Your right building a PC isn't impressive when all you do is slap some hardware components together and load an OS and call it a day. do you even consider future possibilities? Power use? Heat output? Noise output? Any overclocking at all? Building a PC and making one work at optimum potential and future use goes far beyond slapping some parts in a case.
Oh and no I don't, I bought my girl HP desktop, only thing I did was put a fresh install of vista and OC it
Boy I do love you trolls. Boy, you're hilarious! I don't want to waste my time to build a PC. My time is valuable. The same goes for many other people. The same goes for overclocking. No one cares except for gamers who spend 17 hours a day hanging out with their 'clan' on their website. Congratulations for spending less. You got yourself a hobby . Good for you. Just like I'm sure there's some guy saying how his '93 Supra, that he built with 3rd party parts, is so much faster than his friends' 3 year old Toyota. What's your point?
And as for your point as to what Apple innovates, it's funny you say that when many people have said Windows is looking more like OSX more and more. How's that dock in Windows 7 working out for ya?
Can you tell me what phone that has come out out that hasn't imitated the iPhone in some way or the mysterious surge in multitouch trackpads that have surfaced since Apple introduced their own? How about the 7 hour battery life that is in every Apple laptop? Or the Mag-Safe Adapter? Or the iMac which everyone is now trying to copy? Or the Microsoft store with their 'Guru Bar'? When do you think MS will be coming out with their multitouch mouse? And the list goes on.
Uh, yes, the average person will be VERY familiar with it. That's why it is so effective.
OSX has had bugs? Yes. Was it known for daily reboots, needing reinstallation after 6 months, or being riddled with malware? No.
The 10.x releases are major upgrades to OSX; they aren't the 10.-.x updates that regularly come out and not only fix bugs but also add features, like 10.5.7 giving macbooks an extra hour of battery life.
you are clearly not getting my point. When tiger came out, was it said to be the best OSX yet? Yes. When Leopard came out, was it the best OSX yet? Yes. And when Snow Leopard came out, was it even better than Leopard? Yes. Unless OSX has been getting progressively worse, it makes sense that the next version of its software will be better than the last, just as the ad with PC saying that Win7 is better than Vista and so on, would make sense.
And I can't remember using any version of windows where creating a guest account deleted all user data.
Quote:
Originally Posted by str1f3
Can you tell me what phone that has come out out that hasn't imitated the iPhone in some way or the mysterious surge in multitouch trackpads that have surfaced since Apple introduced their own? How about the 7 hour battery life that is in every Apple laptop? Or the Mag-Safe Adapter? Or the iMac which everyone is now trying to copy? Or the Microsoft store with their 'Guru Bar'? When do you think MS will be coming out with their multitouch mouse? And the list goes on.
A question if I may, can you please explain the iphones use of a touchscreen, something that had been on phones before the iphone? What about the camera? The iphone wasnt the first phone with a camera was it? Apple didn't create the touchpad did they? And the list goes on. Its just the natural evolution of technology. Apple may have innovated them but its a logical next step to go.
Don't tell me OSX hasn't been plagued by bugs or else we wouldn't be at 10.5 now would we.
Not really, just missing features. Once they hit 10.3, it was pretty much a stable OS and to reach that position in just 3 years was a great achievement. The mess that was Vista took over 5 years and that wasn't a whole new OS in the way that OS 9 to OS X was.
10.4 added the nice effects, 10.5 added 64-bit support, 10.6 was optimization and full 64-bit.
As for the ads, the first is the best but it's still the vague message of "it's still Windows". No actual reasons why the promises are still broken. A list of flaws is needed to counter the positive reviews Windows 7 gets.
Where is this innovation you speak of? Last time Apple innovated was when they made the worlds first GUI, other than that they've been biting other peoples ideas just like MS has, so this is a weak argument...unless your being sarcastic then the last time they innovated was when they introduced this awesome element of Snow Leopard that deletes your info if someone logs into your guest account...no ones done that before, how innovate truly
innovate |ˈinəˌvāt|
verb [ intrans. ]
make changes in something established, esp. by introducing new methods, ideas, or products : the company's failure to diversify and innovate competitively.
? [ trans. ] introduce (something new, esp. a product) : innovating new products, developing existing ones.
The list of Apple's innovations are endless.
originate |əˈrijəˌnāt|
verb [ intrans. ]
have a specified beginning : the word originated as a marketing term.
