If you read my earlier post you will note it was in response to an earlier poster who claimed : "is now the same for me with Mac/PC's. In order to get the raw performance of a i7 based PC which are in the $800 range the only choice for new is a $2500 Mac".
All I continue to ask for is to give me specific info, with links , instead of your opinion. Is that too much to ask for? "Just the facts, ma'am, just the facts.
HP has the HP Pavilion Elite e9150t series desktop w/ i7-920 2.66GHz, 4GB, 640GB, LightScribe DVD+-RW, 512MB ATI Radeon HD 4350, 15-in-1 card reader, Vista Home Premium 64 bit for only $1050 - $200 off - $30 off via HP coupon code: SV2132 = $820 w/ free shipping.
or even
HP has the HP Pavilion Elite e9150t series desktop w/ i7-920 2.66GHz, 4GB, 640GB, Blu-ray +$120, 512MB ATI Radeon HD 4350, 15-in-1 card reader, Vista Home Premium 64 bit for only $1170 - $250 off via HP coupon code: DTLX1784 = $920 w/ free shipping.
or the Dell Studio XPS line (this one has expired but they offer different ones a different times)
Dell Studio XPS desktop w/ Intel Quad Core i7-920 2.66GHz, Free 6GB DDR3 1066MHz, 750GB 7200RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s 16MB Cache, DVD + DL DVD+-RW dual, Free nVidia GeForce GT 220 1024MB, Vista Home Premium, 2yr Warranty for only $1308 - $459 off = $849 w/ free shipping.
You can find i7-920 systems in the $800 range with the discounts they always offer...
Do they match every spec of a Mac Pro - heck no - but in terms of raw processing power they sure do and even offer features the Mac Pro doesn't
Don't see what all the swift boat headlines are for.
10.6 is barely different than 10.5 if you weigh what is broken vs. what works. At least from an enterprise standpoint. Nice to have 64-bit, oh wait, nothing is 64-bit outside of Apples crappy little iLife suite and Mail etc...
Win 7 is barely different than Vista. Maybe cleaner kernel. But all you are giving us is a taskbar change and more useless graphical window management that is years behind Apple (and Linux).
All too insignificant to warrant 5 pages of comments. And my comment for that matter.
Do they match every spec of a Mac Pro - heck no - but in terms of raw processing power they sure do and even offer features the Mac Pro doesn't
Macs are almost always behind in $/processing power. There several reasons for it. For one the Mac Pros are using more expensive CPU's even if the performance difference isn't that large. Two, as much as people laugh at it the Mac pro case would cost a lot more than the cases in those systems. Then you have the custom designed and built in limited quantity motherboards, the special hard drive mounts, etc, etc. Another major factor is Apples long refresh cycles and the fact that they used fixed price points (if you want best value, buy early). Also, there are so many more PC manufacturers, that it is inevitable that some will have lower prices than what Apple has, and competition will drive prices further down. Those aspects combine to create the "Apple tax".
PC manufacturers tend to sell specs because that is how they differentiate themselves from each other. Apple sells the Mac experience, and specs are only a portion of that. Some people find value in that experience , and some don't. Personally I do (at least for their laptops) and include it in my value calculations for a computer.
I don't remember when the Mac Pro was last updated, but I'm guessing it was around the time that the i7 computers cost $2000 plus (ie. when I built mine), and they wouldn't have dropped the price since.
Macs are almost always behind in $/processing power. There several reasons for it. For one the Mac Pros are using more expensive CPU's even if the performance difference isn't that large. Two, as much as people laugh at it the Mac pro case would cost a lot more than the cases in those systems. Then you have the custom designed and built in limited quantity motherboards, the special hard drive mounts, etc, etc. Another major factor is Apples long refresh cycles and the fact that they used fixed price points (if you want best value, buy early). Also, there are so many more PC manufacturers, that it is inevitable that some will have lower prices than what Apple has, and competition will drive prices further down. Those aspects combine to create the "Apple tax".
