What is wrong with Apple....
Hi!
I am both a Mac and Windows user and I like (and dislike) both platforms for certain reasons.
When I read the preview for Windows Vista Beta, it made me mad to see that Microsoft is using Apple as a cheap research and development solution. SO MUCH has been ripped off!
http://www.informationweek.com/story...8600513&pgno=1
It's not the features (like desktop searching) but the way the implement it. It's like that the search input form field that disturbs me, the fact they use the same icon and the same concept of placing this form field everywhere throughout the OS. http://www.activewin.com/articles/20...%20Results.jpg
They simply copied the folder structure of MacOS (user folders), the 3D desktop... there is nothing really innovative about Microsoft.
---------------------------------------------------------
Now what really annoys me about Apple is hardware.
I spend 1400 euros when the latest Powerbook revision came out, on my 12" laptop. My girlfiend now bought a 800 euro Aspire laptop, with PCI express X600 videocard and widescreen monitor. Now I think the Aspire looks ugly in comparision to my Powerbook, and I can see Apple hardware is more subtle and polished.
But, Apple rips us off on the hardware front feature wise. I get an ancient 1024x768 screen with a refresh update that is horrible, a pathetic videocard and a terrible bus speed.
That is why I am forced to talk my mother into this same kind of Aspire laptop because spending twice as much money on Apple (Imac G5) in comparision to Acer is not acceptable.
And I prefer to see her working with an, easier to use, Mac.
Apple, get your act together, and release a PCI express Intel based laptop with decent specs! I feel ripped off!
I am both a Mac and Windows user and I like (and dislike) both platforms for certain reasons.
When I read the preview for Windows Vista Beta, it made me mad to see that Microsoft is using Apple as a cheap research and development solution. SO MUCH has been ripped off!
http://www.informationweek.com/story...8600513&pgno=1
It's not the features (like desktop searching) but the way the implement it. It's like that the search input form field that disturbs me, the fact they use the same icon and the same concept of placing this form field everywhere throughout the OS. http://www.activewin.com/articles/20...%20Results.jpg
They simply copied the folder structure of MacOS (user folders), the 3D desktop... there is nothing really innovative about Microsoft.
---------------------------------------------------------
Now what really annoys me about Apple is hardware.
I spend 1400 euros when the latest Powerbook revision came out, on my 12" laptop. My girlfiend now bought a 800 euro Aspire laptop, with PCI express X600 videocard and widescreen monitor. Now I think the Aspire looks ugly in comparision to my Powerbook, and I can see Apple hardware is more subtle and polished.
But, Apple rips us off on the hardware front feature wise. I get an ancient 1024x768 screen with a refresh update that is horrible, a pathetic videocard and a terrible bus speed.
That is why I am forced to talk my mother into this same kind of Aspire laptop because spending twice as much money on Apple (Imac G5) in comparision to Acer is not acceptable.
And I prefer to see her working with an, easier to use, Mac.
Apple, get your act together, and release a PCI express Intel based laptop with decent specs! I feel ripped off!
Comments
If you haven't figured it out, I'm making fun. You bought the mac, so apparently you found it to be worth the price. I'm not sure what the commotion is about. If you actually think your mom gives a rats-ass about specs, then that's a new one for me.
Lastly, Apple won't release an intel powerbook before the components exist. If you posted this 9 months from now, it might not seem so futile.
If you just want something to move a pointer around the screen for as little money as possible, buy an Acer. If you want something that is quality, buy an Apple.
Why didn't they ship the Imac with a ATI 9800 instead of a 9600? The performance difference is huge, and for the costs of these Imacs....why not?
And, Imacs have the best value currently, but the Powerbooks...the Minimac...Powermac....eyebrowses raise.
Originally posted by Anders
OT: Is "Glass" nothing but half opaque menu bar? Does that really add anything?
No. Nothing. It's just there fot the sake of it. That's the difference between Apple and M$. Apple uses things elegantly and where necessary (even when it's eye candy), M$ because 'it can be done' without having a f****ng clue. They're like those big, brutal neighbours with a lot of money but no taste.
