If Apples OS's are so good why don't they develop one for the PC?

[Headbust]

I really know nothing of Apple software and how it works other than the fact that you cannot install any of Apples OS's on a PC.

Why is this? is it something to do with the hardware or what? If there OS's are so great why don't they just develop one that can be used on a PC?

[sumofatguy]

well you *can* run them on a PC, it just takes some work arounds. I've never done it personally, because I have a macbook I can use if I want, but I have seen it done.

the result=hacintosh

[pxc]

Intel Macs are pretty much commodity PCs now.

While Apple controls the entire software (OS) and hardware stack, they can make things run more smoothly than others which have to support thousands of different devices out of the box.

Plus, Apple can make fat margins selling its own branded PCs at a premium. See Apple's results announced last week. There is little reason for Apple to be interested in becoming a software company while they are doing so well right now selling both software and hardware. Apple doesn't want to compete in the low margin PC business, which would happen if OS X were opened up to all x86 hardware.

[SuperSubZero]

Apple is a hardware company. They are in the business of making and selling hardware. While some of their software (ie. Safari for Windows) seems to have no obvious business motive, the majority of their software is designed to move hardware. OS X sells Macs. iTunes sells iPods.

Apple wouldn't want to make a PC version of OS X. It would be a support nightmare. As it is, Macs are made from a narrow range of hardware from limited vendors, and they *still* have quirks. Widening that support to include drivers for every piece of hardware in any PC would be monsterous and not worth it. At the end of the day they want the profit margin from selling a Macbook Pro (and AppleCare), not from selling OS X.

[Zardoz]

Apple is a hardware company. Apple also needs to stand out as something different then run of the mill PC. If you like OSX then why not buy hardware Apple makes for it to run on.

Another thing about it is they have closed support on what hardware will run on it. if apple opens OSX then it would need to open support on craps tons of hardware configs. (very hard job)

[Zardoz]

LMAO SSZ

[SuperSubZero]

^^ great minds start the posts alike?

I tried out the Hackintosh thing, and it ended up with me buying a Macbook Pro.

[gtg465x]

If you like OSX then why not buy hardware Apple makes for it to run on.

Because Apple hardware is a rip off and you can't really upgrade internal parts? You can build your own system or buy a Dell with the EXACT same hardware for half the cost and have the bonus of being able to plop new internals in it on a whim.

[compslckr]

You can upgrade anything in macs... do some research. Since switching over to intel it has made the whole mac experience better.

Show me a 13.3", <6lb notebook with webcam, bluetooth, dvd/rw for less that $850 (current refurb price on apple.com for a macbook)

[gtg465x]

You can upgrade anything in macs... do some research. Since switching over to intel it has made the whole mac experience better.

Show me a 13.3", <6lb notebook with webcam, bluetooth, dvd/rw for less that $850 (current refurb price on apple.com for a macbook)

Can you upgrade the motherboard in a Mac? NO!
Are most new video cards supported by OS X? NO!
Are most sound cards supported by OS X? NO!
Are Blu-Ray and HD-DVD drives supported by OS X? NO!

The fact that you're asking me to compare the price of a new PC with a refurbished Mac only further proves my point that Apple hardware is a rip off.

[gtg465x]

Just for shits and giggles I looked up your refurbished MacBook and did a comparison.

At the Dell Factory Outlet you can get a refurbished XPS M1330 with a 13.3" screen, twice the memory of the $850 MacBook, fifty percent more hard drive space than the $850 MacBook, and weighing 1.03 lbs less than the $850 MacBook. All other specs are similar. This refurbished XPS M1330 is only $690.

[GotNoRice]

If I wanted to run an OS that didn't have drivers for anything I use and didn't support most of the games I play there are already plenty of choices available for the PC besides windows.

[WiLLiSTER]

I loved my hacintosh for a while. Then I wanted to customize again and it was a pain in the ass so I just went back to OSX on mac and XP on windows.

[TechieSooner]

Apple's OS isn't that good, IMO.
If it was some amazingly stable OS that never crashed, I'd say otherwise. But even with Apple dictating what hardware goes in the machine, they can't get their damn system to stay stable (Macs still crash all the time... And on a weekly basis I am around about 10 different ones, and at least 1 per week crashes).


So if Apple can't get their OS stable now....
They would be laughed at and go bankrupt at the fact they couldn't support the MILLIONS OF CONFIGURATIONS they would have to support.

I think Windows would be shown to be a hell of alot more stable, and that's something Apple can't admit...

That, and like others said, they sell hardware. Their software sucks (Safari for Windows is terrible... even most folks that own Macs I know don't use it on their Mac).

I'd say the best single piece of software they write is iTunes, I will give them that at least.
Just for shits and giggles I looked up your refurbished MacBook and did a comparison.

At the Dell Factory Outlet you can get a refurbished XPS M1330 with a 13.3" screen, twice the memory of the $850 MacBook, fifty percent more hard drive space than the $850 MacBook, and weighing 1.03 lbs less than the $850 MacBook. All other specs are similar. This refurbished XPS M1330 is only $690.

I own the M1330 as well. I bought mine new though (you generally can't buy a 4 year warranty with accidental protection from the FO).

Better specs, alot less money. That, add in the fact Apple doesn't even offer a 4 year warranty, nor accidental protection or any of that (And I also think their CS sucks- Dell can overnight you parts- I've NEVER seen Apple do that. At-home service, anyone?).

You can upgrade anything in macs... do some research. Since switching over to intel it has made the whole mac experience better.


You're paying a premium to do that. 4GB of RAM in a Mac will cost you a HELL OF ALOT MORE than what Dell will charge you. And buying third party ain't cheap, either (Does buying third party void the Mac warranty? I don't know??)
Edit- and FWIW here is my M1330 configuration. Cost me $1550.
1 222-9693 XPS M1330, Intel Core 2 Duo Processor T7500 (2.2GHz/800MhzFSB, 4M L2 Cache)
1 320-6312 Midnight Blue XPS M1330
1 311-7638 3GB, DDR2, 667MHz 2 Dimm
1 320-5583 13.3 Inch Wide Screen WXGA TL WLED Backlit LCD with Camera, XPS M1330
1 320-5603 128MB NVIDIA GeForce 8400M GS, for XPS M1330
1 341-6242 160G 7200RPM SATA Hard Drive Free Fall Sensor
1 420-6813 Microsoft Windows Vista Home Premium Edition, English
1 420-7098 Media Direct 3.3
1 420-5769 Internet Search and Portal
1 420-5924 Icon Consolidation Application
1 420-6436 Vista, PC-Restore, Dim/Insp
1 463-2282 Dell Owners Manual installed on your system,click on icon after system set-up to access
1 420-7387 DELL RESOURCE DVD,BACK-UP XPS-M1330
1 412-0946 Dell Travel ExpressCard Remote Control, IR
1 310-9246 Creative Earbud EP630
1 420-7622 DELL SUPPORT CENTER 2.0
1 430-2600 Integrated 10/100 Network Card
1 420-7468 ADOBE ACROBAT READER 8.1 DIM/INSP
1 313-5361 8X DVD+/-RW Slot Load Drive for XPSM1330
1 313-4783 Integrated High Definition Audio 2.0
1 430-2590 Dell Wireless 1490 802.11a/g Mini Card
1 461-8389 No Virus Protection Requested
1 312-0561 56 WHr 6-cell Lithium Ion Primary Battery, for XPS M1330
1 412-0148 No Internet Service Provider Requested
1 412-1397 No Productivity Software requested
1 950-7447 4 Year Limited Warranty
1 412-0359 Soft Contracts - Qualxserve
1 980-4063 Type 15- Third Party At Home Service with Nights and Week ends, 24x7 Technical Support, 3 Year Extended
1 987-6358 Dell Hardware Warranty PlusOnsite Service, Extended Year(s)
1 983-3710 Type 15- Third Party At Home Service with Nights and Week ends, 24x7 Technical Support, Initial Year
1 987-6357 Dell Hardware Warranty PlusOnsite Service, Initial Year
1 464-5100 $70 Promotional Gift Card arrives in 6-8 weeks. Redeem before 1 year expiration at www.dell.com/epp/giftcard
1 902-2483 Warranty Support,3 Year Extended
1 960-8710 Warranty Support,Initial Year
1 412-0358 Soft Contracts - Consumer Complete Care
1 960-9189 CompleteCare Accidental DamageProtection, Inspiron, 4 Year
1 988-0689 Bundle LoJack Theft Recovery Service - 4Year
1 430-2566 Dell Wirless 355 Bluetooth Module (2.0+EDR)
1 310-9273 Fingerprint Reader
1 466-8039 Thank you for choosing Dell
1 310-8319 Intel Core 2 Duo Processor
1 310-8628 You have chosen a Windows Vista Premium System
1 313-6146 Slim and Light LCD with Blue High Gloss Casing and Camera XPS M1330
1 410-1196 Adobe Pepe,English
1 464-9572 No Entertainment software pre-installed
1 420-7091 DataSafe Online Dim/Ins/XPS
1 420-7285 Datasafe Online 10GB,1 Year Free
1 987-7449 XPS,Datasafe 10GB,1YR(Incl w/price)
1 988-0099 To activate your online backupaccount, go to Start, Programs, DataSafe Online

