i hope they keep it . the data just rockets along .
Apple has no plans to get rid of FW. I didn't mean to imply that.
They did get rid of, as predicted, all FW400 on Macs. Apple really did mess up with that standard by not making the port design carry on through the way FW800, 1600 & 3200 as well as USB1.0, 2.0 & 3.0 all use the same port design and are backwards compatible to previous implementations within that port design despite some pin changes.
It seems that are making some corrections and learning from old mistakes. They are now using mini-DisplayPort on all their machines which is great now that there is a single, future-forward setup for all their products. Though in typical Apple tradition it will be awhile before the majority of the industry catches up with the majority of their products.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610
Because the topic is Windows. It's the same thing.
They both offer products that will suffice but aren't the best experience for what they offer.
And in this particular occasion, I think it takes some ignorance not to realize, what a poor choice the PC is compared to the basic MacBook Pro. Software - Mac wins. RAM - in real-life situation, I am confident that Mac wins. And you can upgrade that with more DDR3.
So, this time, MS got a bit desperate... But hey, aren't those 'I'm a Mac' ads a bit dated too?
The dumb average user is always screwed when buying computer and in life. Nothing anyone can do to change that. Given that Winblows Sh1tsta needs 4 GB of RAM just to boot up in a reasonable amount of time that argument alone falls apart pretty fast.
Nevermind all the other factors such as viruses, having to reinstall windows and all your applications every 6 months, etc.
Bullcrap.
Unless iMovie has reached the heights of Final Cut Pro... For Pinnacle Studio 12 Plus, you'll have to waste around $60 - 70; at least that is how much I have paid here in NZ (NZ$140).
Vista works fine with 2GB and I was editing my home videos on above mentioned software and aging AMD X2 platform without any problems.
but most others use the cheapest of the shelf junk . they are working on razor thin margins
re fubished components abound in wintel machines .
plus mac has machine tooled alum laptops now >>>> how green is that !!!
there are some good non apple machines out there . its just that they cost more than a mac .
dude ever wonder why us fan boys are so ....
I USED to be a very avid Apple fan. Now that Apple has got an ego too big for itself, I had to move away. They make designer computers, not high quality computers. Evident by my THREE MPBs which all died on their own, and the huge lines for Apple Genius bars (It was so very hard for me to get an appointment because so many people were coming back with broken computers. In the 1 hour I spent there waiting for my last replacement, I saw Apple replace 5 computers. Not good QC in my book) Having opened up an Apple laptop, and looking in, I saw the same chips as a regular PC.
Given, yes, there are companies out there that use refurb stuff... and Apple is not one of them. But I can still build a comparable computer cheaper than a Mac. It won't look a pretty, but it will function the same (if not better due to decent cooling!).
My Quad Core, 4gb, 500gb HD box cost me 500 bucks. Add a 20in screen for 200, add OS X for 150, iLife for 80, keyboard mouse for 30. You come out to $960. That is for a quad core. iMac dual core starts at 1100. And my quad core runs OS X perfectly, never had an issue with it! (I could subtract 100 bucks to bring back down to dual core, but for argument, no)
Was that extra time for a computer I wanted worth saving the 200 bucks, definitely. Am I using refurb equipment, definitely not. It is possible is my point.
I am curious... fan boys like you are so... what? Devout? By your signature, it seems as if Apple is a religion. I actually would like a response to this.
I love these ads. Microsoft needs to do more of them and directly attack Apple's (lack of) features and overall prices more directly.
I'm a MacBook owner. I have a UniBody MacBook. It was a replacement for two plastic MacBooks that failed due to Apple's poor build quality.
I also find the arguments put forth by the Apple apologists to be hilarious.
One of the arguments that fails but is used the most is "total cost of ownership". A Mac user trying to use this argument is just downright stupid.
With a Mac Pro or MacBook Pro, you're spending more than double what you would on an equal PC. With the Mac Pro, you can build something with several times more GPU processing power and about 95% of the CPU power for around $800. With a MacBook Pro you can get a PC with the same processor, bigger HDD, blu-ray, a GPU that is at least twice as fast, and standard features like HDMI and card readers for half the cost. When you compare the iMac to PC desktops, there is no comparison. You can buy a better screen plus use actual DESKTOP components and get much more power for several hundred dollars less. I mean, look at the iMac. It's a laptop on a stand. You have to spend $1799 to get dedicated graphics. A $900 PC tower can have a Core i7 and at least a GeForce 9800 GT. Look at the MacBook. That system I compared to the MacBook Pro a few lines up is priced at $1299, same as the UniBody MacBook. Why even buy a MacBook? If you want a 13.3" screen, Dell's Studio XPS 13 offers dual GPUs running in hybrid SLI, an LED screen, 4GB of RAM, and a 7200RPM 320GB HDD for about the same price as the entry UniBody MacBook. It also has a 2.4GHz processor. Look at the Mac mini. $600 gets me 1GB of RAM and a notebook Core 2 Duo at 2GHz with a GeForce 9400M? $600 in the PC world will get me quad core, 4GB at least, and a good GPU.
There are other aspects to the "total cost of ownership" argument Apple fans like to make. One being anti-virus software. First of all, good AV software is free. Secondly, you have to be pretty stupid to get infected these days. IE and Firefox both guard against malware actively, and will give you multiple warnings and try to stop you from downloading malware at every step. Then Windows itself will attempt to stop you from installing and running it. So that part is bunk.
Then people like to go on to the software aspect. Apple apologists like to point out that Macs come with iLife. Well, I just recently reinstalled OS X to remove all of iLife except iPhoto. iLife is the ultimate in bloatware. By reinstalling OS X without iLife installed I have about 10GB more of free space, even though iLife only requires 6GB to be installed. The iLife suite is useless for most people, and iMovie is only good if you want to do Youtube or Mobile Me clips. It's no longer any good for producing actual movies that would be good enough to burn to DVD, which is still what most people want. Even iMovie's newest and most impressive feature, image stabilization, is a gimmick. All it does is zoom up on the picture. So you have to decide between having a full resolution shaky image or a lower quality still image.
