Someone made an important point on Engadget though. Once that buyer asks, what can I get for $500, they would have to ask some of the PCs back. The reality is that flaws in a computer's operation can be dealt with, the cost of buying one not as easily.
If someone wants to get into doing high end work that taxes a computer, Apple's only option is a £1900 workstation. On the PC side, you can get close to the same performance for £500.
Apple just need to offer more sensible options and stop over charging for BTO parts. I mean really, £120 for 4GB Ram. This is £50 from a 3rd party. It seems like they charge £50 for the Ram and have an Apple service technician fit it at £70 an hour, rounding up.
These Mac ads really are clutching at straws now. It's just the same old stuff repeated ad-nauseum. 2 of the ads forget to mention the free anti-virus the PC has installed. 1 ad doesn't even define what a 'fast processor' is. And 1 ad forgets to mention that a Mac Genius is only any good if there is an Apple store somewhere close by where you can lug your computer to. My nearest Apple shop is just over 100miles away, which is just over 2 hour journey on the train.
Someone made an important point on Engadget though. Once that buyer asks, what can I get for $500, they would have to ask some of the PCs back. The reality is that flaws in a computer's operation can be dealt with, the cost of buying one not as easily.
If someone wants to get into doing high end work that taxes a computer, Apple's only option is a £1900 workstation. On the PC side, you can get close to the same performance for £500.
Apple just need to offer more sensible options and stop over charging for BTO parts. I mean really, £120 for 4GB Ram. This is £50 from a 3rd party. It seems like they charge £50 for the Ram and have an Apple service technician fit it at £70 an hour, rounding up.
Who ever buys BTO from apple is a moron so lets skip that part.
The point here is not that PC users will encounter a virus (even though they will). The point is that in order to be safe using a PC you need an antivirus and an antispyware plus firewall. Each of those sap CPU cycles, cost $$ and are a pain in the arse to maintain due to the constant and relentless updates in definitions.
So in the end paying an extra $500 for a mac seems like the cheaper proposition, really. And note that we are not even touching the subject of OS Leopard being vastly superior to Windows OS (any windows OS) or that it comes with the plenty useful iLife and that you can buy the vastly superior iwork for $80.
The point here is not that PC users will encounter a virus (even though they will). The point is that in order to be safe using a PC you need an antivirus and an antispyware plus firewall. Each of those sap CPU cycles, cost $$ and are a pain in the arse to maintain due to the constant and relentless updates in definitions.
That's just not true though because all of those tools can be had for free, and they update and maintain themselves. There will be a slight performance penalty, but as these PCs tend to be packing quad-core processors over the Mac's usual dual-core, that's of little concern. Therefore, the $500 extra is just wasting money.
Who ever buys BTO from apple is a moron so lets skip that part.
Usually they are people who don't want to open up some of Apple's ridiculously and unnecessarily hard to upgrade machines and risk breaking them and voiding their warranty.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tauron
So in the end paying an extra $500 for a mac seems like the cheaper proposition, really. And note that we are not even touching the subject of OS Leopard being vastly superior to Windows OS (any windows OS) or that it comes with the plenty useful iLife and that you can buy the vastly superior iwork for $80.
It's cheaper assuming those problems arise. A lot of Windows users simply don't have problems with their OS. I run Windows XP on my Mac and it seems to be ok. I would say that Leopard is significantly better but if my only options are a quad core for £1900 with very limited GPU options or a quad for £500 where I can buy off-the-shelf GPU upgrades then for certain lines of work, having to use Windows is really not an issue.
If it was so horrendously bad as to be unusable, 90% of the world wouldn't be using it daily to keep the computing world ticking over.
Apple's response to Microsoft saying Macs are expensive should be to add more options and make the machines more affordable, not to just make the same rants about viruses and tech support. It seems like the kind of attitude that comes from individuals like Bertrand Serlet, who comes over like some drunk with the usual rambings: grumble.... registry... grumble.... dll hell,,, activation
They make some fair points but Microsoft are making some fair points in their current ads too and if Microsoft copy Apple enough and fix their issues enough so that aesthetics and reliability are taken care off, Apple are just a more expensive brand.