? [ trans. ] create or initiate (something) : he is responsible for originating this particular cliché
original |əˈrijənl|
adjective
1 used or produced at the creation or earliest stage of something : costumes made from the original designs | the plasterwork is probably original.
? [ attrib. ] present or existing at the beginning of a series or process; first : the original owner of the house.
2 created directly and personally by a particular artist; not a copy or imitation : original Rembrandts | playing original material.
3 not dependent on other people's ideas; inventive and unusual : a subtle and original thinker. See note at creative
Can't say that I've ever known Apple to have an original idea that came to market. But I can say for sure that Microsoft has never originated or innovated anything other than a monopolistic empire.
Maybe you should have built a dictionary into your imac ass kicking Windows PC.
you are clearly not getting my point. When tiger came out, was it said to be the best OSX yet? Yes. When Leopard came out, was it the best OSX yet? Yes. And when Snow Leopard came out, was it even better than Leopard? Yes. Unless OSX has been getting progressively worse, it makes sense that the next version of its software will be better than the last, just as the ad with PC saying that Win7 is better than Vista and so on, would make sense.
OSX was a better OS upon the next version. Win98 wasn't, and WinME certainly wasn't. WinXP was the first consumer OS from Microsoft since 3.1 that didn't crash daily, but then malware ensued on that OS and all of a sudden Win2k sucked as well. Vista? Does Dell wanting to sell XP as a "downgrade" mean anything to you?
One fulfilled their promises. Microsoft NEVER DOES. And we are still waiting for Longhorn.
Your right building a PC isn't impressive when all you do is slap some hardware components together and load an OS and call it a day. do you even consider future possibilities? Power use? Heat output? Noise output? Any overclocking at all? Building a PC and making one work at optimum potential and future use goes far beyond slapping some parts in a case.
Upgrading, if any, is easily done on a PC or Mac. Most of the time it's a new HD or more RAM. HD is especially easy with all the external drive options available.
Power, heat, and noise are all well addressed on Apple products.
The biggest difference is if you choose to sell it later. Macs will always hold their value better than PCs. Whatever money you saved initially on a PC will be lost if you ever try to sell it.
I guess Apple won't make an ad with all the rave reviews Win 7 has had.
The 'trust me' ad is particularly poor, really grasping at straws. I wish Apple would move to a positive ad message, they are far too focussed on bashing the competition and being negative.
OSX was a better OS upon the next version. Win98 wasn't, and WinME certainly wasn't. WinXP was the first consumer OS from Microsoft since 3.1 that didn't crash daily, but then malware ensued on that OS and all of a sudden Win2k sucked as well. Vista? Does Dell wanting to sell XP as a "downgrade" mean anything to you?
One fulfilled their promises. Microsoft NEVER DOES. And we are still waiting for Longhorn.
Can you please explain to me, with this slew of terrible releases why Windows holds a 95% market share
I guess Apple won't make an ad with all the rave reviews Win 7 has had.
The 'trust me' ad is particularly poor, really grasping at straws. I wish Apple would move to a positive ad message, they are far too focussed on bashing the competition and being negative.
I actually thought it was the best one. For people who have been around long enough, we know all the hassles of a new version of Windows. "Upgrading" typically meant getting a new version of Windows when you bought a new computer. Then you had to figure out why your old software/hardware didn't work with the new version.
I've tried every beta version of Windows since 3.1 (except Vista) and thought the same thing: "This would be an excellent product when they clean it up a little more and work out a few of the bugs." It just never happened. Every major release was almost identical to the betas or RC's. That's why I switched to a Mac and why the "trust me" ad speaks the most to me.
Well first is your PC more quiet than the new iMac? Second, is your screen bigger than the iMac? Third, did your PC come with a wireless Magic Mouse and wireless keyboard? Fourth, is your PC environmentally friendly? Fifth, how long do you think your PC's lifetime will be? Personally I'm tired of naming things but hopefully I made my point.
As a person who uses both Windows and Macs, people really shouldn't bash either until they've tried it. A Mac user should look at a PC and use it before they instantly disregard it as above. Windows 7 has some nice features. My Mac has some nice features. I like them both.