Freeware is almost non-existant on a Mac as well. Aside from VLC, Perian, and Adium, what decent freeware is there? Nearly every piece of software wants you to pony up $5, $10, $15 to fully unlock it. On Windows theres a whole world of freeware thats nearly as or as good as the paid stuff. With Windows, you can get by entirely on freeware.
Another aspect to the "total cost of ownership" argument would be warranty and service. Apple is known for not covering basic build quality issues, just ask the first gen MacBook Air owners about their hinge problems. Apple offers NO damage coverage. With a prebuilt PC, the manufacturer will offer warranties that cost about the same as AppleCare that cover accidental and liquid damage. Apple doesn't do this. AppleCare isn't even available for phone support 24/7. And if you're like me, and they replaced your screen with a defective one, you have to drive 75 miles to your closest Apple Store to prove its defective and get a replacement!
Now that the "total cost of ownership" argument is completely and utterly dead, let's go back to the commercial.
In this commercial she gets an HP HDX system. That means for about half the cost of the MacBook Pro she got a slightly faster GPU, the possibility of blu-ray, a bigger HDD, card readers, HDMI, and all of that good stuff.
Sure, the screen resolution MIGHT be 1366x768. It could be 1920x1080 as well, we don't know what specific model she got. However, 1366x768 is a true 16x9 resolution. Which means even though it is slightly lower than the 1440x900 screen on the MacBook Pro, its not the out an out of proportion 16x10 screen. It's a proper 16x9 screen which is perfect for video. And since it will have standard features like HDMI, she can connect it to any modern display (HDTV, computer monitor) without having to use a mess of expensive adapters and cables.
Some people mention "Windows Movie Maker" as the software Vista comes with. That is true. However, unlike a Mac, you're not stuck with only the pack-in software to choose from. It's extremely likely she already has the software she wants. Or she can buy the software she wants and still come in at saving money compared to buying a MacBook Pro.
The best part of the commercial is the comment about the amount of RAM the MacBook Pro comes with. It's true. Apple's computers tend to come with 1/4 (Mac mini) to 1/2 as much memory as PCs do. Some argue that its because OS X is more efficient. That's just a load of BS that you can smell from a mile away. I've been using OS X for years now, as well as Windows for even longer. Windows runs much better on the same hardware, and Leopard is every bit as "bloated" as Vista is.
In the end, Microsoft needs to keep these ads up. It shows what a ripoff Macs are and how you can get much better for half the money by going with a PC.
And to anyone who says Microsoft is "scared", keep in mind that Apple's worldwide market share is only at about 3.5%, Microsoft's is at about 90%. You think about that
I'm sorry but there is very little rationale behind spending $34 every time you want to backup your 1TB disk. Just buy another drive and keep differential archives, or mirror your disk even. The use of BD-R for backup is really not the best thing it has going for it. Besides if you want Blu-ray movies buy a player, why the hell would you want to watch a 1080p flick on your 15.4" display. Kinda of a waste.
How many people take DVD's on the road with them and watch on their laptops? Loads is the answer, on planes, in hotels, people even use their laptop to watch DVD's while the wife or kids are watching TV. This is why Apple Laptops play DVD's no? Why else would they have DVD player?
Okay, so now imagine you have upgraded your DVD player to a Blu-Ray player at home and like many people are now starting to do you are now buying all your movies on Blu-Ray instead of DVD. How you gonna watch your movies on your laptop now?
This is what people fail to realise with this silly argument about HD movies being pointless on a laptop screen. The point is that people do not buy Blu-Ray's to watch on a laptop, but people do buy Blu-Ray movies and the ability to watch them on their laptop is important to many people.
Or are you saying that all Mac owners should buy both Blu-Ray and DVD versions of every film they purchase?
1) She would not be buying her own PC, her employer/company would
2) Her budget would certainly not be limited to $2000. You cannot make competitive professional work on that budget, not with a PC or even a Mac (not so sure about this last one)
3) She'd know a little better about the differences in hardware between a MBP and her HP
==> She is a filmmaker enthusiast. And that explains her choice...
Sorry but that is just dumb.
People who make films work for companies? Are you sure? no filmmaker works for a company anymore. Independent filmmakers work for themselves, make their own films and try to get distribution deals after the fact. Studio's may finance a project up front but the talent still work for themselves.
Why would her budget be more than $2000 just because she is a filmmaker? Do you actually know any filmmakers? There are some filmmakers out there making whole movies for $20,000, do you really think that being frugal with their hardware choices is not something they would do?
You obviously live in a fantasy world where all filmmakers are Michael Bay. Believe me, the vast majority of filmmakers in the US are independent and broke.
How many people take DVD's on the road with them and watch on their laptops? Loads is the answer, on planes, in hotels, people even use their laptop to watch DVD's while the wife or kids are watching TV. This is why Apple Laptops play DVD's no? Why else would they have DVD player?
DVD Player has been there since OS 8 and it will remain there for a long time. You're assumption that "loads" take DVD with them when they travel doesn't actually tell us anything. I'm sure some due, but anyone with any smarts would just have a copy of a movie on their HDD as running the optical drive on a plane is power inefficient. Good luck getting through a two hour movie if it's Blu-ray.
But then there is the age old issue of the drives themselves. Apple has to fund the manufacturing of and charge a $1000 plus for a Blu-ray drive or make their machines considerably thicker. Does either one sound like a viable option for Apple? Unless Apple can ahold of TARDIS technology you are out of luck.
I would like Apple to add OS support for HDCP so an external BRD can be added to all Macs except the Mac Pro which can take an internal drive, but don't expect any Mac notebooks with BRDs any time soon.
I love these ads. Microsoft needs to do more of them and directly attack Apple's (lack of) features and overall prices more directly.