Originally posted by dacloo
. . ."Crying"? Nope. I'm saying that Apple easily could ship their products with more power. . .
Maybe one day you'll end up working in the high-tech industry, and you'll be able to look back at this and realize how silly your claims are. It takes time to design hardware. The PC-Intel market segment has the advantage that most OEM companies make reference designs for connecting their products to x86 hardware. This is not so for PPC hardware.
Just hold your horses for a year. . . . Sheesh.
Why didn't they ship the Imac with a ATI 9800 instead of a 9600? The performance difference is huge,
What is the performance difference between the 9600 and the 9800 on the iMac G5 motherboard? I'm curious.
It's just as easy as to add a 9800 as an 9600...
Check out Barefeats to see the difference.
Originally posted by dacloo
Apple uses standard hardware products from other companies, so I don't see why "it takes time"...okay, it does take time to implement it, but they do not have to develop a videocard; ATI and NVIDIA do.
It's just as easy as to add a 9800 as an 9600...
Check out Barefeats to see the difference.
Apple has to write the drivers and package it into a pin-package that talks with PCI/AGP/whatever. Granted, the video card manufacturer does most of the work as far as the latter is concerned, but the drivers are a big deal. So are things that aren't immediately obvious to people who don't design electronics hardware: voltages, amperages, heat output, and outline dimensions. That is, the 9800 no-doubt dissipates more power than the 9600 and has a larger outline. The iMac board may not have the ability to provide the amounts of current and the voltages the 9800 needs, and it may not have the capacity to dissipate the extra heat.
From a packaging point of view, iMacs and powerbooks are very-much embedded devices. They have limitations based on real-world engineering and not just computer engineering. Just ask yourself this question: if it were easy for Apple to implement the 9800, don't you think they would have done it by now? Keep in mind that there isn't anything in the PC world with the iMac's form factor, nor is there anything quite like the powerbook. ultra-thin PC laptops don't have great graphics chipsets. The ones that do (like the one in front of me) are noisy, big, and belch out a ton on hot air through an aggressive side-vent. It's enough heat to keep my coffee warm.
Originally posted by dacloo
That is why I am forced to talk my mother into this same kind of Aspire laptop because spending twice as much money on Apple (Imac G5) in comparision to Acer is not acceptable.
And I prefer to see her working with an, easier to use, Mac.
most retarded logic ever.
congratulations
Originally posted by dacloo
That is why I am forced to talk my mother into this same kind of Aspire laptop because spending twice as much money on Apple (Imac G5) in comparision to Acer is not acceptable.
And I prefer to see her working with an, easier to use, Mac.
The Acer Aspire 17-inch at NewEgg:
- almost 2 inches thick
- 9.9 pounds
- ONE HOUR battery life
- $1599.00 US
Apple iMac 17-inch 2.0 gHz: $1499.00 US
Twice as much money?
Splinemodel: Thanks for a normal and thoughtful answer.
Aspire notebooks look and feel clumsy, but try to explain that to 55 year olds who are not very experienced with computers, and when the nearest Apple store is far and far away....
Yes, Apple hardware designs are much better, but they always lag behind so much on certain aspects. PCI express, video cards... When I opened the Powerbook package, I really got the feeling to have bought something special, something that was put together with love and dedication. 12", a slick design and a Geforce 5200FX is amazing, even when the card is very slow compared for nowadays. Don't get me wrong - I love it.
Originally posted by dacloo
Bronxite: You may find that "retarded", but my mom and dad do not understand what you may understand about hardware and software. They only see the difference in price, and relatives say: "why on Earth would you spend twice as much money on that Apple, if the Aspire has X and Y?".
Splinemodel: Thanks for a normal and thoughtful answer.
Aspire notebooks look and feel clumsy, but try to explain that to 55 year olds who are not very experienced with computers, and when the nearest Apple store is far and far away....