Someone made an important point on Engadget though. Once that buyer asks, what can I get for $500, they would have to ask some of the PCs back. The reality is that flaws in a computer's operation can be dealt with, the cost of buying one not as easily.
If someone wants to get into doing high end work that taxes a computer, Apple's only option is a £1900 workstation. On the PC side, you can get close to the same performance for £500.
There's surely truth in this. It's also true, that Apple hardware stands easily at least 5 major releases of native operating system. And even the meaning of "stands" in Apple's world differs from that in IBM clones' world.
Seems that Apple is responding to the same old argument 'Macs are expensive.' We all know that's not the case when you consider all the factors, so, that argument is a fallacy.
Glad to see the new ads responding using the old PC arguments (crashes, viruses, support, etc.)...tit for tat. Should work. General consumers are stupid that way.
Seems that Apple is responding to the same old argument 'Macs are expensive.' We all know that's not the case when you consider all the factors, so, that argument is a fallacy.
Glad to see the new ads responding using the old PC arguments (crashes, viruses, support, etc.)...tit for tat. Should work. General consumers are stupid that way.
It's just a pity they go about it in the same over-used way. They need a fresh new message that actually tells us why a Mac is good and not why a PC is bad.
Usually they are people who don't want to open up some of Apple's ridiculously and unnecessarily hard to upgrade machines and risk breaking them and voiding their warranty.
It's cheaper assuming those problems arise. A lot of Windows users simply don't have problems with their OS. I run Windows XP on my Mac and it seems to be ok. I would say that Leopard is significantly better but if my only options are a quad core for £1900 with very limited GPU options or a quad for £500 where I can buy off-the-shelf GPU upgrades then for certain lines of work, having to use Windows is really not an issue.
If it was so horrendously bad as to be unusable, 90% of the world wouldn't be using it daily to keep the computing world ticking over.
Apple's response to Microsoft saying Macs are expensive should be to add more options and make the machines more affordable, not to just make the same rants about viruses and tech support. It seems like the kind of attitude that comes from individuals like Bertrand Serlet, who comes over like some drunk with the usual rambings: grumble.... registry... grumble.... dll hell,,, activation
They make some fair points but Microsoft are making some fair points in their current ads too and if Microsoft copy Apple enough and fix their issues enough so that aesthetics and reliability are taken care off, Apple are just a more expensive brand.
Your info is old. Today's macs can be upgraded with zero or a couple of simple screws. There is no science to this and it doesn't violate any warranties. Using Windows is always an issue. That is why companies have armies of IT personnel, because stuff is always breaking down. Same thing happens in the household (more, actually) with the exception that one has to deal with 1-2 computers instead of 20-100. The situation I always see is that either the person is computer savvy and spends a ridiculous amount of time doing maintenance, or the person is not savvy and the computer is overrun with spyware, fragmented drives, broken registry, etc, etc.
Macs are actually way cheaper than Windows (no matter how much I say this people don't seem to understand it) if you are a person who values your time and peace of mind. It is the same as buying a Ford or a BMW: sure both have 4 wheels and move but oh my god there is a difference. Next time you think about a purchase do as intelligent people do and consider the overall package you are getting for your dollar and don't do as the average joe who only considers a list of features: how many RAM, how many GBytes, or any other raw number.
Your info is old. Today's macs can be upgraded with zero or a couple of simple screws. There is no science to this and it doesn't violate any warranties. Using Windows is always an issue. That is why companies have armies of IT personnel, because stuff is always breaking down. Same thing happens in the household (more, actually) with the exception that one has to deal with 1-2 computers instead of 20-100. The situation I always see is that either the person is computer savvy and spends a ridiculous amount of time doing maintenance, or the person is not savvy and the computer is overrun with spyware, fragmented drives, broken registry, etc, etc.
Macs are actually way cheaper than Windows (no matter how much I say this people don't seem to understand it) if you are a person who values your time and peace of mind. It is the same as buying a Ford or a BMW: sure both have 4 wheels and move but oh my god there is a difference. Next time you think about a purchase do as intelligent people do and consider the overall package you are getting for your dollar and don't do as the average joe who only considers a list of features: how many RAM, how many GBytes, or any other raw number.