[theDreamer]

You're paying a premium to do that. 4GB of RAM in a Mac will cost you a HELL OF ALOT MORE than what Dell will charge you. And buying third party ain't cheap, either (Does buying third party void the Mac warranty? I don't know??)

First, upgrades is where all companies make money (less than service plans). Third party memory is cheap no matter where you look, 4g can be found for around 50USD or under, and no it will not void your warranty.

[sdlvx]

Apple's OS isn't so good. People just like it because it's not windows and it's easy to use. That and there's not enough people that use it for malware to become worthwhile, so they don't have to worry about that (yet?). Sound like AOL to you back in the 90s? It sure does to me. The whole making things easier and the masses flocking to it thing.

And just because you are running as a user and not as administrator/root because it's a unix environment doesn't make it safe.

http://www.google.com/search?q=linux+root+exploit&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

Case in point. That kind of protection really only slows things down, it doesn't make it untouchable. There's always going to be errors in code or someway to bypass something. It's just that it's much easier to do on Windows, and if *nix OSes (including OSX) were the only ones around, you can bet there'd be just as many problems.

And I have ran a hacintosh before. It's completely not worth it. If you don't have one of the special computers (which happens to be a generic intel system with *maybe* a decent graphics card), most of it doesn't work. Case in point: it wouldn't work worth a damn on my system in my sig, yet it ran fine on a dell with a P4 I got for free with a crap-tastic low end intel board and geforce4 mx440. I couldn't get Quartz 3d running on my 8800GTS at all. My Sondigo Inferno didn't work at all, either. And I didn't even bother trying to use my TV Tuner card or anything like that either. It's just a nightmare.

[rhexis]

apple is a toy company. they are in the business of making and selling over-priced toys. nothing more nothing less.

[xX_Jack_Carver_Xx]

Agreed. If they sold just the OS to run on any PC, there would be no more need for the existence of a Macintosh or any of Apple's manufacturing of it.

They don't just want to be a software company.

Plus, who would be doing the cool packaging design, certainly none of the "PC" companies, they design machines that look like dogshit.

With a Mac you are paying for the innovative design and packaging, not the guts. The guts is generally run of the mill or behind the times, while the packaging of a PC is drab and plain and the guts are state of the art ass kicking.

Lian Li is one of the few companies doing anything in the design/packaging realm of the PC, all the big players just do what is needed to get by, design is not a priority.

[XOR != OR]

Agreed. If they sold just the OS to run on any PC, there would be no more need for the existence of a Macintosh or any of Apple's manufacturing of it.

They don't just want to be a software company.

Plus, who would be doing the cool packaging design, certainly none of the "PC" companies, they design machines that look like dogshit.

With a Mac you are paying for the innovative design and packaging, not the guts. The guts is generally run of the mill or behind the times, while the packaging of a PC is drab and plain and the guts are state of the art ass kicking.

Lian Li is one of the few companies doing anything in the design/packaging realm of the PC, all the big players just do what is needed to get by, design is not a priority.You forgot Alienware.

Ya, that was a joke. Their designs are dogshit too, although they could be said to be trying. Really really hard.

[DeaconFrost]

You can upgrade anything in macs... do some research. Since switching over to intel it has made the whole mac experience better.

Show me a 13.3", <6lb notebook with webcam, bluetooth, dvd/rw for less that $850 (current refurb price on apple.com for a macbook)
In the same post that you told someone else to do some research, you failed to do some of your own. I'll agree that the switch to Intel was one of the best decisions Apple has ever made, but that still doesn't make their hardware any cheaper. To be honest, this is why many people still avoid them, like me. The move to Intel should have made the price-competitive to PC brands, but their greediness, and ability to prey on the fad-followers has kept the prices too high.

[Joe Average]

Apple switched to Intel because they simply did not have any choice, it wasn't a "Oh, let's try this platform architecture and see what happens." When they knew in 1997 or so that Motorola was planning to jump ship from the CPU fab business they started looking for future long-term solutions, and Intel was the only game in town.

They could not have chosen AMD hardware because of a variety of issues (you can figure this stuff out, right?), especially considering Intel basically created the industry singlehandedly over the years. Intel is the CPU market, regardless of how many chips AMD sells, and Apple would not bet the proverbial farm on AMD - Steve Jobs might be a dictator of sorts, but he ain't stupid.

Apple will never release OSX as a standalone OS because it simply goes against their basic philosophy: "Think Different." If you could grab OSX and install it on any piece of hardware, that would conflict with their ability to create a narrow platform profile with specific components they know about, have good relations with the hardware manufacturers for each and every device in a Mac, and therefore have the ability to control on an almost absolute scale the use of the OS as such.

Dropping a standalone version of OSX on the PC market would mean Apple would have to hire 50,000 support personnel and train 'em for every possible contingency like Microsoft does. The Apple knowledge base would become 250x larger than it is over night, literally.

This is neither an economically feasible possibility, nor a practical one. If Apple is anything, it does tend to be dreadfully efficient, just like their OS and machines - this component, that one, this driver, that app, done.

If you want Apple's OS on your own hardware, go learn how to use BSD or FreeBSD, either of which can be turned into a near-perfect clone of OSX with some time and effort - and you wouldn't be locked down to any specific GUI, you could design your own.

Better yet, use Darwin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_(operating_system)) itself - it's open source in the form of OpenDarwin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenDarwin) and although it is no longer being actively developed, there is nothing stopping anyone from starting it up again.

As I've said before, OSX is the operating system that it is because of three other letters:

BSD.

[Cheetoz]

A Camaro has better specs than a Mercedes. And much cheaper!

oh mai gah, what a rip off

[DeaconFrost]

A Camaro has better specs than a Mercedes. And much cheaper!
If you buy a car on specs alone, you fit the saying "fools and their money soon part ways". You can't possibly compare those two, however, in terms of quality, safety, reliability, resale, etc.....things that truly matter. Yes, the Mercedes costs more....but a filet mignon cost more than ground beef as well. Sticking with this example, what does a Mac give you over a PC? Are you getting more to justify that cost? Absolutely not, which is completely different than the car analogy.

[Uberbob102000]

^^Agreed
The only reasonable mac is the Mac Pro because it's reasonably competitive with a dell and close to the same price.

[computerpro3]

But the thinkpad t61/t61p owns the macbook pro in every way except the screen. Lighter, faster, stronger, betterbuilt, more features, and cheaper.

[TechieSooner]

But the thinkpad t61/t61p owns the macbook pro in every way except the screen. Lighter, faster, stronger, betterbuilt, more features, and cheaper.

...But... it's ugly (a factor to those who love Macs)

[computerpro3]

...But... it's ugly (a factor to those who love Macs)

What's more ugly after it falls on the floor - a smashed macbook or an unscratched thinkpad?