I'm a MacBook owner. I have a UniBody MacBook. It was a replacement for two plastic MacBooks that failed due to Apple's poor build quality.
I also find the arguments put forth by the Apple apologists to be hilarious.
One of the arguments that fails but is used the most is "total cost of ownership". A Mac user trying to use this argument is just downright stupid.
With a Mac Pro or MacBook Pro, you're spending more than double what you would on an equal PC. With the Mac Pro, you can build something with several times more GPU processing power and about 95% of the CPU power for around $800. With a MacBook Pro you can get a PC with the same processor, bigger HDD, blu-ray, a GPU that is at least twice as fast, and standard features like HDMI and card readers for half the cost. When you compare the iMac to PC desktops, there is no comparison. You can buy a better screen plus use actual DESKTOP components and get much more power for several hundred dollars less. I mean, look at the iMac. It's a laptop on a stand. You have to spend $1799 to get dedicated graphics. A $900 PC tower can have a Core i7 and at least a GeForce 9800 GT. Look at the MacBook. That system I compared to the MacBook Pro a few lines up is priced at $1299, same as the UniBody MacBook. Why even buy a MacBook? If you want a 13.3" screen, Dell's Studio XPS 13 offers dual GPUs running in hybrid SLI, an LED screen, 4GB of RAM, and a 7200RPM 320GB HDD for about the same price as the entry UniBody MacBook. It also has a 2.4GHz processor. Look at the Mac mini. $600 gets me 1GB of RAM and a notebook Core 2 Duo at 2GHz with a GeForce 9400M? $600 in the PC world will get me quad core, 4GB at least, and a good GPU.
There are other aspects to the "total cost of ownership" argument Apple fans like to make. One being anti-virus software. First of all, good AV software is free. Secondly, you have to be pretty stupid to get infected these days. IE and Firefox both guard against malware actively, and will give you multiple warnings and try to stop you from downloading malware at every step. Then Windows itself will attempt to stop you from installing and running it. So that part is bunk.
Then people like to go on to the software aspect. Apple apologists like to point out that Macs come with iLife. Well, I just recently reinstalled OS X to remove all of iLife except iPhoto. iLife is the ultimate in bloatware. By reinstalling OS X without iLife installed I have about 10GB more of free space, even though iLife only requires 6GB to be installed. The iLife suite is useless for most people, and iMovie is only good if you want to do Youtube or Mobile Me clips. It's no longer any good for producing actual movies that would be good enough to burn to DVD, which is still what most people want. Even iMovie's newest and most impressive feature, image stabilization, is a gimmick. All it does is zoom up on the picture. So you have to decide between having a full resolution shaky image or a lower quality still image.
Freeware is almost non-existant on a Mac as well. Aside from VLC, Perian, and Adium, what decent freeware is there? Nearly every piece of software wants you to pony up $5, $10, $15 to fully unlock it. On Windows theres a whole world of freeware thats nearly as or as good as the paid stuff. With Windows, you can get by entirely on freeware.
Another aspect to the "total cost of ownership" argument would be warranty and service. Apple is known for not covering basic build quality issues, just ask the first gen MacBook Air owners about their hinge problems. Apple offers NO damage coverage. With a prebuilt PC, the manufacturer will offer warranties that cost about the same as AppleCare that cover accidental and liquid damage. Apple doesn't do this. AppleCare isn't even available for phone support 24/7. And if you're like me, and they replaced your screen with a defective one, you have to drive 75 miles to your closest Apple Store to prove its defective and get a replacement!
Now that the "total cost of ownership" argument is completely and utterly dead, let's go back to the commercial.
In this commercial she gets an HP HDX system. That means for about half the cost of the MacBook Pro she got a slightly faster GPU, the possibility of blu-ray, a bigger HDD, card readers, HDMI, and all of that good stuff.
Sure, the screen resolution MIGHT be 1366x768. It could be 1920x1080 as well, we don't know what specific model she got. However, 1366x768 is a true 16x9 resolution. Which means even though it is slightly lower than the 1440x900 screen on the MacBook Pro, its not the out an out of proportion 16x10 screen. It's a proper 16x9 screen which is perfect for video. And since it will have standard features like HDMI, she can connect it to any modern display (HDTV, computer monitor) without having to use a mess of expensive adapters and cables.
Some people mention "Windows Movie Maker" as the software Vista comes with. That is true. However, unlike a Mac, you're not stuck with only the pack-in software to choose from. It's extremely likely she already has the software she wants. Or she can buy the software she wants and still come in at saving money compared to buying a MacBook Pro.
The best part of the commercial is the comment about the amount of RAM the MacBook Pro comes with. It's true. Apple's computers tend to come with 1/4 (Mac mini) to 1/2 as much memory as PCs do. Some argue that its because OS X is more efficient. That's just a load of BS that you can smell from a mile away. I've been using OS X for years now, as well as Windows for even longer. Windows runs much better on the same hardware, and Leopard is every bit as "bloated" as Vista is.
In the end, Microsoft needs to keep these ads up. It shows what a ripoff Macs are and how you can get much better for half the money by going with a PC.
And to anyone who says Microsoft is "scared", keep in mind that Apple's worldwide market share is only at about 3.5%, Microsoft's is at about 90%. You think about that
Sorry, I've not read your post just caught the last sentence scrolling through it on my iPhone.
You do know that Apple profits are over half that of B$. They make the whole thing...$$$$$$ for Apple.
No one is saying that it's not technically possible (which you seem to be echoing over and over despite this being well known), just that it's financially viable for Apple to include a $1000+ option for a 9.5mm Blu-ray drive that will satisfy very few and hurt their business model. If you can't see the logic you'll have to go to the corner with Teckstud.
