I believe Apple have more affordable models in the pipeline that will hopefully quell the argument of cost.
While there is a premium for buying a mac, it is one of R&D, beautiful design (in most cases), and the piece of mind that what you get is a wonderful piece of technology that you can be proud to own. I have several Macs from a G4 500 MHz powerbook to the latest iMac.
I run boot camp XP on the iMac and Operating system alone gives me more headaches than any of my other machines.
The reason most of my friends give for not switching is that they are familiar with Windows and thier company is PC based etc, while this is a fair point, those who have really taken to time to try out a Mac, either in the Apple store or one of mine, have ended up switching and haven't looked back. Once they realised they can use Word, Excel and there are two mouse buttons, everything is fine.
Fortune favoured the likes of IBM and Microsoft at the right time when the computer boom began, I put forward the question: If all the worlds computers, networks, etc were destroyed and we started over, would we adopt the Windows platform and "PC" based machines or one of the alternatives?
One can't talk about "price to specs" comparisons without talking about the OS and over-all user experience. A Hyundai is not an Acura, etc. I want the best user experience I can afford, and that's a Mac. Period. The Microsoft ads don't mention MS products for a reason, just Dell and Intel. The Apple ads emphasize the OS.
argh this argument again LOL. The Dell XPS 13 and Macbook 13" has about £100 ish different when both specced up the same, I know I considered both. Bought the macbook as it was better built (solid aluminium) and thinner (overall).
OSX is unlikely to be opened up as a) Apple will Lose most of there profits b) will become less stable and secure on other hardware.
Software - Both systems are mature enough that there is free alternatives for all software. Apples software is however cheaper to purchase and update etc, and feels a bit more "finished" to me.
Apple responded not because they want to but because the consumer (and us) want them to. Check the forums for the posts about Microsoft ads, there is loads of posts asking how apple are going to respond. The consumer is uninformed, thats how advertising came to be.
Support - No apple doesnt support your SCSI ISA card, but thats because its over 1 decade old and tbh is crap. Yes there is some things I would like that apple doesnt support. but most of the stuff (all large manufacturers these days) support all platforms! EVEN unix/linux. So thats old hat. From my experience more of my stuff is supported by OSX than XP/Vista/Windows 7. But thats just my logitech keyboard and webcam, and my microsoft bluetooth keyboard. Yesterday Powerpoint (2008) wouldnt open an old .ppt I had, keynotes did. However I do need USB Overdrive for my Logitech G5. Whats my point, if you want your SCSI ISA card to work, stick with what is was designed for or buy a new one. If its broke fix it, if it isnt broke dont.
Viruses - From having been using pcs since 1993 (and macs since early last year) I have had many viruses, torjans etc on windows machines (supporting 5000+ machines at times) However OSX still has trojans etc out there. however due to the inherit more secure nature of UNIX (base of OSX) and the design ie (turn the firewall settings down and it turns the system security up) it is better. Also AVG is not enough on PC's nowdays for the AVERAGE user. I know I had enough of them to support! So a paid package is a requirement. With 5000+ terminals we had a MASSIVE cost (I personally use Kaspersky which is about £30 a year (VERY GOOD) however on my mac the free version of iAntivirus (equivalent to AVG on a PC) is enough as the mac has less viruses etc and is by nature more secure to the average user. Finally I would say I am relatively advanced user, being able to write from assembler to high level code, and having a good understanding of computer architecture I have still at times when tired etc made mistakes and sercombe to the odd virus etc on both my pcs and phones. As of yet I have not on my iPhone or OSX, but it is early days.
Apple will not let you run OS X on a PC because they would rather have you pay for their overpriced hardware. They should open the restrictions and see how that goes. The lack of driver support for OS X would be an issue as Windows must work with all hardware while OS X only works with select hardware.
i don't usually wade in on debates such as these, but i think you should look a little into the history of the computer business. it is in fact microsoft that is the black sheep of the pack, developing operating systems for generic hardware. up until they hit the scene the computer business was a hardware business, and hardware manufacturers developed operating systems appropriate and compatible for their hardware. the hardware and the operating system provided by the manufacturer were made to be, and expected to be, a complete and functioning unit, and their merits were evaluated as such.
i'm all for choice on one hand, but this approach to marketing their operating systems is one of the reasons microsoft has got itself into the mess its in these days: far too able to dismiss responsibility for poor user experience and left trying to fit their operating system to diverse amounts of hardware of varying quality instead of vice versa.