[itsukisama]

I personally think I would pick osx over windows just through experience as a laptop. You get both worlds of OS's thru bootcamp. Plus the macbook pro is bullet proof.. ehehehe.. =P
http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/26/macbook-pro-takes-bullet-like-a-champ/
plus it just looks soo sleeker =P

[Glow]

Maybe cause MS bailed Apple out a while ago so they aren't going to invade on their turff

[TechieSooner]

Maybe cause MS bailed Apple out a while ago so they aren't going to invade on their turff
If you go to some of these Apple conferences, they don't hold back on the Microsoft bashing any at all...

I personally think I would pick osx over windows just through experience as a laptop. You get both worlds of OS's thru bootcamp.

Yea, plus two OS licenses :rolleyes:
Sometimes I think Mac users have more money than sense.

[Fryguy8]

1. apple is a hardware company, they sell hardware and minimum stuff to support it.

2. Apple and microsoft are basically at a truce. Each company has a lot of patents on various stupid things (like right clicking). Apple doesn't mess with microsoft's OS sales, microsoft doesn't trigger a patent war.

[blazemonkey]

i know the general consensus is that apples software is much more compatible with the hardware, but ive had less problems with my windows xp machine then i have on my mac at work. i honestly think the quality of apples software has gone downhill since i used it in the 90's, and still feels like im using a toy (minus the games).

[sth128]

The whole point of having a PC is that it's not a Mac and not restricted by Mac's limited compatibility.

The myriad of hardware issues aside, why would you install Mac OS on PC? You won't be able to run any PC softwares and it is basically now a Mac, but more prone to hardware conflicts.

If you're asking why doesn't Apple extend their OS market to PC, two reasons:

1) Microsoft
2) Even if they somehow bested Microsoft and gained a profitable share of the PC market, they'll have gained the same (if not greater) percentage of the hackers, spams, worms, viruses that we enjoy so much. The whole reputation of "totally safer than PC" that Apple boasts at every turn would be negated and Steve Jobs will just be another Bill Gates with a slightly better haircut.

[GORANKAR]

They don't sell OSX on the PC because:

It is not in their best financial interests.
They would sell less hardware.
IMHO, I don't think they can support the amount of hardware MS can and remain as"trouble free" as they currently claim. Which would make their current ad campaign look even dumber than it already does. (they are already up there with "Dude your getting a Dell")
It would tarnish their cool image.:rolleyes:

[JimmiG]

One of the reasons Mac OS X is "better" than Windows (according to some) essentially comes down to the fact that it only runs on a limited number of different hardware combinations.

I *loved* Amiga OS for this reason - it literally booted in a few seconds and was extremely tightly integrated with the hardware, part of the OS even resided in a ROM chip on the mobo. There was only a limited number of hardware devices for the Amiga, you couldn't stick in a Cyrix CPU, a Creative soundcard and an S3 videocard into a Shuttle motherboard and call it a "Amiga"..every piece of Amiga hardware in those days had "Amiga" or "Commodore" stamped all over them. Of course, this lack of flexibility eventually contributed to the downfall of Commodore/Amiga...

I seriously doubt Apple has the resources to test Mac OS X on the huge number of different configurations required, have an entire WHQL-like team, handle communications and relations with hardware and software manufacturers etc. etc. The first several OSX versions for PC's would be very unstable and troublesome, which would give their OS a bad name. If they kept improving it for several years, they might eventually reach the same level of stability, performance and usability has Microsoft has achieved with Windows.

[Joe Average]

Even cooler aspect of Amigas:

You could actually boot them off a RAMdisk - seriously.

You could create a small RAMdisk that would hold whatever system files you desired (depending on how much RAM you had, you could tailor the specifics that would fit into that available space), and the contents of the RAMdisk would survive a warm boot and even boot the computer from that code.

A bootstrap that pointed to a RAMdisk... how freakin' cool was that, in 1984 no less?

Amigas... still the best personal computers ever made, even by today's "standards."

[Rahburt-33]

i dont get what the big deal behind this is
hackintosh, or also knownas as osx86, if you want osx on pc? just make sure youve got a core2 or whatever, nvidia graphics and a wired internet and your set

who cares about the looks, you can just go a find a powermac case in the trash, modify the inside, and your set
someone on this forum actually did it lol

and if you are concerned about hardware compatability, just go buy a mac and install bootcamp on it
an extra $100 for windows xp isnt that much for some people

anways, wouldent you much rather just have one solid computer with xp, vista, linux, and osx anyways? if not just one windows lol (dont we all have a copy of it anyways)

[Archer75]

I think many of you would be suprised at just how well OSX does run on your standard PC with absolutely no support from Apple or hardware vendors. It works on a large variety of hardware too. And is still fast and stable.
Whoever says it would be a support nightmare and it wouldn't be as stable and macs are stable because apple controls the hardware, is full of it. OSX supports a great deal of Intel chipsets, realtek audio and broadcom ethernet, right out of the retail box. EFI PC boards are out there now so soon you won't even need a EFI - bios emulator. And Linux drivers can very easily be modified to work in OSX.
With official support OSX could easily support a greater variety of hardware. Just focus on modern hardware and ditch legacy stuff. Focus on Intel chipsets if they choose and the built in features on them. They support most of that already. Then let ATI and Nvidia release drivers on their sites and you're done. It's really that easy.

Others say Apple is a hardware company and would lose money selling OSX for PC users. Also not true. Dell is a hardware only company and turns a nice profit. Microsoft doesn't build computers, their focus is on software and they have no problem making money.
Apple does both. With OSX for PC's apple would still sell computers. People will always buy apple products. But what also happens is apple sells millions upon millions of copies of OSX and ilife overnight. And their revenue goes through the roof. Whatever would be lost in hardware sales(which wouldn't be much) would easily be gained and then some by the greater volume of software they would sell.

[TechieSooner]

OSX supports a great deal of Intel chipsets, realtek audio and broadcom ethernet, right out of the retail box.
We still aren't talking or even touching the MILLIONS of configurations Windows supports.

Just focus on modern hardware and ditch legacy stuff.
and
Focus on Intel chipsets if they choose
and
Then let ATI and Nvidia release drivers on their sites and you're done.

What have we learned with Vista?
People still have their old, crappy hardware... People use a wide range of hardware... And you can't depend on any vendors to release decent drivers on their own.

[Mandane]

Just treat Apple as a hardware company. They are a boutique seller, so to speak.

If Apple is so overpriced, then how about you talk about Falcon Northwest, Alienware, Voodoo, etc. They are boutique dealers as well, and have far more outrageous prices than Apple and they ship with Windows. Hmm. Why? Because they ship in a pretty case. And in the examples of Falcon Northwest and Voodoo, their builds are also high quality.

Apple computers are also aesthetically appealing and are also high quality builds (not necessarily in the hardware realm).

Just get it through your head that unlike Dell, HP, IBM, etc., Apple isn't exactly selling to the mainstream crowd.

[Archer75]

People still have their old, crappy hardware... People use a wide range of hardware... And you can't depend on any vendors to release decent drivers on their own.

You can narrow the range to something that works for alot of people but still allows OSX to run on various hardware combinations. Like I said before, you'd be surprised the amount of hardware OSX runs on now, without any support from apple. I could go on Newegg right now and come up with dozens upon dozens, maybe even hundreds of motherboards that Leopard will run on. With no apple support. And a good selection of ATI and Nvidia video cards that will allow for gaming in OSX. I speak from experience.
Part of the problem with Vista is that it tries to support hardware no matter the age. Microsoft should have cut legacy support all together.

[Mithent]

It would cheapen the brand if any old PC could run OS X. Apple sells an experience more than anything else. Windows is a workhorse; it generally does anything you want pretty well, but despite Microsoft's attempts at marketing it otherwise, it doesn't really have much "wow". Buying Apple isn't about buying an operating system so much as buying into a whole ecosystem where everything is focused on user experience and style. Apple want to sell you a world where everything is slick, well-designed and Just Works(TM), where you'll be creative and dynamic - an experience that runs from the hardware to the OS to much of the software. It would go against this ethos to sell the OS separately, and make it a commodity item like Windows.

