Any chance you could give us a hint as to which Mac model you're aiming for? I'll assume it's the top-of-the-line iMac. If so, you will not be able to find or build a comparable PC. There is nothing in the PC world that matches this superb iMac all-in-one.
No, it's not. The iMac uses DDR3. You're quoting DDR2.
You're way off base here. The iMac 3.06 GHz uses the X9100 Penryn XE processor with a 44W TDP and an MSRP of $851. The CPU you quoted has an MSRP of just $266.
Back to the drawing boards...
Sorry--no go here either. The Acer is a 6-bit display whereas the 24" iMac's is an 8-bit display. The 24" iMac display also has a much wider viewing angle than the Acer.
Now add about $30 for the RAM, $500 for the CPU, and $200 for the display and you get approximately $2,325 or $125 more than the iMac.
However, you're not finished yet. To your $2,325 system, you have to add:
a keyboard
a mouse
Bluetooth 2.1 + EDR
FireWire 800
a webcam
self-powered speakers
optical audio I/O
iLife (unfortunately, there is no equivalent for Windows, so good luck!)
your labor
a 1 year single-source warranty
I presume you're using Linux and that's why you haven't included the cost of the OS...
So, your system is now up to $2,550++ and it's still not comparable. Not looking like much of a bargain...
Firewire is junk but if I wanted it I could easily find a mobo with it included in the price i quoted along with bluetooth and optical audio. I thought you seemed to know something about components. Sorry. My labor is free as I built it. I am my warranty as Nothing in a computer is that hard to troubleshoot. Picasso will work fine as ilife replacement and if you dont like that theres plenty of open source stuff to keep you entertained, even if you choose MS OS. I'll give you the keyboard and mouse argument though. Theirs nothing uber special about Apples mouse and keyboard pick both up for $50.00 at staples. You can actualy get a halfway descent MS wireless mouse and keyboard for that much. Oh yeah the speakers.....I'll tell you what, go ahead and pick up a hundred dollar pair. I think thats more than anyone ever uses but be my guest.
DDR 3 1066 is essentialy the same as ddr2 1066....or one could claim their both the same as ddr2 800. Bassicly. I knew you'd come back on me for that but I couldnt find Mac branded ram in ddr3 on newegg. trust me I can find 1066 ddr3 for cheaper than I quoted on this stuff if it's not labled Mac.
Your processor costs more because it's a mobile processor. performance is the same between the two.
But....I'll give you that after looking for your processor on ebay I can pick it up for 250.00 on a good deal. So add 60 bucks or so ontop of the allready large leadway I've given you... we are still talking hundreds of dollars cheaper. To be honest you can build an equivlent system with identical performance using AMD chip for even less.
The lcd thing is a no go as the one I point to has other redeaming qualitys outside of your suggestion. But if I want to I could find something that fits the exact specs of the mac for cheaper.... but it's difficult to match up exact specs on that.
I honestly think I added atleast an extra 200 dollars to the system as buffer before even making this response. The difference should come out of that but go ahead and slap extra on there too. If you can't find a board with firewire I'm sure you can pick up a pci variant for 5 or 6 dollars.
Now for the extra 4 or 5 hundred I just saved I might think about liquid cooling or even picking up a copy of windows 7 when it comes out. then I still have some money left over so...hmm.... howabout trading that dusty overpriced processor in?
At least with a Mac, your fully covered. Apple take responsibility for everything in that computer. So when something goes wrong you know exactly who your dealing with, Apple. Because of Apple carefully integrating it's software and making design specifications directly to it's external hardware suppliers, redesigned to work exclusively with Apple's other hardware and OS X, it goes wrong far less often. No other PC maker can integrate their parts with their OS like that.
Sure they could but then they'd be over charging you too.
At least with a Mac, your fully covered. Apple take responsibility for everything in that computer. So when something goes wrong you know exactly who your dealing with, Apple. Because of Apple carefully integrating it's software and making design specifications directly to it's external hardware suppliers, redesigned to work exclusively with Apple's other hardware and OS X, it goes wrong far less often. No other PC maker can integrate their parts with their OS like that.
What about the MacBookAir hinge defect and Apple asking for $800 to repair the problem even though the laptop was underwarranty? Apparently, that little problem comes under accidental damage. Apple are a good company and better than most but they're no angels.
So do mac users, that's why they want the OS they feel is superior, that being OS X. If you've never used it for any length of time, you don't know what you're missing so how can you say you are getting substance over style with something you haven't used enough to know about.
Most Mac users, by necessity (in the workplace, if not in school) are also experienced with Windows. That isn't true in reverse.
