Press weren't the only ones. Business who depend on Windows had little faith in Vista. I'm sure MS has made moves to improve Vista, but that has not seemed to instill much confidence.
No one is forced to buy a Mac. Apple has to compete in an open market with everyone else. If the loyal fan base felt gouged they are free to go elsewhere.
Vista fair enough, I think the real problem wasn't that Vista is/was bad to use, just that it didn't give any tangible benefit at the user end to justify the expense and hassle. I'm sure 7 will correct that.
The loyal fanbase DOES feel gouged..read these boards and MR...but still they buy!!
I think an irrational fear of MS does it.
Me? I'm just happy saving the money and having fun.
Teh reflective screens are part of it. I saw a woman in the Apple store who was looking at the iMacs with her significant other, and she pointed out how bad the reflections were. Admittedly that's just one example, but it confirmed to me that I was not the only one noticing it.
Also, what happened to the Mac being the simple computer to use that shows the friendly face when you boot it up? Programs such as iTunes now have so many features you don't know where to start. 3D docks and visual overload in general.
I'm fine with that. In certain circumstances it's also called trolling.
Quote:
so you went searching for my posts...on other sites.....
I was just reading a thread over there.... and there you were..... same spelling.... same MO.
I just find it curious, that now you have allegedly sold all your Apple gear, you like hanging around on Mac forums constantly repeating your 'opinion' to people that aren't really very interested.
What I am saying is that at no time has Apple ever produced a line of computers, were every computer has worked 100% perfectly 100% of the time. No electronics company holds that record. Their have always been some issue with some line of computer at one point or another.
For the past few years Apple has ranked high in consumer satisfaction with respect to the use of their products.
I find it difficult to believe that Apple gave you 6 replacements. Especially when most of the issues you list are very simple to repair. I've never heard of Apple replacing a whole machine because of a couple of burned out pixels.
You find it hard to believe.
If I scan my receipts for exchange will you say sorry?
whats your email addy?
If a computer is new and is not acceptable, I get it replaced. Period.
Whether Apple, HP or Dell. Although, so far Apple has been the only one with problems for me.
I will say this... I do love the OS. I can't say the same for the hardware. Sorry
However it is superior on hardware that costs a helluva lot more.
95% of Windows problems come from cheap hardware.
People compare a $500 Dell to $1300 Mac.....its not fair.
Apple have carefully constructed and marketed an image which is patently untrue.
If Mr Joe Public was to spend 'mac type' money on a Vista PC he would have arguably less problems. A more powerful computer with greater compatibility and a happy life.!
Well said.
I have owned a $500 computer from Compaq with Vista SP1 - no issues.
A Dell at $1500 - with XP then Vista - minor issues.
iMac 2.8GHz + 3.06 GHz = horrible hardware issues + time machine errors. Replaced the drive twice... it was OS 10.5.5
Hopefully 10.5.6 will iron it out.
In the end, when I spend 2300$ on a computer, I expect it to be a BOSE or BMW not a FORD!
The reality is everyone finds reasons to whine about it. The iMac design as wonderful a design it is (to me personally) always seemed to be a love-it-or-hate-it with people. They were either too white, had a big chin, display was too matte, or glossy, or black/aluminum is horrible... whatever.
I think the design is wonderful. Many friends (all different age groups) that have also bought one think it looks great too. Does that invalidate your claim? It certainly does not. However you do seem place a greater importance on its physical appearance than most people do. Besides, quality and durability is a big factor too and I think the iMac excels where other makers fail. Aluminum is durable and a great heat-sink. The glass display makes cleaning almost effortless and will not scratch.
Instead of criticizing the cosmetic appearance, by all means "Mr. Designer", offer some other kind of design/package/material/color-scheme that would fit your bill. There seems to be many "experts" here that spend an enormous amount of energy to derail a design but don't seem to have anything to offer to improve it.
I believe the current iMac is very "Mac-like". I don't know where you're coming from with that statement but from another post, I find it really hard to believe the current model could ever be mistaken for a Dell. Dell wishes I'm sure they could be mistaken for an Apple.