While I rant a lot about apple pricing, eg the apple care pays for most parts, plus I see how little you can spend if you buy from an apple friend, I think a lot if my anger comes from seeing some of my mac retail friends, get dumped in. Fir example, I knew one girl who was number one in sales and during their quarterly pizza retail meeting party, she did not get any recognition as shebfailed to sell AppleCare with the macs. Fir those that do, with some selling millions, they get a piece of paper. A few years back, they used to get shared commission. Anyway I do want to say that there really is an experience. It just works the way you think it should.
A good example is iwork pages. Want to add a photo and resize it. No problem. Just drag drop and resize. Add a mask, one click. Try that on ms word or even inDesign and the text goes flying off the page, knowhere to be seen and that's just one thing.
I was studying fir a vista cert for a certified apple tech support company, you have to know both plus server and I was shocked at how many stepsvare required to do the simple commands
Yes, macs have problems just lime a of but not nearly as many and they hardly ever crash. The user experience is non surpassed. It works the way a creative brain works. Sure msft might get win 7 to work better, time will telln whatvi would have liked to see is msft buy sun and take project looking glass to the next level. Maybe someday they will buy a Linux platform. That would be a smart move make it high end, lots of apps. It could be done.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 8CoreWhore
One can't talk about "price to specs" comparisons without talking about the OS and over-all user experience. A Hyundai is not an Acura, etc. I want the best user experience I can afford, and that's a Mac. Period. The Microsoft ads don't mention MS products for a reason, just Dell and Intel. The Apple ads emphasize the OS.
i don't usually wade in on debates such as these, but i think you should look a little into the history of the computer business. it is in fact microsoft that is the black sheep of the pack, developing operating systems for generic hardware. up until they hit the scene the computer business was a hardware business, and hardware manufacturers developed operating systems appropriate and compatible for their hardware. the hardware and the operating system provided by the manufacturer were made to be, and expected to be, a complete and functioning unit, and their merits were evaluated as such.
i'm all for choice on one hand, but this approach to marketing their operating systems is one of the reasons microsoft has got itself into the mess its in these days: far too able to dismiss responsibility for poor user experience and left trying to fit their operating system to diverse amounts of hardware of varying quality instead of vice versa.
First. Sorry for spelling. Tired and using iPhone in bathroom. What I would give fir an Apple tab or 10" screen netbook. Anyway, the real idea back in the day was IBM had a vision ofall computer users using a terminal at himewith IBM techs ( remeber the white shirt/black tie?), would be the technical support. The IBM CLONES and Apple clones, changed all that. IBM vision was lost. The personal computer changed all that and let's give credit where it's due. If it wasn't for Apple, no GUI/xerox, no msft, no mass produced OS, no AMD, we would still be paying $500 more for a .05 megahertz speed bump on CPU. I remember those pre AMD Athlon days.
You know, I was thinking the same. I can't remember the last time I force quit. He must be screwing something up for his system having to be forced to quit so often.
Anyone know why adobe acrobat pro takes forever to quit?
Microsoft is fighting to regain street cred & it is understandable, but it is not touting the OS, but hardware!
In my mind Microsoft is attempting to convince users that all their past issues with its OS don't matter, by focusing on HARDWARE, which Microsoft has NO CONTROL OVER, and which attempts to submerge thought of the OS to invisibility.
(I am forced to use Windows, so I do it on the MBPro.)
My Dell laptops failed way too soon just like my older GM Suburbans (4 of them) where knobs would break off and screws fell out and shift indicator inside the dash disappeared and radiators and water pumps and air conditioning compressors & transmissions failed WAY too soon.
Too Soon. That is the issue, as all systems fail at some point.
My experience with OSs is that I have more issues with Windows items mucking up and sooner, and that it takes me more time to recover when things go bad.
That is a cost I don't want to endure. Some PC owners just buy cheap and throw them away. If that works, fine. If your work depends on the PC to keep your income, cheap hardware doesn't pay. At that point you pay just as much as Apple or more (Dell 6400 laptops start at about $2000 and with max. options and tax hits near $6000).
Microsoft is fighting to regain street cred & it is understandable, but it is not touting the OS, but hardware!
In my mind Microsoft is attempting to convince users that all their past issues with its OS don't matter, by focusing on HARDWARE, which Microsoft has NO CONTROL OVER, and which attempts to submerge thought of the OS to invisibility.