[Skillz'n Magic]

If there OS's are so great why don't they just develop one that can be used on a PC?

Because then they couldn't over charge iTrendy iMorons for their hardware.

[Hurshai]

IMHO, I don't think they can support the amount of hardware MS can and remain as"trouble free" as they currently claim.

MS doesn't support hardware, hardware vendors do.

[DeaconFrost]

MS doesn't support hardware, hardware vendors do.
Who do you think certifies the drivers for use with Windows, and attempts to work with the hardware vendors to have stable drivers? MS may not directly support the hardware, aside from their own basic drivers, but they are certainly involved in the chain. It would be no different than ATI making their own drivers for their video cards on a Mac.

[Hurshai]

Who do you think certifies the drivers for use with Windows, and attempts to work with the hardware vendors to have stable drivers? MS may not directly support the hardware, aside from their own basic drivers, but they are certainly involved in the chain. It would be no different than ATI making their own drivers for their video cards on a Mac.

I don't want to drag this any further off topic so I'll PM you later Deacon:D

[MrGuvernment]

Sure it has been said , but simple

Apple is a HARDWARE seller, not a software seller - sell the OS to other platforms - lose MASSIVE hardware sales


simple, close thread now :)

[MrGuvernment]

Because Apple hardware is a rip off and you can't really upgrade internal parts? You can build your own system or buy a Dell with the EXACT same hardware for half the cost and have the bonus of being able to plop new internals in it on a whim.

actually no, more recent compariosons show dell systems or same specs being the same, or more....

the price diff these days is considerably less since they are using more standard parts.

[GORANKAR]

MS doesn't support hardware, hardware vendors do.

True enough, but why don't hardware vendors support it or write drivers? (aside from peripherals of course) The answer to that is prolly why Apple is still a niche provider. Why would you write drivers for OSX when Apple will not put nor condone your hardware in it's computers?

[Archer75]

Sure it has been said , but simple

Apple is a HARDWARE seller, not a software seller - sell the OS to other platforms - lose MASSIVE hardware sales


simple, close thread now :)

Not true at all. Since hardware prices are closer in line with what they should be compared to other makers such as Sony and HP and people like apple hardware they wouldn't lose massive sales. I'm willing to bet they wouldn't lose any sales. But assuming they do, they more than make up for it through software sales which is what has managed to generate more revenue for microsoft than apple can dream of. And it doesn't cost them any more money to sell software as they've already developed it, they are merely selling it to a much larger audience.

[gtg465x]

actually no, more recent compariosons show dell systems or same specs being the same, or more....

the price diff these days is considerably less since they are using more standard parts.

That's an interesting theory... both of these have a bigger hard drive, the 1500 has a faster processor, and the M1530 has twice the amount of RAM as the MacBook. What was that you were saying again?

http://img120.imageshack.us/img120/1365/11474094jm8.jpg

[TechieSooner]

^^^ And the M1330 is actually thinner than the Macbook (I own one [M1330] and have set them down side by side).
If you get it on a sale, you can get it about half price what Dell's regular price is at that, which is considerably cheaper than Apple.

[DeaconFrost]

That right there is one of the reasons I try to avoid Apple at all costs. Considering the innards of the laptops are nearly identical, there is no reason why they should cost that much more.

[tsfroggy]

Their computers are overpriced to the regular consumer, but for high end consumers they really are nice machines. Not necessarily worth the cost out of the box, considering all of the components that go into it (or lack thereof) but at least you know you are buying a quality computer. They're kind of fun to play around with, too. ;)

What it comes down to: If it's worth it to you to drop x amount more for a Mac over a PC, then it's worth it. Period.

[Cheetoz]

Sticking with this example, what does a Mac give you over a PC?

Resale value, reliability, and quality.

If people cared about having the best performance laptop, they would not buy a macbook...
Just as one would not buy a luxury car for drag racing

[computerpro3]

Resale value, reliability, and quality.

Thinkpads hold their value just as well or even better than macs. There are decade old thinkpad laptops selling for $500-700 all the time. Just go look at the for sale forums at forum.thinkpads.com. Hell, people actively collect the damn things. They are also more reliable and built better.

If people cared about having the best performance laptop, they would not buy a macbook...
Just as one would not buy a luxury car for drag racing

So, you never heard of a ferrari, veryon, lamborghini, audi R8, etc, etc? They can beat 99.9999% of the cars on the road in a drag race, and are quite nice inside. I like my thinkpad because it's more luxurious and faster than any mac.

[DeaconFrost]

Resale value, reliability, and quality.
All are things you can get with a Dell or an HP laptop as well. There's no way you can say a Mac laptop is any more reliable than a PC laptop.

[Cheetoz]

So, you never heard of a ferrari, veryon, lamborghini, audi R8, etc, etc? They can beat 99.9999% of the cars on the road in a drag race, and are quite nice inside. I like my thinkpad because it's more luxurious and faster than any mac.

"but omg, what a rip off!!!!!!!!! *points to dell website* you can get a car that is better and cheaper!!!!!!!!!"



edit; and thinkpads are known for their usb hubs breaking. I was going to get one and throw on linux, but then went for a macbook instead (in my sig $850 on ebay)

[DeaconFrost]

"but omg, what a rip off!!!!!!!!! *points to dell website* you can get a car that is better and cheaper!!!!!!!!!"
There's an important part of the analogy you are missing. With those cars, they give you more to somewhat justify the cost difference. As others have been trying to show, you don't get anything extra with a Mac to justify the cost. If they were the same price, or roughly the same, I'd own one as well, because I could run OSX and Vista on the same system.

Here's another example of Apple's bullshit pricing. What if I wanted a MacBook...but in black? I have to pay extra for black? Is black plastic all of a sudden much more expensive than white plastic? WTF?

[computerpro3]

"but omg, what a rip off!!!!!!!!! *points to dell website* you can get a car that is better and cheaper!!!!!!!!!"

You would make a good point - if a macbook really was in a different league than a thinkpad.

There is something to be said for owning a high performance luxury item - like a Ferrari. Yes, you can beat a $300k ferrari with a $100k heavily modified supra, but it's still not a Ferrari.

Now comparing a macbook to a thinkpad is like comparing a ferrari to a lamborghini - except one is 25% cheaper than the other. Only fanboys will get the more expensive one ;)



edit; and thinkpads are known for their usb hubs breaking.

And macs are known for warping, discoloration, and batteries exploding. I have never heard of the USB hub problem and I researched laptops for a solid three months before my purchase. Was it only on an older model or something?

[Cheetoz]

There's an important part of the analogy you are missing. With those cars, they give you more to somewhat justify the cost difference. As others have been trying to show, you don't get anything extra with a Mac to justify the cost. If they were the same price, or roughly the same, I'd own one as well, because I could run OSX and Vista on the same system


Apart from the cheapest macbook- heck yeah they are expensive and a rip off. The important part I am trying to make is that they sell them at a higher cost for the "value." It is like buying a Mercedes rather than a Corolla, because it sets you on a different class. Does a Mercedes do anything more amazing than a Corolla? No. It just looks prettier.

A macbook is more expensive, and looks prettier. Is it better than some PCs? No. But it sets you on a different class.

(now fanboys and egoism is a different topic, lol)

Was it only on an older model or something?Yeah, the 40's. The 60's were too expensive at the time

[DeaconFrost]

Does a Mercedes do anything more amazing than a Corolla? No. It just looks prettier.
I can't speak about the Mercedes from first hand knowledge, but I can tell you there's a world of difference between my BMW 325xi and a Corolla. Sure, I paid about $10k more for mine than a Corolla would have costs, but I got a lot more than just looks for that money.

[computerpro3]

Does a Mercedes do anything more amazing than a Corolla? No. It just looks prettier.

Well there goes your entire argument. Driving our Audi A8L is just a "little" bit different than driving in a corolla. Forget the 4.2l V8, forget the adjustable air suspension, foget the built in air conditioned/heated seats, forget the seat massage, forget the 25 feet of legroom, forget the premium leather and real wood, forget the 4 zone climate control system, foget the automated sunshades on the back seats and the rear window, forget about the unreal handling for the size of the car, foget about the brembo calipers, forget about the 19in Pirelli tires, and forget about the electronic stability control, lane departure warning system, intelligent cruise control, etc, etc, and other than that, you're right, it's the exact same thing. ;)

[Cheetoz]

right, lets just throw in a bunch of exceptions to avoid the point I am making.

