Anand wants to know how you feel about Apple...

[NesuD]

 

[Sureshot324]

Mac laptops aren't nearly as overpriced as their desktops.

 

[ArchStudent]

I was seriously thinking about buying a G4 Powerbook, but then it was a little too far out of my price range. I ended up going with a Dell Inspiron 600m which I am more than happy with.

I would love to try an Apple computer out to get a feel for the OS and software. I am not a gamer, so I do not really care about being able to play games. They do have a very appealing look to them, and are always ahead of the PC world... even if I could try one out for a week that would give me a definite decision about yay or nay.

Cost is cost, and quality is quality. If you buy an exotic sports car, expect to pay the price for it. I mean a car is a car, they all do the same basic tasks... go from point A to point B, all that matters is how fast they do it, how much space they have and features, and how fast they can do it... same idea with Apple computers and PCs.

If you have the money, why not It is hard to make a decision until you've experienced both.

I still miss my friend's Appple IIe

 

[FrustratedUser]

This is quite funny because back in '92 - '95 I would never ever consider moving away from Mac. The Mac OS were just so much better and mature than Windows at the time. They were still more expensive but it was worth it.
It was not until NT4 that I moved over to Windows/PC and felt at home. Before that, Windows/PC was clearly inferior.

When I changed job I had to use use Win 3.11 and it was terrible in comparison.

 

[mooojojojo]

Originally posted by: Cygni
Powerful CPU's + Weak Chipsets + High Prices + Awesome Cases + Uninspired OS = Mac's G4, G5, and powerbook lines.

The stability + ease of use argument for Macs is all rumor, in my eyes. Ive worked on a ton of iMacs, eMacs, towers, i books, and powerbooks, and i havent seen anything that puts them above a standard PC's stability. And WinXP sufficiently puts X to shame in my eyes. Personally, i wont buy a Mac because of the big goose egg in upgradeability, the high price, and the painful OS.

Uninspired OS? What is an inspired OS in your eyes. :Q

 

[drag]

Originally posted by: mooojojojo

Originally posted by: Cygni
Powerful CPU's + Weak Chipsets + High Prices + Awesome Cases + Uninspired OS = Mac's G4, G5, and powerbook lines.

The stability + ease of use argument for Macs is all rumor, in my eyes. Ive worked on a ton of iMacs, eMacs, towers, i books, and powerbooks, and i havent seen anything that puts them above a standard PC's stability. And WinXP sufficiently puts X to shame in my eyes. Personally, i wont buy a Mac because of the big goose egg in upgradeability, the high price, and the painful OS.

Uninspired OS? What is an inspired OS in your eyes. :Q

Linux.

(think about it, it was a OS created by individuals just because they wanted it. Thats inspiration. Now weither or not it's valid or important or good is another issue)

 

[Gunnar]

I think that if a person is determined and skilled enough, they could write a virus for any operating system. The fact that most windows computers are initially vulnerable and its the most deployed platform makes it a very attractive target for writing malicious code. No computer is secure, unless you intend to restrict all access to it (and even then, you have to trust the users).

On the Apple subject, there are only two valid arguments that Ive read around here, that is the price and software availability.

People who say that Apple is for idiots, for losers, for people who know nothing have got to be some of the most shortsighted people I have ever seen. There are plenty, PLENTY, or very intelligent, highly skilled people that work on Macs everyday. And to say that an artist or designer, or even the CEO of Coca-Cola is computer illiterate is completely baseless. And if you dont use a mac because they use it, then you have some sort of dementia.

For people who say the mac isnt upgradeable? How much upgradeability do you want? You can swap the harddrives, the memory, the graphics card, there are a billion add in cards, and some companies even supply CPU upgrades. How much more could you ask for? You want Apple to cover your upgrade modifications?

And for those of you who are looking for software, there are a billion apps for it. Just go to macupdate.com or versiontracker.com. If you refuse to find a substitute, then there is no help for you. I do everything from edit AV files to uing Bittorrent. Its all there, look before you kill.

OSX is a highly useable operating system, but you have to use it. Sitting down in front of a mac for 5 minutes and declaring windows the holy messiah isnt going to cut it. I used to be very anti-Mac, until I had to figure out a way to modify pictures to build a website back in 97. I was forced to use a mac running System 7 and Photoshop. After while, you pass over your foolish stigma and get on with it.

I personally use a Mac because it just works. Its plenty powerful for what I do, and more often than not, i dont worry about drivers, or if my peripheral is going to work if I plug it in. I just use it. And for those you who want to rip this apart, I work with PCs daily, Im a programmer(unfortunately), so I know how to use a windows box.