This is really the heart of the matter.
Windows simply isn't good enough to promote against OS X. So MS gets together with the hardware manufacturers (as a cartel) under this recession and tries to differentiate using the only real element it can: Price. Screw real value. No one cares about that, or the interface, or the software. Just move product out the door. It's a good way to sell junk.
MS assumes the consumer doesn't care about anything except price. This of course paints consumers as cheap losers. Quite a message. The whole "law student" angle is cute. Same for the "film maker" angle. But MS has them stuck in the quicksand of low-brow middle-America. No beauty, no "cool", and certainly nothing to aspire to. MS denegrates both the product and its target market.
It's sad when you have nothing else going for you except the "we're cheap" angle. But then again, this is MS. When was the last time they did something even halfway compelling?
I'm so tired of these ads from both companies. Whats even better is that Appleinsider chooses to venomously dissect Microsoft's ads as its rebuttal, as if to say "See! They're WRONG! Wrong wrong wrong." Every time I see a story about one of these ads on the main page, I think, Oh boy here we go again. Honestly, who cares. All ads amplify and exacerbate truths and falsehoods, Microsoft's and Apple's. Not all Macs come without grief; not all PCs are problem-stricken. In the end, it is all about what a consumer feels is appropriate for his/her needs. The notion that one brand or one OS is better than the other is based on perception, not actuality.
Whoever doesn't think Macs aren't more expensive is just plain stupid. Having said that, Macs still work more efficiently because of their OS which is something you just can't put a price tag on. Therefor the Mac i$ a better deal- less aggravation.
Ok, let's consider I'm stupid (since I bought 24'' iMac, Mac Pro, and aluminum Macbook in that order). I'm a software developer, I have masters degree in Pure Math, I make more than $100,000 a year, so perhaps I could be stupid. But on the other hand I value my time a lot lately, since I have less and less of it. At work I develop on Linux, Windows, Solaris, AIX, HPUX, but at home I use OS X exclusively. Because I don't want a chatty OS, with ugly UI, I don't want to tinker, I don't want to fix stuff, I don't want to troubleshoot. I do that at work. At home I just want to relax and use my computer for fun.
I'm also into photography and video, and it's just fantastic to have a UNIX system that can run Photoshop. I love that OS X is certified UNIX and that I have all the standard tools that I use daily and on depend on.
Macs are also bundled with basic image and video processing software that are surprisingly powerful. You need to spend additional $300 - $500 on your Windows PC to get equivalent software, and it will still not be as polished and streamlined (I would know I develop software and I'm quite familiar with windows offerings).
But even excluding all that, OS X alone would do it for me. It allows me to work measurably faster because of spotlight, expose and spaces in conjunction. I'm one of those 100 word per minute touch typists that uses VIM and the shell, and I like keeping my hands on the home row on the keyboard. And OS X allows you to carry that style of working into the GUI world.
I never have to move my hand to the mouse and navigate the file system to find that image I want to edit. Looking for image I took yesterday with flash and at aperture f2.8. No problem, bring up spotlight CMD+Space, type kind:image fnumber:2.8 flash:1 date:yesterday and the image is top hit.
Want to lauch an app, find doc to edit etc. Usually 3 letters is enough. And you can save these searches as dynamic folders that update their content as more files match their criteria.
Switching between apps with Expose is a Godsend. You never have to leave the keyboard. This is so liberating and so much faster.
As far as hardware itself goes, I have been spending up to $5000 to custom build all by myself an ultra quiet PC. I have been doing this since I was a teenager, and I would spend extra money on quiet case, quiet power supply, quiet low speed fans, hard drive dampeners etc, and I never made the PC that was as sturdy, and as quiet as my Mac Pro. I would challenge any manufacturer to build a PC that is as quiet at ANY price. And quiet is very important to me and some other people (who work with audio).
Besides all that, Mac Pro is competitively priced and cheaper than equivalent Dell. It's actually a steal. And it's joy to use, you never wait for your computer.
So, that's what I'm prepared to pay money for. I want fast, quiet sturdy computer, amazing os that gets out of the way, isn't chatty, decent UI, great standard UNIX tools, and development toolchain, can run Photoshop and Adobe video suite. If you don't value these things, then perhaps PCs are better for you. If all you are looking for is "cheap" then by all means, knock yourself out.