Also, the iMac is hardly eco-friendly. Just because Apple says it doesn't mean squat. An all-in-one like the iMac is probably the worst thing for the environment because the massive 27" display will be good for 10 years, but the computer won't be used for more than 3. A mac mini is much more eco friendly, but the mini has got to be the biggest joke in the Apple lineup (ok I forgot about the MacBook Air). I can build a PC for around $800 that does smoke the iMac, but it won't have a 27" display that's filling up a landfill in 3 years when I want a new PC.
Also, the iMac is hardly eco-friendly. Just because Apple says it doesn't mean squat. An all-in-one like the iMac is probably the worst thing for the environment because the massive 27" display will be good for 10 years, but the computer won't be used for more than 3. A mac mini is much more eco friendly, but the mini has got to be the biggest joke in the Apple lineup (ok I forgot about the MacBook Air). I can build a PC for around $800 that does smoke the iMac, but it won't have a 27" display that's filling up a landfill in 3 years when I want a new PC.
With the new Mini Display port, can't you use the iMac as just a monitor? At least that's what I've read. I don't own one so I can't confirm.
I can’t stand the DIYer snobs. It’s easier than ever to build a PC but the ones that do it think it’s some monumental accomplish. I wonder if Ifail is also going to forums by other PC vendors and stating how you suck if you buy a pre-made PC.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss
No, no... they just think people who don't want to build their own PCs are idiots.
I wouldn't say I'm a snob, maybe because I didn't do it from scratch all by myself. I picked the components and the guy(s) at the IT shop helped to put together some parts and another guy helped reinstall a power supply after I fried the original power supply (blame Furmark and no-name power supply brand LOL).
I have a MacBook Alu 2ghz with Snow Leopard. My other computer's a PC. I just couldn't go with Dell or HP because for the same amount of cash I can get a quality power supply (which I skimped on the first time round) and a great, powerful GPU to run games at 1080p which Dell and HP "overcharge" by wanting to sell you expensive towers with overpowered (for gaming needs) Core i7s and so on.
"DIY" means I get the most bang for my buck and get to select the components that best fit my budget and value. Remember, it doesn't mean the cheapest component, for example, my GPU, ATI 4830 512MB, is far more powerful than many, many GPUs in today's Dells and HPs. But then again, my main purpose was gaming, so DIY was more suitable for me.
As for Windows 7, it rocks because Vista was just rubbish and 64-bit XP is, well, not suitable, I think. So Windows 7 64bit is the only Windows I can use now. Use, as in, tolerate. I fire it up, Firefox works, games mostly work (research "black screen issue for Need For Speed: Shift"). Other than that, meh, what else can you do with Windows? I run Adobe CS4, iMovie, iTunes, iPhoto, Evernote, all great work and life stuff on a Mac.
And I don't care what people say, turning off Aero-whatever in Windows 7 gives me more frame rates in games, I am quite sure of this.
No big bugs or crashes besides for most games (seems hit and miss still nowadays), though occassionally I will get the "windows explorer has stopped responding" recurrent error (Google it).
Upgrading from XP/Vista my Cisco WMP54G 802.11g WiFi card had problems with drivers (there is still no proper Cisco driver to this day) so you had to do some Ralink RT61 driver install thingy. Doable, but silly.
So, if you are not a gamer, and you do the math properly, and can afford it, there's no reason to get a PC. If you are a gamer, or want a less expensive option to just Facebook all day, sure, Windows 7 on PC is there. But I'll tell you the Windows 7 experience is "prettier" and things are a bit more snappy, but at the end of the day it's still Windows. Once the gloss wears off, it's still Windows. \
Now back to fragging Majini in Resident Evil 5 tonight on my PC! LOL. Resident Evil 5 is a *tad* childish, Fear2 was a bit more adult. I'm getting old. 31 now. Today's games, just ain't the same like back when they had Dawn Of War, FEAR, NFS:Most Wanted, Stalker... Dead Space was hella good though.
....
I'd say though if you were a gamer you might as well get an Xbox360 or, if you really want for whatever reason, a PS3 (BluRay, for example). Pure PC-only titles that are worth it are few and far between.
As a person who uses both Windows and Macs, people really shouldn't bash either until they've tried it. A Mac user should look at a PC and use it before they instantly disregard it as above. Windows 7 has some nice features. My Mac has some nice features. I like them both.