Drop the stigmas people. If you cant afford one, thats understandable. If you have to run AutoCad, thats understandable too. But these other reasons are baseless.

 

[sxr7171]

Originally posted by: fisher

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile From his latest weblog entry: The seal on the deal however seems to be OS X, which brings me to my point - being a member of the group of the hardest of hardcore PC users, would you all ever consider not necessarily moving to an Apple but maybe adding one to your collection of computers? I've thought about it in the past, just as an experiment, but the hardware never excited me and the feel of the OS was just a little uncomfortable for me. Just curious as to what you all think.

i seriously thought about buying a ti powerbook when i bought my thinkpad, but then i looked at the price tag, cringed and went back over to www.ibm.com, where for once the prices were reasonable. however, when i buy my next laptop i'll probably give them another look. for a machine that isn't going to be my gaming system, i will once again consider apple. i'd love to get my hands on os x and give it a ride.

I faced the same decision as you, but in my case the price issue wasn't there as the student prices for the Thinkpad I wanted and the Powerbook I wanted were around the same. I realize that these days you can work with files on a MAC just like you can on a PC, but I think what turned me off the most is the cost of software on the MAC and the fact that I'd have to learn to use OS X as efficiently as I can windows. Somehow have a one button click in my perception makes it less efficient as you'd have to use some other method to do the things Windows does with a right click. I also hate childish looking GUIs, even though I have Win XP, my customizations make it look like Win 2K. I used a friend's G4 desktop once, and I thought it was annoying.

 

[sxr7171]

Originally posted by: Duvie
Basically it was put well many weeks ago....Apple is "computers for dummies"....It is a computer for the simple minded peson who doesnt really want to have to know about the process just that it gets done...While that sounds ideally suited for average joe blow, Apples retarded business sense (why they hold little or no market share) puts it out of reach of the average consumer they should be targeting.... My neighbor down the street does things my more computer savvy wife can't do and yet when you talk to here she doesn't know squat about what she is doing or what happened to get to the finished point....Just a few clicks she says and it is done. Five minutes more talking to her and I am convinced turning on the power is the most complexed thing she understands.... Apple even if priced 1/3 less where it should be to be comparable to my PC and PCs around the industry still wouldn't be worth it cause I like to build it myself...piece by piece...component by component...researching OPTIONS in hardware to find the best at the best price...You see what I just described cannot happen in MAC world.... To sum it all up look at most actors and actresses...they use macs....Need I say more??? If it is good enough for the HOLLYWOOD IDIOTS (Rosie Odonell, Jeff Goldblum, traitors Sean Penn and Susan Sarrandon,etc) I can't imagine I need it!!!

Okay, I agree that Apples are "computers for dummies" and that's part of why I could never tolerate one. I need to tweak every single little thing on my machine that I can possibly mess with. People (average joe types) use my machine and get lost trying to figure out what's going on. On that point I agree.


On the other point that they price themselves out of market, I find it hard to agree with. They have all sorts of iMacs and eMacs that start at $799. That might be more than an HP or Compaq that average joe might pickup at Best Buy, but it isn't that much more expensive. They are absolutely perfect for average joe in price and design. They look like you could put them on a table, plug them in, and start burning DVDs, or digitize old VHS tapes within 10 minutes of it entering your house (as you alluded to). I mean $799 isn't bad at all especially since average joes really like paying looks too. These eMacs and iMacs and Powerbooks and even iBooks look pretty darn fashionable at home and out in the coffee shop. I have to say Apple markets to its "types" pretty darn well these days.

 

[ai42]

It all comes down to a matter of opinion....

1. Apples are certainly more expensive for the hardware than PCs, however you do get quite a bit of software/support with it
2. OS-X with Linux core is pretty spiffy
3. It is a diffrent processor/platform so you cannot easily compare benchmarks

I have however owned many macs in fairly recent times. I used to buy and sell ibooks on ebay (no longer do it as it is not profitable anymore) so I would play with these laptops and was doing this when OSX was first introed, to the intro of the G4 ibook. And honestly its got it's high points but being such a hardcore PC using it very very much irks me that I don't know how to do stuff on macs. I mean I could of course naviagate and do basic stuff but chaning settings and playing with the console and such just got me mad. So every time I would seriously play with one I would just get rid of it. And I did not leave because it was a terrible platform it was certainly capable and had a lot of really cool features but in the end I am just too much of a PC user to do that. Now I don't own any macs and am just leaving it for the mac enthusiests again.