How did you conclude that a 9.5mm blu-ray drive would cost more than four times more than an entire blu-ray set top box? The 9.5mm model is a $560 option on a Levono T500, and that's a burner mind you. Mind you, when Apple first started putting Superdrives in Powermacs the things costed $1,000 if you were to buy one outright. If Apple's laptops were thick enough to accept a 12.5mm blu-ray burner the cost would go down to $299.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
Come again? The MacBook and MacBook Pro are the same thickness and yet the MacBook pro has FW800. Also, both machine types have Ethernet which is a taller port than either FW800. Saying that the MacBook doesn't have FW because its too thin makes me think that you haven't even seen a Mac before.
The MacBook lost Firewire when it went to the unibody enclosure and the motherboard moved all to one side (meaning all of the ports had to be as well). I thought that had something to do with the thinness of them, but perhaps it's unrelated.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
The MS ads do have a point, but they are preaching to their own built in audience, not actually procuring a new audience. There are plenty of PCs that are more than suitable for ones needs. Apple has a very limited selection of PC models to choose from. They are an over-grown boutique shop in many ways. You need to stop thinking that Apple should try to appeal to everyone's needs across the board and realize that they are trying to only appeal to the needs of customers that can make them money. What you are asking for is a lose-lose financial situation for Apple that doesn't benefit the average Mac consumer.
DVD was introduced in the United States in 1997 and by late 1999 Apple had playback support standard in their mid and high iMac series. Blu-Ray was introduced in 2006 and...here we are mid-2009 with no Blu-Ray compatibility on even the most expensive Mac. With the professional video and audio tools being a significant part of Apple's software lineup, and a supposed appreciation for the highest quality possible, I don't see how blu-ray support falls into the category of features Mac consumers don't need.
In the end, Microsoft needs to keep these ads up. It shows what a ripoff Macs are and how you can get much better for half the money by going with a PC.
...You think about that
The RAM upgrade on the MB Pro is $100 and you get a far superior machine. In two years' time, it will still be worth a lot and will be working allright. The HP, or whatever Sheila bought will be worth significantly less. And you think about that, money-boy.
Aluminum housing, great trackpad, excellent OS... all these are just a bonus.
How did you conclude that a 9.5mm blu-ray drive would cost more than four times more than an entire blu-ray set top box? The 9.5mm model is a $560 option on a Levono T500, and that's a burner mind you.
Those are 12.7mm drives and they are twice the cost of the large tray loading. IF you go slot loading they cost more. If you shave 3mm off the thickness and size of components they cost more. If you think that 12.7mm Blu-ray drives that are made in large quantites from multiple OEMs are going to be as cheap as a 9.5mm Blu-ray burner that doesn't exist on the market and that Apple would have to fund to get manufactured then you are sadly mistaken.
BTW, The previous MB had all it's ports on one side and it has a FW400. To think that it's too thin when thicker ports exist and FW exists on MBPs that are just as thin proves that you are posting just to argue and really just trolling. I wish you luck with your future posts.
In the end, Microsoft needs to keep these ads up. It shows what a ripoff Macs are and how you can get much better for half the money by going with a PC.
Then why are you here? If you love PCs so much, go to a PC forum and buy more PCs. All you do is bitch and moan about Apple in every single comment you make. Boring!
"Apple reported $7.9 billion in revenues and $1.14 billion in net profit, but those numbers don't include most of its iPhone business, which is hidden away in subscription accounting under GAAP rules. For that reason, Apple also released its real earnings: $11.68 billion in revenue and $2.44 billion in net profits. The company also reported a cash position of $24.5 billion.
Microsoft's quarterly revenues grew by 9%, compared to Apple's non-GAAP revenue increase of 75.1% year over year."
In the end, Microsoft needs to keep these ads up. It shows what a ripoff Macs are and how you can get much better for half the money by going with a PC.
Kias in general are more than 50% cheaper than Mercedes Benz and BMW. They are both made of steel and plastic. I bet once you have the money the first thing you will do is buy a BMW or a Benz.
Some people sound like they are the one paying for others Mac purchases!!
Quote:
And to anyone who says Microsoft is "scared", keep in mind that Apple's worldwide market share is only at about 3.5%, Microsoft's is at about 90%. You think about that
Kias in general are more than 50% cheaper than Mercedes Benz and BMW. They are both made of steel and plastic. I bet once you have the money the first thing you will do is buy a BMW or a Benz.
Some people sound like they are the one paying for others Mac purchases!!
What happened to the rest 6.5%?!
Yeah...
When your Kia gets into an accident, I bet you will really appreciate your 50% savings then.
Both are made of steel and plastic, but only one will save your life!
I guess that is why Jobs himself drives a Benz (from Newsweek).
My friend was in a huge crash. The cops could not believe he walked away alive. All the cops on the scene ended up buying Mercedes.
If your computer were to crash, which would you prefer, the cheaper PC or the Mac?
It is nice to save money, but when you are in trouble -- you only want the best!
I've known the PC are for decades... 25 years of hard work configuring systems to do this, or that... 25 years i've worked on MS-DOS, Windows, Win9x, Win2K, WinME, WinXP etc...
I bought my Macbook Pro 2 years ago. It was a dare for me to prove (mainly myself) that a Mac would fail at even the most basic tasks i had devised for it. Boy was i wrong...
Not only did this little endeavour cost me a new computer but i also got rid of my OLD COMPAQ LAPTOP, a beefy, bulky laptop with tons (supposedly) of power.
Today, i run Macs... nothing but Macs... At the office, everyone around me wonder how i can work with a Mac in this Windows environment. Recently, my director (and friend) asked me howcome i never complained about computer freezing anymore... I said: "I switched to Mac"
You should have looked at his face.
Micro$loth forgets in their ad campain that Useability is worth more than the actual computer. Vista does not come close to OSX for useability...
Yes it's cheaper to buy a PC... but how much time do you spend trying to get it to work compared to a Mac and how much is that time worth?
Comments
This'll change her mind. Easy folks, actresses need jobs too.
i will miss fire wire .
i hope they keep it . the data just rockets along .
Apple has no plans to get rid of FW. I didn't mean to imply that.