Totally agree with you. I may be an elitist jerk but I like Apple as a niche brand, as I think the biggest danger for their products quality is to get too "mainstream". I don't think they need to answer MS ridiculous ads, nor that they should go down the lowest price route.
This makes complete sense to me. Although I do like Apple's ad campaign. It's polished, lighthearted, and quite sophisticated. Another good differentiator. It's all about image.
But how fast do these generic PCs run OS X and its own software?
Oh wait . . .
Depends on the specs. But you can build a PC for less money and run OSX on it faster than any mac.
Quote:
Originally Posted by evilcnboy
Lol, do you even know what you talking about??? Have you really used iLife. iPhoto, like Picasa and Photoshop, is meant to be more of a organizer and presentation of your photos with some editing features. For real editor, you have to go things like PS or after effect, which most ppl won't used. iPhoto is "light years" ahead, Picasa is the best alternative on the windows for such basic app. Why do you think google doesn't have a mac version of it (as they already going to have chrome for mac soon), cuz they know they won't get any share there. iMovie only a lil bit better than movie make? tat's a joke rite? really funny. Movie maker is worthless piece of junk while iMovie is sufficient to make gorgeous home movies for a lot of great features. For professional, you could need such thing as Final Cut Pro (which is arguable the best) or Premiere. Garageband vs. songsmith, lol, no need to test which is way superior.
ilife is horrible. Absolutely horrible. I hate using it and was relieved when I finally got picasa in OSX.
Songsmith is not a competitor to garageband. They are different apps.
The new movie maker is actually better than you think. And in some ways superior to imovie. Though I do really like imovie.
I could go on and on about all the things in OSX that really irritate me. Things I wish they would copy from microsoft. But that would be pointless here. I know mac users think that all PC users are infected with viruses but it's just not true. Out of the millions of viruses out there I have never had one. And how do I avoid them? Nothing special. Just smart computing.
Yet it was the mac to fall first, two years in a row, in the hacker challenge. With the hacker stating it was much more difficult to get that exploit to even function in windows. He did say windows was more secure for several reasons. Though apple will fix those in snow leopard.
I can say that on the same machine I have better performance in most things in Vista and Windows 7 RC than I do in OSX.
You have to stop buying into the false apple advertising that just repeats old and long dead cliches. It just isn't the case. If anything the microsoft advertising is far more accurate as you can get alot more machine for the money. That is fact. And if you know how to find deals I can show you where to get a machine more powerful than a macbook pro for $900. Highly rated too.
And with a PC I can upgrade my video card. Which is a requirement in whatever machine I get/build. While mac users throw there machines away and buy new ones I just upgrade as the years go by. Changing out whatever parts I deem necessary.
You have to stop buying into the false apple advertising that just repeats old and long dead cliches. It just isn't the case. If anything the Microsoft advertising is far more accurate as you can get a lot more machine for the money. That is fact. And if you know how to find deals I can show you where to get a machine more powerful than a macbook pro for $900. Highly rated too.
And with a PC I can upgrade my video card. Which is a requirement in whatever machine I get/build. While mac users throw there machines away and buy new ones I just upgrade as the years go by. Changing out whatever parts I deem necessary.
Amen. Although I take issue with Microsoft's ads because they are essentially hawking 3rd party manufacturers' hardware (they're primarily a software company), the issue of price is a completely relevant one and is applicable across the PC/Mac spectrum. Unlike in Apple's ads, where Apple takes one specific instance identified as a problem with Windows and applies it across the entire PC spectrum, implying that all PCs get viruses, that all PCs freeze, and the list goes on and on. This is deception at its finest, and ultimately a scare tactic to entice those who really don't know the ins and outs of using a PC, or for that matter using Windows.
It is funny to see Apple feel the need to respond to the Microsoft ads. I would think Apple would be above this if they were not worried about the ads.
There is nothing in these ads that Apple hasn't been saying in their ads all along. Microsoft's ads did give Apple the idea for another way to approach it and make the same point: It's about Mac OS X, and no PC has that out of the box.
I love Macs, Love using OSX, Love my Macbook Pro 2007, but the latest round of Macs with this horrible glass displays has had me thinking the same thing, "very little choice". I would love it if Apple gave me a choice for a new 15 inch MBP. Maybe I don't have $3000 for a Matte 17 inch, maybe I don't want a 17inch.
Depends on the specs. But you can build a PC for less money and run OSX on it faster than any mac.
...