PC manufacturers tend to sell specs because that is how they differentiate themselves from each other. Apple sells the Mac experience, and specs are only a portion of that. Some people find value in that experience , and some don't. Personally I do (at least for their laptops) and include it in my value calculations for a computer.
I don't remember when the Mac Pro was last updated, but I'm guessing it was around the time that the i7 computers cost $2000 plus (ie. when I built mine), and they wouldn't have dropped the price since.
Well exactly.
Apple competes on what happens from the time you sit down at your mac to when you finish whatever it is you set out to do.
If Mossburg compares windows to Apple,as the bottom line, then I hope to see an ad soon where PC has his private reviewer, saying things like "Windows is an extra step closer to being as good as the Mac!"
Windows 7 is lipstick on a pitbull. Despite the M$ marketing claims that of a major overhaul, it's really just a slight evolution of the same old MS garbage. Things like the Task Manager are EXACTLY the same in 7 as they are in XP. What's also amazing is how poor MS thread handling is and how most apps on the system can't even utilise both cores of a processor. Then there's the registry and security nightmares... Even the things that M$ have tried to copy from Apple are implemented much worse.
To be fair there are a couple of really cool improvements. I do like way you can click on any level of the directory tree and it takes you there, kind of like the multi-pane view of the Finder but is actually simpler and more space efficient. But I'm really scraping for something nice to say.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ilogic
If Mossburg compares windows to Apple,as the bottom line, then I hope to see an ad soon where PC has his private reviewer, saying things like "Windows is an extra step closer to being as good as the Mac!"
But there are a few key areas where Windows 7 falls behind Snow Leopard, Mossberg said. For one, Microsoft's OS "still isn't quite as natural" as it is on Mac, though it's an improvement from Vista.
And though Windows 7 is faster, his MacBook Pro still started and restarted faster than most of the PCs he tested. "But the speed gap has narrowed considerably," he said.
OK, this calls all of his credibility into question, let me explain...
Speed: I have a 1.6ghz single core netbook with 1.6ghz single core cpu, and 2gb ram: it boots 7 Ultimate with all fancy features enabled in less time than my 2.0ghz core 2 duo macbook with 4gb ram loads snow leopard, ditto for a handfull of 3-5 year old old laptops I have tried at work. Is Mr Mossburg testing Windows 7 as a clean install that he preformed? or using Dell or HPs crappware infested implementation thereof? if he is using an OEM install, he isnt evaluating windows 7, he is evaluating that OEMs vision thereof.
"not quite as natural" Give me a break. he is a mac user, no windows is gonig to feel as "natural" just like any long time windows user might find the Mac to be unnatural at first.
Note, I have been using 7 RTM via my university, who made it availible 4 weeks ago, and via my job where I have MVLS.
Eh, I've seen what similar technologies, like CUDA and Stream, can do, and at the moment I'm not impressed. The most it does is offload some of the work off the CPU, allowing you to maybe push a few more tasks simultaneously. It will be useful going forward, but with CPUs as powerful as they are these days, the difference is marginal. Besides, OpenCL is just that - an open standard. There's nothing preventing Microsoft from integrating it in the future.
You're computer will be more efficient, but it won't have the same performance as "multiple PC machines" in a single Mac Pro. That's just silly.
.
Your completely wrong on this. See my earlier comment.
The thing is, GCD is a framework that 'drives' OpenCL. It is nothing like CUDA. And GCD is accompanied by several other core technologies like LLVM and a C extension (closures) to make it much easier to implement.
I'v seen some experiment with it and a speedup of 20 to 25 times for some rendering applications like photo enhancements and movie effects is already shown.
And, thats a lot of PC's to buy.
And yes, OpenCL and more importantly GCD is (or will bee soon) open source.
And MS can implement that in the future. But the problem is that GCD must be implemented in the core of the OS, and that takes a lot of time to implement, even if you have the source.
(Another potential problem is that GCD is written for a Unix environment, this could introduce even more problems for MS.)