They did get rid of, as predicted, all FW400 on Macs. Apple really did mess up with that standard by not making the port design carry on through the way FW800, 1600 & 3200 as well as USB1.0, 2.0 & 3.0 all use the same port design and are backwards compatible to previous implementations within that port design despite some pin changes.
It seems that are making some corrections and learning from old mistakes. They are now using mini-DisplayPort on all their machines which is great now that there is a single, future-forward setup for all their products. Though in typical Apple tradition it will be awhile before the majority of the industry catches up with the majority of their products.
Because the topic is Windows. It's the same thing.
They both offer products that will suffice but aren't the best experience for what they offer.
Having said that...
She looks a bit PC.
And in this particular occasion, I think it takes some ignorance not to realize, what a poor choice the PC is compared to the basic MacBook Pro. Software - Mac wins. RAM - in real-life situation, I am confident that Mac wins. And you can upgrade that with more DDR3.
So, this time, MS got a bit desperate... But hey, aren't those 'I'm a Mac' ads a bit dated too?
About $300.
The dumb average user is always screwed when buying computer and in life. Nothing anyone can do to change that. Given that Winblows Sh1tsta needs 4 GB of RAM just to boot up in a reasonable amount of time that argument alone falls apart pretty fast.
Nevermind all the other factors such as viruses, having to reinstall windows and all your applications every 6 months, etc.
Bullcrap.
Unless iMovie has reached the heights of Final Cut Pro... For Pinnacle Studio 12 Plus, you'll have to waste around $60 - 70; at least that is how much I have paid here in NZ (NZ$140).
Vista works fine with 2GB and I was editing my home videos on above mentioned software and aging AMD X2 platform without any problems.
It's all about Sheila. So let's pile on.
I really doubt she's a filmmaker or whatever they're claiming. And I think her choice shows she's maybe half as bright as her goofy smile.
Sheila should be put back on her chain under the porch.
in most cases no
apple uses top of the line stuff
wintel on there high end may match apple
but most others use the cheapest of the shelf junk . they are working on razor thin margins
re fubished components abound in wintel machines .
plus mac has machine tooled alum laptops now >>>> how green is that !!!
there are some good non apple machines out there . its just that they cost more than a mac .
dude ever wonder why us fan boys are so ....
I USED to be a very avid Apple fan. Now that Apple has got an ego too big for itself, I had to move away. They make designer computers, not high quality computers. Evident by my THREE MPBs which all died on their own, and the huge lines for Apple Genius bars (It was so very hard for me to get an appointment because so many people were coming back with broken computers. In the 1 hour I spent there waiting for my last replacement, I saw Apple replace 5 computers. Not good QC in my book) Having opened up an Apple laptop, and looking in, I saw the same chips as a regular PC.
Given, yes, there are companies out there that use refurb stuff... and Apple is not one of them. But I can still build a comparable computer cheaper than a Mac. It won't look a pretty, but it will function the same (if not better due to decent cooling!).
My Quad Core, 4gb, 500gb HD box cost me 500 bucks. Add a 20in screen for 200, add OS X for 150, iLife for 80, keyboard mouse for 30. You come out to $960. That is for a quad core. iMac dual core starts at 1100. And my quad core runs OS X perfectly, never had an issue with it! (I could subtract 100 bucks to bring back down to dual core, but for argument, no)
Was that extra time for a computer I wanted worth saving the 200 bucks, definitely. Am I using refurb equipment, definitely not. It is possible is my point.
I am curious... fan boys like you are so... what? Devout? By your signature, it seems as if Apple is a religion. I actually would like a response to this.
I'm a MacBook owner. I have a UniBody MacBook. It was a replacement for two plastic MacBooks that failed due to Apple's poor build quality.
I also find the arguments put forth by the Apple apologists to be hilarious.
One of the arguments that fails but is used the most is "total cost of ownership". A Mac user trying to use this argument is just downright stupid.
With a Mac Pro or MacBook Pro, you're spending more than double what you would on an equal PC. With the Mac Pro, you can build something with several times more GPU processing power and about 95% of the CPU power for around $800. With a MacBook Pro you can get a PC with the same processor, bigger HDD, blu-ray, a GPU that is at least twice as fast, and standard features like HDMI and card readers for half the cost. When you compare the iMac to PC desktops, there is no comparison. You can buy a better screen plus use actual DESKTOP components and get much more power for several hundred dollars less. I mean, look at the iMac. It's a laptop on a stand. You have to spend $1799 to get dedicated graphics. A $900 PC tower can have a Core i7 and at least a GeForce 9800 GT. Look at the MacBook. That system I compared to the MacBook Pro a few lines up is priced at $1299, same as the UniBody MacBook. Why even buy a MacBook? If you want a 13.3" screen, Dell's Studio XPS 13 offers dual GPUs running in hybrid SLI, an LED screen, 4GB of RAM, and a 7200RPM 320GB HDD for about the same price as the entry UniBody MacBook. It also has a 2.4GHz processor. Look at the Mac mini. $600 gets me 1GB of RAM and a notebook Core 2 Duo at 2GHz with a GeForce 9400M? $600 in the PC world will get me quad core, 4GB at least, and a good GPU.
There are other aspects to the "total cost of ownership" argument Apple fans like to make. One being anti-virus software. First of all, good AV software is free. Secondly, you have to be pretty stupid to get infected these days. IE and Firefox both guard against malware actively, and will give you multiple warnings and try to stop you from downloading malware at every step. Then Windows itself will attempt to stop you from installing and running it. So that part is bunk.
Then people like to go on to the software aspect. Apple apologists like to point out that Macs come with iLife. Well, I just recently reinstalled OS X to remove all of iLife except iPhoto. iLife is the ultimate in bloatware. By reinstalling OS X without iLife installed I have about 10GB more of free space, even though iLife only requires 6GB to be installed. The iLife suite is useless for most people, and iMovie is only good if you want to do Youtube or Mobile Me clips. It's no longer any good for producing actual movies that would be good enough to burn to DVD, which is still what most people want. Even iMovie's newest and most impressive feature, image stabilization, is a gimmick. All it does is zoom up on the picture. So you have to decide between having a full resolution shaky image or a lower quality still image.