And you could still have all that without the expensive cost of an Audi or a BMW.
Throw in some bolt-ons on a Camaro and watch it blow your little toy car away, with half the cost

[computerpro3]

right, lets just throw in a bunch of exceptions to avoid the point I am making.

And you could still have all that without the expensive cost of an Audi or a BMW.
Throw in some bolt-ons on a Camaro and watch it blow your little toy car away, with half the cost

You missed the entire point. The camaro has none of those features that the Audi or BMW has. They are in a completely different class. Sure, modifiy it to your hearts content but it will never be the car that the Audi is in terms of overall class, features, or feel. A thinkpad has more features than the macbook has - they are in the exact same class, luxury notebooks.

[Mav451]

If your point is luxury - then I got it. Many of things 90% of us don't need or care about. I certainly would NOT pay extra for luxuries. I also would never buy a German car, but that's for another discussion :D

[computerpro3]

The point I am trying to make is that just as an audi is in a different class than a toyota (its retarded that he even brought the camaro up - that's like comparing a macbook to a 17in gaming laptop, nobody looking for one would buy the other), macbooks and thinkpads are in a different class than dells.

However, just as ferrari and lamborghini are in the same class as each other, so are thinkpads and macbooks - and if one is significantly faster and cheaper than the other, and has all of the same capabilities (want me to post pics of my T61 in leopard 10.5.2?), than only a fanboy would defend the slower, more expensive one.

Which in this case, is the Mac.

[Joe Average]

For some reason, at this point in this thread, this image comes to mind:

http://img230.imageshack.us/img230/4942/bustedwebcamig2.jpg

Just seems to fit, for some reason. ;)

[DeaconFrost]

right, lets just throw in a bunch of exceptions to avoid the point I am making.

And you could still have all that without the expensive cost of an Audi or a BMW.
Throw in some bolt-ons on a Camaro and watch it blow your little toy car away, with half the cost
Ha ha, no, not quite. What you see as an exception, is really a glaring hole in your logic. Let's pretend for a second, that we are mature adults who realize a car is measured by MUCH more than it's 0-60 time. Instead of you talking about an exception, let's look at the whole picture....you can't compare a Camaro to an Audi or a BMW. As mentioned, they aren't even in the same class of vehicle. If you want some simple proof, try and drive them on a windy country road.
I also would never buy a German car, but that's for another discussion :D
Yikes, I've never seen such craziness!

[Ockie]

Does a Mercedes do anything more amazing than a Corolla? No. It just looks prettier.

A Mercedes can avoid an accident by accident avoidance saving your life, a corolla can't. A Mercedes has an auto braking avoidance system in that after the driver approaches the line of no return of impact, the merc will automatically apply brake power (if the merc can not swerve out automatically via the collision avoidance system), scream an alarm, and prepare for impact... once impact is imminent, the merc will blow out its steering column (so it wont break your ribs) prepare airbag deployment, fire explosive to lock seatbelt, tilt you seat into the best impact position, send out notification of impact to emergency services... millimeters from impact the merc will deploy it's airbags on a first stage and will fire 3 stages depending on the speed of travel to avoid additional injury to you, it will also fire leg airbags to protect your knee from splitting open on the dash. Before you have noticed it, the car did hundreds of functions in that second that saved your life. A merc also has a better designed impact zones, larger car, better crumple zones... thus increasing your survivability.


A corolla just smashes at full speed into the oncoming object and deploying airbags as a reactive approach.


So yeah, other than that, it's just prettier.

Sorry, I had to nit pick.

[Joe Average]

Personally, I think using a car analogy to compare a Mac vs a PC is a bit ridiculous. I favor a Timex vs Rolex analogy myself: they both do pretty much the same thing - tell time - but one is a bit more "bling bling" to get the job done, and by design isn't meant for everyone.

[DeaconFrost]

That is a much better analogy because the feature set and functionality of the two products are nearly identical.....more so than even a Mac vs PC comparison.

[computerpro3]

Don't insult Rolex by comparing it to a Mac...some craftsmanship actually goes into the Rolex.

[DeaconFrost]

Have watch batteries ever been recalled due to an explosion risk?

[Mav451]

Have watch batteries ever been recalled due to an explosion risk?

This is where PC comes by and says, "Touche".

*edit*
And just realized that Dell batteries also had this problem. So touche to my brain then, lol.

[theDreamer]

The battery was, technically, Sony's fault. They built and produced the batteries and sold them to Apple, Dell, etc. to use. So the battery crisis was another black mark for Sony, but it did not help Apple or Dell.

[Shaggy3zx]

Having a mac is like having supermodel gf. Wow are they hot but one day you'll come home and find it making the beast with two backs with your best friend. :eek:

I like penny arcades take on mac: Forbidden Fruit (http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2006/03/03/)

[TechieSooner]

But it sets you on a different class.

(now fanboys and egoism is a different topic, lol)


Wait, it is???

Prime reason right there why so many PC folk not only love it when Mac fails at something, but make a big deal about it: The superiority complex. "Sets me in a different class higher than others".

[rei1574]

You can upgrade anything in macs... do some research. Since switching over to intel it has made the whole mac experience better.

Show me a 13.3", <6lb notebook with webcam, bluetooth, dvd/rw for less that $850 (current refurb price on apple.com for a macbook)
Dell XPS m1330

[DeaconFrost]

The battery was, technically, Sony's fault. They built and produced the batteries and sold them to Apple, Dell, etc. to use. So the battery crisis was another black mark for Sony, but it did not help Apple or Dell.
Correct. That was somewhat the point I was trying to make. Mac's are definitely no more reliable than a PC. A hard drive can fail in both. A screen could fail on both. Memory could be/go bad in both. The battery could be recalled/explode in both. Someone above incorrectly stated that Macs are more reliable, justifying the cost premium, and that isn't so.

[Cheetoz]

Wait, it is???

Prime reason right there why so many PC folk not only love it when Mac fails at something, but make a big deal about it: The superiority complex. "Sets me in a different class higher than others".

Until mac surpassed Dell in laptop sales in higher education (posted on /.)

now everybody has one

[DeaconFrost]

Until mac surpassed Dell in laptop sales in higher education (posted on /.)
You need to be careful using the term "sales" in that respect. Apple just about gives them away to schools and other functions. I know the legit business reasons for doing so, but they also do it to pad their sales numbers. It is very similar to how a lot of the domestic car manufacturers count the fleet and rental cars they *ahem* sell in their overall sales totals.

[alex2792]

Anyone who thinks that OS X sucks has never used a Mac(or at least not a real one). I have a MacBook Pro with Vista in bootcamp and unless I absolutely have to use an application that is not available on a Mac I avoid it. OS X is the most stable, problem free OS ever not to mention the interface is light years ahead of MS when it comes to intuitiveness and design(hmm perhaps thats why most of Vista's "innovative" features are nothing more than a OS X rip off?). I'm not an MS hater nor do I think Steve Jobs is god and I can use both Windows and Mac and get stuff done BUT given a choice I'll take Leopard 11 out of 10 times.

[Mav451]

Haha is that the standard playoffs line "I give 110%"?
*Except applied in the computer world...

And if MS was smart, they would have ripped off Expose at least.

[alex2792]

Haha is that the standard playoffs line "I give 110%"?
*Except applied in the computer world...

And if MS was smart, they would have ripped off Expose at least.


YES definately the flip 3D is useless when you have many windows open because they are turned SIDEWAYS which makes it hard to see what exactly that window is showing. Seriously who came up with that idea?