I see you know lots about components, and for all I know you're a C++ programmer, but I think you don't get that for most people who buy Macs the thing about 'em is you don't have to know much about gear or about security and anti-malware software and what to do about User Control Access prompts, only have to reboot when there's a major system update, and whether if you have a problem the hardware support people will tell you it's an OS problem and refer you to MS, and MS will tell you it's a component problem, so you call Dell back (in Bangalore) and 30 minutes later they have you calling the graphics card vendor, whereas with Apple Care there's a single point of accountable support in fluent English for the most part. It's always having the menu in the same place, installing programs by dragging an icon half an inch, having more things work the same way in more programs. It's playing with delightfully designed software rather than managing systems and hardware.
And to whatever extent there's an "Apple Tax," for those of us who'd be buying in Apple's general price ranges, for the benefits above it's well worth it to those folks. (This premium is overrated by Win fans, but it exists in some ways.)
Friends still call me for Win Support, and luckily I'm beginning to forget how to help them because I've been able to rededicate the part of my brain reserved for exotic computer maintenance knowledge to more useful purposes.
You're a geek who reads spec sheets on mobos in your spare time, "not that there's anything wrong with that" (I used to be one in fact), so you'll likely never be a Mac type and should never consider one. Some people build their own homes too, just the way they like 'em and save some $ in the process, but me, I just like to turn the key and walk into one that's pretty cool and pre-configured with 90% of my wish list about what should be in the house, where it should be and how it's put together.
But I'll bet you are a good fisherman. 'Cos you've had people constantly rising to take your bait ever since you joined this thread.
What about the MacBookAir hinge defect and Apple asking for $800 to repair the problem even though the laptop was underwarranty? Apparently, that little problem comes under accidental damage. Apple are a good company and better than most but they're no angels.
I'm not familiar with that, so won't comment on it. All I can say is that the only problem I've had, so far, was a faulty camera on my iPhone and I was given a brand new iPhone as a result.
So do mac users, that's why they want the OS they feel is superior, that being OS X. If you've never used it for any length of time, you don't know what you're missing so how can you say you are getting substance over style with something you haven't used enough to know about.
Most Mac users, by necessity (in the workplace, if not in school) are also experienced with Windows. That isn't true in reverse.
There's really no point in arguing with PC users on an Apple site about which is better. They project the same sentiment MS is offering in their ads. For all the bluster about Windows machines, they're more prevalent, less expensive, whatever, the fact remains that they seek out Apple users to argue that Windows is better because, for some reason, even though they feel they are using the "better" platform, they also seem to feel strangely threatened by those who use Apple. Either it's a case of "doth protest too much" or they feel challenged by people who don't choose what they do and aren't just like them. They are the Rovian Neocons of the computer world. Strange.
You can't use OS X on a non Mac machine unless you bust you knuckles hacking it, so it's the same thing.
You can actually and it's a pretty easy process. I've done it myself. Same as installing any OS so no, it's not the same thing. I was comparing hardware only. If you wanna compare the OS, that's another thing entirely.
You can actually and it's a pretty easy process. I've done it myself. Same as installing any OS so no, it's not the same thing. I was comparing hardware only. If you wanna compare the OS, that's another thing entirely.
Installing it once is not the same as maintaining it with peripherals and the numerous OS X updates. It's not easy, all you have to do is read the hackintosh forums to see this. Again, the whole thing with Apple, the user experience, functionality, performance, is that the hardware and OS are for all intents and purposes, integrated. That is something PC users just don't seem to get. Windows is not HP or Dell or Sony, but OS X, PLUS the Mac is Apple. If you choose the OS, you choose the hardware with Apple. Now, if you want to argue that Apple has holes in it's hardware lineup, as a loyal Mac user, I will agree whole heartedly with you that Apple is too limiting in their desktop lineup—once again for the millionth time from me: mid-range headless Mac please.
So you're willing to spend $600 more for slower hardware just so you can have OSX... Wow... Why don't just buy a netbook and you'll have a Hackintosh for next to nothing or would buying anything non-Apple branded be a mortal sin...
I have been using OSX for over 6 years now, I can not see myself using anything else, I also built a PC box running Ubuntu Linux, which serves my other needs, sorry but you can not sell me on anything running the windows operating system.
Best analogy I've heard so far. As a user if both, I've also thought this.
Also, a lot of people forget this, but when IBM was in control they really believed that the end user would be using a terminal and would require the IT white shirt black tie tech consultant to help them with user problems. As well, compound this with Jobs and Gates being and thinking different, one is right grained, the other left brained.
As well, as another user pointed out, many design advert firms, agencies, video,audio post all had macs, it's true but Jobs dreamedband stated during first iMac release he envisioned an iMac in every home. This never transpired. The cost was to high and up until the intel switch, even with alvitec, they we're under powered and while some say megahertz doesn't matter anymore, it does as all chips, while slower than 5 years ago, a 3.4 duo core will be faster than. 2.4 duo core. It didn't matter when the duo cores were compared to p4 chips, today, for the most part, are all duo, quad, etc., core. These server Chios should have stayed on Xserve and the i7 with cheaper ram should have been on the mac pros. Just my 2 cents.
