SO you think Apple sucks?

[TridenT]

Originally posted by: theblackbox
I hear over and over that apple sucks, but nobody ever has a good reason. Well, if you got a good reason, here you go....tell us about it.

I do ask for proof. If you are going to use the "overpriced" route, please be sure to back it up with a price comparison that can back it up. If you are going to just say because they do, well, obviously, you fail.

You are welcome to use the "you can't play games on an apple" and that is fine. apple users know this, and we also know that windows is for playing games. it excels at it, there is no argument if you want to play games, use windows.

Oh, and if you want to talk about their advertising, please spare me and include equal time to the whole Mojave commercial blitz.

I would love to hear why, and see some actual reasons to back it up.

My only gripe with apple right now is the use of glossy screens on the new macbook pro, the matte screen was the best thing apple ever did, and the inclusion of the nvidia 9400/9600 in the mbp. they could have gone with a better gpu. i obviously don't hae them or think they suck for that decision, i jus don't agree with it.

But please, feel free to explain to me why apple sucks if you feel they do.

Alright!

They are overpriced. They have kept the Mac Mini the same price for years it seems now. Technology advances, but they never lower their prices until a new model comes out. Putting 4GBs of ram in a Macbook is an extra $150. Just for 2GBs more I have to pay $150. You can get 4GBs of DDR2 for less than $75 and still have the 2x1GB kit. You cannot easily compare an Apple computer to others because they are so different. The iMac is something you cannot build, easily, and the same is for the Mac Pro or Mac Mini. You just cannot make the same exact system. But, I still consider them overpriced because I can buy a very similar or better spec'd system for less. It just won't be an all-in-one. If you want proof, just look in the All Things Apple section. There is a thread there about OSx86 and how to make your own "hackintosh."

You can play games on a Mac if you install Windows XP/Vista. It's just a corrupt system though since they won't legitimately let people install OS X on any system and offer support like Windows does. OSx86 is not a real solution. The drivers are crap and it is very limited support.

I don't know, they have been doing advertising for years now... Windows just started. Windows doesn't lash out like Apple does. Windows advertising is like a person who knows they are better than the other and just smiles about it all, they don't even attack Apple. Windows just says, "We have a good product." Apple makes A LOT of invalid claims. I have used Macs before, and the spinning beachball of death is always there when I use it. Forget ever using iMovie or Garage Band. So while a Mac may not BSOD, it will have that stupid beachball spin forever.

I don't dislike the OS as much as the price premium on the hardware. If they just opened up the OS for ALL systems then I wouldn't care. Instead they have a monopoly over the market. "You want to use our OS? Well, you have to buy our super expensive Apple computer." Maybe my parents just want to do some basic things and don't want to shell out $1000 for a computer that I cannot upgrade? (Upgrading the ram is not a real upgrade) "Oh, well, then a Mac is not for you." Whatever.

 

[MovingTarget]

I'll jump in here...

I've been a Windows user and PC enthusiast for years ever since I cut my teeth on my first 286 when I was a kid. I eventually progressed into the IT field after I graduated HS. Windows was king, and hardware was...well....any spare parts I could find. :/ Macs? For trust-fund kiddies and Photoshopaholics...

Windows was expensive for a cheaparse like myself, and with the whole "activation" thing that began with windows xp, I decided that I'd either have to pira...err...pony up a hefty sum for an operating system or look elsewhere. My parents' copy of windows 9x was showing its age by then. This is when I discovered linux. (Related note: even with the legit copies I later purchased, this still bugs the crap out of me. I could understand the move with xp, but with Vista they have made this process insane. WGA has caused one too many headaches as of late with my more recent system builds - prior to getting fed up and wiping the drives to go back to linux...)

Open source and closed wallet - I was freed from my ethical (and financial) dilemma! However, I soon discovered that I was still a bit of a novice in the area, and I could never get everything working right. Drivers, dependencies, package managers.... I had a lot of problems to say the least. I did, however develop a newfound respect for CLI as I began to start programming and wean myself from the GUI world. I liked the power of being able to do what I wanted directly and know what was going on when I pressed the enter key. Linux sucked the first few years I used it (starting around 2002), but it is only recently that I have become a convert. I started with a lab install of SuSE 9.2, which was crappy to say the least - upgraded thru 10.3 - which is a massive improvement. Solid, stable, integrated. With OpenSuSE 11.0 and now 11.1, I have now ditched Windows entirely. I hereby take back anything I have said regarding linux being crappy.