Anyhow, W7 doesn't have it now, and it might take W10 and a few years from now to include it in an expensive upgrade. Mac user can use it now if an application is adapted. And I can assure you this will not take long.
GCD is revolutionary and I know a lot of people are looking at it now.
Instead of spending time on the tablet, Apple should:
1) make sure all major software producers release their software to take advantage of GCD and OpenCL
2) release some updates to their professional line of software (Aperture) so that they still have an edge in this regard
3) Apple should help more some specialized software houses to make their software better for Mac (ArchiCAD Cocoa rewrite) or to port it to Mac (AutoCAD).
Then, after that, they should release some new MacPros and iMacs.
After all these steps are completed they can create the iTablet, keeping one thing in mind:
- NO CONTENT = NO SALES
So, for instance, if you don't have a movie and video store in 99% of the countries you shouldn't be surprised that the Apple TV is still in some sort of beta limbo...
Microsoft Windows 7 getting better? This is a piece of news that should affect every Mac enthusiast who doesn't wear blindfolds.
Apple has an edge, in my opinion, in a combination of factors, OSX being only one of them. But it is true that Snow Leopard brought only under the hood changes, which is a good idea in my opinion, but it is also true that if nobody (software) profits from these changes they are as good as useless. iCal and Mail have never been the most resource intensive tasks my MBP performs.. Happy to see they are faster, but ArchiCAD and Aperture in my case are the two that might benefit MUCH more from being 64bit and GCD compatible. So that is something Apple has to fix next.
This is solely based on interface features & feel.
Also, I strongly disagree with some of the aspects Walt places above OS X. Expose is way better than the Windows method. Also, the UI for Windows 7 is a little better than Vista, but still not very fluid in my opinion.
When you start getting into the depth of the Unix system & all the capabilities of a Mac on a networking level, sorry Microsoft but Win 7 is way behind.
$599 would suffice, if you wait a few days is will be as low as $499.
If the guy is saying a 5 year old PC is adequate then switching may not actually be the right move for them.
Where I always recommend people switch is when they start talking about wanting to get into more than just e-mail. They'll say things like, "I was thinking I want to get a computer with a camera to do video chat & maybe turn some of my home videos into a home movie." I immediately point them in the direction of a Mac because everything you need to do these things is built right in.
Definitely right on the price though, 1200+ is only if you want the pro line laptops. People need to stop watching the MS adds, rotting their brains.
OK, this calls all of his credibility into question, let me explain...
Speed: I have a 1.6ghz single core netbook with 1.6ghz single core cpu, and 2gb ram: it boots 7 Ultimate with all fancy features enabled in less time than my 2.0ghz core 2 duo macbook with 4gb ram loads snow leopard, ditto for a handfull of 3-5 year old old laptops I have tried at work. Is Mr Mossburg testing Windows 7 as a clean install that he preformed? or using Dell or HPs crappware infested implementation thereof? if he is using an OEM install, he isnt evaluating windows 7, he is evaluating that OEMs vision thereof.
"not quite as natural" Give me a break. he is a mac user, no windows is gonig to feel as "natural" just like any long time windows user might find the Mac to be unnatural at first.
Note, I have been using 7 RTM via my university, who made it availible 4 weeks ago, and via my job where I have MVLS.
Ultimate shouldn't boot any slower than other versions, unless you are actually setting a ton of crap to load at startup.
You're NetBook have a SSD? That kinda makes a huge difference on boot times & would be important to note.
We also have Win 7 at work & have done some testing. Boot times for a clean install of Win 7 compared to a Mac that has been used for quite some time & has lots of customizations & login items, well yeah it takes longer for the Mac to boot. 2 clean installs side by side, sorry but the Mac still wins.
UI, mostly preference but from an artistic standpoint Microsoft makes a lot of UI decisions that are just plain abrasive. There were a select few that loved the Windows XP crayola UI too but that didn't justify it as being better. However, this is a hard one to compare since it is largely dependent on the user preference.