Also, the iMac is hardly eco-friendly. Just because Apple says it doesn't mean squat. An all-in-one like the iMac is probably the worst thing for the environment because the massive 27" display will be good for 10 years, but the computer won't be used for more than 3. A mac mini is much more eco friendly, but the mini has got to be the biggest joke in the Apple lineup (ok I forgot about the MacBook Air). I can build a PC for around $800 that does smoke the iMac, but it won't have a 27" display that's filling up a landfill in 3 years when I want a new PC.
The 27" iMac is good for at least 5 years because even when you get tired of it after 1 or 2 years you have a 27" LED-backlit *IPS* display. Unlike the current cheapo PC screens which go straight into landfill for plastic rubbish after a few years.
I actually thought it was the best one. For people who have been around long enough, we know all the hassles of a new version of Windows. "Upgrading" typically meant getting a new version of Windows when you bought a new computer. Then you had to figure out why your old software/hardware didn't work with the new version.
I've tried every beta version of Windows since 3.1 (except Vista) and thought the same thing: "This would be an excellent product when they clean it up a little more and work out a few of the bugs." It just never happened. Every major release was almost identical to the betas or RC's. That's why I switched to a Mac and why the "trust me" ad speaks the most to me.
Windows 7 is the best Windows they've made. But doesn't mean it's super fantastic. Just makes you think how anybody endured Vista. Sad, sad times, it was, with Vista.
Apple's got a great marketing firm. For the most part, they've managed to do a great job with the commercials for Macs, iPods & iPhones. I bet people will remember these ads for a much longer period of time than 99.9% of the commercials we see now-a-day.
About the Apple vs Microsoft debate:
Honestly, I could care less if someone wants to buy/use a Mac or Windows PC. As a graphic designer & website developer I have to use a full range of computers for multiple tasks. Heck, I still have a OS 8 machine and a Win 98' PC that I use for testing old web browser compatibility issues. IYou'd still amazed to know that among all the people in the US that use Internet Explorer, more than 15% have version 6.0 or older.
In the end, just buy/use something that works best with your everyday needs. And if you decide to go the Apple route, but can't afford a new Mac...there's always the refurbished route.
So, if you are not a gamer, and you do the math properly, and can afford it, there's no reason to get a PC. If you are a gamer, or want a less expensive option to just Facebook all day, sure, Windows 7 on PC is there. But I'll tell you the Windows 7 experience is "prettier" and things are a bit more snappy, but at the end of the day it's still Windows. Once the gloss wears off, it's still Windows. \
Now back to fragging Majini in Resident Evil 5 tonight on my PC! LOL. Resident Evil 5 is a *tad* childish, Fear2 was a bit more adult. I'm getting old. 31 now. Today's games, just ain't the same like back when they had Dawn Of War, FEAR, NFS:Most Wanted, Stalker... Dead Space was hella good though.
....
I'd say though if you were a gamer you might as well get an Xbox360 or, if you really want for whatever reason, a PS3 (BluRay, for example). Pure PC-only titles that are worth it are few and far between.
Peace
Very well said - I use my Win XP machine for testing various applications/solutions for my business and Mac for everything else. If I fancy a bit of gaming I power up my PS3.
As a person who uses both Windows and Macs, people really shouldn't bash either until they've tried it. A Mac user should look at a PC and use it before they instantly disregard it as above. Windows 7 has some nice features. My Mac has some nice features. I like them both.
Also, the iMac is hardly eco-friendly. Just because Apple says it doesn't mean squat. An all-in-one like the iMac is probably the worst thing for the environment because the massive 27" display will be good for 10 years, but the computer won't be used for more than 3. A mac mini is much more eco friendly, but the mini has got to be the biggest joke in the Apple lineup (ok I forgot about the MacBook Air). I can build a PC for around $800 that does smoke the iMac, but it won't have a 27" display that's filling up a landfill in 3 years when I want a new PC.
The iMac is more "eco-friendly" than anything HP, Dell, Sony, Acer & Toshiba make. Before moving to Seattle, I worked with an electronics recycling company in San Diego where I broke down computers, printers & monitors to be recycled or resold as parts. For most current computers (including monitor), 85% of the materials can be recycled and the rest can be safely disposed (mercury, rayon filliments, alkaline, etc.). Roughly 95% of an aluminum iMac can be recycled.
