I chose not to get Gigabit ethernet or a camera. I had the option and chose not to get them. They were inexpensive options but I didn't see any benefit. Two years ago multi-touch wasn't an issue and it's also one I don't care about. My battery life is excellent, because I had an option to get a larger battery and I chose it. I don't care about unibody or optical audio. I've never broken a tray and prefer the tray over the slot loading drives. Speakers on her Macbook do not sound better. Less than an inch thick or its weight doesn't matter to me. I don't know what my Dell weighs. It's not heavy, so I don't care. I have Bluetooth. Who cares about DisplayPort? I certainly don't. I think the display on my Dell is excellent and I can't see the difference between my daughter's Macbook and my Dell except that mine is bigger.
These are dismissive comments considering you asked what a mac had that your Dell didn't. Even if you don't want a feature, that feature still increases the cost. Your preference of a tray loading drive doesn't change the fact that a slot loading drive costs more, thus increasing the cost. You are correct in stating that you have more options with a PC than with a mac, I doubt you will find any mac user that will argue that point. I just recently built a PC because Apple didn't have what I wanted. The lack of selection, however, doesn't change the fact that if Dell were to make a macbook, the cost would be very similar to Apple's. All the extra features that you dismissed would ensure that. I always find direct comparisons between windows pc's and macs amusing, as there is no pc that directly compares to a mac feature for feature, and the features that are ignored or dismissed have a significant impact on the cost.
You either have not installed and used and run anti-virus software before, or you do not consider your time to be of any value.
Hours of work per month installing, configuring and running something otherwise completely unproductive is not "free". Slowing down your system while you run a scan or update the engine or definitions is not "free".
You either have not installed and used and run anti-virus software before, or you do not consider your time to be of any value.
Hours of work per month installing, configuring and running something otherwise completely unproductive is not "free". Slowing down your system while you run a scan or update the engine or definitions is not "free".
What anti-virus software do you use that takes hours each month installing, configuring and running? Just install something like AVG or Avast, which after a 30 second installation requires no further interaction for as long as you use it - and they are both free too! Avast uses 40mb of RAM to run in the background on my laptop, and since I'm packing 3GB of RAM, I'm not really concerned about how terribly my performance is degraded by anti-virus software.
"Free" doesn't mean they're any good, comprehensive, or a royal treat to install and run.
Big whoop.
Microsoft sells 10X more OS licenses than Apple and they still charge what for it? So much for the economies of scale.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton
You either have not installed and used and run anti-virus software before, or you do not consider your time to be of any value.
Hours of work per month installing, configuring and running something otherwise completely unproductive is not "free". Slowing down your system while you run a scan or update the engine or definitions is not "free".
LOL... AVG among others is 100% free. Takes less than 10 minutes to install. Its rated extremly high. So yes it is good and comprehensive.
In addition I can tell it to scan and update at 2 in the morning when i'm long gone from my computer and it won't waste me time. But actually I have scans disabled because all I really care is the active shield that monitors as websites download content etc.. I haven't had a virus in years on any of my Windows machines.
As for economics or scale... its common knowledge that Apple makes most of its profits from Hardware and not Software. In addition keeping constantly upgraded costs more with OS X as there are much more frequent paid updates. I think this all goes to further my point that you are over exagerating the costs of Windows.
LOL... AVG among others is 100% free. Takes less than 10 minutes to install. Its rated extremly high. So yes it is good and comprehensive.
In addition I can tell it to scan and update at 2 in the morning when i'm long gone from my computer and it won't waste me time. But actually I have scans disabled because all I really care is the active shield that monitors as websites download content etc.. I haven't had a virus in years on any of my Windows machines.
As for economics or scale... its common knowledge that Apple makes most of its profits from Hardware and not Software. In addition keeping constantly upgraded costs more with OS X as there are much more frequent paid updates. I think this all goes to further my point that you are over exagerating the costs of Windows.
I agree with this to an extent. Apple are able to subsidise the cost of OSX through the hardware. Contrary to this, Microsoft don't have hardware that they can use to subsidise the cost of their OS. It might be cheaper to buy an OSX license than it is a Windows license, but the hardware you bought to run it on is considerably more expensive to begin with.
LOL... AVG among others is 100% free. Takes less than 10 minutes to install.
So... once again, your time is worthless, then.