Windows 7 did a lot to bring it neck & neck in performance & speed. Interface is definitely much better than Vista, which seemed more concerned with cool effects than usefulness. The big lesson from this is that Apple now has it's work cut out if they want to keep stealing people away from Microsoft.
By the way, adding touch as a feature over the Macs was not a fair comparison. That is a hardware feature, one that you don't get with all PCs & one that it is possible to actually get with a customized Mac. Multitouch was around for Macs long before even the release of Windows Vista.
Second, Windows updates are released ONCE PER MONTH on the second Tuesday of every month. The only updates that are released outside that schedule are deemed highly critical, and that doesn't happen often. With Windows 7's new patch engine, you *RARELY* need to restart after a Windows update. In fact, I don't believe I've ever had to restart after an update and have been using it since beta. Not even for video drivers!
I actually really like this feature. Win7 has been rock solid even with updates - I have not rebooted in more than 60 days.
But you do get Windows Live Essentials, which is a pretty competent suite. And its free
As much as I like Win7, I can't agree with this. Live Mail is terrible compared to Mac Mail. Searches are awful, IMAP is slow, rules and filters are cumbersome and it messes up formatting from virtually every client. Ugh...
Keep email, photos and music (especially composing music) on Macs - PCs can keep gaming, Office stuff and finance apps.
That's why I, and almost everyone else with a Mac, has both.
As much as I like Win7, I can't agree with this. Live Mail is terrible compared to Mac Mail. Searches are awful, IMAP is slow, rules and filters are cumbersome and it messes up formatting from virtually every client. Ugh...
Keep email, photos and music (especially composing music) on Macs - PCs can keep gaming, Office stuff and finance apps.
That's why I, and almost everyone else with a Mac, has both.
I have need for office software as well (as well as Quicken), and a Mac meets requirements in this area. You've got your choice of iWork or Office for Mac. Why use both Mac and PC or Windows and OS X? The whole point of switching . . . is to switch. Some of you are too wedded to Windows.
nice to read reviews from people which are probably in microsoft's payroll
also how is this apple news?
people that compare snow leopard to windows 7 are angry pc users which have never owned / operated a mac and have no idea of what they're talking about, and were paid big amounts of money to write good reviews, like this mossberg character
you're a moron. there's as many blind PC haters as their are Mac haters.... way to call yourself out. you've either never touched Windows 7 or are so unbelievably biased in your hate for Windows that you can't even admit to a good release from Microsoft when it's staring you right in the face. have fun with the limitations of being a Mac only guy... if you were smart at all you'd use all 3 platforms based on whatever task said OS was suited best for.
you think Mac haters are bad, well your pretentious little rant was no better.
You think what car you drive and what computer you own determines your level of class?
Pretty sad...
Correct.
Not because of how much it costs necessarily but mostly because it determines your level of education and knowhow.
For instance, a Lexus is a car for sheepole with little brains. Why? Anybody who understands engineering know a standard Lexus is a $42k car that should cost $25 because it is a Toyota with an "L" badge.
On the other hand people with education and brains know a $42k BMW should cost $42k and will go into detail as to why it is a 10-times better car than Lexus. This is and absolutely accurate statement and it is information above and beyond what is available out there from car reviews, which most of the time spill nonsense that fools everybody except for people who are the true experts.
It is all about education, about class, about your level.
Same thing with computer. Sheepole and the average joe will say a PC is better because, well, software is about the same and it is cheaper and offer more features.
A person with knowhow and a high level of education will point out that for all the metrics that matter: depreciation rate, overall experience and productivity with the computer, mac wins by an undisputable margin. Whereas all the metrics that do not matter: price, features, the wintell box "wins". You see? There is a huge difference, but it is a subtle one and I have already tried to explain it to you people with no luck. It seems that you lack the basic software to understand.
Everybody who really knows their computing agrees with me 100%. But to realize this you need to be above average intelligence, be knowledgeable, and have good analytical thinking.