I look forward to the refresh soon. I'm waiting to see what they come up with!
</rant>
OK... I'm going to take back my assessment, and notably the "not Mac-like" comment.
Unfortunately, I have yet to see the new MacBooks und MBPs in person here in Germany. I will get the chance tomorrow. However, this morning I went to the gallery on Apple's page... and am forced to rescind my comment. Really a gorgeous piece of work and design! I am "concerned" about the glass displays, but from what I've read... and even commented upon... maybe they're not as bad as they are preconceived to be... or at the Apple Stores in the US due to the lighting.
Regardless... and on another tact, to a certain degree I could care less... because nothing else is available to use the Mac OS on. For me... that's the end of the discussion.
I've stated it before in previous posts, but again: no other OS offers the ease of use, low-maintenance, and hence productivity that OSX offers. With close to 100 colleagues that I work with over the year, we had less than a handful of issues. And those were attributed to Adobe products... and minor. In one of the companies I work for, they even bought iMacs for the secretaries to replace Dells. Only from what I've heard... they are all not only more productive... but totally "orgasmic" (as told to me by the Art Director to be working on such a machine every day.
So... am I always thrilled with the design choices, or tech-specs from Apple's line-up? No. Am I a fanboy of OSX? A definite YES! Do I whine? NEVER! Am I human and make rash judgements and mistakes sometimes? YES! Am I a big boy enough to reconsider, or say I made a mistake? ALWAYS!
Apple cannot market outdated and overpriced consumer computers to knowledgeable buyers in a recession market. Quad-core Windows desktops have been available for the last 2 years and selling $300 cheaper than dual-core iMacs. And the next wave has arrived with brand new Core i7 quad-core desktop computers, 20% to 30% more powerful than quad-core Penryns.
iMacs have neither quad-core Penryns or quad-core Core i7 desktop processors because Apple doesn't want to use desktop processors in its consumer desktop computers. And Apple doesn't want to build business desktop computers because it wouldn't be able to overcharge businesses by $300 to $500 for every office computer.
Did you ever wonder why Apple is still in business? It is becoming increasingly difficult to recommend Apple computers to knowledgeable buyers because there are no business desktop computers and consumer desktop iMacs are outdated and overpriced by at least $300.
That is fairy comment.
Apple's desktop line needs overhaul from top to bottom.
Apple's desktop line needs overhaul from top to bottom.
Lemon Bon Bon.
Pretty much.
I was home for the holidays, and bought my mom a new computer, a Dell at Best Buy, with a 2.66 GHz C2D, 4 GB, 640 GB, Intel GMA x3100 graphics, and Vista x64. It's been great so far for her, and it gives her tons of space for her photos on her new Nikon D60 and MP3s. Only $600. (She already had a new LCD). Vista has been just fine for me, and that was her first experience with it for her, and no complaints. But she needed a cheap PC to upgrade her old one that was failing after about 4-5 years, and Apple just priced themselves out of the search for us.
Cost as much as my Mini did last year, which is what Apple still charges for it now. But I also agree, the rest of their line is overpriced for what they offer; HW is cheap, especially RAM and HDs, and Apple still acts like this is still 10 years ago, and prices those parts accordingly.
I just got an Acer Aspire One, and for $350, it has 1 GB, 160 GB HD, and XP SP3. I even put Ubuntu 8.10 on it too, and it runs like a top. Small and pretty fast (less than 2.5 pounds). I'd put OSX on it too, if the Atheros wifi card worked in OSX.
Apple's desktop line needs overhaul from top to bottom.
Apple has always had much longer refresh cycles than the PC OEM's. Its likely Apple has its desktop refresh ready and just has to wait for MW in January. Perhaps is the reason they are tired of announcing new products on an artificial time line.
Quote:
Originally Posted by guinness
Pretty much.
But I also agree, the rest of their line is overpriced for what they offer; HW is cheap, especially RAM and HDs, and Apple still acts like this is still 10 years ago, and prices those parts accordingly.