I hadn't realised that it was so easy to access the hard drive, processor and graphics card in the iMac to upgrade. I thought you pretty much had to take the machine to bits to get access to these parts?
Seems that Apple is responding to the same old argument 'Macs are expensive.' We all know that's not the case when you consider all the factors, so, that argument is a fallacy.
Glad to see the new ads responding using the old PC arguments (crashes, viruses, support, etc.)...tit for tat. Should work. General consumers are stupid that way.
They're not expensive (well the Mac Pros are, but only because the price is jacked up to protect the iMac), but they do have a very limited black and white view of the industry. If you want one feature, you must be this and need all these other high end features too. It just doesn't compute to them why someone not at the absolute highest echelon of a market would want a affordable larger screen notebook to replace the family desktop or an upgradable desktop.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tauron
Your info is old. Today's macs can be upgraded with zero or a couple of simple screws. There is no science to this and it doesn't violate any warranties.
For the Macbook, yes. For the iMac and mini you have to tear them apart. Ironic that the laptops are easier to upgrade than the desktops.
That's why I said the argument was a fallacy, and why Apple responded in kind. Not to mention, there's no such thing as a 'base model' BMW/Cadillac/etc...at a certain level, you expect certain things to be standard, and to be priced accordingly.
That's why I said the argument was a fallacy, and why Apple responded in kind. Not to mention, there's no such thing as a 'base model' BMW/Cadillac/etc...at a certain level, you expect certain things to be standard, and to be priced accordingly.
Cadillac/BMW don't run on a proprietary fuel or set of roads. Apple is the only company making Mac OS X computers. Most of the luxury brands also have general purpose sister brands.
It's just a pity they go about it in the same over-used way. They need a fresh new message that actually tells us why a Mac is good and not why a PC is bad.
Right! Show us how much iLife rocks (especially iPhoto), or show what the pro apps can do. A quick demo of Time Machine (w/ the same narrator used in the iPhone commercials) could get a lot more people to think twice before buying another PC.
Someone made an important point on Engadget though. Once that buyer asks, what can I get for $500, they would have to ask some of the PCs back. The reality is that flaws in a computer's operation can be dealt with, the cost of buying one not as easily.
If someone wants to get into doing high end work that taxes a computer, Apple's only option is a £1900 workstation. On the PC side, you can get close to the same performance for £500.
Apple just need to offer more sensible options and stop over charging for BTO parts. I mean really, £120 for 4GB Ram. This is £50 from a 3rd party. It seems like they charge £50 for the Ram and have an Apple service technician fit it at £70 an hour, rounding up.
This seems like you are for PCs more then Macs, so why are you an Appleinsider Mod?
By the way I just bought a Mac for $1,400 and it is every bit worth that amount for no PC headaches, extra software charges.
Usually they are people who don't want to open up some of Apple's ridiculously and unnecessarily hard to upgrade machines and risk breaking them and voiding their warranty.
It's cheaper assuming those problems arise. A lot of Windows users simply don't have problems with their OS. I run Windows XP on my Mac and it seems to be ok. I would say that Leopard is significantly better but if my only options are a quad core for £1900 with very limited GPU options or a quad for £500 where I can buy off-the-shelf GPU upgrades then for certain lines of work, having to use Windows is really not an issue.
If it was so horrendously bad as to be unusable, 90% of the world wouldn't be using it daily to keep the computing world ticking over.
Apple's response to Microsoft saying Macs are expensive should be to add more options and make the machines more affordable, not to just make the same rants about viruses and tech support. It seems like the kind of attitude that comes from individuals like Bertrand Serlet, who comes over like some drunk with the usual rambings: grumble.... registry... grumble.... dll hell,,, activation
They make some fair points but Microsoft are making some fair points in their current ads too and if Microsoft copy Apple enough and fix their issues enough so that aesthetics and reliability are taken care off, Apple are just a more expensive brand.
The New Macbooks are totally upgradable and you run Windows XP because Vista is a total piece of shit. Please STOP BEING A MOD FOR THIS SITE AND GO TO THE PC SITES.