I am not rich, but I earn a pretty fair $30 per hour. Ten minutes doing something I don't want to do is $5 to me, dude. Maybe you're odd and actually enjoy installing stuff. I don't. so for me, there's the Mac.
And installation isn't the only time cost of using anti-virus programs. Once again, I guess your time is worthless. Mine is not.
I do use Anti-virus when I'm forced to use Windows. I much prefer Avast over AVG. I've used both. They both slow down your system when performing updates, and it's annoying. Occasionally I've been forced to run a full scan, or worse, a boot time scan. When there are things I want to do on the machine, that costs time, which is money.
What anti-virus software do you use that takes hours each month installing, configuring and running? Just install something like AVG or Avast, which after a 30 second installation requires no further interaction for as long as you use it - and they are both free too! Avast uses 40mb of RAM to run in the background on my laptop, and since I'm packing 3GB of RAM, I'm not really concerned about how terribly my performance is degraded by anti-virus software.
The hit on an underpowered laptop is not due to RAM, but to processor cycles. And the laptops Microsoft is "promoting" in this ad campaign -- the laptops you guys claim compete against Apple -- are all underpowered and a "hit" is definitely felt.
You honestly never have to touch Avast after you install it? How much do you use your machine for things other than gaming?
The hit on an underpowered laptop is not due to RAM, but to processor cycles. And the laptops Microsoft is "promoting" in this ad campaign -- the laptops you guys claim compete against Apple -- are all underpowered and a "hit" is definitely felt.
You honestly never have to touch Avast after you install it? How much do you use your machine for things other than gaming?
Why would I need to open Avast? It updates on its own, and the resident shield sits there protecting my machine without any intervention from me. I've been using Avast for about 3 months now and I've not once had to load it up for any reason. On my laptop it's using 40MB of RAM and 0% CPU resources. If I uninstall it, it makes no difference at all to the performance of my machine.
I am not rich, but I earn a pretty fair $30 per hour. Ten minutes doing something I don't want to do is $5 to me, dude. Maybe you're odd and actually enjoy installing stuff. I don't. so for me, there's the Mac.
And installation isn't the only time cost of using anti-virus programs. Once again, I guess your time is worthless. Mine is not.
I do use Anti-virus when I'm forced to use Windows. I much prefer Avast over AVG. I've used both. They both slow down your system when performing updates, and it's annoying. Occasionally I've been forced to run a full scan, or worse, a boot time scan. When there are things I want to do on the machine, that costs time, which is money.
So you sit their earning $30 per hour for 24 hours per day, and even 5minutes out to install an anti-virus program once is going to leave you out of pocket? I think not. You earn those $30 an hour at work, not at home, and you don't need to take a day off work to install an anti-virus program. You just do it when you get home from work. Jeez.
I don't want to get in the middle of an anti-virus fight, but just thought I'd add my limited experience with AVG.
I told a friend of mine, who couldn't afford to pay for anti-virus software, to download AVG for his laptop. I helped him out installing it so I saw that it was installed and running, but he would still get some kind of virus about every other month. I don't know why or how, but I do know he visited porn sites a lot. AVG detected the virus and told him it was there, but never prevented him from getting it nor could get rid of it. Is this typical of AVG?
THE FACT is that Apple does not sell a retail version of Mac OS X that can be installed on any computer. In fact all version of Mac OS X are considered an upgrade.
Point taken & made, but that wasn't the purpose of my post, I was
Referring to a comparison of capable systems, running enthusiast to pro grade software.
Referring to total system costs, in an enthusiast (even moderate) sector.
Enthusiasts are "consumers" too, and brand loyalty is earned daily, not assumed (at least in my playbook)
As for the costs, if you can you get a HD consumer camcorder, memory, DSLR, dual printers, required accessories and year's broadband for less than $5k with a Mac or brand-name PC capable of working with them decently, let me know!
Rating AVG High is like determining which pile of dog poo smells least bad.
I've seen it run on far too many $300 Best Buy specials to be convinced it is any good. Not only does it make the computer unusable for the first 10 minutes or so after startup. it still does not protect against some of the most common and most vile spyware (AKA the Anti-Virus 2009 and all variations of it)
Rating AVG High is like determining which pile of dog poo smells least bad.