Around 2005, after many heated conversations and mac-bashing flamefests with a coworker and friend (who was a mac-only fanboy), I decided to jump in and give it a try. I had money back then (I guess it would be called "disposable" income.....which all gets disposed of in my gas tank as of late) I bought an iBook G4 upon the last revision, eating three years worth of words I had with said coworker. I upgraded the RAM myself (as any self-respecting techie w/ a mac would), and had a damn solid machine. I have worked on Windows laptops for years and HATED the way that everything was integrated. If I'm going to plop down some $$ for a portable machine, it should be something that simply works and operates smoothly and aesthetically.

OSX + two finger scrolling did the trick. Trackpads suck for scrolling if you have to actually use the scrollbar. Arrow keys don't give you near as much control though. The dock and expose really make working with a trackpad almost bearable. If comparable windows laptops did this easily, I'd be all over it. The dock itself is also a plus, but I find that the windows third party replacement (stardock/objectdock) to be somewhat klunky in comparison. For desktops though, none of those features really apply in my opinion. I've found that for desktops I don't have any preference for apple at all in terms of useability. So for me - portables w/ osx and desktops with Windows/Linux. Besides, I like to have a little more control on upgrading my hardware for a desktop. PC wins there.

As far as software goes, since I'm still on PPC hardware, I am still somewhat limited as I don't want to pony up for another OS upgrade (to Leopard). I can get by on what I have quite nicely though, as I never had any intention of gaming on a 12" laptop. Office software, email clients, web browsers, calendars...all pretty standard, but more aesthetically pleasing out of the box w/ apple.

However, OSX's UNIX core really did start to shine with me as I had a fully featured bash terminal where I could do all the stuff I liked when I was running linux. I also had started to program more in my mathematics courses (C/C++, FORTRAN 77/95, shell scripts, LINDO, etc.) and use more open-source tools (gnuplot, maxima, freemat) to do my work. While the Windows guys in the programming courses were struggling to find everything, I was the only person in the class who didn't have to go install another OS on their machine or use the lab's linux machines exclusively. (Note to apple: you claim open source software as a positive for third party apps, but you neglect to include a command line utility like apt-get. fail. Also, xcode is waaay too convoluted for most programmers in my field. Just the basic compilers would be nice. kthxbye. )

All in all... Apple products have their niches, but anyone who would use them exclusively because of these niches is probably foolish.

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: marketsons1985

Originally posted by: Acanthus
Apple sucks because they sell mediocre products at premium prices.

Being a "bang for your buck" shopper i find apple to be frivilous.

Itunes is overall a slow and resource hungry media player... 128 bitrates... also screw AAC vs MP3...

There are better alternatives to ipods.

I dont want to run more than one operating system to run my software.

I will never spend $1200 a year for a phone plan. So the iPhone is again over the top for me.

There are people who will waste fantastic amounts of money to have "toys" and apple is good at filling the yuppie nitch. It's not for everyone. I am not one of those people.

Again, please play by the rules as laid out by the OP. Use proof. Show me your "mediocre product at a premium price"

and wtf are you talking about 128 bitrates? You can change settings in iTunes however tf you want. I rip all my CDs in 192 VBR MP3. What else is as complete as iTunes (ripping, playing mp3s, movies, podcasts, store, etc.)? Nothing.

What better alternatives are there to iPods? And what makes them better? If you have a statement, back it up with some proof.

And $1200 a year for a phone plan is pretty common for a lot of Blackberry's, etc, all of which don't necessarily do as much as the iPhone.

Well before this became a big flamewar, this thread was about why I personally dont like apple products.

As for proof:
There's a lot of hardware comparisons in the thread already.

The 128 bitrates are in reference to the AAC stuff purchased from the Itunes store.

The ipod is a poor decision because as others have said without firmware modding it doesnt act like a removable HD, nor will it play all formats. It is also almost always the most expensive player in its class.

Windows Media Player has everyting but the store, and again, the itunes store sucks. AAC + 128 bit.

The $1200/yr phone thing is a personal decision, I think its a complete waste of money regardless of the platform. However i could see how some users that dont use all that bandwidth may use their iPhone to replace their internet connection as well. I need a lot of speed. I dont like waiting.

 

[irishScott]

Not going to go into the rest, but the iPod classic is simply overpriced standard technology. Only advantage it has is storage. Woooooo 120 GB. I barely have 10 gig of music as it is.