You have to stop buying into the false apple advertising that just repeats old and long dead cliches. It just isn't the case. If anything the microsoft advertising is far more accurate as you can get alot more machine for the money. That is fact. And if you know how to find deals I can show you where to get a machine more powerful than a macbook pro for $900. Highly rated too.
And with a PC I can upgrade my video card. Which is a requirement in whatever machine I get/build. While mac users throw there machines away and buy new ones I just upgrade as the years go by. Changing out whatever parts I deem necessary.
What price do you put on your own time?
If tinkering with your hardware is your passion and hobby, that's great. But most people have very little interest in such things. For them, the ability to do other interesting things with the time saved is worth much much more.
Comments
While there is a premium for buying a mac, it is one of R&D, beautiful design (in most cases), and the piece of mind that what you get is a wonderful piece of technology that you can be proud to own. I have several Macs from a G4 500 MHz powerbook to the latest iMac.
I run boot camp XP on the iMac and Operating system alone gives me more headaches than any of my other machines.
The reason most of my friends give for not switching is that they are familiar with Windows and thier company is PC based etc, while this is a fair point, those who have really taken to time to try out a Mac, either in the Apple store or one of mine, have ended up switching and haven't looked back. Once they realised they can use Word, Excel and there are two mouse buttons, everything is fine.
Fortune favoured the likes of IBM and Microsoft at the right time when the computer boom began, I put forward the question: If all the worlds computers, networks, etc were destroyed and we started over, would we adopt the Windows platform and "PC" based machines or one of the alternatives?
OSX is unlikely to be opened up as a) Apple will Lose most of there profits b) will become less stable and secure on other hardware.
Software - Both systems are mature enough that there is free alternatives for all software. Apples software is however cheaper to purchase and update etc, and feels a bit more "finished" to me.
Apple responded not because they want to but because the consumer (and us) want them to. Check the forums for the posts about Microsoft ads, there is loads of posts asking how apple are going to respond. The consumer is uninformed, thats how advertising came to be.
Support - No apple doesnt support your SCSI ISA card, but thats because its over 1 decade old and tbh is crap. Yes there is some things I would like that apple doesnt support. but most of the stuff (all large manufacturers these days) support all platforms! EVEN unix/linux. So thats old hat. From my experience more of my stuff is supported by OSX than XP/Vista/Windows 7. But thats just my logitech keyboard and webcam, and my microsoft bluetooth keyboard. Yesterday Powerpoint (2008) wouldnt open an old .ppt I had, keynotes did. However I do need USB Overdrive for my Logitech G5. Whats my point, if you want your SCSI ISA card to work, stick with what is was designed for or buy a new one. If its broke fix it, if it isnt broke dont.
Viruses - From having been using pcs since 1993 (and macs since early last year) I have had many viruses, torjans etc on windows machines (supporting 5000+ machines at times) However OSX still has trojans etc out there. however due to the inherit more secure nature of UNIX (base of OSX) and the design ie (turn the firewall settings down and it turns the system security up) it is better. Also AVG is not enough on PC's nowdays for the AVERAGE user. I know I had enough of them to support! So a paid package is a requirement. With 5000+ terminals we had a MASSIVE cost (I personally use Kaspersky which is about £30 a year (VERY GOOD) however on my mac the free version of iAntivirus (equivalent to AVG on a PC) is enough as the mac has less viruses etc and is by nature more secure to the average user. Finally I would say I am relatively advanced user, being able to write from assembler to high level code, and having a good understanding of computer architecture I have still at times when tired etc made mistakes and sercombe to the odd virus etc on both my pcs and phones. As of yet I have not on my iPhone or OSX, but it is early days.
Apple will not let you run OS X on a PC because they would rather have you pay for their overpriced hardware. They should open the restrictions and see how that goes. The lack of driver support for OS X would be an issue as Windows must work with all hardware while OS X only works with select hardware.
i don't usually wade in on debates such as these, but i think you should look a little into the history of the computer business. it is in fact microsoft that is the black sheep of the pack, developing operating systems for generic hardware. up until they hit the scene the computer business was a hardware business, and hardware manufacturers developed operating systems appropriate and compatible for their hardware. the hardware and the operating system provided by the manufacturer were made to be, and expected to be, a complete and functioning unit, and their merits were evaluated as such.
i'm all for choice on one hand, but this approach to marketing their operating systems is one of the reasons microsoft has got itself into the mess its in these days: far too able to dismiss responsibility for poor user experience and left trying to fit their operating system to diverse amounts of hardware of varying quality instead of vice versa.