I've seen it run on far too many $300 Best Buy specials to be convinced it is any good. Not only does it make the computer unusable for the first 10 minutes or so after startup. it still does not protect against some of the most common and most vile spyware (AKA the Anti-Virus 2009 and all variations of it)
I think your logic is a little bit twisted there. So you're saying that if it came on a $3000 computer, it would suddenly be a good product even though nothing had changed about it? I've used it for many years prior to switching to Avast, and it's been fine. It's amazing how many people think that because a product is free it is automatically rubbish, and that the paid for product is obviously much better.
Some people pay for anti-virus software because they want features not offered in the free versions, not to mention the included support and resources.
Other people buy Macs because they don't want to have to worry about anti-virus and anti-spyware software bogging down their system with endless scans and definition updates.
Other people buy Macs because they don't want to have to worry about anti-virus and anti-spyware software bogging down their system with endless scans and definition updates.
Good news for you then, because definition updates require no interaction and very minimal resources, and active sheild means you don't need to actually run scans. So count that reason out
AVG detected the virus and told him it was there, but never prevented him from getting it nor could get rid of it. Is this typical of AVG?
No idea, haven't used AVG in years, but would venture to say that some free is better than other free, and from experience would venture to say that Avast! is probably the best "free" out there.
I only recommend "free AV" to my friends as a short-term coverage, but that's just me. AV companies that are for profit, don't stay in business from "free". I also try to avoid recommending those that rely on a lot of marketing (that's targeting, not marketing, far as I'm concerned) - research AV comparatives, wikipedia (see how long they've been around, who's who - free support, how fast, etc.)
As a fair analogy - with any AV, or Mac or PC, the irony is that many folks (myself included, historically) will face that day where they think that a winch on a lifted and locked jeep guarantees they can go anywhere - and end up places where it takes many winches to get out of...
Comments
The FACT is, Apple is more expensive overall. Anti-virus is free. There are several free virus products.
"Free" doesn't mean they're any good, comprehensive, or a royal treat to install and run.
Microsoft themselves are introducing their own FREE anti-virus in the near future.
Big whoop.
Microsoft sells 10X more OS licenses than Apple and they still charge what for it? So much for the economies of scale.
I chose not to get Gigabit ethernet or a camera. I had the option and chose not to get them. They were inexpensive options but I didn't see any benefit. Two years ago multi-touch wasn't an issue and it's also one I don't care about. My battery life is excellent, because I had an option to get a larger battery and I chose it. I don't care about unibody or optical audio. I've never broken a tray and prefer the tray over the slot loading drives. Speakers on her Macbook do not sound better. Less than an inch thick or its weight doesn't matter to me. I don't know what my Dell weighs. It's not heavy, so I don't care. I have Bluetooth. Who cares about DisplayPort? I certainly don't. I think the display on my Dell is excellent and I can't see the difference between my daughter's Macbook and my Dell except that mine is bigger.
These are dismissive comments considering you asked what a mac had that your Dell didn't. Even if you don't want a feature, that feature still increases the cost. Your preference of a tray loading drive doesn't change the fact that a slot loading drive costs more, thus increasing the cost. You are correct in stating that you have more options with a PC than with a mac, I doubt you will find any mac user that will argue that point. I just recently built a PC because Apple didn't have what I wanted. The lack of selection, however, doesn't change the fact that if Dell were to make a macbook, the cost would be very similar to Apple's. All the extra features that you dismissed would ensure that. I always find direct comparisons between windows pc's and macs amusing, as there is no pc that directly compares to a mac feature for feature, and the features that are ignored or dismissed have a significant impact on the cost.
http://www.businessweek.com/technolo...ge_top+stories
Seems to have a bit of an anti-Apple axe to grind for a "market intelligence" type.
My MacBook Works, It Just Works! That is what I pay for!!
It's Not an Apple Tax, it's a Microsoft Discount for having to put up with a product that does not work as well as my Apple MacBook.
The FACT is... Anti-virus is free...
You either have not installed and used and run anti-virus software before, or you do not consider your time to be of any value.
Hours of work per month installing, configuring and running something otherwise completely unproductive is not "free". Slowing down your system while you run a scan or update the engine or definitions is not "free".
You either have not installed and used and run anti-virus software before, or you do not consider your time to be of any value.