Comments
The first is PC Choice chat where PC is hosting a talk radio show and is asked question after question about PC viruses etc
http://movies.apple.com/media/us/mac...12_480x272.mov
The second is 'Elimination' where PC has brought along a whole host of PC's to help a customer 'A Megan' find the best one.
http://movies.apple.com/media/us/mac...12_480x272.mov
Simple straightforward response to Microsofts ad's.
There is also a third ad which highlights the benefits of the Apple Genius called 'Customer Care'
http://movies.apple.com/media/us/mac...12_480x272.mov
Will ask next time I will be in States.
If someone wants to get into doing high end work that taxes a computer, Apple's only option is a £1900 workstation. On the PC side, you can get close to the same performance for £500.
Apple just need to offer more sensible options and stop over charging for BTO parts. I mean really, £120 for 4GB Ram. This is £50 from a 3rd party. It seems like they charge £50 for the Ram and have an Apple service technician fit it at £70 an hour, rounding up.
Someone made an important point on Engadget though. Once that buyer asks, what can I get for $500, they would have to ask some of the PCs back. The reality is that flaws in a computer's operation can be dealt with, the cost of buying one not as easily.
If someone wants to get into doing high end work that taxes a computer, Apple's only option is a £1900 workstation. On the PC side, you can get close to the same performance for £500.
Apple just need to offer more sensible options and stop over charging for BTO parts. I mean really, £120 for 4GB Ram. This is £50 from a 3rd party. It seems like they charge £50 for the Ram and have an Apple service technician fit it at £70 an hour, rounding up.
Who ever buys BTO from apple is a moron so lets skip that part.
The point here is not that PC users will encounter a virus (even though they will). The point is that in order to be safe using a PC you need an antivirus and an antispyware plus firewall. Each of those sap CPU cycles, cost $$ and are a pain in the arse to maintain due to the constant and relentless updates in definitions.
So in the end paying an extra $500 for a mac seems like the cheaper proposition, really. And note that we are not even touching the subject of OS Leopard being vastly superior to Windows OS (any windows OS) or that it comes with the plenty useful iLife and that you can buy the vastly superior iwork for $80.
The point here is not that PC users will encounter a virus (even though they will). The point is that in order to be safe using a PC you need an antivirus and an antispyware plus firewall. Each of those sap CPU cycles, cost $$ and are a pain in the arse to maintain due to the constant and relentless updates in definitions.
That's just not true though because all of those tools can be had for free, and they update and maintain themselves. There will be a slight performance penalty, but as these PCs tend to be packing quad-core processors over the Mac's usual dual-core, that's of little concern. Therefore, the $500 extra is just wasting money.
Who ever buys BTO from apple is a moron so lets skip that part.
Usually they are people who don't want to open up some of Apple's ridiculously and unnecessarily hard to upgrade machines and risk breaking them and voiding their warranty.
So in the end paying an extra $500 for a mac seems like the cheaper proposition, really. And note that we are not even touching the subject of OS Leopard being vastly superior to Windows OS (any windows OS) or that it comes with the plenty useful iLife and that you can buy the vastly superior iwork for $80.
It's cheaper assuming those problems arise. A lot of Windows users simply don't have problems with their OS. I run Windows XP on my Mac and it seems to be ok. I would say that Leopard is significantly better but if my only options are a quad core for £1900 with very limited GPU options or a quad for £500 where I can buy off-the-shelf GPU upgrades then for certain lines of work, having to use Windows is really not an issue.
If it was so horrendously bad as to be unusable, 90% of the world wouldn't be using it daily to keep the computing world ticking over.
Apple's response to Microsoft saying Macs are expensive should be to add more options and make the machines more affordable, not to just make the same rants about viruses and tech support. It seems like the kind of attitude that comes from individuals like Bertrand Serlet, who comes over like some drunk with the usual rambings: grumble.... registry... grumble.... dll hell,,, activation
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-2C2gb6ws8
They make some fair points but Microsoft are making some fair points in their current ads too and if Microsoft copy Apple enough and fix their issues enough so that aesthetics and reliability are taken care off, Apple are just a more expensive brand.
Someone made an important point on Engadget though. Once that buyer asks, what can I get for $500, they would have to ask some of the PCs back. The reality is that flaws in a computer's operation can be dealt with, the cost of buying one not as easily.