While I rant a lot about apple pricing, eg the apple care pays for most parts, plus I see how little you can spend if you buy from an apple friend, I think a lot if my anger comes from seeing some of my mac retail friends, get dumped in. Fir example, I knew one girl who was number one in sales and during their quarterly pizza retail meeting party, she did not get any recognition as shebfailed to sell AppleCare with the macs. Fir those that do, with some selling millions, they get a piece of paper. A few years back, they used to get shared commission. Anyway I do want to say that there really is an experience. It just works the way you think it should.
A good example is iwork pages. Want to add a photo and resize it. No problem. Just drag drop and resize. Add a mask, one click. Try that on ms word or even inDesign and the text goes flying off the page, knowhere to be seen and that's just one thing.
I was studying fir a vista cert for a certified apple tech support company, you have to know both plus server and I was shocked at how many stepsvare required to do the simple commands
Yes, macs have problems just lime a of but not nearly as many and they hardly ever crash. The user experience is non surpassed. It works the way a creative brain works. Sure msft might get win 7 to work better, time will telln whatvi would have liked to see is msft buy sun and take project looking glass to the next level. Maybe someday they will buy a Linux platform. That would be a smart move make it high end, lots of apps. It could be done.
One can't talk about "price to specs" comparisons without talking about the OS and over-all user experience. A Hyundai is not an Acura, etc. I want the best user experience I can afford, and that's a Mac. Period. The Microsoft ads don't mention MS products for a reason, just Dell and Intel. The Apple ads emphasize the OS.
i don't usually wade in on debates such as these, but i think you should look a little into the history of the computer business. it is in fact microsoft that is the black sheep of the pack, developing operating systems for generic hardware. up until they hit the scene the computer business was a hardware business, and hardware manufacturers developed operating systems appropriate and compatible for their hardware. the hardware and the operating system provided by the manufacturer were made to be, and expected to be, a complete and functioning unit, and their merits were evaluated as such.
i'm all for choice on one hand, but this approach to marketing their operating systems is one of the reasons microsoft has got itself into the mess its in these days: far too able to dismiss responsibility for poor user experience and left trying to fit their operating system to diverse amounts of hardware of varying quality instead of vice versa.
First. Sorry for spelling. Tired and using iPhone in bathroom. What I would give fir an Apple tab or 10" screen netbook. Anyway, the real idea back in the day was IBM had a vision ofall computer users using a terminal at himewith IBM techs ( remeber the white shirt/black tie?), would be the technical support. The IBM CLONES and Apple clones, changed all that. IBM vision was lost. The personal computer changed all that and let's give credit where it's due. If it wasn't for Apple, no GUI/xerox, no msft, no mass produced OS, no AMD, we would still be paying $500 more for a .05 megahertz speed bump on CPU. I remember those pre AMD Athlon days.
You know, I was thinking the same. I can't remember the last time I force quit. He must be screwing something up for his system having to be forced to quit so often.
Anyone know why adobe acrobat pro takes forever to quit?
Thanks.
In my mind Microsoft is attempting to convince users that all their past issues with its OS don't matter, by focusing on HARDWARE, which Microsoft has NO CONTROL OVER, and which attempts to submerge thought of the OS to invisibility.
(I am forced to use Windows, so I do it on the MBPro.)
My Dell laptops failed way too soon just like my older GM Suburbans (4 of them) where knobs would break off and screws fell out and shift indicator inside the dash disappeared and radiators and water pumps and air conditioning compressors & transmissions failed WAY too soon.
Too Soon. That is the issue, as all systems fail at some point.
My experience with OSs is that I have more issues with Windows items mucking up and sooner, and that it takes me more time to recover when things go bad.
That is a cost I don't want to endure. Some PC owners just buy cheap and throw them away. If that works, fine. If your work depends on the PC to keep your income, cheap hardware doesn't pay. At that point you pay just as much as Apple or more (Dell 6400 laptops start at about $2000 and with max. options and tax hits near $6000).
Microsoft is fighting to regain street cred & it is understandable, but it is not touting the OS, but hardware!
In my mind Microsoft is attempting to convince users that all their past issues with its OS don't matter, by focusing on HARDWARE, which Microsoft has NO CONTROL OVER, and which attempts to submerge thought of the OS to invisibility.
This is really the heart of the matter.
