? And claiming the iPhone and iPad were neither fundamentally innovative nor game changers is laughable at best. Maybe putting the entire computer behind the screen? What about a cooling system on a workstation computer that allows it to operate completely silent at idle and under 50db under load? Oh! How about a professional laptop under three quarters of an inch think? Maybe it was being able to make the world's first 17" laptop barely over an inch. Pushing wireless standards across their entire computer lineup before anyone else to promote the vastly accelerated adoption of 802.11? How about all the engineering that goes into every single revision of every computer they make to keep it not only up to their already elevated standards, but to make them stand out unquestionably as being the best in each of their respective classes?


     


    So I say again: Come off it. You don't have a clue what you're talking about, either because you're willfully ignoring history or refusing to learn about it before claiming "desires". 

  • Reply 191 of 223
    rcfarcfa Posts: 1,124member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post





    Originally Posted by rcfa View Post

    Hardly a list of any innovation…


     


    It's blindingly obvious that you didn't even bother reading it. That's funnier than it is sad, luckily, but it's embarrassing for you either way.



     


    Embarrassing for you is, that you keep making statements without supplying what you pretend to have supplied.


    You were probably still wetting your diapers when I was already doing my thesis work on a NeXT cube...


    ...so don't tell me about knowing what's disruptive and what isn't, or what the history of the platform is or not.


     


    The NeXT system was disruptive, it was so disruptive that Apple is still largely sailing on the fundamentals laid down back then, it was so disruptive that the majority of the people think "the internet" is the WWW that was invented on the cube. I still have the original web browser somewhere...


     


    And, just because you act like a moderator around here doesn't make your posts less troll-like.


     





    "Fundamentally innovative" are things that are game changers. 



     


    Ah, so like moving the keyboard back in the body and giving people a palm rest. How about the click-wheel on the iPod? And claiming the iPhone and iPad were neither fundamentally innovative nor game changers is laughable at best. Maybe putting the entire computer behind the screen? What about a cooling system on a workstation computer that allows it to operate completely silent at idle and under 50db under load? Oh! How about a professional laptop under three quarters of an inch think? Maybe it was being able to make the world's first 17" laptop barely over an inch. Pushing wireless standards across their entire computer lineup before anyone else to promote the vastly accelerated adoption of 802.11? How about all the engineering that goes into every single revision of every computer they make to keep it not only up to their already elevated standards, but to make them stand out unquestionably as being the best in each of their respective classes?


     


    So I say again: Come off it. You don't have a clue what you're talking about, either because you're willfully ignoring history or refusing to learn about it before claiming "desires". 



     


    I have no desires. I look at things fairly objectively, unlike you, who dismiss anything that doesn't wreak of fan-boy-stench. Funny thing is, I've been with the platform longer than just about anyone except for a few people inside NeXT, started working with what's the basis of OS X and iOS when it was called NeXTSTEP 0.8; went to dev camp, so I could buy one of these machines because they weren't even available to the general public at that time.


    Heck, have even the full sets of printed documentation of it in the bookshelf starting at 0.8 going all the way up. So I don't need some kids like you teach me about the history of it all, I lived actually through it, and didn't read about it second hand on some fan sites.


     


    What you don't get is that industrial design and computing are two different things. E.g. moving the keyboard didn't change computing, it changes ergonomics, packaging, look and feel. That's not computing, that's ID.


     


    Here are some computing changes:


    FPUs, DMA, protected memory, real multi-tasking, multi-processing, multi-user, sandboxing, vector processing, virtual memory, RAID, modern file systems (e.g. ZFS), etc. and some of these are pure software innovations. 


    Many of these things Mac OS X has, and most of these were already there in NeXTSTEP/Mach-BSD before Apple took over, and none of them are NeXT/Apple inventions, either, although NeXT can take credit of bringing many of them first to personal computing. e.g. Vector processing was achieved with a DSP chip on the NeXT, later mainstreamed by instruction set additions in the PPC and x86 chips, and further pushed with GPU based processing, which (pendulum swings back) is again starting to be integrated into the main CPU as time marches on. So when Apple boasts about GCD, it's an evolutionary change, with the true novelty being OpenCL, which is a software technology. That doesn't mean GCD is useless or not innovative, but it's evolutionary not revolutionary, and it's software.