Comments
If you read my earlier post you will note it was in response to an earlier poster who claimed : "is now the same for me with Mac/PC's. In order to get the raw performance of a i7 based PC which are in the $800 range the only choice for new is a $2500 Mac".
All I continue to ask for is to give me specific info, with links , instead of your opinion. Is that too much to ask for? "Just the facts, ma'am, just the facts.
Take a few minutes and search the deal sites...
Look at the HP e9150t line
HP has the HP Pavilion Elite e9150t series desktop w/ i7-920 2.66GHz, 4GB, 640GB, LightScribe DVD+-RW, 512MB ATI Radeon HD 4350, 15-in-1 card reader, Vista Home Premium 64 bit for only $1050 - $200 off - $30 off via HP coupon code: SV2132 = $820 w/ free shipping.
or even
HP has the HP Pavilion Elite e9150t series desktop w/ i7-920 2.66GHz, 4GB, 640GB, Blu-ray +$120, 512MB ATI Radeon HD 4350, 15-in-1 card reader, Vista Home Premium 64 bit for only $1170 - $250 off via HP coupon code: DTLX1784 = $920 w/ free shipping.
or the Dell Studio XPS line (this one has expired but they offer different ones a different times)
Dell Studio XPS desktop w/ Intel Quad Core i7-920 2.66GHz, Free 6GB DDR3 1066MHz, 750GB 7200RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s 16MB Cache, DVD + DL DVD+-RW dual, Free nVidia GeForce GT 220 1024MB, Vista Home Premium, 2yr Warranty for only $1308 - $459 off = $849 w/ free shipping.
You can find i7-920 systems in the $800 range with the discounts they always offer...
Do they match every spec of a Mac Pro - heck no - but in terms of raw processing power they sure do and even offer features the Mac Pro doesn't
10.6 is barely different than 10.5 if you weigh what is broken vs. what works. At least from an enterprise standpoint. Nice to have 64-bit, oh wait, nothing is 64-bit outside of Apples crappy little iLife suite and Mail etc...
Win 7 is barely different than Vista. Maybe cleaner kernel. But all you are giving us is a taskbar change and more useless graphical window management that is years behind Apple (and Linux).
All too insignificant to warrant 5 pages of comments. And my comment for that matter.
Sorry, I mean 11 pages.
Wont be going Windows, and 7 sure didn't change my mind.
Do they match every spec of a Mac Pro - heck no - but in terms of raw processing power they sure do and even offer features the Mac Pro doesn't
Macs are almost always behind in $/processing power. There several reasons for it. For one the Mac Pros are using more expensive CPU's even if the performance difference isn't that large. Two, as much as people laugh at it the Mac pro case would cost a lot more than the cases in those systems. Then you have the custom designed and built in limited quantity motherboards, the special hard drive mounts, etc, etc. Another major factor is Apples long refresh cycles and the fact that they used fixed price points (if you want best value, buy early). Also, there are so many more PC manufacturers, that it is inevitable that some will have lower prices than what Apple has, and competition will drive prices further down. Those aspects combine to create the "Apple tax".
PC manufacturers tend to sell specs because that is how they differentiate themselves from each other. Apple sells the Mac experience, and specs are only a portion of that. Some people find value in that experience , and some don't. Personally I do (at least for their laptops) and include it in my value calculations for a computer.
I don't remember when the Mac Pro was last updated, but I'm guessing it was around the time that the i7 computers cost $2000 plus (ie. when I built mine), and they wouldn't have dropped the price since.
Macs are almost always behind in $/processing power. There several reasons for it. For one the Mac Pros are using more expensive CPU's even if the performance difference isn't that large. Two, as much as people laugh at it the Mac pro case would cost a lot more than the cases in those systems. Then you have the custom designed and built in limited quantity motherboards, the special hard drive mounts, etc, etc. Another major factor is Apples long refresh cycles and the fact that they used fixed price points (if you want best value, buy early). Also, there are so many more PC manufacturers, that it is inevitable that some will have lower prices than what Apple has, and competition will drive prices further down. Those aspects combine to create the "Apple tax".