Depends on the type of hardware. Older hardware can be cheap, newer hardware isn't necessarily cheap at all. A $600 PC from Best Buy isn't using the newest most expensive components.
It's easy to read this article and draw the wrong conclusions from the data. The thing to remember is that sales are not revenue or profit. Unit sales of Windows machines may well have gone up when Apple unit sales stayed flat. As Gruber pointed out Apple didn't have to put their computers on sale in order to move product. So what if Dell or HP or whoever sold more machines year to year if they had to resort to extreme %off sales. They axed their profit margin to near the Fed's lending rates while Apple had their rather paltry Black Friday sale and that's it. In the final analysis what's important to know and what wasn't reported is the margins on the machines sold, total revenue and finally, profits.
Apple has always had much longer refresh cycles than the PC OEM's. Its likely Apple has its desktop refresh ready and just has to wait for MW in January. Perhaps is the reason they are tired of announcing new products on an artificial time line.
Depends on the type of hardware. Older hardware can be cheap, newer hardware isn't necessarily cheap at all. A $600 PC from Best Buy isn't using the newest most expensive components.
True. but that $600 Dell is using a E7300 C2D, which is 45nm, 3 MB L2 cache. and 1066 FSB. The RAM is 800 MHz DDR2 if I remember correctly, but for what my mom uses her computer for, it doesn't matter that much, but then again, most people that are buying that $1200 iMac aren't that computer savy either - they just need something that browses the web, e-mail, photos and music. I'll always take more, slightly slower RAM over less, faster RAM anyway.
And that iMac isn't using the most expensive components either, it's 20" panel is not very good at all. My 20" 1680x1050 widescreen is just a cheap Acer (sub-$200), and it has a better contrast ratio than the 20" in the low-end iMac. The 24" is a completely different animal, but it is using a good IPS panel.
The fact remains that RAM and HD's are cheap, even DDR3 isn't expensive, I just think most Apple users are used to paying a premium anyway, because they think that Apple always offers the very best, but when you're used to shopping around or building PC's, you know how much components usually are. It'd be like me building a PC through parts bought from Best Buy; yeah, I could probably do it, but there is a high BB markup.
So I'm a mini fan also, but I think people like towers. Also, a lot of retail chains in the US (BB) that carry Apple do not have any minis on display ever. When people see cheap PCs and don't care as much about PC v. Mac, they don't seem likely to pay the iMac premium. Don't get me wrong; it's not about the value of the iMac; it's about the absolute price. Additionally, the entire lineup in my opinion needs to be more aggressively refreshed. It's a rapidly changing industry, etc.
I was in BB a few days ago and not a Mini in sight. While I was playing with an iMac a couple were looking at hardware and she showed him a MBP 15" and he blurted out "You could buy 2 computers for that price!" To which she said "This is a BETTER 'puter Honey, I use one at work..."
Apparently, it was his birthday and she was buying. I didn't stick around to see who got the win, but my guess is that it went to some windoze box. In listening to the conversation though, he was oblivious to the fact that you could run MS Office on a Mac, let alone windows...\
Point being, Apple needs to massage the entry fee a bit further south and change perceptions, many people are put off by the high sticker and are looking through the dollar sign glasses - including me, but even so, I'll never go back to the dark side...
Its true that at this point the iMac's are not offering the best value. Its because they are at the end of a long refresh cycle. Many people know this and is why they are not buying them right now.
The next update will have them with newer and better components.
Quote:
Originally Posted by guinness
The fact remains that RAM and HD's are cheap, even DDR3 isn't expensive, I just think most Apple users are used to paying a premium anyway, because they think that Apple always offers the very best, but when you're used to shopping around or building PC's, you know how much components usually are. It'd be like me building a PC through parts bought from Best Buy; yeah, I could probably do it, but there is a high BB markup.
Its true that at this point the iMac's are not offering the best value. Its because they are at the end of a long refresh cycle. Many people know this and is why they are not buying them right now.
The next update will have them with newer and better components.
yes I agree....but it'll still be far too expensive for the 80%+ of users who just surf, email, photos etc.
truth is..... still the the sensible decision for most people is to buy a Vista box and keep the $$$$ in their pockets.