[MrGuvernment]

That's an interesting theory... both of these have a bigger hard drive, the 1500 has a faster processor, and the M1530 has twice the amount of RAM as the MacBook. What was that you were saying again?

http://img120.imageshack.us/img120/1365/11474094jm8.jpg




the one does have a massive sale on it $400+ off :)


i can agree, with Dell's sales it is hard to beat their prices, but i recall a similar thread like this not too long ago, and when a comparison was done, Dell actually came out more in most cases (like 1-$300 more), especially when trying to build a desktop to compare to the Mac Pro.

the problem with apple too is that they dont update their lines with the new parts like dell does as soon as things come out.

[Joe Average]

the one does have a massive sale on it $400+ off :)


Yeah, I wonder. Has Apple ever had a sale? :D And I'm not thinking about their refurb stuff online from the Apple Store either, I mean in a retail environment. They restrict pricing on stuff just like Microsoft used to do, and got in trouble for. When Windows 95 came out, Microsoft flat out said to vendors and retailers "Here's what we suggest as the retail price. If we catch you selling it for less, you'll never sell another Microsoft product ever again."

Apple does essentially the same thing. Don't believe me? Try this on for size:

Anyone selling Apple products can't even advertise a lower price if they choose to put something "on sale." Take Fry's for example. When they sell an iPod for less than the actual MSRP from Apple, they can't advertise it at the lower price, they have to use some marketing doublespeak and say something like "$199 (Price is before markdown)"

I caught that recently when they had a Macbook (black) on sale and noted the price and thought, "That ain't no sale" then realized they are stuck and have to print the MSRP essentially and then say "Price before markdown" which you won't know till you get into the store and ask. It's not a bait-and-switch tactic by Fry's either - they literally can't advertise a lower price in the ad.

Kinda scummy business practices considering when you buy something you're not buying it from Apple: you're buying it from Fry's because Fry's is buying it from Apple.

Bleh.

</off_topic>

[theDreamer]

Yeah, I wonder. Has Apple ever had a sale? :D And I'm not thinking about their refurb stuff online from the Apple Store either, I mean in a retail environment. They restrict pricing on stuff just like Microsoft used to do, and got in trouble for. When Windows 95 came out, Microsoft flat out said to vendors and retailers "Here's what we suggest as the retail price. If we catch you selling it for less, you'll never sell another Microsoft product ever again."

Apple does essentially the same thing. Don't believe me? Try this on for size:

Anyone selling Apple products can't even advertise a lower price if they choose to put something "on sale." Take Fry's for example. When they sell an iPod for less than the actual MSRP from Apple, they can't advertise it at the lower price, they have to use some marketing doublespeak and say something like "$199 (Price is before markdown)"

I caught that recently when they had a Macbook (black) on sale and noted the price and thought, "That ain't no sale" then realized they are stuck and have to print the MSRP essentially and then say "Price before markdown" which you won't know till you get into the store and ask. It's not a bait-and-switch tactic by Fry's either - they literally can't advertise a lower price in the ad.

Kinda scummy business practices considering when you buy something you're not buying it from Apple: you're buying it from Fry's because Fry's is buying it from Apple.

Bleh.

</off_topic>

Apple does one (maybe two?) sales a year and they are winter sales for the holiday season.

Also, Apple is not alone in having to advertise or forcing stores to only print MSRP prices. Check online and you will see places have X price listed but you can click and see a lower price. A more common approach is like the Fry's ad or Best Buy, you see 1,999USD "Before Discount," because they are not allowed to show a lower price (these items range from televisions, to refrigerators, to computers).

Apple never really needs to have a sale because they know they control the OS X market, and set prices which all stores follow.

[TechieSooner]

Anyone who thinks that OS X sucks has never used a Mac(or at least not a real one).
It is pretty odd, actually... I used to be an avid supporter FOR Apple and Mac until I started using them.
When I started using them, I was amazed at how dumb the OS was. They assume the user is a jackass... Most are, but even for the enthusiast, you've got your hands tied in too many ways.

Apple does one (maybe two?) sales a year and they are winter sales for the holiday season.


Do they? I know they LOWER their prices at times, but I have never seen a sale.


You are correct though the MSRP isn't unusual for other things in life, though.

[theDreamer]

It is pretty odd, actually... I used to be an avid supporter FOR Apple and Mac until I started using them.
When I started using them, I was amazed at how dumb the OS was. They assume the user is a jackass... Most are, but even for the enthusiast, you've got your hands tied in too many ways.



Do they? I know they LOWER their prices at times, but I have never seen a sale.


You are correct though the MSRP isn't unusual for other things in life, though.

I got an email about "Our special shopping event," which was the day after Thanksgiving and last for 24 hours. Basically it was like 25USD off some iPods, maybe 50USD off some of the desktop/laptop line, in the end I could get the same prices with my student discount. Though for others it was a sale.

[alex2792]

It is pretty odd, actually... I used to be an avid supporter FOR Apple and Mac until I started using them.
When I started using them, I was amazed at how dumb the OS was. They assume the user is a jackass... Most are, but even for the enthusiast, you've got your hands tied in too many ways.


What can you do with windows thats not possible with OS X? You can tweak just about everything with OS X especially if you know what you're doing with the terminal. The UAC is terrible because it doesn't actually stop anyone from screwing up the system at least with OS X you have to know the password so if someone else is using your computer they can't f it up.

[MrGuvernment]

Anyone who thinks that OS X sucks has never used a Mac(or at least not a real one). .

lame attempt, some people just dont like it, many people have used OSX and dont like it, so drop your assumptions, i have used OS since OS 9 and simply dont like it

[MrGuvernment]

Anyone who thinks that OS X sucks has never used a Mac(or at least not a real one). .

lame attempt, some people just dont like it, many people have used OSX and dont like it, so drop your assumptions, i have used OS since OS 9 and simply dont like it

[DeaconFrost]

I've been using OSX on a new Mac Pro I got for my graphics designer. I set the system up completely for her, and honestly, I wasn't impressed at all. I'm not saying it was bad, just that nothing really jumped out at me as being better or superior than a PC. Given what it cost, I'm sure I could build or buy a PC that would be capable of running Adobe's CS3 suite just as well, and saved some cash.

[TechieSooner]

What can you do with windows thats not possible with OS X?
Tweak just about any UI change you'd like, for starters.

The UAC is terrible because it doesn't actually stop anyone from screwing up the system at least with OS X you have to know the password so if someone else is using your computer they can't f it up.
Prove it.
Try deleting C:\Windows with UAC enabled and turned on, and post a screencast of you doing it.

That's right- it'll stop you.

If you're talking about a user hitting "Continue", there is simply no way around that. Even in OS X, they can type the password out and keep running.
The only way in OS X it is protected is it ALWAYS prompts for a password. Which can be a PITA if you look at it in a way, but Windows can be done the same way with a limited account. Therefore, I fail to see a valid argument here.

If a user hits Continue and tells it to do something- the computer has to do it. PERIOD. I don't know why some people don't get this.
Any OS on earth... if you tell the computer to do something- it has to do it.
This is why all of us around here will always be employed- because people will always screw things up.

[gtg465x]

I'm not an MS hater nor do I think Steve Jobs is god and I can use both Windows and Mac and get stuff done BUT given a choice I'll take Leopard 11 out of 10 times.

I guess you don't plan on doing much gaming any of those 11 times, or watching HD movies (Blu-Ray and HD-DVD), or developing hardware and software. Don't feel bad... I love Linux, but it has trouble getting the job done in those areas too. I find it quite funny that the Mac commercials portray PCs as boring, yet gaming on Macs sucks and it's taking forever for them to add Blu-Ray support. In my opinion, Apple just can't seem to add enough glitter to OS X to hide the fact that it's boring.

[gtg465x]

the one does have a massive sale on it $400+ off :)


i can agree, with Dell's sales it is hard to beat their prices, but i recall a similar thread like this not too long ago, and when a comparison was done, Dell actually came out more in most cases (like 1-$300 more), especially when trying to build a desktop to compare to the Mac Pro.

the problem with apple too is that they dont update their lines with the new parts like dell does as soon as things come out.

A few points...

1. That's not a sale... it's a marketing scam (because the sales are always there) to make people think they're getting a better deal.