Hours of work per month installing, configuring and running something otherwise completely unproductive is not "free". Slowing down your system while you run a scan or update the engine or definitions is not "free".
What anti-virus software do you use that takes hours each month installing, configuring and running? Just install something like AVG or Avast, which after a 30 second installation requires no further interaction for as long as you use it - and they are both free too! Avast uses 40mb of RAM to run in the background on my laptop, and since I'm packing 3GB of RAM, I'm not really concerned about how terribly my performance is degraded by anti-virus software.
"Free" doesn't mean they're any good, comprehensive, or a royal treat to install and run.
Big whoop.
Microsoft sells 10X more OS licenses than Apple and they still charge what for it? So much for the economies of scale.
You either have not installed and used and run anti-virus software before, or you do not consider your time to be of any value.
Hours of work per month installing, configuring and running something otherwise completely unproductive is not "free". Slowing down your system while you run a scan or update the engine or definitions is not "free".
LOL... AVG among others is 100% free. Takes less than 10 minutes to install. Its rated extremly high. So yes it is good and comprehensive.
In addition I can tell it to scan and update at 2 in the morning when i'm long gone from my computer and it won't waste me time. But actually I have scans disabled because all I really care is the active shield that monitors as websites download content etc.. I haven't had a virus in years on any of my Windows machines.
As for economics or scale... its common knowledge that Apple makes most of its profits from Hardware and not Software. In addition keeping constantly upgraded costs more with OS X as there are much more frequent paid updates. I think this all goes to further my point that you are over exagerating the costs of Windows.
LOL... AVG among others is 100% free. Takes less than 10 minutes to install. Its rated extremly high. So yes it is good and comprehensive.
In addition I can tell it to scan and update at 2 in the morning when i'm long gone from my computer and it won't waste me time. But actually I have scans disabled because all I really care is the active shield that monitors as websites download content etc.. I haven't had a virus in years on any of my Windows machines.
As for economics or scale... its common knowledge that Apple makes most of its profits from Hardware and not Software. In addition keeping constantly upgraded costs more with OS X as there are much more frequent paid updates. I think this all goes to further my point that you are over exagerating the costs of Windows.
I agree with this to an extent. Apple are able to subsidise the cost of OSX through the hardware. Contrary to this, Microsoft don't have hardware that they can use to subsidise the cost of their OS. It might be cheaper to buy an OSX license than it is a Windows license, but the hardware you bought to run it on is considerably more expensive to begin with.
LOL... AVG among others is 100% free. Takes less than 10 minutes to install.
So... once again, your time is worthless, then.
I am not rich, but I earn a pretty fair $30 per hour. Ten minutes doing something I don't want to do is $5 to me, dude. Maybe you're odd and actually enjoy installing stuff. I don't. so for me, there's the Mac.
And installation isn't the only time cost of using anti-virus programs. Once again, I guess your time is worthless. Mine is not.
I do use Anti-virus when I'm forced to use Windows. I much prefer Avast over AVG. I've used both. They both slow down your system when performing updates, and it's annoying. Occasionally I've been forced to run a full scan, or worse, a boot time scan. When there are things I want to do on the machine, that costs time, which is money.
What anti-virus software do you use that takes hours each month installing, configuring and running? Just install something like AVG or Avast, which after a 30 second installation requires no further interaction for as long as you use it - and they are both free too! Avast uses 40mb of RAM to run in the background on my laptop, and since I'm packing 3GB of RAM, I'm not really concerned about how terribly my performance is degraded by anti-virus software.
The hit on an underpowered laptop is not due to RAM, but to processor cycles. And the laptops Microsoft is "promoting" in this ad campaign -- the laptops you guys claim compete against Apple -- are all underpowered and a "hit" is definitely felt.
You honestly never have to touch Avast after you install it? How much do you use your machine for things other than gaming?
The hit on an underpowered laptop is not due to RAM, but to processor cycles. And the laptops Microsoft is "promoting" in this ad campaign -- the laptops you guys claim compete against Apple -- are all underpowered and a "hit" is definitely felt.
You honestly never have to touch Avast after you install it? How much do you use your machine for things other than gaming?
Why would I need to open Avast? It updates on its own, and the resident shield sits there protecting my machine without any intervention from me. I've been using Avast for about 3 months now and I've not once had to load it up for any reason. On my laptop it's using 40MB of RAM and 0% CPU resources. If I uninstall it, it makes no difference at all to the performance of my machine.