Comments
Press weren't the only ones. Business who depend on Windows had little faith in Vista. I'm sure MS has made moves to improve Vista, but that has not seemed to instill much confidence.
No one is forced to buy a Mac. Apple has to compete in an open market with everyone else. If the loyal fan base felt gouged they are free to go elsewhere.
Vista fair enough, I think the real problem wasn't that Vista is/was bad to use, just that it didn't give any tangible benefit at the user end to justify the expense and hassle. I'm sure 7 will correct that.
The loyal fanbase DOES feel gouged..read these boards and MR...but still they buy!!
I think an irrational fear of MS does it.
Me? I'm just happy saving the money and having fun.
The loyal fanbase DOES feel gouged..read these boards and MR...but still they buy!! I think an irrational fear of MS does it.
Irrational is right, they are only gouging themselves.
Me? I'm just happy saving the money and having fun.
That's what its all about.
Irrational is right, they are only gouging themselves.
That's what its all about.
Cool!
Also, what happened to the Mac being the simple computer to use that shows the friendly face when you boot it up? Programs such as iTunes now have so many features you don't know where to start. 3D docks and visual overload in general.
Its called 'free will' and expressing an opinion.
I'm fine with that. In certain circumstances it's also called trolling.
so you went searching for my posts...on other sites.....
I was just reading a thread over there.... and there you were..... same spelling.... same MO.
I just find it curious, that now you have allegedly sold all your Apple gear, you like hanging around on Mac forums constantly repeating your 'opinion' to people that aren't really very interested.
But as you say... your 'havin' fun'.
What I am saying is that at no time has Apple ever produced a line of computers, were every computer has worked 100% perfectly 100% of the time. No electronics company holds that record. Their have always been some issue with some line of computer at one point or another.
For the past few years Apple has ranked high in consumer satisfaction with respect to the use of their products.
I find it difficult to believe that Apple gave you 6 replacements. Especially when most of the issues you list are very simple to repair. I've never heard of Apple replacing a whole machine because of a couple of burned out pixels.
You find it hard to believe.
If I scan my receipts for exchange will you say sorry?
whats your email addy?
If a computer is new and is not acceptable, I get it replaced. Period.
Whether Apple, HP or Dell. Although, so far Apple has been the only one with problems for me.
I will say this... I do love the OS. I can't say the same for the hardware. Sorry
not true... OSX is superior.
However it is superior on hardware that costs a helluva lot more.
95% of Windows problems come from cheap hardware.
People compare a $500 Dell to $1300 Mac.....its not fair.
Apple have carefully constructed and marketed an image which is patently untrue.
If Mr Joe Public was to spend 'mac type' money on a Vista PC he would have arguably less problems. A more powerful computer with greater compatibility and a happy life.!
Well said.
I have owned a $500 computer from Compaq with Vista SP1 - no issues.
A Dell at $1500 - with XP then Vista - minor issues.
iMac 2.8GHz + 3.06 GHz = horrible hardware issues + time machine errors. Replaced the drive twice... it was OS 10.5.5
Hopefully 10.5.6 will iron it out.
In the end, when I spend 2300$ on a computer, I expect it to be a BOSE or BMW not a FORD!
If this is true you've had some unusually bad luck. Most people have not had that numerous of issues.
EDIT: Actually you do get to return a new machine within 14 days of purchase.
You find it hard to believe.
If I scan my receipts for exchange will you say sorry?
whats your email addy?
If a computer is new and is not acceptable, I get it replaced. Period.
Whether Apple, HP or Dell. Although, so far Apple has been the only one with problems for me.
I will say this... I do love the OS. I can't say the same for the hardware. Sorry
The reality is everyone finds reasons to whine about it. The iMac design as wonderful a design it is (to me personally) always seemed to be a love-it-or-hate-it with people. They were either too white, had a big chin, display was too matte, or glossy, or black/aluminum is horrible... whatever.