PC manufacturers tend to sell specs because that is how they differentiate themselves from each other. Apple sells the Mac experience, and specs are only a portion of that. Some people find value in that experience , and some don't. Personally I do (at least for their laptops) and include it in my value calculations for a computer.
I don't remember when the Mac Pro was last updated, but I'm guessing it was around the time that the i7 computers cost $2000 plus (ie. when I built mine), and they wouldn't have dropped the price since.
Well exactly.
Apple competes on what happens from the time you sit down at your mac to when you finish whatever it is you set out to do.
The rest compete on price.
To be fair there are a couple of really cool improvements. I do like way you can click on any level of the directory tree and it takes you there, kind of like the multi-pane view of the Finder but is actually simpler and more space efficient. But I'm really scraping for something nice to say.
If Mossburg compares windows to Apple,as the bottom line, then I hope to see an ad soon where PC has his private reviewer, saying things like "Windows is an extra step closer to being as good as the Mac!"
But there are a few key areas where Windows 7 falls behind Snow Leopard, Mossberg said. For one, Microsoft's OS "still isn't quite as natural" as it is on Mac, though it's an improvement from Vista.
And though Windows 7 is faster, his MacBook Pro still started and restarted faster than most of the PCs he tested. "But the speed gap has narrowed considerably," he said.
[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]
OK, this calls all of his credibility into question, let me explain...
Speed: I have a 1.6ghz single core netbook with 1.6ghz single core cpu, and 2gb ram: it boots 7 Ultimate with all fancy features enabled in less time than my 2.0ghz core 2 duo macbook with 4gb ram loads snow leopard, ditto for a handfull of 3-5 year old old laptops I have tried at work. Is Mr Mossburg testing Windows 7 as a clean install that he preformed? or using Dell or HPs crappware infested implementation thereof? if he is using an OEM install, he isnt evaluating windows 7, he is evaluating that OEMs vision thereof.
"not quite as natural" Give me a break. he is a mac user, no windows is gonig to feel as "natural" just like any long time windows user might find the Mac to be unnatural at first.
Note, I have been using 7 RTM via my university, who made it availible 4 weeks ago, and via my job where I have MVLS.
Windows 7 is lipstick on a pitbull.
Please do not insult Windows like that, as bad ad many people may find that OS, it is still much preferable to Sarah Palin.
there's no reason to spend $1200+ on a computer for her, when her old $600 does just a good of a job even 5 years later.
$599 would suffice, if you wait a few days is will be as low as $499.
Eh, I've seen what similar technologies, like CUDA and Stream, can do, and at the moment I'm not impressed. The most it does is offload some of the work off the CPU, allowing you to maybe push a few more tasks simultaneously. It will be useful going forward, but with CPUs as powerful as they are these days, the difference is marginal. Besides, OpenCL is just that - an open standard. There's nothing preventing Microsoft from integrating it in the future.
You're computer will be more efficient, but it won't have the same performance as "multiple PC machines" in a single Mac Pro. That's just silly.
.
Your completely wrong on this. See my earlier comment.
The thing is, GCD is a framework that 'drives' OpenCL. It is nothing like CUDA. And GCD is accompanied by several other core technologies like LLVM and a C extension (closures) to make it much easier to implement.
I'v seen some experiment with it and a speedup of 20 to 25 times for some rendering applications like photo enhancements and movie effects is already shown.
And, thats a lot of PC's to buy.
And yes, OpenCL and more importantly GCD is (or will bee soon) open source.
And MS can implement that in the future. But the problem is that GCD must be implemented in the core of the OS, and that takes a lot of time to implement, even if you have the source.
(Another potential problem is that GCD is written for a Unix environment, this could introduce even more problems for MS.)
Anyhow, W7 doesn't have it now, and it might take W10 and a few years from now to include it in an expensive upgrade. Mac user can use it now if an application is adapted. And I can assure you this will not take long.