So... once again, your time is worthless, then.
I am not rich, but I earn a pretty fair $30 per hour. Ten minutes doing something I don't want to do is $5 to me, dude. Maybe you're odd and actually enjoy installing stuff. I don't. so for me, there's the Mac.
And installation isn't the only time cost of using anti-virus programs. Once again, I guess your time is worthless. Mine is not.
I do use Anti-virus when I'm forced to use Windows. I much prefer Avast over AVG. I've used both. They both slow down your system when performing updates, and it's annoying. Occasionally I've been forced to run a full scan, or worse, a boot time scan. When there are things I want to do on the machine, that costs time, which is money.
So you sit their earning $30 per hour for 24 hours per day, and even 5minutes out to install an anti-virus program once is going to leave you out of pocket? I think not. You earn those $30 an hour at work, not at home, and you don't need to take a day off work to install an anti-virus program. You just do it when you get home from work. Jeez.
I told a friend of mine, who couldn't afford to pay for anti-virus software, to download AVG for his laptop. I helped him out installing it so I saw that it was installed and running, but he would still get some kind of virus about every other month. I don't know why or how, but I do know he visited porn sites a lot. AVG detected the virus and told him it was there, but never prevented him from getting it nor could get rid of it. Is this typical of AVG?
Apple doesn't sell a shrink wrapped version of OS X? Huh.
- Yes they do...
http://store.apple.com/us/product/MC094Z/A
...and it's $129
THE FACT is that Apple does not sell a retail version of Mac OS X that can be installed on any computer. In fact all version of Mac OS X are considered an upgrade.
You don't know what you are talking about.
Point taken & made, but that wasn't the purpose of my post, I was
- Referring to a comparison of capable systems, running enthusiast to pro grade software.
- Referring to total system costs, in an enthusiast (even moderate) sector.
Enthusiasts are "consumers" too, and brand loyalty is earned daily, not assumed (at least in my playbook)As for the costs, if you can you get a HD consumer camcorder, memory, DSLR, dual printers, required accessories and year's broadband for less than $5k with a Mac or brand-name PC capable of working with them decently, let me know!
theft is not allowed in this scenario
haha..well played sir.
I've seen it run on far too many $300 Best Buy specials to be convinced it is any good. Not only does it make the computer unusable for the first 10 minutes or so after startup. it still does not protect against some of the most common and most vile spyware (AKA the Anti-Virus 2009 and all variations of it)
Rating AVG High is like determining which pile of dog poo smells least bad.
I've seen it run on far too many $300 Best Buy specials to be convinced it is any good. Not only does it make the computer unusable for the first 10 minutes or so after startup. it still does not protect against some of the most common and most vile spyware (AKA the Anti-Virus 2009 and all variations of it)
I think your logic is a little bit twisted there. So you're saying that if it came on a $3000 computer, it would suddenly be a good product even though nothing had changed about it? I've used it for many years prior to switching to Avast, and it's been fine. It's amazing how many people think that because a product is free it is automatically rubbish, and that the paid for product is obviously much better.
Other people buy Macs because they don't want to have to worry about anti-virus and anti-spyware software bogging down their system with endless scans and definition updates.
Other people buy Macs because they don't want to have to worry about anti-virus and anti-spyware software bogging down their system with endless scans and definition updates.
Good news for you then, because definition updates require no interaction and very minimal resources, and active sheild means you don't need to actually run scans. So count that reason out
AVG detected the virus and told him it was there, but never prevented him from getting it nor could get rid of it. Is this typical of AVG?
No idea, haven't used AVG in years, but would venture to say that some free is better than other free, and from experience would venture to say that Avast! is probably the best "free" out there.
I only recommend "free AV" to my friends as a short-term coverage, but that's just me. AV companies that are for profit, don't stay in business from "free". I also try to avoid recommending those that rely on a lot of marketing (that's targeting, not marketing, far as I'm concerned) - research AV comparatives, wikipedia (see how long they've been around, who's who - free support, how fast, etc.)
As a fair analogy - with any AV, or Mac or PC, the irony is that many folks (myself included, historically) will face that day where they think that a winch on a lifted and locked jeep guarantees they can go anywhere - and end up places where it takes many winches to get out of...