In addition, iMacs use less electricty than most other desktops (241 watts =21.5" iMac & 365 watts = 27" iMac). Most CPUs (including the MacPro) use more than 350 watts and that's not including a monitor.
Comments
Your right building a PC isn't impressive when all you do is slap some hardware components together and load an OS and call it a day. do you even consider future possibilities? Power use? Heat output? Noise output? Any overclocking at all? Building a PC and making one work at optimum potential and future use goes far beyond slapping some parts in a case.
Oh and no I don't, I bought my girl HP desktop, only thing I did was put a fresh install of vista and OC it
Boy I do love you trolls. Boy, you're hilarious! I don't want to waste my time to build a PC. My time is valuable. The same goes for many other people. The same goes for overclocking. No one cares except for gamers who spend 17 hours a day hanging out with their 'clan' on their website. Congratulations for spending less. You got yourself a hobby . Good for you. Just like I'm sure there's some guy saying how his '93 Supra, that he built with 3rd party parts, is so much faster than his friends' 3 year old Toyota. What's your point?
And as for your point as to what Apple innovates, it's funny you say that when many people have said Windows is looking more like OSX more and more. How's that dock in Windows 7 working out for ya?
Can you tell me what phone that has come out out that hasn't imitated the iPhone in some way or the mysterious surge in multitouch trackpads that have surfaced since Apple introduced their own? How about the 7 hour battery life that is in every Apple laptop? Or the Mag-Safe Adapter? Or the iMac which everyone is now trying to copy? Or the Microsoft store with their 'Guru Bar'? When do you think MS will be coming out with their multitouch mouse? And the list goes on.
Please!
Uh, yes, the average person will be VERY familiar with it. That's why it is so effective.
OSX has had bugs? Yes. Was it known for daily reboots, needing reinstallation after 6 months, or being riddled with malware? No.
The 10.x releases are major upgrades to OSX; they aren't the 10.-.x updates that regularly come out and not only fix bugs but also add features, like 10.5.7 giving macbooks an extra hour of battery life.
you are clearly not getting my point. When tiger came out, was it said to be the best OSX yet? Yes. When Leopard came out, was it the best OSX yet? Yes. And when Snow Leopard came out, was it even better than Leopard? Yes. Unless OSX has been getting progressively worse, it makes sense that the next version of its software will be better than the last, just as the ad with PC saying that Win7 is better than Vista and so on, would make sense.
And I can't remember using any version of windows where creating a guest account deleted all user data.
Can you tell me what phone that has come out out that hasn't imitated the iPhone in some way or the mysterious surge in multitouch trackpads that have surfaced since Apple introduced their own? How about the 7 hour battery life that is in every Apple laptop? Or the Mag-Safe Adapter? Or the iMac which everyone is now trying to copy? Or the Microsoft store with their 'Guru Bar'? When do you think MS will be coming out with their multitouch mouse? And the list goes on.
A question if I may, can you please explain the iphones use of a touchscreen, something that had been on phones before the iphone? What about the camera? The iphone wasnt the first phone with a camera was it? Apple didn't create the touchpad did they? And the list goes on. Its just the natural evolution of technology. Apple may have innovated them but its a logical next step to go.
Don't tell me OSX hasn't been plagued by bugs or else we wouldn't be at 10.5 now would we.
Not really, just missing features. Once they hit 10.3, it was pretty much a stable OS and to reach that position in just 3 years was a great achievement. The mess that was Vista took over 5 years and that wasn't a whole new OS in the way that OS 9 to OS X was.
10.4 added the nice effects, 10.5 added 64-bit support, 10.6 was optimization and full 64-bit.
As for the ads, the first is the best but it's still the vague message of "it's still Windows". No actual reasons why the promises are still broken. A list of flaws is needed to counter the positive reviews Windows 7 gets.
Where is this innovation you speak of? Last time Apple innovated was when they made the worlds first GUI, other than that they've been biting other peoples ideas just like MS has, so this is a weak argument...unless your being sarcastic then the last time they innovated was when they introduced this awesome element of Snow Leopard that deletes your info if someone logs into your guest account...no ones done that before, how innovate truly
innovate |ˈinəˌvāt|
verb [ intrans. ]
make changes in something established, esp. by introducing new methods, ideas, or products : the company's failure to diversify and innovate competitively.
? [ trans. ] introduce (something new, esp. a product) : innovating new products, developing existing ones.