Peace.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RoboNerd
Well, technically, OpenStep.
Coming from a jack-of-all-trades experience in all things computing, I'd like to throw my two cents in with the whole Microsoft advertising campaign. I think there's a little bit of "everyone is right, and everyone is wrong" involved here. Let's leave the more obvious things aside -- the malware, viruses, etc., simply because those are external forces. Let's talk about inherent traits of both the Mac and Windows approach to user experience.
I've used a huge variety of systems over my time... CP/M, Apple ][ DOS, MS-DOS, Windows/286, Windows 3.xx, OS/2 2.0 - OS/2 4.0, Linux/GNOME, Linux/KDE, Linux/Enlightenment, Linux with no X server installed... Solaris, Windows 95-98-Me, Windows NT-2000-XP-Vista-7, AIX, XENIX, OS/400, Commodore 64, AmigaOS... and the list goes on for a while yet. In other words, I have pretty good experience with a broad range of user environments, from personal computers to mainframes and back again. I have seen really brilliant stuff on very limited hardware (AmigaOS comes to mind here) and absolute bone-headed design (ie, pre-Ubuntu Linux distributions with millions of menu options to overwhelm even power-users).
What I find particularly useful about what Apple has accomplished with Mac OS X is expressed in a very basic metric: how much does the system allow me to accomplish without the computer being a hinderance to my work? In the case of OS X, it is the best I have used with that respect.
Compare and contrast the user experience of a Windows machine to a Mac. Plug in a USB "keychain" drive. On the Mac, the OS adds an icon for that drive on your desktop, and creates a link in the /Volumes directory. That's all. On the Windows machine, a "balloon" pops up, with a sound, confirming that it recognized the drive. Another pops up soon afterwards, stating what kind of device it is. Then it pops up yet another balloon with the proper name of the device. Finally a balloon pops up to let you know the device is ready.
While these two sequences of events might seem trivial to examine, they provide deep insight into the mindset of Apple and Microsoft as software companies. Apple has a "zen"-like approach of keeping distractions to a minimum, breaking the user from his work flow only when absolutely necessary. They enforce this with strict UI standards for developers and tools within XCode to bring about a more consistent, low-key interface. The net effect of all this, plus the insistence on high-quality displays and interface hardware, creates a system that connects on a very deep human level in a near-symbiotic relationship. It's akin to a craftsman who has his one favorite tool; don't dare to make him use another one. The tool and the craftsman have become one. The same goes for a great computer interface and the user.
Now, let's look at Windows. Microsoft designed it around the "am I doing it right, boss?" approach. The system feels the need to inform you every time it's doing some piece of work for you. The problem with Microsoft's approach is that it is extremely disruptive to keeping a continuous thought pattern going with your desired task accomplishments. Windows requires the user to attend to a message that may or may not be trivial, each one requiring the same amount of momentary breaks in concentration. Add a more lax standard for developers' interfaces, and the Windows environment becomes cranial clutter; each application requiring the brain to slightly re-tool itself.
Now what on earth does any of this have to do with the Microsoft ad campaign? Well, it's quite simple. Microsoft can (rightly) go on TV and state that you can buy a cheaper computer. What it cannot claim is that you will be more productive with that Windows-based system, because most likely you will find yourself working around the distractions inherent in Microsoft's software philosophy. That is why Microsoft is betting good money over bad with this ad campaign -- because it's very difficult to pin down, in "bumper sticker" language, just why the experience of working on a Mac is better. Macs are better machines because they allow you to tap your creative potential with fewer encumbrances. The problem is -- put that in an ad.
I have been using OSX for over 6 years now, I can not see myself using anything else, I also built a PC box running Ubuntu Linux, which serves my other needs, sorry but you can not sell me on anything running the windows operating system.
I was trying to sell you OSX...\ I suggested getting a netbook and installing OSX on it so you have a Hackintosh. Since you're happy to pay more for slower hardware, why don't you pay LESS for even slower hardware This way will be a lot cheaper than any Mac laptop.
I was trying to sell you OSX...\ I suggested getting a netbook and installing OSX on it so you have a Hackintosh. Since you're happy to pay more for slower hardware, why don't you pay LESS for even slower hardware This way will be a lot cheaper than any Mac laptop.
Have you ever thought maybe I like the way apple hardware is designed and can last for several years before even thinking about upgrades? seriously, there is nothing these netbooks have that I would desire, they are running extremely low level machines, that lack the finish and aesthetics of apple hardware, sorry but the price of a normal macbook is worth paying over that of a $600 netbook. Besides apple hardware has such tight integration with its various products available, ie ipods, iphones, itunes software etc. The way I see things now, if you are happy with using windows on slower or faster hardware, that is your business.