 

[BFG10K]

no its not, the title of the thread is "Anand wants to know how you feel about Apple..." and when giving an opinion like "apple is junk", usually one says WHY they feel that way

I already have given reasons.

ok, since both work fine, it doesnt make the other junk.

A Mini works fine, as does a Porsche. But the Porsche is basically superior in every way to the Mini.

So tell me, if the Mini cost three times as much as the Porsche did, would you make the claim that the Mini isn't junk?

 

[VIAN]

1. Too overpriced.
2. Not very personal.
3. Boring OS.
4. It's name is MAC, I would give it more credit if it named itself Apple.
5. Why bother.
6. Low Game Library.
7. Not mainstream.
8. The IPOD incidents.
9. Not a gaming Computer.
10. Bad gaming Computer.

 

[compslckr]

yeah, i agree that the hardware is grossley overpriced and that there is limited posibilities for gaming and upgrading. i will stick with win XP or Linux if i was given the choice between those 2 or OS X.

 

[Daishim]

Buying a MAC is the same concept as buying a PC made by Microsoft, that allowed you to only run Windows, only run MS Office, and only their programs. I've used many a Apple/MAC at the many schools I've been to, friends, business, and my field of work, and everytime I use one I feel like I'm being hand led through a three ring circus by wicked clown.

The idea of running a MAC brings back those horrid memories of the days of going to your local computer shop to find mountains of software... only to realize that you have about 5 titles you can actually use.

Hardware wise you maybe have two options when trying to upgrade on your own or when trying to build one. So, maybe they come standard with dual procs, maybe they are special because they're 64-bit, but is it practical? And for the price of a top-end MAC, I could have three equal performing PCs, even in 64-bit.

And this nonsense about how a MAC never locks up? ... Someone clearly rarely ever used their MAC to never have it lock up. I've had MACs lock up plenty of times and troubleshooting them is so much more difficult since there is no built "BSOD" that atleast gives you somewhat of an idea of what happened. Like stated in a previous post, MACs lock up just like PCs, atleast a PC tells you when something went wrong, whereas a MAC hasn't even a clue. Hmmm... sounds like false advertisement to me.

So, no... I won't own a MAC.

MS only postponed the inevitable by bailing out Apple... the PC will win. Not because it has "Windows"... but because it has flexibility, low cost solutions, upgradability, and commen sense.

 

[Gunnar]

dude, thats is so much rhetoric I dont know where to begin.

Led by a wicked clown? Who the hell is leading you? The OS doesnt pop bubbles saying that "you need to press here" If anything, you should feel wicked using WinXP, with its horrible color scheme.

MacOS used to lock up plenty, I cant vouch for that. It really wasnt a good OS, despite its user interface. Ive had no problems using OSX. And Ive yet to receive a single kernel panic. You can quit out of applications just the same as on the PC, you bring up the Activity Monitor, kill the process. Alternatively, you can grab the pid of the process and kill -9 it (too much Unix for you eh?). And it has no idea it crashed? Are you stupid? You can grab debug information if you want, install Xcode, its free, compared to Visual Studio which is very not free. Hey, maybe the average guy doesnt know all this, but its there.

And to say that you can get 3 equal performing PCs, I challenge you to do that. And please price in the cost of Windows, we arent all pirates here. I seriously doubt youll get one, and who will warranty your work? Newegg?

5 titles? Unless you need to have every goddamn game ever put out, I think youll do just fine. Go to versiontracker.com or macupdate.com. If you cant find a substitute for what you want, Im sure you can buy something. I havent had any problems finding what I need, I only play Warcraft though (and it works just fine on a Mac), I dont primarily use it for games though.

Hardware wise you can upgrade just about as much as you need as on a PC, just shy of swapping a motherboard. The video card can be replaced, the memory, you can find ethernet and sound cards or whatever you want for the PCI expansion slots, the cd-rom and harddrives are standard components. Not having enough bays in the case is generally the problem, but then again, my PC has never had more than two bays full. You can replace the CPUs as well, Newer Technologies, Sonnet and other companies offer full upgrade solutions.

And this line basically confirms that you are a moron:
"MS only postponed the inevitable by bailing out Apple... the PC will win. Not because it has "Windows"... but because it has flexibility, low cost solutions, upgradability, and commen sense."

Its misinformed people like this that give the Mac a bad name. You need to get out from behind your PC if you want to see anything.

 

[Daishim]

Personal experience, not rhetoric.

And it's funny how violent MAC zealots get when someone says something about a MAC.

Maybe it was moronic of me to say, but that's my opinion.

 

[Cerb]

Originally posted by: ai42
It all comes down to a matter of opinion....