Yes, Apple hardware designs are much better, but they always lag behind so much on certain aspects. PCI express, video cards... When I opened the Powerbook package, I really got the feeling to have bought something special, something that was put together with love and dedication. 12", a slick design and a Geforce 5200FX is amazing, even when the card is very slow compared for nowadays. Don't get me wrong - I love it.
frankly i dont believe your parents even know what PCI express and a graphics card is and i tend to think they dont even care.
what i really think is that you are creating stupid arguments and don't put much thought into things.
not a personal attack, just making conclusions from your posts
Originally posted by dacloo
Hi!
I am both a Mac and Windows user and I like (and dislike) both platforms for certain reasons.
When I read the preview for Windows Vista Beta, it made me mad to see that Microsoft is using Apple as a cheap research and development solution. SO MUCH has been ripped off!
http://www.informationweek.com/story...8600513&pgno=1
It's not the features (like desktop searching) but the way the implement it. It's like that the search input form field that disturbs me, the fact they use the same icon and the same concept of placing this form field everywhere throughout the OS. http://www.activewin.com/articles/20...%20Results.jpg
They simply copied the folder structure of MacOS (user folders), the 3D desktop... there is nothing really innovative about Microsoft.
---------------------------------------------------------
Now what really annoys me about Apple is hardware.
I spend 1400 euros when the latest Powerbook revision came out, on my 12" laptop. My girlfiend now bought a 800 euro Aspire laptop, with PCI express X600 videocard and widescreen monitor. Now I think the Aspire looks ugly in comparision to my Powerbook, and I can see Apple hardware is more subtle and polished.
But, Apple rips us off on the hardware front feature wise. I get an ancient 1024x768 screen with a refresh update that is horrible, a pathetic videocard and a terrible bus speed.
That is why I am forced to talk my mother into this same kind of Aspire laptop because spending twice as much money on Apple (Imac G5) in comparision to Acer is not acceptable.
And I prefer to see her working with an, easier to use, Mac.
Apple, get your act together, and release a PCI express Intel based laptop with decent specs! I feel ripped off!
Or just install Mac OS X on that an Aspire. Which, come 2006, will be even more feasible than it is now.
Captain Obvious says his job is done here.
Yes, they could put a 9800 in the iMac. They could put a 9600 in the Mac Mini. And they could certainly do better than a 9650 in a $3000 PowerMac.
The real answer is profit margin. Apple's is much higher than the industry average, and they like it that way.
Originally posted by nowayout11
Apple has been short-arming RAM and graphic cards for a long time. Arguments about heat, power requirements, "Apple's not a game machine", etc. are apologist reasonings much of the time.
Yes, they could put a 9800 in the iMac. They could put a 9600 in the Mac Mini. And they could certainly do better than a 9650 in a $3000 PowerMac.
The real answer is profit margin. Apple's is much higher than the industry average, and they like it that way.
Apologists?
Does anyone complain about crippling a computer when Dell sells a Celeron with integrated graphics? No, its just passed off as a low price point computer. Why should anyone treat Apple any different. Thats no apologism, that's pointing out hypocricy.
Business wise there are two ways to make money, low volume, higher margin/price -- or low margin/price, very high volume. The middle ground never survives for long. So either vote with your pocketbook and move on, or be happy to get what you pay for. Because a large part of what you are paying for are the differences that are only available from a lower volume product.
Originally posted by Bronxite
what i really think is that you are creating stupid arguments and don't put much thought into things.
yep
Originally posted by Hiro
Apologists?
Does anyone complain about crippling a computer when Dell sells a Celeron with integrated graphics? No, its just passed off as a low price point computer. Why should anyone treat Apple any different. Thats no apologism, that's pointing out hypocricy.
I don't understand your connection. If Dell uses cheap parts, they price the system cheap. Apple didn't target the value market until the Mini. Their $3000 system has a 9650 in it. And the GeForce 5200 issue certainly doesn't need to be rehashed again.
Profit. Margin.