Folks that are happy purchasing and using apple hardware/software will always see the value in sticking with their associated vendor. Do not get it twisted, I have used windoze in the past, but after having to reformat and reinstall windoze due to malware and viruses, it gets old really fast. My 3 year old macpro workstation is still kicking with 8Gigs of ram and is more than ready to tackle an upgrade to snow leopard when it debuts.
Have you ever thought maybe I like the way apple hardware is designed and can last for several years before even thinking about upgrades? seriously, there is nothing these netbooks have that I would desire, they are running extremely low level machines, that lack the finish and aesthetics of apple hardware, sorry but the price of a normal macbook is worth paying over that of a $600 netbook. Besides apple hardware has such tight integration with its various products available, ie ipods, iphones, itunes software etc. The way I see things now, if you are happy with using windows on slower or faster hardware, that is your business.
Folks that are happy purchasing and using apple hardware/software will always see the value in sticking with their associated vendor. Do not get it twisted, I have used windoze in the past, but after having to reformat and reinstall windoze due to malware and viruses, it gets old really fast. My 3 year old macpro workstation is still kicking with 8Gigs of ram and is more than ready to tackle an upgrade to snow leopard when it debuts.
You keep going round in circles. Talking to you is like talking to a brick wall so I'm going to stop now.
Saw this posted somewhere else and thought it was very appropriate.
"Perhaps we could just stop saying "OS X is better than OS Y (pun intended)" or "OS Y is the best operating system we have period"? The best operating system does not exist. It totally depends on the person who is using it and the tasks that need to be done. If people would just say "This OS is the best for me", that would be a true reflection of reality. Saying "This OS is the best" is not.
I've been working with OS X in the past year and a half as a web designer, with Mac evangelists all around me to help me point to software and tips and tricks. But guess what - XP is still my preferred OS and this won't change. OS X is a very good OS and it would be a better OS than XP for many, many people, but it's not the be all and end all (and neither is XP or Linux or...)."
I think Microsoft is going the right way with these ads as an OS does not apply to everybody. However, price does. Chances are, many people will already have made up their minds on what to buy, regardless of price (as demonstrated in this thread). For those undecided, however, price becomes an issue and by emphasising the price advantage that PCs have, Microsoft "could" be on to a winner. I say "could" because, if Apple comes out with a netbook, then all bets are off.
That Microsoft even considers Apple enough of a threat to run an ad campaign against them is quite telling.
We can argue here until we are blue in the face, but the fact of the matter remains:
Some people buy Macs. Some people buy bre-built Windows PCs. Some people build their own PCs. Some people use Mac OS. Some people use Windows. Some people use Linux. Some people don't even use computers at all.
Why does it have to be about who is right or wrong, or who is better? If your computer helps you accomplish whatever you need/want to accomplish, who's to tell you you're "wrong"?
It doesn't make much sense for someone who is perfectly content with a $699 Windows laptop to tell someone who is perfectly content with a $2500 MBP that they are somehow "wrong" for buying the MBP.
You're essentially telling them "you shouldn't have bought it because I wouldn't have". Huh??
Someone who doesn't use computers at all could just as easily tell the $699 laptop guy that he's an idiot for spending so much on a "stupid computer".
Working in IT, I have been fighting this war for a long time, though I no longer have the energy to argue it.
Yes, Macs cost more. You can compare specs between Apple and PC Vendor X or Y all day long, compare benchmarks, software offerings, etc until the cows come home but for me, it comes down to these items:
1. Design. Pick up one of the new Macbook or Macbook Pros by the corner of the case. In the other hand, do the same with a PC notebook. Look at how much the PC flexes and how it just feels unsteady. The Mac is solid; it's thin, it weighs less and it's of higher quality. When it comes to notebooks, it is worth it to me to have this quality as I take it with me everywhere. To me, that's worth the cost.
2. Software - Put simply, I'm more productive in Mac OS X than in Windows. The guts of the OS get the hell out of my way and let me do my work. If I want to futz around with them, I can do so if I MUST, but I've been working in a mixed platform IT environment for 15 years. My screwdriver has been relegated to the drawer with the 10,000 twisty-ties and 743 Bic Stick pens. Also, I should point out that I don't have to spend hours installing updates, removing trialware/bloatware and manufacturer "utilities" on a Mac. I'm up and running within minutes, not hours.
3. Support - Apple has treated me VERY well with support. My PowerBook G4 lost it's ability to display video properly about 2 months before the end of AppleCare. The logic board for this model wasn't available, so 2 days later, I had a brand new Macbook Pro delivered to my house, free of charge. If I ever need to call for support, I get a well-trained person who speaks the language perfectly. Getting through the process smoothly and quickly is worth the cost.