The list of Apple's innovations are endless.
originate |əˈrijəˌnāt|
verb [ intrans. ]
have a specified beginning : the word originated as a marketing term.
? [ trans. ] create or initiate (something) : he is responsible for originating this particular cliché
original |əˈrijənl|
adjective
1 used or produced at the creation or earliest stage of something : costumes made from the original designs | the plasterwork is probably original.
? [ attrib. ] present or existing at the beginning of a series or process; first : the original owner of the house.
2 created directly and personally by a particular artist; not a copy or imitation : original Rembrandts | playing original material.
3 not dependent on other people's ideas; inventive and unusual : a subtle and original thinker. See note at creative
Can't say that I've ever known Apple to have an original idea that came to market. But I can say for sure that Microsoft has never originated or innovated anything other than a monopolistic empire.
Maybe you should have built a dictionary into your imac ass kicking Windows PC.
you are clearly not getting my point. When tiger came out, was it said to be the best OSX yet? Yes. When Leopard came out, was it the best OSX yet? Yes. And when Snow Leopard came out, was it even better than Leopard? Yes. Unless OSX has been getting progressively worse, it makes sense that the next version of its software will be better than the last, just as the ad with PC saying that Win7 is better than Vista and so on, would make sense.
OSX was a better OS upon the next version. Win98 wasn't, and WinME certainly wasn't. WinXP was the first consumer OS from Microsoft since 3.1 that didn't crash daily, but then malware ensued on that OS and all of a sudden Win2k sucked as well. Vista? Does Dell wanting to sell XP as a "downgrade" mean anything to you?
One fulfilled their promises. Microsoft NEVER DOES. And we are still waiting for Longhorn.
Your right building a PC isn't impressive when all you do is slap some hardware components together and load an OS and call it a day. do you even consider future possibilities? Power use? Heat output? Noise output? Any overclocking at all? Building a PC and making one work at optimum potential and future use goes far beyond slapping some parts in a case.
Upgrading, if any, is easily done on a PC or Mac. Most of the time it's a new HD or more RAM. HD is especially easy with all the external drive options available.
Power, heat, and noise are all well addressed on Apple products.
The biggest difference is if you choose to sell it later. Macs will always hold their value better than PCs. Whatever money you saved initially on a PC will be lost if you ever try to sell it.
The 'trust me' ad is particularly poor, really grasping at straws. I wish Apple would move to a positive ad message, they are far too focussed on bashing the competition and being negative.
OSX was a better OS upon the next version. Win98 wasn't, and WinME certainly wasn't. WinXP was the first consumer OS from Microsoft since 3.1 that didn't crash daily, but then malware ensued on that OS and all of a sudden Win2k sucked as well. Vista? Does Dell wanting to sell XP as a "downgrade" mean anything to you?
One fulfilled their promises. Microsoft NEVER DOES. And we are still waiting for Longhorn.
Can you please explain to me, with this slew of terrible releases why Windows holds a 95% market share
Can you please explain to me, with this slew of terrible releases why Windows holds a 95% market share
Got around 5 hours to go down memory lane?
I guess Apple won't make an ad with all the rave reviews Win 7 has had.
The 'trust me' ad is particularly poor, really grasping at straws. I wish Apple would move to a positive ad message, they are far too focussed on bashing the competition and being negative.
I actually thought it was the best one. For people who have been around long enough, we know all the hassles of a new version of Windows. "Upgrading" typically meant getting a new version of Windows when you bought a new computer. Then you had to figure out why your old software/hardware didn't work with the new version.
I've tried every beta version of Windows since 3.1 (except Vista) and thought the same thing: "This would be an excellent product when they clean it up a little more and work out a few of the bugs." It just never happened. Every major release was almost identical to the betas or RC's. That's why I switched to a Mac and why the "trust me" ad speaks the most to me.
Well first is your PC more quiet than the new iMac? Second, is your screen bigger than the iMac? Third, did your PC come with a wireless Magic Mouse and wireless keyboard? Fourth, is your PC environmentally friendly? Fifth, how long do you think your PC's lifetime will be? Personally I'm tired of naming things but hopefully I made my point.
As a person who uses both Windows and Macs, people really shouldn't bash either until they've tried it. A Mac user should look at a PC and use it before they instantly disregard it as above. Windows 7 has some nice features. My Mac has some nice features. I like them both.