Take the creative Zen for comparison:
http://us.creative.com/product...14&product=16999&nav=1

iPod Classic cost: $250
Memory: HD based (more prone to damage), 120 GB
Microphone: No
FM Receiver: No
Expandable SD Card Slot: No
Battery Life: 3-4 hours (personal experience)
Supported Audo Formats: Apple codecs + WAV + mp3
Supported Video Codecs: H264, mp4
Requires use of a proprietary media player: yes
Requires proprietary interface adapter: yes

Screen Size: 2.5"
Screen Resolution: 320x240, 260 thousand colors
Screen Scratch Resistance: Non-existent. Practically requires case/polish to prevent/treat long-term screen damage from normal usage
Interface: Click wheel (another nice point)

Notes: iTunes video conversion is slow and unreliable. Many times I tried to convert simple mpeg1 vids and they came out with no audio. Took forever too.



Creative Zen cost: $190
Max Memory: Flash based, 16GB
Microphone: Yes
FM Receiver: Yes
Expandable SD card slot: Yes
Battery Life: 5-7 hours (personal experience)
Supported Audio Codecs: Playback is mp3, wma, unprotected AAC and wav, but it can transcode virtually any format including flac and ogg automatically upon synchronization
Supported Video Codecs: Playback is MJPEG or WMV9, but can transcode mpeg1, 2 and 4, divx 4 and 5, and xVid.
Requires a proprietary media player: No. The only required software is for synchronization purposes, and is extremely lightweight/fast. It syncs with a folder you specify.
Requires a proprietary interface adapter: No. Interface is miniUSB.

Screen Size: 2.5"
Screen Resolution: 320x240, 16.7 mill colors
Screen Scratch Resistance: Excellent. I've had the screen bare for almost a year now. From normal use, no visible scratches.
Interface: DPad with buttons. Not as elegantly simple as the click-wheel, but I got the hang of it after a few minutes and once you use it for a couple of days you can do everything by instinct. Also less sensitive than the click-wheel, easier to use in that regard.

Notes: Software known as "zencast" downloads and converts all apple podcasts listed in apple's database. Organized and easy to use. Only downside is the necessary transcoding, which could take some time depending on your CPU/content.

 

[Goosemaster]

A mac mini coupled with a few TB of storage and an external firewire or esata HD makes an excellent student computer that doesn't play games ( I gave that up... or so I tell myself) but allows you to program and learn and sh!t. The same can be said of most any pc I do think that vista would run too slow on my coreduo 1.6ghz however, although leopard runs just fine. The requirement of vista are simply higher.

I use everything and would argue that all of the majors have something to offer. Frankly my needs are pretty simple and the mac mini fulfills it on the cheap. I have itunes coupled with some lossless music and an airport express on the network feeding my new stereo. Works fabulously and is simple as hell.

If anything I would argue that the real benefit of the mac is that it, in many cases, is setup to address your immediate tasks in a simple and consistent way. Due to the Windows legacy, Vista does the same but also offers many more options upfront. Both methods have their merits, but I can see how a novice with little demand for options would be detracted by "meaningless" complexity and attracted to a system focused on simplification.

 

[JM Aggie08]

PC users just came all over the smug faces of all the Mac users.

 

[Goosemaster]

Originally posted by: JM Aggie08
PC users just came all over the smug faces of all the Mac users.

Dude...I just came back from executing a few fvks that looked at my 10 daughters the wrong way? Remind me what we were taking about again?

*fires up vi*

 

[theblackbox]

Originally posted by: Eeezee

Originally posted by: theblackbox
what if i need more then 4 gig of ram in your setup? a second processor? i didn't see that in your build. mac pro uses a 5000x based board, i believe.

half a billion vs 300 million. nice play on words. say it 500 million vs 300 million, not that much. u r clever, not me.

and you are right, there are gamers that make money off gaming. are they more then 25% of the microsoft windows pc user base? most gamers do it for fun.

i didn't say there were not good alternatives to mac software, i think avid is a great package for video, and pro tools is not bad, and 8 is supposed to be better. but...


and back to newegg. we are back to the do it yourself market. i'd love to see you spec a workstation from dell at the same as the base mac pro.

and i checked newegg too.

the E5440 harpertown runs 738.00
the macpro uses the 5462
so 738x2 is 1476

dual lga 771 motherboards run about 300 bucks. i'm at 1776 now
starts adding up fast if you do a fair comparison of similar items.

never said two processors made things faster, but with leverage it sure does help rendering and processing video.
pushing calculations it makes things a lot smoother.