     


    It's the software that makes the difference. Apple knows it, I know it, you pretend not to know it.

  • Reply 192 of 223
    philboogiephilboogie Posts: 7,675member
    Blindingly obvious someone didn't write their thesis on the topic of personhood.
  • Reply 193 of 223
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member


    Originally Posted by rcfa View Post


    What you don't get is that industrial design and computing are two different things. E.g. moving the keyboard didn't change computing, it changes ergonomics, packaging, look and feel. That's not computing, that's ID.



     


    Like effing clockwork. image






    There's that phrase, "I consider", where you get to magically dismiss anything I might bring up under your own super secret criteria.


  • Reply 194 of 223
    smallwheelssmallwheels Posts: 584member


    When the iPad came out I was excited about it. I played with one and that enthusiasm faded. I still liked it but the interface wasn't impressive enough for me to buy one. Since I'm not wealthy enough to just plop down money for the next expensive toy to come out I must consider the best bang for my buck.


     


    The latest versions of OSX aren't impressive to me. They definitely are better than the Windows 7&8 OSs but not more impressive than Open SUSE or Ubuntu. I'm still using 10.5.8 because low and behold it just works great. I'm getting to the point where I must upgrade or my internet browsing will be limited. It's no fault of the machine that Chrome, Safari, and to some degree Firefox won't function optimally because certain things aren't being updated for my version. My hardware isn't compatible with anything above 10.6. So I'm considering getting a new machine.


     


    It is because of my need to update the Mac Book that I've looked at the other OSs. This look has shown me that I don't need OSX. I like it but don't need it. I am a person that Apple will lose if their prices and hardware aren't competitive. It was a bit daunting to consider switching away from XP because it was all I knew. Once I made the switch life got better. Now that I know all that is entailed in switching from one OS to another, moving to Linux isn't daunting at all, especially since professional movie editing software is now available on Linux, and it's free!


     


    I agree that Apple's real forte is in software. It is their software that draws people to the platform. It was my frustration with Windows that got me to switch. Linux software is the most innovative anywhere. It isn't always polished and pretty but it is definitely cutting edge. Not all software innovation comes from Apple. There are thousands of Linux developers out there doing great things.


     


    Ubuntu and others are just as intuitive and easy to use as OSX once everything is set up. I find Ubuntu quicker than OSX in many tasks.


     


    When I go to buy my next machine I intend to see what Apple has to offer. If I can get better for less from HP or another company they will get my business. Apple is in the running but their slowness to incorporate the newest chips really lessens the chances that they will earn my money.

  • Reply 195 of 223
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,926member
    rcfa wrote: »
    ...

    The NeXT system was disruptive, it was so disruptive that Apple is still largely sailing on the fundamentals laid down back then, it was so disruptive that the majority of the people think "the internet" is the WWW that was invented on the cube. I still have the original web browser somewhere...

    Next was so disruptive that it failed to sell and the Next box was abandoned.

    Why is it expected for only Apple to reinvent everything. What are these other companies doing? Absofrikking nothing.
  • Reply 196 of 223
    v5vv5v Posts: 1,357member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Smallwheels View Post


    [...] Apple is in the running but their slowness to incorporate the newest chips really lessens the chances that they will earn my money.



     


    Your expressions of personal preference are perfectly valid. Your sensitivity to price is reasonable. I don't understand the comment above, though. Apple dragged their feet painfully with USB3, but I can't think of another case in which they've been slow to adopt "the newest chips." Can you describe what you're referring to?