4. Compatibility - There are certain applications out there that are better on the Windows side due to the sheer number of developers for the platform. The ability to run Windows on my Mac resolves those issues. If it weren't for the apps I use to edit and reburn my TiVo files (Toast doesn't count because it sucks at it) and Quicken, I would never run Windows at all.
Comments
Any chance you could give us a hint as to which Mac model you're aiming for? I'll assume it's the top-of-the-line iMac. If so, you will not be able to find or build a comparable PC. There is nothing in the PC world that matches this superb iMac all-in-one.
No, it's not. The iMac uses DDR3. You're quoting DDR2.
You're way off base here. The iMac 3.06 GHz uses the X9100 Penryn XE processor with a 44W TDP and an MSRP of $851. The CPU you quoted has an MSRP of just $266.
Back to the drawing boards...
Sorry--no go here either. The Acer is a 6-bit display whereas the 24" iMac's is an 8-bit display. The 24" iMac display also has a much wider viewing angle than the Acer.
Now add about $30 for the RAM, $500 for the CPU, and $200 for the display and you get approximately $2,325 or $125 more than the iMac.
However, you're not finished yet. To your $2,325 system, you have to add:
- a keyboard
- a mouse
- Bluetooth 2.1 + EDR
- FireWire 800
- a webcam
- self-powered speakers
- optical audio I/O
- iLife (unfortunately, there is no equivalent for Windows, so good luck!)
- your labor
- a 1 year single-source warranty
I presume you're using Linux and that's why you haven't included the cost of the OS...So, your system is now up to $2,550++ and it's still not comparable. Not looking like much of a bargain...
Firewire is junk but if I wanted it I could easily find a mobo with it included in the price i quoted along with bluetooth and optical audio. I thought you seemed to know something about components. Sorry. My labor is free as I built it. I am my warranty as Nothing in a computer is that hard to troubleshoot. Picasso will work fine as ilife replacement and if you dont like that theres plenty of open source stuff to keep you entertained, even if you choose MS OS. I'll give you the keyboard and mouse argument though. Theirs nothing uber special about Apples mouse and keyboard pick both up for $50.00 at staples. You can actualy get a halfway descent MS wireless mouse and keyboard for that much. Oh yeah the speakers.....I'll tell you what, go ahead and pick up a hundred dollar pair. I think thats more than anyone ever uses but be my guest.
DDR 3 1066 is essentialy the same as ddr2 1066....or one could claim their both the same as ddr2 800. Bassicly. I knew you'd come back on me for that but I couldnt find Mac branded ram in ddr3 on newegg. trust me I can find 1066 ddr3 for cheaper than I quoted on this stuff if it's not labled Mac.
Your processor costs more because it's a mobile processor. performance is the same between the two.
But....I'll give you that after looking for your processor on ebay I can pick it up for 250.00 on a good deal. So add 60 bucks or so ontop of the allready large leadway I've given you... we are still talking hundreds of dollars cheaper. To be honest you can build an equivlent system with identical performance using AMD chip for even less.
The lcd thing is a no go as the one I point to has other redeaming qualitys outside of your suggestion. But if I want to I could find something that fits the exact specs of the mac for cheaper.... but it's difficult to match up exact specs on that.
I honestly think I added atleast an extra 200 dollars to the system as buffer before even making this response. The difference should come out of that but go ahead and slap extra on there too. If you can't find a board with firewire I'm sure you can pick up a pci variant for 5 or 6 dollars.
Now for the extra 4 or 5 hundred I just saved I might think about liquid cooling or even picking up a copy of windows 7 when it comes out. then I still have some money left over so...hmm.... howabout trading that dusty overpriced processor in?
At least with a Mac, your fully covered. Apple take responsibility for everything in that computer. So when something goes wrong you know exactly who your dealing with, Apple. Because of Apple carefully integrating it's software and making design specifications directly to it's external hardware suppliers, redesigned to work exclusively with Apple's other hardware and OS X, it goes wrong far less often. No other PC maker can integrate their parts with their OS like that.
Sure they could but then they'd be over charging you too.
At least with a Mac, your fully covered. Apple take responsibility for everything in that computer. So when something goes wrong you know exactly who your dealing with, Apple. Because of Apple carefully integrating it's software and making design specifications directly to it's external hardware suppliers, redesigned to work exclusively with Apple's other hardware and OS X, it goes wrong far less often. No other PC maker can integrate their parts with their OS like that.
What about the MacBookAir hinge defect and Apple asking for $800 to repair the problem even though the laptop was underwarranty? Apparently, that little problem comes under accidental damage. Apple are a good company and better than most but they're no angels.