2. The problem with Dell's website is that you can configure the exact same computer in several different places on the site and get totally different prices. However, I promise that if you configure the same computer in all of those different places on Dell's site, the lowest priced one will always beat Apple, except for in one case...

3. The Mac Pro is way cheaper than a similarly configured Dell. However, we're talking about an 8 core desktop here... Dell just isn't trying to compete in the dual quad core arena. Not to mention, the Mac Pro is an extremely unbalanced system. It has nearly $2000 worth of processors, but everything else in the system looks like something you would find in a $500 desktop.

[bigdogchris]

If there OS's are so great why don't they just develop one that can be used on a PC?Because they're not. The best line I ever heard was by a guy defending MSFT, "If building OS es is so easy, and MSFT is so bad, why are more people not building them?" Reason, it's not easy to built a OS that supports the millions of possible hardware configurations. There's only one company that has been able to do it successfully. They've also made the PC something that everyone, no matter where you go, can use it. But yet, they are still evil for some reason, mostly just to conspiracy lunatics though.

But to be serious, Apples OS are OK but people are set in their ways. They will never take over the market. The only thing they have to go on is to sell their products to people who have their heads so far up their own asses that they can't walk across a street without getting hit by a car because they're listening to their ipod and dancing like an idiot. Then they make fun of Vista which I think is really funny because while I'm watching their commercials, I'm playing a bunch of badass game titles that they will never have. I'm having a lot more fun than I would be having making movies of my family reunion.

[Serpico]

Tweak just about any UI change you'd like, for starters.

Example please? The UI can be tweaked in many ways, and if you're not happy with that then there are plenty of outside applications you can use to do that with (much like you could get for XP).

As far as working in the guts of the OS if you really do want to get in there, there's a UNIX terminal right there to work with. I'd say there is a pretty fair balance struck with OS X as far as usability and the experience level of the user. It is very simple to use and customize on the GUI level (and, most importantly it gets the hell out of the way and has the best window and workspace management out there), while you can also get deeper access to the OS through the terminal if you wish.

[Serpico]

lame attempt, some people just dont like it, many people have used OSX and dont like it, so drop your assumptions, i have used OS since OS 9 and simply dont like it

I agree with you but I do have to ask, OS 9? Gross. :)

[Serpico]

I've been using OSX on a new Mac Pro I got for my graphics designer. I set the system up completely for her, and honestly, I wasn't impressed at all. I'm not saying it was bad, just that nothing really jumped out at me as being better or superior than a PC. Given what it cost, I'm sure I could build or buy a PC that would be capable of running Adobe's CS3 suite just as well, and saved some cash.

A 24" iMac and an external drive for the secondary might have been a better call if price was an issue. Unless she needed a Quadro or more than two monitors then I don't see a reason for the Mac Pro purchase. Damn thing has two quad-core Harpertown Xeons in there. Yeah it is nice but it is such expensive overkill for most people when the Core 2 Duos are also solid performers.

[MrGuvernment]

A few points...

1. That's not a sale... it's a marketing scam (because the sales are always there) to make people think they're getting a better deal.

2. The problem with Dell's website is that you can configure the exact same computer in several different places on the site and get totally different prices. However, I promise that if you configure the same computer in all of those different places on Dell's site, the lowest priced one will always beat Apple, except for in one case...

3. The Mac Pro is way cheaper than a similarly configured Dell. However, we're talking about an 8 core desktop here... Dell just isn't trying to compete in the dual quad core arena. Not to mention, the Mac Pro is an extremely unbalanced system. It has nearly $2000 worth of processors, but everything else in the system looks like something you would find in a $500 desktop.


you got it, and i have seen this, with their server lines especially "get this server for $400, regular price $1000!!!) sorry how is a 4 year old AMD opteron server with 1 HD worth $1000!


basically alot of times they UP the price on other areas to make it seem like a deal when really your paying what you SHOULD be paying originally... but dell makes it a sale.

and the price diff is big between say home and small buisness, like a few hundred dollara for the exact same configuration.

[alex2792]

And speaking of gaming, nobody(even Apple) ever claimed that OS X is great for gaming. Macs are not really designed to be gaming computers and imo with bootcamp it's really a moot point since you can easily install xp or vista to use for gaming. However when it comes to doing just about anything else(I never attempted to watch a blu ray movie on my mbp because doing so on a 15in screen is pointless when I can use my ps3 on a 42in plasma) OS X can't be beat for usability. Not having to run any registry cleaners, trojan/malware scanners and anti virus software is very liberating to say the least :)

[Archer75]

I guess you don't plan on doing much gaming any of those 11 times, or watching HD movies (Blu-Ray and HD-DVD), or developing hardware and software. Don't feel bad... I love Linux, but it has trouble getting the job done in those areas too. I find it quite funny that the Mac commercials portray PCs as boring, yet gaming on Macs sucks and it's taking forever for them to add Blu-Ray support. In my opinion, Apple just can't seem to add enough glitter to OS X to hide the fact that it's boring.

I don't think most people realize just how many games are out there for OSX. There are quite a few. I personally play WoW, EVE, Civ4, my wife plays Sims2. Soon to have CoD4. There is also UT3 and NWN2. Those are just what interests me, but there are far more. I'd like to check out Enermy Territory: Quake Wars. In fact I only have to boot into windows for one game, a certain MMO that is in beta.

I also hear that parallels will allow for full speed windows gaming but I have not tested that yet.

One can easily play HD movies in OSX. Maybe not legally. But I can certainly download rips or make my own rips. I watch HD movies in OSX all the time.

[TechieSooner]

2. The problem with Dell's website is that you can configure the exact same computer in several different places on the site and get totally different prices.
Yea, it's a PITA. You can follow in different links to Dell's website and get different offers as well.
Spending some time to research can land you a great deal though ($1500 for a fully loaded M1330 beats anything else out there).



3. The Mac Pro is way cheaper than a similarly configured Dell. However, we're talking about an 8 core desktop here... Dell just isn't trying to compete in the dual quad core arena. Not to mention, the Mac Pro is an extremely unbalanced system. It has nearly $2000 worth of processors, but everything else in the system looks like something you would find in a $500 desktop.
You pretty much summed it up, but I'd also like to add the demand for 8 core desktops is pretty slim, for either PC or Mac.
If you're in the market for an 8 core desktop, chances are you're doing something that needs some good power. Along with that comes some heavy RAM, Hard Drive, and other requirements, which the Mac lacks on.

Because they're not. The best line I ever heard was by a guy defending MSFT, "If building OS es is so easy, and MSFT is so bad, why are more people not building them?" Reason, it's not easy to built a OS that supports the millions of possible hardware configurations. There's only one company that has been able to do it successfully. They've also made the PC something that everyone, no matter where you go, can use it. But yet, they are still evil for some reason, mostly just to conspiracy lunatics though.
I believe that was me!
But you're exactly right. Nobody has come up with anything near the support Windows has. I get so tired of folks bitching about Microsoft/Windows how bad it is, but quite frankly I haven't seen anything that has the support they do. Yes, Linux can work, but it takes a hell of alot of manual configuration on too much stuff. I tried Ubuntu, after someone telling me how great the support was, and was pretty disapointed to say the least... It's a solid OS, it's just for the masses it still isn't anywhere near ready.

That said: Microsoft employs thousands of people working on Windows. It's pretty safe to say they'll always be ahead in this technology/new features department. Yes, there are execptions, but I am talking overall.
Take OpenOffice. You can equate that to Office 2003.
Microsoft releases Office 2007, and suddenly OO is a pretty dated piece of software. Like Office 2007 or not, it's a step ahead.... Just another example is all. I use OO on some machines, and it is pretty capable for most folks.

basically alot of times they UP the price on other areas to make it seem like a deal when really your paying what you SHOULD be paying originally... but dell makes it a sale.
After reading that, there have been some sweet deals on PCs. There always are.
But there are NEVER any sweet deals on Macs...
They could probably sell more if they had real sales, but then their profit margins go down!!!

