Apple bashing (Mac Users Unite!)

ast3r3x

I know there have been 888 threads before like this but since i'm a retard and cant find them (actually i couldn't get the search to work) so I need some ammo on why macs are better then PC's. My teacher asked 'why anyone would buy a mac' and rather then debate with him (considering the class was cheering) i'd rather be able to slam down a sheet of facts and say...this is why!



The faster the better because I'd like to do it 2morrow...but I suppose I can wait till wed.



Also please make them facts, not opinionated, like how cool os x looks (not that it doesnt look so amazing you want to lick it but because i want cold hard facts you cant dispute)

darren smith

Check out this <a href="http://forums.appleinsider.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=2&t=001406"; target="_blank">thread</a> for starters.

matsu

At this point Apple isn't worth defending publicly. They're still great computers if someone else is footing the bill, but they're doing a lot of damage to themselves with their pricing and specifications.

hmurchison

[quote]Originally posted by Matsu:

<strong>At this point Apple isn't worth defending publicly. They're still great computers if someone else is footing the bill, but they're doing a lot of damage to themselves with their pricing and specifications.</strong><hr></blockquote>





<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />

mcq

Biggest things I'd say is the iApps, along with fewer (read: next to none) viruses, less spyware and activation schemes, graphics are awesome, and free development tools.

tigerwoods99

Funny thing is he's right.

brianmacos

One thing you can tell him if he starts ripping on Macs again is to go ok an early leave for the day so he can go format his PC before it dies.

power apple

[quote]Originally posted by Matsu:

<strong>At this point Apple isn't worth defending publicly. They're still great computers if someone else is footing the bill, but they're doing a lot of damage to themselves with their pricing and specifications.</strong><hr></blockquote>



Shut up Matsu! (And others) The only thing that lacks on a mac today is raw processor speed, and that's NOT the fault of Apple. They are doing everything they can. take those iMac/Gateway comparisons and imagine the mac with double (or triple )the clock speed. Then there would be no comparison at all. (btw, I'm sure the iMac will get speed bumped very soon, but of course not enough)



regarding pricing, they are trying to raise the prices (and especially volume) on software (Mac OS X, .mac etc.) to compensate for lower gross margin on hardware.



Apple is a VERY well run company, don't think they are not doing their best. Sure they make mistakes (the 100$ iMac price jump this spring was a big mistake IMO ). However, some of the things that mac users initially consider mistakes are actually benifits in the long run (.mac is one example)



So quit the whining, it won't change anything. And if you have to whine, direct it to Motorola (or IBM - I don't know why everybody always talks so fondly of IBM's PPC, they are not doing much better on the desktop than MOT)



[ 08-27-2002: Message edited by: Power Apple ]</p>

matsu

Actually the long term trend is that Apple VERY SLOWLY continues to lose market-share. A few quarters of growth aside. They may be very well run, and they may even get millions of users but the size of the platform's installed base is very important. Once it shrinks past a certain point, the company you know will cease to exist as a consumer platform. You already see the effects of smaller market-share on pricing. ALL computers will become commodities whether Apple wants it or not. They will need to formulate that kind of pricing if they want to survive, or they will become vendors of exclusively high-end machines (that no consumer and most professionals would not be able to buy) They have about 10-12 years with which to do this, trust me.

capt. obvious

[quote]Originally posted by Matsu:

<strong>Actually the long term trend is that Apple VERY SLOWLY continues to lose market-share. A few quarters of growth aside. They may be very well run, and they may even get millions of users but the size of the platform's installed base is very important.</strong><hr></blockquote>



Anyone know where to find details about HOW "market share" is figured? Are they counting CPUs? Windows licenses? Once a 'computer' is chalked up to a particular platform, does it EVER go out of service - retired as a market share element?



Do all those junked-PC mountains woven into landfills around the world still count as market-share/installed-base? Do the PCs that replaced them count toward market share, too?



I wonder about this because I think it would be really easy to skew these numbers, especially if boosterism adds its weight to help make the "industry outlook" (ie, wintel) look rosy.



IIf anyone here can break it down for us, please do!





PS - Matsu: lighten up, dude - you gonna hurt yourself you go on this way....

hmurchison

PC's marketshare is highly inflated. Many old and decrepit DOS boxes are counted because loosely DOS can be defined as a MS OS. There are legions of factories, plants etc still running machines with 3.1 on them.



I always laugh when I hear someone talk about %95 marketshare because it's very foolish to presume that even a third of these machines are even Pentium class computers.



Matsu- it Apple has 10-12 years we're looking VERY good. That's ages in computer years. I believe that Apple has the infrastructure to finally grab marketshare.



1. Xserve- Apple has never had decent Server HW other than a powerful Desktop running ASIP



2. Finally they have a robust OS that can scale from Grannies Office to the Power Users with ease.



3. Apple finally realizes that breaking into the Corporate market is going to be a slow process.



The groundwork is laid for Apple to succeed. Don't know about you but right now I'd rather sell one box and make 2.5 times the profit of a gutted PC that requires almost 3 computer sales.

agent69

To me, the advantages of the Mac are the integration of hardware and software. Since Apple controls both, it can do things that are difficult to do in the PC world. It also happens to be the only other commercial (consumer) OS available and everyone should be glad to have a choice, regardless of preference.



Personally, I really think that it comes down to what you like and what you want to do. Each platform has its benefits.



As for speed, Mac systems are fast enough for most things. But the constant hand wringing over speed shows just how important clock speed is in marketing.



Quite frankly, it would be better for Apple (for marketing purposed) to have a 3Ghz inefficient CPU in their computers than it would be to have a slower CPU that is more efficient for its clock speed.

matsu

Let's say this. Key pieces for Apple success are in place, but it's going to be a game of brinksmanship (whether they survive as a consumer box maker). The home computer will become a commodity, that is unavoidable. Apple is having trouble making a 999 computer. In 10 years time 999 will describe a fairly high-end box, with the low end at around 299. But unlike today's low end, which is great for communication and Office work, the low end machines of 2012 will pull off photo-realistic rendering, 3-d modelling, and video-editing quite well. Apple has/'will have' the best software for all this, but if it's tied to too expensive hardware, they won't sell any of it. Computers depreciate far too quickly for consumers to want to invest similar money to what they spend today. Apple will not successfully hold this trend at bay forever.



Pricing will claim a lot of victims and as far as I'm concerned that's good. Too much technology is much too expensive, not just Apple's.