GCD is revolutionary and I know a lot of people are looking at it now.
J.
Instead of spending time on the tablet, Apple should:
1) make sure all major software producers release their software to take advantage of GCD and OpenCL
2) release some updates to their professional line of software (Aperture) so that they still have an edge in this regard
3) Apple should help more some specialized software houses to make their software better for Mac (ArchiCAD Cocoa rewrite) or to port it to Mac (AutoCAD).
Then, after that, they should release some new MacPros and iMacs.
After all these steps are completed they can create the iTablet, keeping one thing in mind:
- NO CONTENT = NO SALES
So, for instance, if you don't have a movie and video store in 99% of the countries you shouldn't be surprised that the Apple TV is still in some sort of beta limbo...
Microsoft Windows 7 getting better? This is a piece of news that should affect every Mac enthusiast who doesn't wear blindfolds.
Apple has an edge, in my opinion, in a combination of factors, OSX being only one of them. But it is true that Snow Leopard brought only under the hood changes, which is a good idea in my opinion, but it is also true that if nobody (software) profits from these changes they are as good as useless. iCal and Mail have never been the most resource intensive tasks my MBP performs.. Happy to see they are faster, but ArchiCAD and Aperture in my case are the two that might benefit MUCH more from being 64bit and GCD compatible. So that is something Apple has to fix next.
This is solely based on interface features & feel.
Also, I strongly disagree with some of the aspects Walt places above OS X. Expose is way better than the Windows method. Also, the UI for Windows 7 is a little better than Vista, but still not very fluid in my opinion.
When you start getting into the depth of the Unix system & all the capabilities of a Mac on a networking level, sorry Microsoft but Win 7 is way behind.
$599 would suffice, if you wait a few days is will be as low as $499.
If the guy is saying a 5 year old PC is adequate then switching may not actually be the right move for them.
Where I always recommend people switch is when they start talking about wanting to get into more than just e-mail. They'll say things like, "I was thinking I want to get a computer with a camera to do video chat & maybe turn some of my home videos into a home movie." I immediately point them in the direction of a Mac because everything you need to do these things is built right in.
Definitely right on the price though, 1200+ is only if you want the pro line laptops. People need to stop watching the MS adds, rotting their brains.
OK, this calls all of his credibility into question, let me explain...
Speed: I have a 1.6ghz single core netbook with 1.6ghz single core cpu, and 2gb ram: it boots 7 Ultimate with all fancy features enabled in less time than my 2.0ghz core 2 duo macbook with 4gb ram loads snow leopard, ditto for a handfull of 3-5 year old old laptops I have tried at work. Is Mr Mossburg testing Windows 7 as a clean install that he preformed? or using Dell or HPs crappware infested implementation thereof? if he is using an OEM install, he isnt evaluating windows 7, he is evaluating that OEMs vision thereof.
"not quite as natural" Give me a break. he is a mac user, no windows is gonig to feel as "natural" just like any long time windows user might find the Mac to be unnatural at first.
Note, I have been using 7 RTM via my university, who made it availible 4 weeks ago, and via my job where I have MVLS.
Ultimate shouldn't boot any slower than other versions, unless you are actually setting a ton of crap to load at startup.
You're NetBook have a SSD? That kinda makes a huge difference on boot times & would be important to note.
We also have Win 7 at work & have done some testing. Boot times for a clean install of Win 7 compared to a Mac that has been used for quite some time & has lots of customizations & login items, well yeah it takes longer for the Mac to boot. 2 clean installs side by side, sorry but the Mac still wins.
UI, mostly preference but from an artistic standpoint Microsoft makes a lot of UI decisions that are just plain abrasive. There were a select few that loved the Windows XP crayola UI too but that didn't justify it as being better. However, this is a hard one to compare since it is largely dependent on the user preference.
Windows 7 did a lot to bring it neck & neck in performance & speed. Interface is definitely much better than Vista, which seemed more concerned with cool effects than usefulness. The big lesson from this is that Apple now has it's work cut out if they want to keep stealing people away from Microsoft.