Freeware is almost non-existant on a Mac as well. Aside from VLC, Perian, and Adium, what decent freeware is there? Nearly every piece of software wants you to pony up $5, $10, $15 to fully unlock it. On Windows theres a whole world of freeware thats nearly as or as good as the paid stuff. With Windows, you can get by entirely on freeware.
Another aspect to the "total cost of ownership" argument would be warranty and service. Apple is known for not covering basic build quality issues, just ask the first gen MacBook Air owners about their hinge problems. Apple offers NO damage coverage. With a prebuilt PC, the manufacturer will offer warranties that cost about the same as AppleCare that cover accidental and liquid damage. Apple doesn't do this. AppleCare isn't even available for phone support 24/7. And if you're like me, and they replaced your screen with a defective one, you have to drive 75 miles to your closest Apple Store to prove its defective and get a replacement!
Now that the "total cost of ownership" argument is completely and utterly dead, let's go back to the commercial.
In this commercial she gets an HP HDX system. That means for about half the cost of the MacBook Pro she got a slightly faster GPU, the possibility of blu-ray, a bigger HDD, card readers, HDMI, and all of that good stuff.
Sure, the screen resolution MIGHT be 1366x768. It could be 1920x1080 as well, we don't know what specific model she got. However, 1366x768 is a true 16x9 resolution. Which means even though it is slightly lower than the 1440x900 screen on the MacBook Pro, its not the out an out of proportion 16x10 screen. It's a proper 16x9 screen which is perfect for video. And since it will have standard features like HDMI, she can connect it to any modern display (HDTV, computer monitor) without having to use a mess of expensive adapters and cables.
Some people mention "Windows Movie Maker" as the software Vista comes with. That is true. However, unlike a Mac, you're not stuck with only the pack-in software to choose from. It's extremely likely she already has the software she wants. Or she can buy the software she wants and still come in at saving money compared to buying a MacBook Pro.
The best part of the commercial is the comment about the amount of RAM the MacBook Pro comes with. It's true. Apple's computers tend to come with 1/4 (Mac mini) to 1/2 as much memory as PCs do. Some argue that its because OS X is more efficient. That's just a load of BS that you can smell from a mile away. I've been using OS X for years now, as well as Windows for even longer. Windows runs much better on the same hardware, and Leopard is every bit as "bloated" as Vista is.
In the end, Microsoft needs to keep these ads up. It shows what a ripoff Macs are and how you can get much better for half the money by going with a PC.
And to anyone who says Microsoft is "scared", keep in mind that Apple's worldwide market share is only at about 3.5%, Microsoft's is at about 90%. You think about that
I'm sorry but there is very little rationale behind spending $34 every time you want to backup your 1TB disk. Just buy another drive and keep differential archives, or mirror your disk even. The use of BD-R for backup is really not the best thing it has going for it. Besides if you want Blu-ray movies buy a player, why the hell would you want to watch a 1080p flick on your 15.4" display. Kinda of a waste.
How many people take DVD's on the road with them and watch on their laptops? Loads is the answer, on planes, in hotels, people even use their laptop to watch DVD's while the wife or kids are watching TV. This is why Apple Laptops play DVD's no? Why else would they have DVD player?
Okay, so now imagine you have upgraded your DVD player to a Blu-Ray player at home and like many people are now starting to do you are now buying all your movies on Blu-Ray instead of DVD. How you gonna watch your movies on your laptop now?
This is what people fail to realise with this silly argument about HD movies being pointless on a laptop screen. The point is that people do not buy Blu-Ray's to watch on a laptop, but people do buy Blu-Ray movies and the ability to watch them on their laptop is important to many people.
Or are you saying that all Mac owners should buy both Blu-Ray and DVD versions of every film they purchase?
If she was really a professional filmmaker:
1) She would not be buying her own PC, her employer/company would
2) Her budget would certainly not be limited to $2000. You cannot make competitive professional work on that budget, not with a PC or even a Mac (not so sure about this last one)
3) She'd know a little better about the differences in hardware between a MBP and her HP
==> She is a filmmaker enthusiast. And that explains her choice...
Sorry but that is just dumb.
People who make films work for companies? Are you sure? no filmmaker works for a company anymore. Independent filmmakers work for themselves, make their own films and try to get distribution deals after the fact. Studio's may finance a project up front but the talent still work for themselves.
Why would her budget be more than $2000 just because she is a filmmaker? Do you actually know any filmmakers? There are some filmmakers out there making whole movies for $20,000, do you really think that being frugal with their hardware choices is not something they would do?
You obviously live in a fantasy world where all filmmakers are Michael Bay. Believe me, the vast majority of filmmakers in the US are independent and broke.
How many people take DVD's on the road with them and watch on their laptops? Loads is the answer, on planes, in hotels, people even use their laptop to watch DVD's while the wife or kids are watching TV. This is why Apple Laptops play DVD's no? Why else would they have DVD player?
DVD Player has been there since OS 8 and it will remain there for a long time. You're assumption that "loads" take DVD with them when they travel doesn't actually tell us anything. I'm sure some due, but anyone with any smarts would just have a copy of a movie on their HDD as running the optical drive on a plane is power inefficient. Good luck getting through a two hour movie if it's Blu-ray.
But then there is the age old issue of the drives themselves. Apple has to fund the manufacturing of and charge a $1000 plus for a Blu-ray drive or make their machines considerably thicker. Does either one sound like a viable option for Apple? Unless Apple can ahold of TARDIS technology you are out of luck.
I would like Apple to add OS support for HDCP so an external BRD can be added to all Macs except the Mac Pro which can take an internal drive, but don't expect any Mac notebooks with BRDs any time soon.
