[quote]OS and design are all a matter of personal taste.<hr></blockquote>
Aesthetics wouldn't mean anything if design were all a matter of personal taste. That PC will never win any meaningful design awards. The problem with my argument for aesthetics is people's lack of taste.
So that's what's important to you guys: style. You like the iMac because of it's style.
Amazing.
So why did you guys use Macs back when they were all beige boxes?
Face it, Apple hardware sucks. The reason we all use Macs is because of OS X and other Apple software. But the problem is that most Wintel users haven't used a Mac and thus don't know why they are better. All they know is hardware specs, and Apple loses on those. Unless Apple can offer a truly compelling reason to buy their hardware, they will forever remain a niche company.
You know I just feel dirty defending any aspect of Apple hardware right now, but I think the design philosophies are evident between the two.
If any design went into that PC thing it probably went like this, "We got this flat screen, make it look cool."
The iMac design conference went something like this, "We've got this flat screen, make it work"
The results are what you see before you. The iMac is strong because it's 'engineered' to solve problems -- space and ergonomics primarily. The PC looks like it does, because some guy just tried to make it look 'cool'
Personally, I think the iMac looks great, but whatever you may think of it's looks, you can't deny that it is a strong space/ergo efficient design. Design! The PC in question is, for lack of a better word, 'styled.' I think there's a difference there. And it doesn't even look good to boot.
Same goes for the iPod, the El Capitan case, ADC... Their industrial design is top notch. There are a few 'stylistic' quirks that would do better to give way to 'design' solutions -- Front facing notebook drives, slot load drives in general, the lack of force eject pin access, mainly. But in general you can't beat Apple's design for ease and efficiency.
<strong>So that's what's important to you guys: style. You like the iMac because of it's style.
Amazing.
So why did you guys use Macs back when they were all beige boxes?
Face it, Apple hardware sucks. The reason we all use Macs is because of OS X and other Apple software. But the problem is that most Wintel users haven't used a Mac and thus don't know why they are better. All they know is hardware specs, and Apple loses on those. Unless Apple can offer a truly compelling reason to buy their hardware, they will forever remain a niche company.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I use my mac because I love the OS, I hate the alternatives, I love the available software, I love the design, my G4 is quite easy to get into.
When will you get the point JD? The reason we are using macs is because we realized that a bigger number doesn't mean a better computer.
We know that PC's are cheaper. We know that they are probably faster. That doesn't mean i'm gonna buy the rice rocket over the cadillac.
I like to be comfortable when I use my computer. I like it to handle well. I like it to have a good resell value. I like it to not break down because it was built with all the cheapest parts with the only intrest being the speed.
</car analogy>
Sure speed is important, but for someone who spends as much time reading and posting to a forum like this as you do, you should know that you would be able to browse the net just as fast on a G3 333
<strong>So that's what's important to you guys: style. You like the iMac because of it's style.</strong>
That's a part of it!
<strong>So why did you guys use Macs back when they were all beige boxes?</strong>
Because, in case you aren't aware, they were actually faster than any Wintel machine. Period!
<strong>Face it, Apple hardware sucks. The reason we all use Macs is because of OS X and other Apple software.</strong>
And that's why forums like these go rampant when a Macworld nears, eh? Get a life. They make a lot more money with software sales, but their hardware gets our balls bouncing.
Comments
Aesthetics wouldn't mean anything if design were all a matter of personal taste. That PC will never win any meaningful design awards. The problem with my argument for aesthetics is people's lack of taste.
<strong>
Now back to your regularly scheduled JYD thread.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Dare I say... best post ever?
Amazing.
So why did you guys use Macs back when they were all beige boxes?
Face it, Apple hardware sucks. The reason we all use Macs is because of OS X and other Apple software. But the problem is that most Wintel users haven't used a Mac and thus don't know why they are better. All they know is hardware specs, and Apple loses on those. Unless Apple can offer a truly compelling reason to buy their hardware, they will forever remain a niche company.
<strong>
Dare I say... best post ever?</strong><hr></blockquote>
You may.
And I'll agree.
If any design went into that PC thing it probably went like this, "We got this flat screen, make it look cool."
The iMac design conference went something like this, "We've got this flat screen, make it work"
The results are what you see before you. The iMac is strong because it's 'engineered' to solve problems -- space and ergonomics primarily. The PC looks like it does, because some guy just tried to make it look 'cool'
Personally, I think the iMac looks great, but whatever you may think of it's looks, you can't deny that it is a strong space/ergo efficient design. Design! The PC in question is, for lack of a better word, 'styled.' I think there's a difference there. And it doesn't even look good to boot.
Same goes for the iPod, the El Capitan case, ADC... Their industrial design is top notch. There are a few 'stylistic' quirks that would do better to give way to 'design' solutions -- Front facing notebook drives, slot load drives in general, the lack of force eject pin access, mainly. But in general you can't beat Apple's design for ease and efficiency.
<strong>So that's what's important to you guys: style. You like the iMac because of it's style.
Amazing.
So why did you guys use Macs back when they were all beige boxes?
Face it, Apple hardware sucks. The reason we all use Macs is because of OS X and other Apple software. But the problem is that most Wintel users haven't used a Mac and thus don't know why they are better. All they know is hardware specs, and Apple loses on those. Unless Apple can offer a truly compelling reason to buy their hardware, they will forever remain a niche company.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I use my mac because I love the OS, I hate the alternatives, I love the available software, I love the design, my G4 is quite easy to get into.
When will you get the point JD? The reason we are using macs is because we realized that a bigger number doesn't mean a better computer.
We know that PC's are cheaper. We know that they are probably faster. That doesn't mean i'm gonna buy the rice rocket over the cadillac.
I like to be comfortable when I use my computer. I like it to handle well. I like it to have a good resell value. I like it to not break down because it was built with all the cheapest parts with the only intrest being the speed.
</car analogy>
Sure speed is important, but for someone who spends as much time reading and posting to a forum like this as you do, you should know that you would be able to browse the net just as fast on a G3 333
[ 07-25-2002: Message edited by: Eupfhoria ]</p>
<strong>So that's what's important to you guys: style. You like the iMac because of it's style.</strong>
That's a part of it!
<strong>So why did you guys use Macs back when they were all beige boxes?</strong>
Because, in case you aren't aware, they were actually faster than any Wintel machine. Period!
<strong>Face it, Apple hardware sucks. The reason we all use Macs is because of OS X and other Apple software.</strong>
And that's why forums like these go rampant when a Macworld nears, eh? Get a life. They make a lot more money with software sales, but their hardware gets our balls bouncing.
<img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />
...Just stating it as it is!
Off to General Discussion....