We want more substance over style.
So do mac users, that's why they want the OS they feel is superior, that being OS X. If you've never used it for any length of time, you don't know what you're missing so how can you say you are getting substance over style with something you haven't used enough to know about.
Most Mac users, by necessity (in the workplace, if not in school) are also experienced with Windows. That isn't true in reverse.
I see you know lots about components, and for all I know you're a C++ programmer, but I think you don't get that for most people who buy Macs the thing about 'em is you don't have to know much about gear or about security and anti-malware software and what to do about User Control Access prompts, only have to reboot when there's a major system update, and whether if you have a problem the hardware support people will tell you it's an OS problem and refer you to MS, and MS will tell you it's a component problem, so you call Dell back (in Bangalore) and 30 minutes later they have you calling the graphics card vendor, whereas with Apple Care there's a single point of accountable support in fluent English for the most part. It's always having the menu in the same place, installing programs by dragging an icon half an inch, having more things work the same way in more programs. It's playing with delightfully designed software rather than managing systems and hardware.
And to whatever extent there's an "Apple Tax," for those of us who'd be buying in Apple's general price ranges, for the benefits above it's well worth it to those folks. (This premium is overrated by Win fans, but it exists in some ways.)
Friends still call me for Win Support, and luckily I'm beginning to forget how to help them because I've been able to rededicate the part of my brain reserved for exotic computer maintenance knowledge to more useful purposes.
You're a geek who reads spec sheets on mobos in your spare time, "not that there's anything wrong with that" (I used to be one in fact), so you'll likely never be a Mac type and should never consider one. Some people build their own homes too, just the way they like 'em and save some $ in the process, but me, I just like to turn the key and walk into one that's pretty cool and pre-configured with 90% of my wish list about what should be in the house, where it should be and how it's put together.
But I'll bet you are a good fisherman. 'Cos you've had people constantly rising to take your bait ever since you joined this thread.
Ha, I like you. You're right.
What about the MacBookAir hinge defect and Apple asking for $800 to repair the problem even though the laptop was underwarranty? Apparently, that little problem comes under accidental damage. Apple are a good company and better than most but they're no angels.
I'm not familiar with that, so won't comment on it. All I can say is that the only problem I've had, so far, was a faulty camera on my iPhone and I was given a brand new iPhone as a result.
So do mac users, that's why they want the OS they feel is superior, that being OS X. If you've never used it for any length of time, you don't know what you're missing so how can you say you are getting substance over style with something you haven't used enough to know about.
Most Mac users, by necessity (in the workplace, if not in school) are also experienced with Windows. That isn't true in reverse.
I was talking about the hardware.
I was talking about the hardware.
You can't use OS X on a non Mac machine unless you bust you knuckles hacking it, so it's the same thing.
You can't use OS X on a non Mac machine unless you bust you knuckles hacking it, so it's the same thing.
You can actually and it's a pretty easy process. I've done it myself. Same as installing any OS so no, it's not the same thing. I was comparing hardware only. If you wanna compare the OS, that's another thing entirely.
You can actually and it's a pretty easy process. I've done it myself. Same as installing any OS so no, it's not the same thing. I was comparing hardware only. If you wanna compare the OS, that's another thing entirely.
Installing it once is not the same as maintaining it with peripherals and the numerous OS X updates. It's not easy, all you have to do is read the hackintosh forums to see this. Again, the whole thing with Apple, the user experience, functionality, performance, is that the hardware and OS are for all intents and purposes, integrated. That is something PC users just don't seem to get. Windows is not HP or Dell or Sony, but OS X, PLUS the Mac is Apple. If you choose the OS, you choose the hardware with Apple. Now, if you want to argue that Apple has holes in it's hardware lineup, as a loyal Mac user, I will agree whole heartedly with you that Apple is too limiting in their desktop lineup—once again for the millionth time from me: mid-range headless Mac please.
So you're willing to spend $600 more for slower hardware just so you can have OSX... Wow... Why don't just buy a netbook and you'll have a Hackintosh for next to nothing or would buying anything non-Apple branded be a mortal sin...
I have been using OSX for over 6 years now, I can not see myself using anything else, I also built a PC box running Ubuntu Linux, which serves my other needs, sorry but you can not sell me on anything running the windows operating system.
Also, a lot of people forget this, but when IBM was in control they really believed that the end user would be using a terminal and would require the IT white shirt black tie tech consultant to help them with user problems. As well, compound this with Jobs and Gates being and thinking different, one is right grained, the other left brained.