I love these ads. Microsoft needs to do more of them and directly attack Apple's (lack of) features and overall prices more directly.
I'm a MacBook owner. I have a UniBody MacBook. It was a replacement for two plastic MacBooks that failed due to Apple's poor build quality.
I also find the arguments put forth by the Apple apologists to be hilarious.
One of the arguments that fails but is used the most is "total cost of ownership". A Mac user trying to use this argument is just downright stupid.
With a Mac Pro or MacBook Pro, you're spending more than double what you would on an equal PC. With the Mac Pro, you can build something with several times more GPU processing power and about 95% of the CPU power for around $800. With a MacBook Pro you can get a PC with the same processor, bigger HDD, blu-ray, a GPU that is at least twice as fast, and standard features like HDMI and card readers for half the cost. When you compare the iMac to PC desktops, there is no comparison. You can buy a better screen plus use actual DESKTOP components and get much more power for several hundred dollars less. I mean, look at the iMac. It's a laptop on a stand. You have to spend $1799 to get dedicated graphics. A $900 PC tower can have a Core i7 and at least a GeForce 9800 GT. Look at the MacBook. That system I compared to the MacBook Pro a few lines up is priced at $1299, same as the UniBody MacBook. Why even buy a MacBook? If you want a 13.3" screen, Dell's Studio XPS 13 offers dual GPUs running in hybrid SLI, an LED screen, 4GB of RAM, and a 7200RPM 320GB HDD for about the same price as the entry UniBody MacBook. It also has a 2.4GHz processor. Look at the Mac mini. $600 gets me 1GB of RAM and a notebook Core 2 Duo at 2GHz with a GeForce 9400M? $600 in the PC world will get me quad core, 4GB at least, and a good GPU.
There are other aspects to the "total cost of ownership" argument Apple fans like to make. One being anti-virus software. First of all, good AV software is free. Secondly, you have to be pretty stupid to get infected these days. IE and Firefox both guard against malware actively, and will give you multiple warnings and try to stop you from downloading malware at every step. Then Windows itself will attempt to stop you from installing and running it. So that part is bunk.
Then people like to go on to the software aspect. Apple apologists like to point out that Macs come with iLife. Well, I just recently reinstalled OS X to remove all of iLife except iPhoto. iLife is the ultimate in bloatware. By reinstalling OS X without iLife installed I have about 10GB more of free space, even though iLife only requires 6GB to be installed. The iLife suite is useless for most people, and iMovie is only good if you want to do Youtube or Mobile Me clips. It's no longer any good for producing actual movies that would be good enough to burn to DVD, which is still what most people want. Even iMovie's newest and most impressive feature, image stabilization, is a gimmick. All it does is zoom up on the picture. So you have to decide between having a full resolution shaky image or a lower quality still image.
Freeware is almost non-existant on a Mac as well. Aside from VLC, Perian, and Adium, what decent freeware is there? Nearly every piece of software wants you to pony up $5, $10, $15 to fully unlock it. On Windows theres a whole world of freeware thats nearly as or as good as the paid stuff. With Windows, you can get by entirely on freeware.
Another aspect to the "total cost of ownership" argument would be warranty and service. Apple is known for not covering basic build quality issues, just ask the first gen MacBook Air owners about their hinge problems. Apple offers NO damage coverage. With a prebuilt PC, the manufacturer will offer warranties that cost about the same as AppleCare that cover accidental and liquid damage. Apple doesn't do this. AppleCare isn't even available for phone support 24/7. And if you're like me, and they replaced your screen with a defective one, you have to drive 75 miles to your closest Apple Store to prove its defective and get a replacement!
Now that the "total cost of ownership" argument is completely and utterly dead, let's go back to the commercial.
In this commercial she gets an HP HDX system. That means for about half the cost of the MacBook Pro she got a slightly faster GPU, the possibility of blu-ray, a bigger HDD, card readers, HDMI, and all of that good stuff.
Sure, the screen resolution MIGHT be 1366x768. It could be 1920x1080 as well, we don't know what specific model she got. However, 1366x768 is a true 16x9 resolution. Which means even though it is slightly lower than the 1440x900 screen on the MacBook Pro, its not the out an out of proportion 16x10 screen. It's a proper 16x9 screen which is perfect for video. And since it will have standard features like HDMI, she can connect it to any modern display (HDTV, computer monitor) without having to use a mess of expensive adapters and cables.
Some people mention "Windows Movie Maker" as the software Vista comes with. That is true. However, unlike a Mac, you're not stuck with only the pack-in software to choose from. It's extremely likely she already has the software she wants. Or she can buy the software she wants and still come in at saving money compared to buying a MacBook Pro.
The best part of the commercial is the comment about the amount of RAM the MacBook Pro comes with. It's true. Apple's computers tend to come with 1/4 (Mac mini) to 1/2 as much memory as PCs do. Some argue that its because OS X is more efficient. That's just a load of BS that you can smell from a mile away. I've been using OS X for years now, as well as Windows for even longer. Windows runs much better on the same hardware, and Leopard is every bit as "bloated" as Vista is.
In the end, Microsoft needs to keep these ads up. It shows what a ripoff Macs are and how you can get much better for half the money by going with a PC.
And to anyone who says Microsoft is "scared", keep in mind that Apple's worldwide market share is only at about 3.5%, Microsoft's is at about 90%. You think about that
Sorry, I've not read your post just caught the last sentence scrolling through it on my iPhone.
You do know that Apple profits are over half that of B$. They make the whole thing...$$$$$$ for Apple.
No one is saying that it's not technically possible (which you seem to be echoing over and over despite this being well known), just that it's financially viable for Apple to include a $1000+ option for a 9.5mm Blu-ray drive that will satisfy very few and hurt their business model. If you can't see the logic you'll have to go to the corner with Teckstud.