  • Reply 197 of 223
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    Your comments are very interesting to say the least. I have some counterpoints that I hope you will consider before buying new hardware.
    When the iPad came out I was excited about it. I played with one and that enthusiasm faded. I still liked it but the interface wasn't impressive enough for me to buy one. Since I'm not wealthy enough to just plop down money for the next expensive toy to come out I must consider the best bang for my buck.
    This is interesting because I find the iPad to be one of the most innovative and useful devices out there right now. It takes care of a good portion of my portable needs better than a laptop. And it just gets better. More importantly it has caused me to extend the life of my laptop beyond what I might have in the past.
    The latest versions of OSX aren't impressive to me. They definitely are better than the Windows 7&8 OSs but not more impressive than Open SUSE or Ubuntu.
    The trouble with Linux is that it looks good on the surface, lots of flash and twinkle but it just isn't that usable in user space. I came to the Mac in 2008 and had years of Linux experience prior to that so I have a good feel for the OS, thus I can say OS/X is a far better user experience. I've kept up to date too running Linux on a VM and it will leaves a lot to be desired and takes a lot of user involvement to keep running.
    I'm still using 10.5.8 because low and behold it just works great. I'm getting to the point where I must upgrade or my internet browsing will be limited. It's no fault of the machine that Chrome, Safari, and to some degree Firefox won't function optimally because certain things aren't being updated for my version. My hardware isn't compatible with anything above 10.6. So I'm considering getting a new machine.
    The ugly part of Linux is the need to update your entire installation every six months or so. The problem is this, if you want the latest tech you end up needing new libs and such and often end up with issues with compatibility. In a nut shell unless you are willing to stick with a distro with long term support you end up with multiple cycles of updates of OS re installations.
    It is because of my need to update the Mac Book that I've looked at the other OSs. This look has shown me that I don't need OSX. I like it but don't need it.
    To look at this in a finer way nobody needs a computer.
    I am a person that Apple will lose if their prices and hardware aren't competitive. It was a bit daunting to consider switching away from XP because it was all I knew. Once I made the switch life got better. Now that I know all that is entailed in switching from one OS to another, moving to Linux isn't daunting at all, especially since professional movie editing software is now available on Linux, and it's free!
    Apples laptops are not bad values at all. It is the desktop line up that sucks monkey balls.

    Beyond all of that you really should consider the modern concept of a Virtual Machine (VM). Just make sure you have an HD that is large enough at the time of purchase to support a couple of VM images beyond you Mac Install. Given that you buy a Mac with enough RAM to support the VMs you won't even notice a performance hit. Technically there might be some performance regressions but it is a given that the machine will be much faster than your old hardware. I'm actually puzzled by the fact that more people don't take advantage of VMs. Lets face it there will always be apps on other platforms that are just better for a certain use, there is no getting around that, but there is no reason today to buy hardware to specifically support those operating systems. In a nut shell the operating systems just become another app running in a window in Mac OS/X.
    I agree that Apple's real forte is in software. It is their software that draws people to the platform. It was my frustration with Windows that got me to switch. Linux software is the most innovative anywhere. It isn't always polished and pretty but it is definitely cutting edge. Not all software innovation comes from Apple. There are thousands of Linux developers out there doing great things.
    Not really! Think about this some of those innovative Linux developers also develop for Mac OS/X. If you tend to focus on specific niches I'm certain that you will find examples where developers are more innovative on either platform. However as a blanket statement your point here isn't valid.

    As a side note don't forget that under the hood Mac OS/X is UNIX. As such your selection of UNIX/LINUX type software is only a repository away. HomeBrew is one example of a great repository of free software for the Mac.
    Ubuntu and others are just as intuitive and easy to use as OSX once everything is set up. I find Ubuntu quicker than OSX in many tasks.
    You will spend countless hours though trying to keep a Linux install working. I've done multiple OS updates on my Mac now and hardly ever have compatibility issues with existing apps. No need to wipe the disk or rummaging through apps to find what is broken. Just try installing the latest distro release on top of an existing Linux install and see what happens. Since 2008 I've installed every Apple OS update without the need to start over, you can't do that with Linux.