Also, the iMac is hardly eco-friendly. Just because Apple says it doesn't mean squat. An all-in-one like the iMac is probably the worst thing for the environment because the massive 27" display will be good for 10 years, but the computer won't be used for more than 3. A mac mini is much more eco friendly, but the mini has got to be the biggest joke in the Apple lineup (ok I forgot about the MacBook Air). I can build a PC for around $800 that does smoke the iMac, but it won't have a 27" display that's filling up a landfill in 3 years when I want a new PC.
Also, the iMac is hardly eco-friendly. Just because Apple says it doesn't mean squat. An all-in-one like the iMac is probably the worst thing for the environment because the massive 27" display will be good for 10 years, but the computer won't be used for more than 3. A mac mini is much more eco friendly, but the mini has got to be the biggest joke in the Apple lineup (ok I forgot about the MacBook Air). I can build a PC for around $800 that does smoke the iMac, but it won't have a 27" display that's filling up a landfill in 3 years when I want a new PC.
With the new Mini Display port, can't you use the iMac as just a monitor? At least that's what I've read. I don't own one so I can't confirm.
I can’t stand the DIYer snobs. It’s easier than ever to build a PC but the ones that do it think it’s some monumental accomplish. I wonder if Ifail is also going to forums by other PC vendors and stating how you suck if you buy a pre-made PC.
No, no... they just think people who don't want to build their own PCs are idiots.
I wouldn't say I'm a snob, maybe because I didn't do it from scratch all by myself. I picked the components and the guy(s) at the IT shop helped to put together some parts and another guy helped reinstall a power supply after I fried the original power supply (blame Furmark and no-name power supply brand LOL).
I have a MacBook Alu 2ghz with Snow Leopard. My other computer's a PC. I just couldn't go with Dell or HP because for the same amount of cash I can get a quality power supply (which I skimped on the first time round) and a great, powerful GPU to run games at 1080p which Dell and HP "overcharge" by wanting to sell you expensive towers with overpowered (for gaming needs) Core i7s and so on.
"DIY" means I get the most bang for my buck and get to select the components that best fit my budget and value. Remember, it doesn't mean the cheapest component, for example, my GPU, ATI 4830 512MB, is far more powerful than many, many GPUs in today's Dells and HPs. But then again, my main purpose was gaming, so DIY was more suitable for me.
As for Windows 7, it rocks because Vista was just rubbish and 64-bit XP is, well, not suitable, I think. So Windows 7 64bit is the only Windows I can use now. Use, as in, tolerate. I fire it up, Firefox works, games mostly work (research "black screen issue for Need For Speed: Shift"). Other than that, meh, what else can you do with Windows? I run Adobe CS4, iMovie, iTunes, iPhoto, Evernote, all great work and life stuff on a Mac.
And I don't care what people say, turning off Aero-whatever in Windows 7 gives me more frame rates in games, I am quite sure of this.
No big bugs or crashes besides for most games (seems hit and miss still nowadays), though occassionally I will get the "windows explorer has stopped responding" recurrent error (Google it).
Upgrading from XP/Vista my Cisco WMP54G 802.11g WiFi card had problems with drivers (there is still no proper Cisco driver to this day) so you had to do some Ralink RT61 driver install thingy. Doable, but silly.
So, if you are not a gamer, and you do the math properly, and can afford it, there's no reason to get a PC. If you are a gamer, or want a less expensive option to just Facebook all day, sure, Windows 7 on PC is there. But I'll tell you the Windows 7 experience is "prettier" and things are a bit more snappy, but at the end of the day it's still Windows. Once the gloss wears off, it's still Windows.
Now back to fragging Majini in Resident Evil 5 tonight on my PC! LOL. Resident Evil 5 is a *tad* childish, Fear2 was a bit more adult. I'm getting old. 31 now.
....
I'd say though if you were a gamer you might as well get an Xbox360 or, if you really want for whatever reason, a PS3 (BluRay, for example). Pure PC-only titles that are worth it are few and far between.
Peace
With the new Mini Display port, can't you use the iMac as just a monitor? At least that's what I've read. I don't own one so I can't confirm.
The 27" iMacs have Mini Display Port input.
As a person who uses both Windows and Macs, people really shouldn't bash either until they've tried it. A Mac user should look at a PC and use it before they instantly disregard it as above. Windows 7 has some nice features. My Mac has some nice features. I like them both.