If someone wants to get into doing high end work that taxes a computer, Apple's only option is a £1900 workstation. On the PC side, you can get close to the same performance for £500.
There's surely truth in this. It's also true, that Apple hardware stands easily at least 5 major releases of native operating system. And even the meaning of "stands" in Apple's world differs from that in IBM clones' world.
Upgrade is tough work, yet feasible.
Glad to see the new ads responding using the old PC arguments (crashes, viruses, support, etc.)...tit for tat. Should work. General consumers are stupid that way.
Seems that Apple is responding to the same old argument 'Macs are expensive.' We all know that's not the case when you consider all the factors, so, that argument is a fallacy.
Glad to see the new ads responding using the old PC arguments (crashes, viruses, support, etc.)...tit for tat. Should work. General consumers are stupid that way.
It's just a pity they go about it in the same over-used way. They need a fresh new message that actually tells us why a Mac is good and not why a PC is bad.
Usually they are people who don't want to open up some of Apple's ridiculously and unnecessarily hard to upgrade machines and risk breaking them and voiding their warranty.
It's cheaper assuming those problems arise. A lot of Windows users simply don't have problems with their OS. I run Windows XP on my Mac and it seems to be ok. I would say that Leopard is significantly better but if my only options are a quad core for £1900 with very limited GPU options or a quad for £500 where I can buy off-the-shelf GPU upgrades then for certain lines of work, having to use Windows is really not an issue.
If it was so horrendously bad as to be unusable, 90% of the world wouldn't be using it daily to keep the computing world ticking over.
Apple's response to Microsoft saying Macs are expensive should be to add more options and make the machines more affordable, not to just make the same rants about viruses and tech support. It seems like the kind of attitude that comes from individuals like Bertrand Serlet, who comes over like some drunk with the usual rambings: grumble.... registry... grumble.... dll hell,,, activation
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-2C2gb6ws8
They make some fair points but Microsoft are making some fair points in their current ads too and if Microsoft copy Apple enough and fix their issues enough so that aesthetics and reliability are taken care off, Apple are just a more expensive brand.
Your info is old. Today's macs can be upgraded with zero or a couple of simple screws. There is no science to this and it doesn't violate any warranties. Using Windows is always an issue. That is why companies have armies of IT personnel, because stuff is always breaking down. Same thing happens in the household (more, actually) with the exception that one has to deal with 1-2 computers instead of 20-100. The situation I always see is that either the person is computer savvy and spends a ridiculous amount of time doing maintenance, or the person is not savvy and the computer is overrun with spyware, fragmented drives, broken registry, etc, etc.
Macs are actually way cheaper than Windows (no matter how much I say this people don't seem to understand it) if you are a person who values your time and peace of mind. It is the same as buying a Ford or a BMW: sure both have 4 wheels and move but oh my god there is a difference. Next time you think about a purchase do as intelligent people do and consider the overall package you are getting for your dollar and don't do as the average joe who only considers a list of features: how many RAM, how many GBytes, or any other raw number.
2 of the ads forget to mention.....
1 ad doesn't even define what a ....
1 ad forgets to mention that a ...
Just curious but have you ever seen a TV commercial before ?
Your info is old. Today's macs can be upgraded with zero or a couple of simple screws. There is no science to this and it doesn't violate any warranties. Using Windows is always an issue. That is why companies have armies of IT personnel, because stuff is always breaking down. Same thing happens in the household (more, actually) with the exception that one has to deal with 1-2 computers instead of 20-100. The situation I always see is that either the person is computer savvy and spends a ridiculous amount of time doing maintenance, or the person is not savvy and the computer is overrun with spyware, fragmented drives, broken registry, etc, etc.
Macs are actually way cheaper than Windows (no matter how much I say this people don't seem to understand it) if you are a person who values your time and peace of mind. It is the same as buying a Ford or a BMW: sure both have 4 wheels and move but oh my god there is a difference. Next time you think about a purchase do as intelligent people do and consider the overall package you are getting for your dollar and don't do as the average joe who only considers a list of features: how many RAM, how many GBytes, or any other raw number.