    Frankly with Linux if you do want the latest in innovation you have to be willing to install the operating system fresh with each release you are interested in. I've yet to see a Linux distro where this isn't the case.
    When I go to buy my next machine I intend to see what Apple has to offer. If I can get better for less from HP or another company they will get my business. Apple is in the running but their slowness to incorporate the newest chips really lessens the chances that they will earn my money.
    I really don't understand this concept about the chips. Apples laptops are very advanced in their price range. The technology incorporated is generally bleeding edge. Some features such as their batteries are worth any additional expense you may pay. You often end up paying for that bottom of the barrel hardware through frequent battery replacements. You can ignore the battery issue but then you really have to consider the rest of the hardware, you don't really see sound competition for the Mac Book AIRs for example.

    There are lots of good reasons to look at other hardware and operating systems so don't get me wrong there as I still have operational Linux systems at home. But when it comes to a machine that I as a user will interact with often, that is as a personal PC, it is hard to beat Mac OS/X. It is just more reliable and trouble free. So I'm not trying to dissuade you from Linux, just that this is not a logical OR problem. You can benefit from Linux as you needed it right on your new Mac.

    By the way your comments about chips is important also as Apple does use the more advanced Intel CPUs with good support for VMs. It does make a difference as some processors have only marginal support for VMs and performance will suffer. Remember though that performance is relative as you new Mac is likely to be several times faster than what. You have now. It is a factor in bottom end hardware from other manufactures selling discounted laptops.
  • Reply 198 of 223
    v5vv5v Posts: 1,357member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post



    Yeah. You can't refute anything I said and you can't establish any credibility for your ridiculous assertions that you know how to build computers better than Apple, so you resort to simple name calling.



    Please go away and come back only if you come up with something intelligent to say.


     


    I have trouble making my exchanges with you beneficial to anyone, but I let my frustration get the better of me in my response to you. My remarks were vulgar and had nothing to do with the topic at hand. I apologize to you and anyone else reading the group for that.


     


    My exasperation doesn't excuse my response. In the future I'll just bow out rather than hurling insults.

  • Reply 199 of 223
    smallwheelssmallwheels Posts: 584member


    Wizard69 I understand many of your points. Virtual machines are a good idea on a fast computer.


     


    I started off wanting a Mini. Apple took so long to update it that I gave up and bought a Mac Book. I plug it into an external monitor. For a while I used a dual screen mode. Eventually I just enjoyed one larger new screen.


     


    As far as the iPads. I don't really need to be mobile with my computer thus having a touch interface on the go wasn't very compelling. My next machine will probably be a laptop because I will be living on the road in an RV in a year or so. It will be easier to hide it when I'm away from the vehicle or I can take it with me.


     


    Open SUSE 12.3 has now begun an ongoing update cycle. It will update forever. Ubuntu has started that too.


     


    My usage of computers is mostly for entertainment but I also make movies and presentations. I really want a computer with better graphics than the all-in-one graphics from Intel. My old computer with them just stinks at rendering images quickly. I won't ever be making feature films but putting together video advertisements for clients is more fun when I don't have to sit around waiting for frames to catch up with what I want to do next as I scroll through a video.


     


    In the past, and even now, Apple has been stingy with the discrete graphics chips. HP and others aren't so stingy at the same and even lower price points. Windows is irrelevant to me. I keep Vista around for Netflix just in case my Mac Book breaks. That is it. There is a Silverlight installation for Ubuntu that works but I haven't installed it.  Eventually I will.


     


    I don't want to buy a Mac Pro or an iMac, especially since Apple is putting 5400 rpm drives into iMacs. If I weren't planning to be in an RV all of the time I would really prefer a tower of some type that was much more capable than a Mini. The Mini's hardware is really much more expensive than the competition's. If you argue that the software of OSX has more standard features than Windows then it is a valid argument. When compared to Linux it isn't. If one can forgo iTunes then there really isn't a need to have Windows or OSX. Libre Office is catching up to Office. If one doesn't need the fancy features then Libre Office is enough. I'm in that boat.


     


    Apple hardware needs to grab me and say; "This is the best thing for your needs at the best price." So do HP and the others.

  • Reply 200 of 223
    philboogiephilboogie Posts: 7,675member
    ...I will be living on the road in an RV in a year or so. It will be easier to hide it when I'm away from the vehicle or I can take it with me.

    Hence your username?
Sign In or Register to comment.