Windows simply isn't good enough to promote against OS X. So MS gets together with the hardware manufacturers (as a cartel) under this recession and tries to differentiate using the only real element it can: Price. Screw real value. No one cares about that, or the interface, or the software. Just move product out the door. It's a good way to sell junk.
MS assumes the consumer doesn't care about anything except price. This of course paints consumers as cheap losers. Quite a message. The whole "law student" angle is cute. Same for the "film maker" angle. But MS has them stuck in the quicksand of low-brow middle-America. No beauty, no "cool", and certainly nothing to aspire to. MS denegrates both the product and its target market.
It's sad when you have nothing else going for you except the "we're cheap" angle. But then again, this is MS. When was the last time they did something even halfway compelling?
Whoever doesn't think Macs aren't more expensive is just plain stupid. Having said that, Macs still work more efficiently because of their OS which is something you just can't put a price tag on. Therefor the Mac i$ a better deal- less aggravation.
Ok, let's consider I'm stupid (since I bought 24'' iMac, Mac Pro, and aluminum Macbook in that order). I'm a software developer, I have masters degree in Pure Math, I make more than $100,000 a year, so perhaps I could be stupid. But on the other hand I value my time a lot lately, since I have less and less of it. At work I develop on Linux, Windows, Solaris, AIX, HPUX, but at home I use OS X exclusively. Because I don't want a chatty OS, with ugly UI, I don't want to tinker, I don't want to fix stuff, I don't want to troubleshoot. I do that at work. At home I just want to relax and use my computer for fun.
I'm also into photography and video, and it's just fantastic to have a UNIX system that can run Photoshop. I love that OS X is certified UNIX and that I have all the standard tools that I use daily and on depend on.
Macs are also bundled with basic image and video processing software that are surprisingly powerful. You need to spend additional $300 - $500 on your Windows PC to get equivalent software, and it will still not be as polished and streamlined (I would know I develop software and I'm quite familiar with windows offerings).
But even excluding all that, OS X alone would do it for me. It allows me to work measurably faster because of spotlight, expose and spaces in conjunction. I'm one of those 100 word per minute touch typists that uses VIM and the shell, and I like keeping my hands on the home row on the keyboard. And OS X allows you to carry that style of working into the GUI world.
I never have to move my hand to the mouse and navigate the file system to find that image I want to edit. Looking for image I took yesterday with flash and at aperture f2.8. No problem, bring up spotlight CMD+Space, type kind:image fnumber:2.8 flash:1 date:yesterday and the image is top hit.
Want to lauch an app, find doc to edit etc. Usually 3 letters is enough. And you can save these searches as dynamic folders that update their content as more files match their criteria.
Switching between apps with Expose is a Godsend. You never have to leave the keyboard. This is so liberating and so much faster.
As far as hardware itself goes, I have been spending up to $5000 to custom build all by myself an ultra quiet PC. I have been doing this since I was a teenager, and I would spend extra money on quiet case, quiet power supply, quiet low speed fans, hard drive dampeners etc, and I never made the PC that was as sturdy, and as quiet as my Mac Pro. I would challenge any manufacturer to build a PC that is as quiet at ANY price. And quiet is very important to me and some other people (who work with audio).
Besides all that, Mac Pro is competitively priced and cheaper than equivalent Dell. It's actually a steal. And it's joy to use, you never wait for your computer.
So, that's what I'm prepared to pay money for. I want fast, quiet sturdy computer, amazing os that gets out of the way, isn't chatty, decent UI, great standard UNIX tools, and development toolchain, can run Photoshop and Adobe video suite. If you don't value these things, then perhaps PCs are better for you. If all you are looking for is "cheap" then by all means, knock yourself out.
Anyone know why adobe acrobat pro takes forever to quit?
Thanks.
You just answered your own question. It's an Adobe product. Therefore it's probably a bad port of the junk they hawk for Windows.
Totally agree with you. I may be an elitist jerk but I like Apple as a niche brand, as I think the biggest danger for their products quality is to get too "mainstream". I don't think they need to answer MS ridiculous ads, nor that they should go down the lowest price route.
This makes complete sense to me. Although I do like Apple's ad campaign. It's polished, lighthearted, and quite sophisticated. Another good differentiator. It's all about image.
Ok.
But how fast do these generic PCs run OS X and its own software?
Oh wait . . .
Depends on the specs. But you can build a PC for less money and run OSX on it faster than any mac.