1. Apples are certainly more expensive for the hardware than PCs, however you do get quite a bit of software/support with it

Yes...and even with OS and software, a PC isn't much. it's what...$250 for XP Pro and PSP, which amount to 100% of the programs I use that aren't free (OK, I'm still using Win2k right now) and aren't games (since games transfer just fine, and aren't included for any Mac that I know of).

2. OS-X with Linux core is pretty spiffy

Um...is it not FreeBSD?

3. It is a diffrent processor/platform so you cannot easily compare benchmarks

If a program natively runs on the OS, there are three ways you can compare benchmarks:
1. Fastest of both.
Pit the G5 dual 2.0GHz against the A64 3400+ (or FX-53) and P4 3.2 (or EE) in apps that are made for both OSes. Sure, the apps are probably a little different under the skin, but that's part of any performance difference.
2. Price point. Price a PC and Mac, including OS, any applications that the Mac comes with, buy OEM (or at least equivalents), and compare, otherwise, as using #1.
From benchmarks of the dual G5 2GHz, we're already faster again. But if you're not a gamer...it'd be fast enough. My PC could easily be a stock Duron 1GHz w/ 512MB PC2100 and a GF4 MX if it weren't for games.

I have however owned many macs in fairly recent times. I used to buy and sell ibooks on ebay (no longer do it as it is not profitable anymore) so I would play with these laptops and was doing this when OSX was first introed, to the intro of the G4 ibook. And honestly its got it's high points but being such a hardcore PC using it very very much irks me that I don't know how to do stuff on macs. I mean I could of course naviagate and do basic stuff but chaning settings and playing with the console and such just got me mad. So every time I would seriously play with one I would just get rid of it. And I did not leave because it was a terrible platform it was certainly capable and had a lot of really cool features but in the end I am just too much of a PC user to do that. Now I don't own any macs and am just leaving it for the mac enthusiests again.

 

[mosco]

Originally posted by: Daishim
Personal experience, not rhetoric.

And it's funny how violent MAC zealots get when someone says something about a MAC.

Maybe it was moronic of me to say, but that's my opinion.

Just like if i were to make fun of counter strike or if i were to say something bad about the Athlon64 or if were... etc. You get the point. You gotta realize, while some of the complaints about mac are warranted, mac users have to go through their computer life being told their computer sucks by people who have not used a mac recently or for more than 10 minutes. It never stops, Sometimes i tell people that I use a mac and to them that means i don't know how to use a computer, when infact i know java, c++, etc. I know more about computer technology than most windows users yet somehow people think I am a "noob". If just gets annoying that people are so ignorant, and its impossible to even have a good debate with these people because they argue like they are 14 years old again.

 

[xype]

I have to agree here. No Mac user in their right mind will claim the G5 being (at the moment) faster than a spiced up Pentium 4 EE or AMD workstation (save for people who don't have a clue). Neither do many of them claim that the Mac is a gaming machine or that it's less expensive than your homebuilt Duron.

But even on AnandTech the amount of stupidities claimed about Macs is astonishing. Some people saw ipod's drity little secret video and conclude that Apple's support is bad (surely digging deeper to see there were battery replacement availible for the iPod from 3rd parties would take too much time, would it), some used OS 9 and conclude OS X is the same, etc, etc. Most of the people here think of a Mac as of a homebuilt PC, not considering the facts that with a Mac you get a bunch of software and that it's not meant to compete with homebuilt PCs. Their laptop line is priced failry decently (no, it's _your_ problem if you can't afford a PowerBook, not Apple's) and the PowerMacs are not personal computers but rather workstations. Sure, they're not as fast as your hydrogen-cooled P4, but so aren't Suns or SGIs. Yes, you can plug in any USB mouse and it will work, you can plug in a lot of other stuff as well - and it will work, too (that being the point of a Mac, that it work).

You can assemble your PC for less than $1,000? You are smart enough to apply security fixes (which OS X doesn't come without, either)? More power to you. But you are not Apple's target audience and neither Dell's. Don't complain about the price if you're not shopping for a Mac anyway. Unless, deep within, you _want_ a Mac but just can't afford/justify one.

As for the speed of the G5 - meh, the Pentium 4 got a lukewarm reception from you guys as well. To expect a new CPU architecture to be released and the software _fully_ adapted 2 months after that (when most of the G5 benchmarking was happening) is naive. VT built a supercomputer out of G5s, so it's not slow. But we're not talking twice the speed of x86, either, which would probably be the only thing you guys would be happy with.