As well, as another user pointed out, many design advert firms, agencies, video,audio post all had macs, it's true but Jobs dreamedband stated during first iMac release he envisioned an iMac in every home. This never transpired. The cost was to high and up until the intel switch, even with alvitec, they we're under powered and while some say megahertz doesn't matter anymore, it does as all chips, while slower than 5 years ago, a 3.4 duo core will be faster than. 2.4 duo core. It didn't matter when the duo cores were compared to p4 chips, today, for the most part, are all duo, quad, etc., core. These server Chios should have stayed on Xserve and the i7 with cheaper ram should have been on the mac pros. Just my 2 cents.
Peace.
Well, technically, OpenStep.
Coming from a jack-of-all-trades experience in all things computing, I'd like to throw my two cents in with the whole Microsoft advertising campaign. I think there's a little bit of "everyone is right, and everyone is wrong" involved here. Let's leave the more obvious things aside -- the malware, viruses, etc., simply because those are external forces. Let's talk about inherent traits of both the Mac and Windows approach to user experience.
I've used a huge variety of systems over my time... CP/M, Apple ][ DOS, MS-DOS, Windows/286, Windows 3.xx, OS/2 2.0 - OS/2 4.0, Linux/GNOME, Linux/KDE, Linux/Enlightenment, Linux with no X server installed... Solaris, Windows 95-98-Me, Windows NT-2000-XP-Vista-7, AIX, XENIX, OS/400, Commodore 64, AmigaOS... and the list goes on for a while yet. In other words, I have pretty good experience with a broad range of user environments, from personal computers to mainframes and back again. I have seen really brilliant stuff on very limited hardware (AmigaOS comes to mind here) and absolute bone-headed design (ie, pre-Ubuntu Linux distributions with millions of menu options to overwhelm even power-users).
What I find particularly useful about what Apple has accomplished with Mac OS X is expressed in a very basic metric: how much does the system allow me to accomplish without the computer being a hinderance to my work? In the case of OS X, it is the best I have used with that respect.
Compare and contrast the user experience of a Windows machine to a Mac. Plug in a USB "keychain" drive. On the Mac, the OS adds an icon for that drive on your desktop, and creates a link in the /Volumes directory. That's all. On the Windows machine, a "balloon" pops up, with a sound, confirming that it recognized the drive. Another pops up soon afterwards, stating what kind of device it is. Then it pops up yet another balloon with the proper name of the device. Finally a balloon pops up to let you know the device is ready.
While these two sequences of events might seem trivial to examine, they provide deep insight into the mindset of Apple and Microsoft as software companies. Apple has a "zen"-like approach of keeping distractions to a minimum, breaking the user from his work flow only when absolutely necessary. They enforce this with strict UI standards for developers and tools within XCode to bring about a more consistent, low-key interface. The net effect of all this, plus the insistence on high-quality displays and interface hardware, creates a system that connects on a very deep human level in a near-symbiotic relationship. It's akin to a craftsman who has his one favorite tool; don't dare to make him use another one. The tool and the craftsman have become one. The same goes for a great computer interface and the user.
Now, let's look at Windows. Microsoft designed it around the "am I doing it right, boss?" approach. The system feels the need to inform you every time it's doing some piece of work for you. The problem with Microsoft's approach is that it is extremely disruptive to keeping a continuous thought pattern going with your desired task accomplishments. Windows requires the user to attend to a message that may or may not be trivial, each one requiring the same amount of momentary breaks in concentration. Add a more lax standard for developers' interfaces, and the Windows environment becomes cranial clutter; each application requiring the brain to slightly re-tool itself.
Now what on earth does any of this have to do with the Microsoft ad campaign? Well, it's quite simple. Microsoft can (rightly) go on TV and state that you can buy a cheaper computer. What it cannot claim is that you will be more productive with that Windows-based system, because most likely you will find yourself working around the distractions inherent in Microsoft's software philosophy. That is why Microsoft is betting good money over bad with this ad campaign -- because it's very difficult to pin down, in "bumper sticker" language, just why the experience of working on a Mac is better. Macs are better machines because they allow you to tap your creative potential with fewer encumbrances. The problem is -- put that in an ad.
I have been using OSX for over 6 years now, I can not see myself using anything else, I also built a PC box running Ubuntu Linux, which serves my other needs, sorry but you can not sell me on anything running the windows operating system.
I was trying to sell you OSX...
I was trying to sell you OSX...
Have you ever thought maybe I like the way apple hardware is designed and can last for several years before even thinking about upgrades? seriously, there is nothing these netbooks have that I would desire, they are running extremely low level machines, that lack the finish and aesthetics of apple hardware, sorry but the price of a normal macbook is worth paying over that of a $600 netbook. Besides apple hardware has such tight integration with its various products available, ie ipods, iphones, itunes software etc. The way I see things now, if you are happy with using windows on slower or faster hardware, that is your business.