Also, the iMac is hardly eco-friendly. Just because Apple says it doesn't mean squat. An all-in-one like the iMac is probably the worst thing for the environment because the massive 27" display will be good for 10 years, but the computer won't be used for more than 3. A mac mini is much more eco friendly, but the mini has got to be the biggest joke in the Apple lineup (ok I forgot about the MacBook Air). I can build a PC for around $800 that does smoke the iMac, but it won't have a 27" display that's filling up a landfill in 3 years when I want a new PC.
The 27" iMac is good for at least 5 years because even when you get tired of it after 1 or 2 years you have a 27" LED-backlit *IPS* display. Unlike the current cheapo PC screens which go straight into landfill for plastic rubbish after a few years.
I actually thought it was the best one. For people who have been around long enough, we know all the hassles of a new version of Windows. "Upgrading" typically meant getting a new version of Windows when you bought a new computer. Then you had to figure out why your old software/hardware didn't work with the new version.
I've tried every beta version of Windows since 3.1 (except Vista) and thought the same thing: "This would be an excellent product when they clean it up a little more and work out a few of the bugs." It just never happened. Every major release was almost identical to the betas or RC's. That's why I switched to a Mac and why the "trust me" ad speaks the most to me.
Windows 7 is the best Windows they've made. But doesn't mean it's super fantastic. Just makes you think how anybody endured Vista. Sad, sad times, it was, with Vista.
About the Apple vs Microsoft debate:
Honestly, I could care less if someone wants to buy/use a Mac or Windows PC. As a graphic designer & website developer I have to use a full range of computers for multiple tasks. Heck, I still have a OS 8 machine and a Win 98' PC that I use for testing old web browser compatibility issues. IYou'd still amazed to know that among all the people in the US that use Internet Explorer, more than 15% have version 6.0 or older.
In the end, just buy/use something that works best with your everyday needs. And if you decide to go the Apple route, but can't afford a new Mac...there's always the refurbished route.
She will understand.
Snip...
So, if you are not a gamer, and you do the math properly, and can afford it, there's no reason to get a PC. If you are a gamer, or want a less expensive option to just Facebook all day, sure, Windows 7 on PC is there. But I'll tell you the Windows 7 experience is "prettier" and things are a bit more snappy, but at the end of the day it's still Windows. Once the gloss wears off, it's still Windows.
Now back to fragging Majini in Resident Evil 5 tonight on my PC! LOL. Resident Evil 5 is a *tad* childish, Fear2 was a bit more adult. I'm getting old. 31 now.
....
I'd say though if you were a gamer you might as well get an Xbox360 or, if you really want for whatever reason, a PS3 (BluRay, for example). Pure PC-only titles that are worth it are few and far between.
Peace
Very well said - I use my Win XP machine for testing various applications/solutions for my business and Mac for everything else. If I fancy a bit of gaming I power up my PS3.
These ads made me laugh.
As a person who uses both Windows and Macs, people really shouldn't bash either until they've tried it. A Mac user should look at a PC and use it before they instantly disregard it as above. Windows 7 has some nice features. My Mac has some nice features. I like them both.
Also, the iMac is hardly eco-friendly. Just because Apple says it doesn't mean squat. An all-in-one like the iMac is probably the worst thing for the environment because the massive 27" display will be good for 10 years, but the computer won't be used for more than 3. A mac mini is much more eco friendly, but the mini has got to be the biggest joke in the Apple lineup (ok I forgot about the MacBook Air). I can build a PC for around $800 that does smoke the iMac, but it won't have a 27" display that's filling up a landfill in 3 years when I want a new PC.
The iMac is more "eco-friendly" than anything HP, Dell, Sony, Acer & Toshiba make. Before moving to Seattle, I worked with an electronics recycling company in San Diego where I broke down computers, printers & monitors to be recycled or resold as parts. For most current computers (including monitor), 85% of the materials can be recycled and the rest can be safely disposed (mercury, rayon filliments, alkaline, etc.). Roughly 95% of an aluminum iMac can be recycled.
In addition, iMacs use less electricty than most other desktops (241 watts =21.5" iMac & 365 watts = 27" iMac). Most CPUs (including the MacPro) use more than 350 watts and that's not including a monitor.