By the way, adding touch as a feature over the Macs was not a fair comparison. That is a hardware feature, one that you don't get with all PCs & one that it is possible to actually get with a customized Mac. Multitouch was around for Macs long before even the release of Windows Vista.
Second, Windows updates are released ONCE PER MONTH on the second Tuesday of every month. The only updates that are released outside that schedule are deemed highly critical, and that doesn't happen often. With Windows 7's new patch engine, you *RARELY* need to restart after a Windows update. In fact, I don't believe I've ever had to restart after an update and have been using it since beta. Not even for video drivers!
I actually really like this feature. Win7 has been rock solid even with updates - I have not rebooted in more than 60 days.
But you do get Windows Live Essentials, which is a pretty competent suite. And its free
As much as I like Win7, I can't agree with this. Live Mail is terrible compared to Mac Mail. Searches are awful, IMAP is slow, rules and filters are cumbersome and it messes up formatting from virtually every client. Ugh...
Keep email, photos and music (especially composing music) on Macs - PCs can keep gaming, Office stuff and finance apps.
That's why I, and almost everyone else with a Mac, has both.
As much as I like Win7, I can't agree with this. Live Mail is terrible compared to Mac Mail. Searches are awful, IMAP is slow, rules and filters are cumbersome and it messes up formatting from virtually every client. Ugh...
Keep email, photos and music (especially composing music) on Macs - PCs can keep gaming, Office stuff and finance apps.
That's why I, and almost everyone else with a Mac, has both.
I have need for office software as well (as well as Quicken), and a Mac meets requirements in this area. You've got your choice of iWork or Office for Mac. Why use both Mac and PC or Windows and OS X? The whole point of switching . . . is to switch. Some of you are too wedded to Windows.
Gaming is a different story, of course.
nice to read reviews from people which are probably in microsoft's payroll
also how is this apple news?
people that compare snow leopard to windows 7 are angry pc users which have never owned / operated a mac and have no idea of what they're talking about, and were paid big amounts of money to write good reviews, like this mossberg character
you're a moron. there's as many blind PC haters as their are Mac haters.... way to call yourself out. you've either never touched Windows 7 or are so unbelievably biased in your hate for Windows that you can't even admit to a good release from Microsoft when it's staring you right in the face. have fun with the limitations of being a Mac only guy... if you were smart at all you'd use all 3 platforms based on whatever task said OS was suited best for.
you think Mac haters are bad, well your pretentious little rant was no better.
Please do not insult Windows like that, as bad ad many people may find that OS, it is still much preferable to Sarah Palin.
Being better than Sarah Palin is not a compliment.
You think what car you drive and what computer you own determines your level of class?
Pretty sad...
Correct.
Not because of how much it costs necessarily but mostly because it determines your level of education and knowhow.
For instance, a Lexus is a car for sheepole with little brains. Why? Anybody who understands engineering know a standard Lexus is a $42k car that should cost $25 because it is a Toyota with an "L" badge.
On the other hand people with education and brains know a $42k BMW should cost $42k and will go into detail as to why it is a 10-times better car than Lexus. This is and absolutely accurate statement and it is information above and beyond what is available out there from car reviews, which most of the time spill nonsense that fools everybody except for people who are the true experts.
It is all about education, about class, about your level.
Same thing with computer. Sheepole and the average joe will say a PC is better because, well, software is about the same and it is cheaper and offer more features.
A person with knowhow and a high level of education will point out that for all the metrics that matter: depreciation rate, overall experience and productivity with the computer, mac wins by an undisputable margin. Whereas all the metrics that do not matter: price, features, the wintell box "wins". You see? There is a huge difference, but it is a subtle one and I have already tried to explain it to you people with no luck. It seems that you lack the basic software to understand.
Everybody who really knows their computing agrees with me 100%. But to realize this you need to be above average intelligence, be knowledgeable, and have good analytical thinking.