I hadn't realised that it was so easy to access the hard drive, processor and graphics card in the iMac to upgrade. I thought you pretty much had to take the machine to bits to get access to these parts?
Seems that Apple is responding to the same old argument 'Macs are expensive.' We all know that's not the case when you consider all the factors, so, that argument is a fallacy.
Glad to see the new ads responding using the old PC arguments (crashes, viruses, support, etc.)...tit for tat. Should work. General consumers are stupid that way.
They're not expensive (well the Mac Pros are, but only because the price is jacked up to protect the iMac), but they do have a very limited black and white view of the industry. If you want one feature, you must be this and need all these other high end features too. It just doesn't compute to them why someone not at the absolute highest echelon of a market would want a affordable larger screen notebook to replace the family desktop or an upgradable desktop.
Your info is old. Today's macs can be upgraded with zero or a couple of simple screws. There is no science to this and it doesn't violate any warranties.
For the Macbook, yes. For the iMac and mini you have to tear them apart. Ironic that the laptops are easier to upgrade than the desktops.
They're not expensive[...].
That's why I said the argument was a fallacy, and why Apple responded in kind. Not to mention, there's no such thing as a 'base model' BMW/Cadillac/etc...at a certain level, you expect certain things to be standard, and to be priced accordingly.
That's why I said the argument was a fallacy, and why Apple responded in kind. Not to mention, there's no such thing as a 'base model' BMW/Cadillac/etc...at a certain level, you expect certain things to be standard, and to be priced accordingly.
Cadillac/BMW don't run on a proprietary fuel or set of roads. Apple is the only company making Mac OS X computers. Most of the luxury brands also have general purpose sister brands.
It's just a pity they go about it in the same over-used way. They need a fresh new message that actually tells us why a Mac is good and not why a PC is bad.
Right! Show us how much iLife rocks (especially iPhoto), or show what the pro apps can do. A quick demo of Time Machine (w/ the same narrator used in the iPhone commercials) could get a lot more people to think twice before buying another PC.
Someone made an important point on Engadget though. Once that buyer asks, what can I get for $500, they would have to ask some of the PCs back. The reality is that flaws in a computer's operation can be dealt with, the cost of buying one not as easily.
If someone wants to get into doing high end work that taxes a computer, Apple's only option is a £1900 workstation. On the PC side, you can get close to the same performance for £500.
Apple just need to offer more sensible options and stop over charging for BTO parts. I mean really, £120 for 4GB Ram. This is £50 from a 3rd party. It seems like they charge £50 for the Ram and have an Apple service technician fit it at £70 an hour, rounding up.
This seems like you are for PCs more then Macs, so why are you an Appleinsider Mod?
By the way I just bought a Mac for $1,400 and it is every bit worth that amount for no PC headaches, extra software charges.
Usually they are people who don't want to open up some of Apple's ridiculously and unnecessarily hard to upgrade machines and risk breaking them and voiding their warranty.
It's cheaper assuming those problems arise. A lot of Windows users simply don't have problems with their OS. I run Windows XP on my Mac and it seems to be ok. I would say that Leopard is significantly better but if my only options are a quad core for £1900 with very limited GPU options or a quad for £500 where I can buy off-the-shelf GPU upgrades then for certain lines of work, having to use Windows is really not an issue.
If it was so horrendously bad as to be unusable, 90% of the world wouldn't be using it daily to keep the computing world ticking over.
Apple's response to Microsoft saying Macs are expensive should be to add more options and make the machines more affordable, not to just make the same rants about viruses and tech support. It seems like the kind of attitude that comes from individuals like Bertrand Serlet, who comes over like some drunk with the usual rambings: grumble.... registry... grumble.... dll hell,,, activation
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-2C2gb6ws8
They make some fair points but Microsoft are making some fair points in their current ads too and if Microsoft copy Apple enough and fix their issues enough so that aesthetics and reliability are taken care off, Apple are just a more expensive brand.
The New Macbooks are totally upgradable and you run Windows XP because Vista is a total piece of shit. Please STOP BEING A MOD FOR THIS SITE AND GO TO THE PC SITES.
THANKYOU!