I think the design is wonderful. Many friends (all different age groups) that have also bought one think it looks great too. Does that invalidate your claim? It certainly does not. However you do seem place a greater importance on its physical appearance than most people do. Besides, quality and durability is a big factor too and I think the iMac excels where other makers fail. Aluminum is durable and a great heat-sink. The glass display makes cleaning almost effortless and will not scratch.
Instead of criticizing the cosmetic appearance, by all means "Mr. Designer", offer some other kind of design/package/material/color-scheme that would fit your bill. There seems to be many "experts" here that spend an enormous amount of energy to derail a design but don't seem to have anything to offer to improve it.
I believe the current iMac is very "Mac-like". I don't know where you're coming from with that statement but from another post, I find it really hard to believe the current model could ever be mistaken for a Dell. Dell wishes I'm sure they could be mistaken for an Apple.
I look forward to the refresh soon. I'm waiting to see what they come up with!
</rant>
OK... I'm going to take back my assessment, and notably the "not Mac-like" comment.
Unfortunately, I have yet to see the new MacBooks und MBPs in person here in Germany. I will get the chance tomorrow. However, this morning I went to the gallery on Apple's page... and am forced to rescind my comment. Really a gorgeous piece of work and design! I am "concerned" about the glass displays, but from what I've read... and even commented upon... maybe they're not as bad as they are preconceived to be... or at the Apple Stores in the US due to the lighting.
Regardless... and on another tact, to a certain degree I could care less... because nothing else is available to use the Mac OS on. For me... that's the end of the discussion.
I've stated it before in previous posts, but again: no other OS offers the ease of use, low-maintenance, and hence productivity that OSX offers. With close to 100 colleagues that I work with over the year, we had less than a handful of issues. And those were attributed to Adobe products... and minor. In one of the companies I work for, they even bought iMacs for the secretaries to replace Dells. Only from what I've heard... they are all not only more productive... but totally "orgasmic" (as told to me by the Art Director
So... am I always thrilled with the design choices, or tech-specs from Apple's line-up? No. Am I a fanboy of OSX? A definite YES! Do I whine? NEVER! Am I human and make rash judgements and mistakes sometimes? YES! Am I a big boy enough to reconsider, or say I made a mistake? ALWAYS!
Apple cannot market outdated and overpriced consumer computers to knowledgeable buyers in a recession market. Quad-core Windows desktops have been available for the last 2 years and selling $300 cheaper than dual-core iMacs. And the next wave has arrived with brand new Core i7 quad-core desktop computers, 20% to 30% more powerful than quad-core Penryns.
iMacs have neither quad-core Penryns or quad-core Core i7 desktop processors because Apple doesn't want to use desktop processors in its consumer desktop computers. And Apple doesn't want to build business desktop computers because it wouldn't be able to overcharge businesses by $300 to $500 for every office computer.
Did you ever wonder why Apple is still in business? It is becoming increasingly difficult to recommend Apple computers to knowledgeable buyers because there are no business desktop computers and consumer desktop iMacs are outdated and overpriced by at least $300.
That is fairy comment.
Apple's desktop line needs overhaul from top to bottom.
Lemon Bon Bon.
That is fairy comment.
Apple's desktop line needs overhaul from top to bottom.
Lemon Bon Bon.
Pretty much.
I was home for the holidays, and bought my mom a new computer, a Dell at Best Buy, with a 2.66 GHz C2D, 4 GB, 640 GB, Intel GMA x3100 graphics, and Vista x64. It's been great so far for her, and it gives her tons of space for her photos on her new Nikon D60 and MP3s. Only $600. (She already had a new LCD). Vista has been just fine for me, and that was her first experience with it for her, and no complaints. But she needed a cheap PC to upgrade her old one that was failing after about 4-5 years, and Apple just priced themselves out of the search for us.
Cost as much as my Mini did last year, which is what Apple still charges for it now. But I also agree, the rest of their line is overpriced for what they offer; HW is cheap, especially RAM and HDs, and Apple still acts like this is still 10 years ago, and prices those parts accordingly.