Lol, do you even know what you talking about??? Have you really used iLife. iPhoto, like Picasa and Photoshop, is meant to be more of a organizer and presentation of your photos with some editing features. For real editor, you have to go things like PS or after effect, which most ppl won't used. iPhoto is "light years" ahead, Picasa is the best alternative on the windows for such basic app. Why do you think google doesn't have a mac version of it (as they already going to have chrome for mac soon), cuz they know they won't get any share there. iMovie only a lil bit better than movie make? tat's a joke rite? really funny. Movie maker is worthless piece of junk while iMovie is sufficient to make gorgeous home movies for a lot of great features. For professional, you could need such thing as Final Cut Pro (which is arguable the best) or Premiere. Garageband vs. songsmith, lol, no need to test which is way superior.
ilife is horrible. Absolutely horrible. I hate using it and was relieved when I finally got picasa in OSX.
Songsmith is not a competitor to garageband. They are different apps.
The new movie maker is actually better than you think. And in some ways superior to imovie. Though I do really like imovie.
I could go on and on about all the things in OSX that really irritate me. Things I wish they would copy from microsoft. But that would be pointless here. I know mac users think that all PC users are infected with viruses but it's just not true. Out of the millions of viruses out there I have never had one. And how do I avoid them? Nothing special. Just smart computing.
Yet it was the mac to fall first, two years in a row, in the hacker challenge. With the hacker stating it was much more difficult to get that exploit to even function in windows. He did say windows was more secure for several reasons. Though apple will fix those in snow leopard.
I can say that on the same machine I have better performance in most things in Vista and Windows 7 RC than I do in OSX.
You have to stop buying into the false apple advertising that just repeats old and long dead cliches. It just isn't the case. If anything the microsoft advertising is far more accurate as you can get alot more machine for the money. That is fact. And if you know how to find deals I can show you where to get a machine more powerful than a macbook pro for $900. Highly rated too.
And with a PC I can upgrade my video card. Which is a requirement in whatever machine I get/build. While mac users throw there machines away and buy new ones I just upgrade as the years go by. Changing out whatever parts I deem necessary.
You have to stop buying into the false apple advertising that just repeats old and long dead cliches. It just isn't the case. If anything the Microsoft advertising is far more accurate as you can get a lot more machine for the money. That is fact. And if you know how to find deals I can show you where to get a machine more powerful than a macbook pro for $900. Highly rated too.
And with a PC I can upgrade my video card. Which is a requirement in whatever machine I get/build. While mac users throw there machines away and buy new ones I just upgrade as the years go by. Changing out whatever parts I deem necessary.
Amen. Although I take issue with Microsoft's ads because they are essentially hawking 3rd party manufacturers' hardware (they're primarily a software company), the issue of price is a completely relevant one and is applicable across the PC/Mac spectrum. Unlike in Apple's ads, where Apple takes one specific instance identified as a problem with Windows and applies it across the entire PC spectrum, implying that all PCs get viruses, that all PCs freeze, and the list goes on and on. This is deception at its finest, and ultimately a scare tactic to entice those who really don't know the ins and outs of using a PC, or for that matter using Windows.
It is funny to see Apple feel the need to respond to the Microsoft ads. I would think Apple would be above this if they were not worried about the ads.
There is nothing in these ads that Apple hasn't been saying in their ads all along. Microsoft's ads did give Apple the idea for another way to approach it and make the same point: It's about Mac OS X, and no PC has that out of the box.
Depends on the specs. But you can build a PC for less money and run OSX on it faster than any mac.
...
You have to stop buying into the false apple advertising that just repeats old and long dead cliches. It just isn't the case. If anything the microsoft advertising is far more accurate as you can get alot more machine for the money. That is fact. And if you know how to find deals I can show you where to get a machine more powerful than a macbook pro for $900. Highly rated too.
And with a PC I can upgrade my video card. Which is a requirement in whatever machine I get/build. While mac users throw there machines away and buy new ones I just upgrade as the years go by. Changing out whatever parts I deem necessary.
What price do you put on your own time?
If tinkering with your hardware is your passion and hobby, that's great. But most people have very little interest in such things. For them, the ability to do other interesting things with the time saved is worth much much more.
OMG, this new Lauren is so hot. But all you freaking nerds keep spinning the Win/OSX broken record.
Don't know about others but to me, her voice is so annoying it might as well be a broken record.