Folks that are happy purchasing and using apple hardware/software will always see the value in sticking with their associated vendor. Do not get it twisted, I have used windoze in the past, but after having to reformat and reinstall windoze due to malware and viruses, it gets old really fast. My 3 year old macpro workstation is still kicking with 8Gigs of ram and is more than ready to tackle an upgrade to snow leopard when it debuts.
Have you ever thought maybe I like the way apple hardware is designed and can last for several years before even thinking about upgrades? seriously, there is nothing these netbooks have that I would desire, they are running extremely low level machines, that lack the finish and aesthetics of apple hardware, sorry but the price of a normal macbook is worth paying over that of a $600 netbook. Besides apple hardware has such tight integration with its various products available, ie ipods, iphones, itunes software etc. The way I see things now, if you are happy with using windows on slower or faster hardware, that is your business.
Folks that are happy purchasing and using apple hardware/software will always see the value in sticking with their associated vendor. Do not get it twisted, I have used windoze in the past, but after having to reformat and reinstall windoze due to malware and viruses, it gets old really fast. My 3 year old macpro workstation is still kicking with 8Gigs of ram and is more than ready to tackle an upgrade to snow leopard when it debuts.
You keep going round in circles. Talking to you is like talking to a brick wall so I'm going to stop now.
You keep going round in circles. Talking to you is like talking to a brick wall so I'm going to stop now.
This has been your best response thus far.
"Perhaps we could just stop saying "OS X is better than OS Y (pun intended)" or "OS Y is the best operating system we have period"? The best operating system does not exist. It totally depends on the person who is using it and the tasks that need to be done. If people would just say "This OS is the best for me", that would be a true reflection of reality. Saying "This OS is the best" is not.
I've been working with OS X in the past year and a half as a web designer, with Mac evangelists all around me to help me point to software and tips and tricks. But guess what - XP is still my preferred OS and this won't change. OS X is a very good OS and it would be a better OS than XP for many, many people, but it's not the be all and end all (and neither is XP or Linux or...)."
I think Microsoft is going the right way with these ads as an OS does not apply to everybody. However, price does. Chances are, many people will already have made up their minds on what to buy, regardless of price (as demonstrated in this thread). For those undecided, however, price becomes an issue and by emphasising the price advantage that PCs have, Microsoft "could" be on to a winner. I say "could" because, if Apple comes out with a netbook, then all bets are off.
We can argue here until we are blue in the face, but the fact of the matter remains:
Some people buy Macs. Some people buy bre-built Windows PCs. Some people build their own PCs. Some people use Mac OS. Some people use Windows. Some people use Linux. Some people don't even use computers at all.
Why does it have to be about who is right or wrong, or who is better? If your computer helps you accomplish whatever you need/want to accomplish, who's to tell you you're "wrong"?
It doesn't make much sense for someone who is perfectly content with a $699 Windows laptop to tell someone who is perfectly content with a $2500 MBP that they are somehow "wrong" for buying the MBP.
You're essentially telling them "you shouldn't have bought it because I wouldn't have". Huh??
Someone who doesn't use computers at all could just as easily tell the $699 laptop guy that he's an idiot for spending so much on a "stupid computer".
Yes, Macs cost more. You can compare specs between Apple and PC Vendor X or Y all day long, compare benchmarks, software offerings, etc until the cows come home but for me, it comes down to these items:
1. Design. Pick up one of the new Macbook or Macbook Pros by the corner of the case. In the other hand, do the same with a PC notebook. Look at how much the PC flexes and how it just feels unsteady. The Mac is solid; it's thin, it weighs less and it's of higher quality. When it comes to notebooks, it is worth it to me to have this quality as I take it with me everywhere. To me, that's worth the cost.
2. Software - Put simply, I'm more productive in Mac OS X than in Windows. The guts of the OS get the hell out of my way and let me do my work. If I want to futz around with them, I can do so if I MUST, but I've been working in a mixed platform IT environment for 15 years. My screwdriver has been relegated to the drawer with the 10,000 twisty-ties and 743 Bic Stick pens. Also, I should point out that I don't have to spend hours installing updates, removing trialware/bloatware and manufacturer "utilities" on a Mac. I'm up and running within minutes, not hours.
3. Support - Apple has treated me VERY well with support. My PowerBook G4 lost it's ability to display video properly about 2 months before the end of AppleCare. The logic board for this model wasn't available, so 2 days later, I had a brand new Macbook Pro delivered to my house, free of charge. If I ever need to call for support, I get a well-trained person who speaks the language perfectly. Getting through the process smoothly and quickly is worth the cost.
4. Compatibility - There are certain applications out there that are better on the Windows side due to the sheer number of developers for the platform. The ability to run Windows on my Mac resolves those issues. If it weren't for the apps I use to edit and reburn my TiVo files (Toast doesn't count because it sucks at it) and Quicken, I would never run Windows at all.