Waving your hand at the Mac saying it's irrelevant and Apple being gone in 1 year just show the ignorance of 14 year old kids. They wouldn't come that far if they hadn't had a market.

 

[Cerb]

Originally posted by: xype
I have to agree here. No Mac user in their right mind will claim the G5 being (at the moment) faster than a spiced up Pentium 4 EE or AMD workstation (save for people who don't have a clue). Neither do many of them claim that the Mac is a gaming machine or that it's less expensive than your homebuilt Duron.

But even on AnandTech the amount of stupidities claimed about Macs is astonishing. Some people saw ipod's drity little secret video and conclude that Apple's support is bad (surely digging deeper to see there were battery replacement availible for the iPod from 3rd parties would take too much time, would it), some used OS 9 and conclude OS X is the same, etc, etc. Most of the people here think of a Mac as of a homebuilt PC, not considering the facts that with a Mac you get a bunch of software and that it's not meant to compete with homebuilt PCs. Their laptop line is priced failry decently (no, it's _your_ problem if you can't afford a PowerBook, not Apple's) and the PowerMacs are not personal computers but rather workstations. Sure, they're not as fast as your hydrogen-cooled P4, but so aren't Suns or SGIs. Yes, you can plug in any USB mouse and it will work, you can plug in a lot of other stuff as well - and it will work, too (that being the point of a Mac, that it work).

You can assemble your PC for less than $1,000? You are smart enough to apply security fixes (which OS X doesn't come without, either)? More power to you. But you are not Apple's target audience and neither Dell's. Don't complain about the price if you're not shopping for a Mac anyway. Unless, deep within, you _want_ a Mac but just can't afford/justify one.

I'd probably like a Mac laptop if I got the $ for one ($ for any laptop), as it'd be interesting to play around with.

As for the speed of the G5 - meh, the Pentium 4 got a lukewarm reception from you guys as well. To expect a new CPU architecture to be released and the software _fully_ adapted 2 months after that (when most of the G5 benchmarking was happening) is naive. VT built a supercomputer out of G5s, so it's not slow. But we're not talking twice the speed of x86, either, which would probably be the only thing you guys would be happy with.

The Willamette(sp) P4s, even on i850Es, still aren't impressive. Optomizations have occured, but it has mostly been the chipsets that have come a long way; I could feel a difference moving from a KT333 to NForce2 (same RAM, HD and CPU for about the first hour or two).
Also, in the big supercomputers, the interconnects are becoming more and more the bottlenecks. For pure math work, nobody has yet to say the G5 is inferior. IBM knows what they are doing.
Sure, the software will get faster, but they'd also have to ram up clock speed...the G5 2x2GHz could just compete when released. Now it'll be even slower in comparison--but um...look, I'm running a 1800+ @ 1.72GHz...so I'm just pointing this out for completeness.

Waving your hand at the Mac saying it's irrelevant and Apple being gone in 1 year just show the ignorance of 14 year old kids. They wouldn't come that far if they hadn't had a market.

They have a loyal following and move in slow, great steps.

 

[addragyn]

What's more expensive than a PC or Mac?

an x86 G5 (w/o AGP!) :Q

 

[sillymofo]

Unless they make more games for Apple... and lower the prices....and simplify the nav, NEVER.

 

[Corporate Thug]

Originally posted by: BFG10K

no its not, the title of the thread is "Anand wants to know how you feel about Apple..." and when giving an opinion like "apple is junk", usually one says WHY they feel that way

I already have given reasons.

ok, since both work fine, it doesnt make the other junk.

A Mini works fine, as does a Porsche. But the Porsche is basically superior in every way to the Mini.

So tell me, if the Mini cost three times as much as the Porsche did, would you make the claim that the Mini isn't junk?

i said it a million times: although the apple costs more, it retains a higher resell value

 

[Corporate Thug]

Originally posted by: VIAN

1. Too overpriced - i perfer a $1300 powerbook to almost anything on the windows platform at that price
2. Not very personal. - what does this mean?
3. Boring OS. - far superior to windows XP
4. It's name is MAC, I would give it more credit if it named itself Apple. - i dont see what this has anything to do with the computer
5. Why bother. - another bad reason
6. Low Game Library. - some people are not into gaming. trust me, there are people like that
7. Not mainstream. - so anything that isnt mainstream isnt good right?
8. The IPOD incidents. - what ipod incident? one in a 100 ipods battery dies AFTER the warrenty is expired? the fact that the battery is very easily replacable?
9. Not a gaming Computer. - again some people dont game
10. Bad gaming Computer - u already said that

 

[Rectalfier]

Steve Jobs.


nuff said