How did you conclude that a 9.5mm blu-ray drive would cost more than four times more than an entire blu-ray set top box? The 9.5mm model is a $560 option on a Levono T500, and that's a burner mind you. Mind you, when Apple first started putting Superdrives in Powermacs the things costed $1,000 if you were to buy one outright. If Apple's laptops were thick enough to accept a 12.5mm blu-ray burner the cost would go down to $299.
Come again? The MacBook and MacBook Pro are the same thickness and yet the MacBook pro has FW800. Also, both machine types have Ethernet which is a taller port than either FW800. Saying that the MacBook doesn't have FW because its too thin makes me think that you haven't even seen a Mac before.
The MacBook lost Firewire when it went to the unibody enclosure and the motherboard moved all to one side (meaning all of the ports had to be as well). I thought that had something to do with the thinness of them, but perhaps it's unrelated.
The MS ads do have a point, but they are preaching to their own built in audience, not actually procuring a new audience. There are plenty of PCs that are more than suitable for ones needs. Apple has a very limited selection of PC models to choose from. They are an over-grown boutique shop in many ways. You need to stop thinking that Apple should try to appeal to everyone's needs across the board and realize that they are trying to only appeal to the needs of customers that can make them money. What you are asking for is a lose-lose financial situation for Apple that doesn't benefit the average Mac consumer.
DVD was introduced in the United States in 1997 and by late 1999 Apple had playback support standard in their mid and high iMac series. Blu-Ray was introduced in 2006 and...here we are mid-2009 with no Blu-Ray compatibility on even the most expensive Mac. With the professional video and audio tools being a significant part of Apple's software lineup, and a supposed appreciation for the highest quality possible, I don't see how blu-ray support falls into the category of features Mac consumers don't need.
In the end, Microsoft needs to keep these ads up. It shows what a ripoff Macs are and how you can get much better for half the money by going with a PC.
...You think about that
The RAM upgrade on the MB Pro is $100 and you get a far superior machine. In two years' time, it will still be worth a lot and will be working allright. The HP, or whatever Sheila bought will be worth significantly less. And you think about that, money-boy.
Aluminum housing, great trackpad, excellent OS... all these are just a bonus.
How did you conclude that a 9.5mm blu-ray drive would cost more than four times more than an entire blu-ray set top box? The 9.5mm model is a $560 option on a Levono T500, and that's a burner mind you.
Those are 12.7mm drives and they are twice the cost of the large tray loading. IF you go slot loading they cost more. If you shave 3mm off the thickness and size of components they cost more. If you think that 12.7mm Blu-ray drives that are made in large quantites from multiple OEMs are going to be as cheap as a 9.5mm Blu-ray burner that doesn't exist on the market and that Apple would have to fund to get manufactured then you are sadly mistaken.
BTW, The previous MB had all it's ports on one side and it has a FW400. To think that it's too thin when thicker ports exist and FW exists on MBPs that are just as thin proves that you are posting just to argue and really just trolling. I wish you luck with your future posts.
In the end, Microsoft needs to keep these ads up. It shows what a ripoff Macs are and how you can get much better for half the money by going with a PC.
Then why are you here? If you love PCs so much, go to a PC forum and buy more PCs. All you do is bitch and moan about Apple in every single comment you make. Boring!
"Apple reported $7.9 billion in revenues and $1.14 billion in net profit, but those numbers don't include most of its iPhone business, which is hidden away in subscription accounting under GAAP rules. For that reason, Apple also released its real earnings: $11.68 billion in revenue and $2.44 billion in net profits. The company also reported a cash position of $24.5 billion.
Microsoft's quarterly revenues grew by 9%, compared to Apple's non-GAAP revenue increase of 75.1% year over year."
~Appleinsider http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...microsoft.html
In the end, Microsoft needs to keep these ads up. It shows what a ripoff Macs are and how you can get much better for half the money by going with a PC.
Kias in general are more than 50% cheaper than Mercedes Benz and BMW. They are both made of steel and plastic. I bet once you have the money the first thing you will do is buy a BMW or a Benz.
Some people sound like they are the one paying for others Mac purchases!!
And to anyone who says Microsoft is "scared", keep in mind that Apple's worldwide market share is only at about 3.5%, Microsoft's is at about 90%. You think about that
What happened to the rest 6.5%?!
Kias in general are more than 50% cheaper than Mercedes Benz and BMW. They are both made of steel and plastic. I bet once you have the money the first thing you will do is buy a BMW or a Benz.
Some people sound like they are the one paying for others Mac purchases!!
What happened to the rest 6.5%?!
Yeah...
When your Kia gets into an accident, I bet you will really appreciate your 50% savings then.
Both are made of steel and plastic, but only one will save your life!
I guess that is why Jobs himself drives a Benz (from Newsweek).
My friend was in a huge crash. The cops could not believe he walked away alive. All the cops on the scene ended up buying Mercedes.
If your computer were to crash, which would you prefer, the cheaper PC or the Mac?
It is nice to save money, but when you are in trouble -- you only want the best!
I've known the PC are for decades... 25 years of hard work configuring systems to do this, or that... 25 years i've worked on MS-DOS, Windows, Win9x, Win2K, WinME, WinXP etc...
I bought my Macbook Pro 2 years ago. It was a dare for me to prove (mainly myself) that a Mac would fail at even the most basic tasks i had devised for it. Boy was i wrong...
Not only did this little endeavour cost me a new computer but i also got rid of my OLD COMPAQ LAPTOP, a beefy, bulky laptop with tons (supposedly) of power.
Today, i run Macs... nothing but Macs... At the office, everyone around me wonder how i can work with a Mac in this Windows environment. Recently, my director (and friend) asked me howcome i never complained about computer freezing anymore... I said: "I switched to Mac"
You should have looked at his face.
Micro$loth forgets in their ad campain that Useability is worth more than the actual computer. Vista does not come close to OSX for useability...
Yes it's cheaper to buy a PC... but how much time do you spend trying to get it to work compared to a Mac and how much is that time worth?
-----------
GSXRikal
Amen to that!