I just got an Acer Aspire One, and for $350, it has 1 GB, 160 GB HD, and XP SP3. I even put Ubuntu 8.10 on it too, and it runs like a top. Small and pretty fast (less than 2.5 pounds). I'd put OSX on it too, if the Atheros wifi card worked in OSX.
That is fairy comment.
Apple's desktop line needs overhaul from top to bottom.
Apple has always had much longer refresh cycles than the PC OEM's. Its likely Apple has its desktop refresh ready and just has to wait for MW in January. Perhaps is the reason they are tired of announcing new products on an artificial time line.
Pretty much.
But I also agree, the rest of their line is overpriced for what they offer; HW is cheap, especially RAM and HDs, and Apple still acts like this is still 10 years ago, and prices those parts accordingly.
Depends on the type of hardware. Older hardware can be cheap, newer hardware isn't necessarily cheap at all. A $600 PC from Best Buy isn't using the newest most expensive components.
Apple has always had much longer refresh cycles than the PC OEM's. Its likely Apple has its desktop refresh ready and just has to wait for MW in January. Perhaps is the reason they are tired of announcing new products on an artificial time line.
Depends on the type of hardware. Older hardware can be cheap, newer hardware isn't necessarily cheap at all. A $600 PC from Best Buy isn't using the newest most expensive components.
True. but that $600 Dell is using a E7300 C2D, which is 45nm, 3 MB L2 cache. and 1066 FSB. The RAM is 800 MHz DDR2 if I remember correctly, but for what my mom uses her computer for, it doesn't matter that much, but then again, most people that are buying that $1200 iMac aren't that computer savy either - they just need something that browses the web, e-mail, photos and music. I'll always take more, slightly slower RAM over less, faster RAM anyway.
And that iMac isn't using the most expensive components either, it's 20" panel is not very good at all. My 20" 1680x1050 widescreen is just a cheap Acer (sub-$200), and it has a better contrast ratio than the 20" in the low-end iMac. The 24" is a completely different animal, but it is using a good IPS panel.
The fact remains that RAM and HD's are cheap, even DDR3 isn't expensive, I just think most Apple users are used to paying a premium anyway, because they think that Apple always offers the very best, but when you're used to shopping around or building PC's, you know how much components usually are. It'd be like me building a PC through parts bought from Best Buy; yeah, I could probably do it, but there is a high BB markup.
So I'm a mini fan also, but I think people like towers. Also, a lot of retail chains in the US (BB) that carry Apple do not have any minis on display ever. When people see cheap PCs and don't care as much about PC v. Mac, they don't seem likely to pay the iMac premium. Don't get me wrong; it's not about the value of the iMac; it's about the absolute price. Additionally, the entire lineup in my opinion needs to be more aggressively refreshed. It's a rapidly changing industry, etc.
I was in BB a few days ago and not a Mini in sight. While I was playing with an iMac a couple were looking at hardware and she showed him a MBP 15" and he blurted out "You could buy 2 computers for that price!" To which she said "This is a BETTER 'puter Honey, I use one at work..."
Apparently, it was his birthday and she was buying. I didn't stick around to see who got the win, but my guess is that it went to some windoze box. In listening to the conversation though, he was oblivious to the fact that you could run MS Office on a Mac, let alone windows...
Point being, Apple needs to massage the entry fee a bit further south and change perceptions, many people are put off by the high sticker and are looking through the dollar sign glasses - including me, but even so, I'll never go back to the dark side...
The next update will have them with newer and better components.
The fact remains that RAM and HD's are cheap, even DDR3 isn't expensive, I just think most Apple users are used to paying a premium anyway, because they think that Apple always offers the very best, but when you're used to shopping around or building PC's, you know how much components usually are. It'd be like me building a PC through parts bought from Best Buy; yeah, I could probably do it, but there is a high BB markup.
Its true that at this point the iMac's are not offering the best value. Its because they are at the end of a long refresh cycle. Many people know this and is why they are not buying them right now.
The next update will have them with newer and better components.
yes I agree....but it'll still be far too expensive for the 80%+ of users who just surf, email, photos etc.
truth is..... still the the sensible decision for most people is to buy a Vista box and keep the $$$$ in their pockets.