And speaking of gaming, nobody(even Apple) ever claimed that OS X is great for gaming. Macs are not really designed to be gaming computers
But OMG!!! It's such a supreme graphics/multimedia machine in every other sense with all this power that kicks Windows around the block, why the hell can't it run some games???!?!?!?



and imo with bootcamp it's really a moot point since you can easily install xp or vista to use for gaming.
And I think that's a moot point.
Why pay more for more hardware, pay more for another OS license, if you're just going to end up running Windows anyway?

IMO Bootcamp establishes the fact that Apple can't do it all. I think it was more of a feature of current users needing more support than getting new users to switch.

Not having to run any registry cleaners, trojan/malware scanners and anti virus software is very liberating to say the least :)
You could say the same for Vista...
Fact of the matter is if you are on OS X, you have no protection. This was demonstrated to the world with that two minute hack.

[alex2792]

I don't understand you problem with bootcamp. If you get a Mac NOBODY FORCES YOU TO USE IT but for people who want to play Windows only games or have to use certain application that is not OS X compatible it's a great alternative. There are some applications that I use at my job where all PCs are running XP all I gotta do is start up Parallels and a minute later I'm running it alongside OS X. A Dell while cheaper does not give that option, sure I could most likely install OS X on it ala hackintosh but there are compatibility issues and dual booting with windows can be a real PITA. With a mac I get the best of both world, OS X for all my surfing/itunes/DVDs and work and I have an option of booting into windows OR running it virtualized which even lets you drag and drop files between windows and mac.

[Archer75]

Anyone who thinks that OS X sucks has never used a Mac(or at least not a real one). I have a MacBook Pro with Vista in bootcamp and unless I absolutely have to use an application that is not available on a Mac I avoid it. OS X is the most stable, problem free OS ever not to mention the interface is light years ahead of MS when it comes to intuitiveness and design(hmm perhaps thats why most of Vista's "innovative" features are nothing more than a OS X rip off?). I'm not an MS hater nor do I think Steve Jobs is god and I can use both Windows and Mac and get stuff done BUT given a choice I'll take Leopard 11 out of 10 times.

On the same machine I find that Vista is more stable than OSX. Both are fast, some more than the other in different areas.
Apple rips off features from Microsoft too. Vista has previous versions which apple ripped off for time machine. Apple ripped off widgets from konfabulator. It goes on and on. To tell you the truth I don't even care. I would hope that they would both steal the best ideas from each other.
I could go on and on about all the stupid little crap in OSX that drives me nuts, little things that Windows does that OSX doesn't that makes doing certain tasks more efficient in windows. It goes both ways.

I don't run any anti-virus/spyware or reg cleaners in windows. Never had a problem.

Some file extraction that I do can bring Leopard to a screeching halt whereas windows can handle it and still allow me to do other stuff. Maybe it's not the OS but rather the app. I don't know.

Still, with that said I do prefer Leopard over Windows.

[alex2792]

On the same machine I find that Vista is more stable than OSX. Both are fast, some more than the other in different areas.
Apple rips off features from Microsoft too. Vista has previous versions which apple ripped off for time machine. Apple ripped off widgets from konfabulator. It goes on and on. To tell you the truth I don't even care. I would hope that they would both steal the best ideas from each other.
I could go on and on about all the stupid little crap in OSX that drives me nuts, little things that Windows does that OSX doesn't that makes doing certain tasks more efficient in windows. It goes both ways.

I don't run any anti-virus/spyware or reg cleaners in windows. Never had a problem.

Some file extraction that I do can bring Leopard to a screeching halt whereas windows can handle it and still allow me to do other stuff. Maybe it's not the OS but rather the app. I don't know.

Still, with that said I do prefer Leopard over Windows.

Of course Apple takes ideas from MS and other companies with that said instead of attempting to copy expose(and failing miserably cuz flip 3D is useless) MS should've implemented something like stacks. Best feature ever imo, I no longer have to clutter my dock with shortcuts unless they're apps that I use all the time.

[Serpico]

But OMG!!! It's such a supreme graphics/multimedia machine in every other sense with all this power that kicks Windows around the block, why the hell can't it run some games???!?!?!?

DirectX, in a nutshell. Companies like Blizzard, id, some EA games, produce games that use OpenGL and release them simultaneously on both Windows and OS X, sometimes Linux as well (if not on the same day, it is usually pretty soon after). If a Windows game uses DirectX, which is most games these days, then it will require additional work to port it over to OS X or Linux.

Creating and pushing DirectX is one of the absolute smartest things Microsoft did back in the 90s. It came out at a time when Windows was basically the only mainstream OS in town, and the rise and success of that API over OpenGL allowed Microsoft to more or less lock down PC games on that platform. IMO, gaming is the biggest reason outside of enterprise to use Windows, and Microsoft made an excellent move creating a graphics API that is only made to work on it.

[TechieSooner]

I don't understand you problem with bootcamp. If you get a Mac NOBODY FORCES YOU TO USE IT but for people who want to play Windows only games or have to use certain application that is not OS X compatible it's a great alternative.
How is it a great alternative?

You pay more for the hardware, and you're paying for a second OS license.

[Serpico]

On the same machine I find that Vista is more stable than OSX. Both are fast, some more than the other in different areas.

I have Vista SP1 and OS X dual booting on a few machines, and in many respects there is a huge difference in speed between the two. OS X boots up and shuts down in less than half the time, copying and transferring files is much faster, use of network shares is much much simpler, applications start up faster, the list goes on. There are lots of useful things already built into OS X that requires third party software in Windows, stuff like mounting ISOs. Quick Look is a godsend for me since I work with lots of large media files, and I haven't seen anything like it anywhere else. Then there is window and application management stuff that again is built into the OS. Sometimes I'm working on a project with Final Cut Pro, Photoshop, DVD Studio Pro, and Sorensen Squeeze all open at the same time, and managing my work in between those programs is so much simpler now in 10.5 compared to anything else I have worked with before, either with prior versions of OS X or Windows.

Unlike all the Vista haters that go around these forums, I sincerely believe that Vista SP1 is a significant improvement over XP. But that said, like you I prefer using Leopard over anything else given a choice.

[Terpfen]

I knew I shouldn't have opened this thread. I knew what it contained, I knew what awaited me, and I clicked the link anyway.

Good gravy what a collection of ignorance, envy, and decay.

[gtg465x]

I knew I shouldn't have opened this thread. I knew what it contained, I knew what awaited me, and I clicked the link anyway.

Good gravy what a collection of ignorance, envy, and decay.

lolz... you knew what to expect coming in... it's always the same.

[DeaconFrost]

A 24" iMac and an external drive for the secondary might have been a better call if price was an issue.
Luckily, I had it in my budget. I work for a non-profit, so I have to plan ahead and put things aside for a budget, which is generally approved. I went with a single quad-core and the lowest HDD to save some cash, since she stores her work on a server. Even still, it was around $3k by the time I added the 3 year AppleCare plan.

[Serpico]

Luckily, I had it in my budget. I work for a non-profit, so I have to plan ahead and put things aside for a budget, which is generally approved. I went with a single quad-core and the lowest HDD to save some cash, since she stores her work on a server. Even still, it was around $3k by the time I added the 3 year AppleCare plan.

I see, and you probably wanted to use the full budget allotment, lest you get that line cut down the next year if you don't meet it.

I see your single CPU config at $2550 with the Applecare added, but then again you might have had to add some video cards or RAM or something (4GB SD-DIMM config direct from Apple adds another $500, double the amount from Crucial, oof). But yeah, those Harpertowns aren't cheap. I priced out one with a good mobo and FB-DIMMs and was like :eek: I know I keep saying this but man it would be nice if they offered a Core 2 Duo tower option.

[Cheetoz]

Yes, Linux can work, but it takes a hell of alot of manual configuration on too much stuff.

Did you have linux compatible hardware???

[MrGuvernment]

use of network shares is much much simpler,


ya that is when you can actually get it to work between other non OSX systems, everything worked fine in Tiger, the leopard came along with their BSOD network icons and funny, networks shares between windows machine suddenl wont work properly with out jumping between a million "try this and that's"

also how can it get much eashier then click / open / copy? how does leopard do it so much easier?