Then install 8GB in the PC. Apple charges a huge markup per extra GB of RAM, further solidifying my point. You do NOT need a second processor; if you do, then you should be purchasing server hardware, not Mac Pros. Your PC needs two processors as much as a fish needs a bicycle.

Half a billion actually sounds like less than 300 million. You've gotten your marketing concepts all switched around. In any case, you've conceded this point.

Of course I'm right, that's because I don't use a Mac. Are the people who make money off of video and photo editing more than 25% of the Mac user base? No

You'd rather I go to Dell for the comparison? I gave you a huge benefit by going to Alienware, a company notorious for its ludicrous markups. Why would you want me to go to an even more affordable provider? Are you just a troll or do you actually have no idea what you're talking about?

Two processors may help rendering, but I've never seen a benchmark that places performance gains above 25% for having that second processor in even the most heavy loads. You may as well burn a big pile of money.

Remember, this is Mac vs PC, not Mac vs high-end server (in which case the high-end server will always win on every front).

okay, last issue. no one buys mac ram, or at least they shouldn't. i bought all my ram third party. why, because mac, like other manufacturers overcharges for things like ram. thats fine, thats their business to do that. however, like any diy, you buy it third party. same with hard drives, video cards and anything else.

i'm not much for benchmarks, because they are just that, benchmarks. i prefer real world experience. Maybe my dislike for benchmarks goes back to the days when futuremark was being ran by optimizations to favor the flavor of the week in gpus.

compare the dell precision with the same exact specs. you say apple overcharfes, well dell charges even more.
dell precision t5400
2 quad core xeon 5440 ( 1333fsb) apple specs 5462 stock (1600fsb)
1 gb ddr2 fb-dimms 667 (apple srecs 2gb 800)
80gb hd (apple 320)
dell charges 3588 for that, but you do get 150 bucks savings.
but no one ever says, gee, dell sure is overpriced. i found a similar spec on the same one on dell with 583 dollars cash back, but it still costs 3528 and comes with the slower fsb, ram, etc.

i'm being kind, compare the dell precision t7400, which costs even more, but at least specs with the same motherboard, fsb, cpu and they even spot you 2gb ram. it only comes in around 4500 after instant rebat of 603.

you can get the dual 2.8 for 2399 usually refurb, or you can get it new from 2500-2700
you can call me a troll, but if you don't believe me, spec it yourself.
hp, even worse.
so is dell really that affordable when it comes to the same exact specs, sorry, but no.

gosh, why'd i buy and apple when i could have spent more and bought a dell....
so you can say things like i'm a troll that doesn't know anything, but unless my math doesn't work in your world, apple is cheaper then dell for the same exact spec, plus with apple you get a 1200 watt ps, dell a little over 850.
and dell is always cheaper, at least thats is what i'm told.

 

[zerocool84]

Originally posted by: theblackbox

Originally posted by: Eeezee

Originally posted by: theblackbox
what if i need more then 4 gig of ram in your setup? a second processor? i didn't see that in your build. mac pro uses a 5000x based board, i believe.

half a billion vs 300 million. nice play on words. say it 500 million vs 300 million, not that much. u r clever, not me.

and you are right, there are gamers that make money off gaming. are they more then 25% of the microsoft windows pc user base? most gamers do it for fun.

i didn't say there were not good alternatives to mac software, i think avid is a great package for video, and pro tools is not bad, and 8 is supposed to be better. but...


and back to newegg. we are back to the do it yourself market. i'd love to see you spec a workstation from dell at the same as the base mac pro.

and i checked newegg too.

the E5440 harpertown runs 738.00
the macpro uses the 5462
so 738x2 is 1476

dual lga 771 motherboards run about 300 bucks. i'm at 1776 now
starts adding up fast if you do a fair comparison of similar items.

never said two processors made things faster, but with leverage it sure does help rendering and processing video.
pushing calculations it makes things a lot smoother.

Then install 8GB in the PC. Apple charges a huge markup per extra GB of RAM, further solidifying my point. You do NOT need a second processor; if you do, then you should be purchasing server hardware, not Mac Pros. Your PC needs two processors as much as a fish needs a bicycle.

Half a billion actually sounds like less than 300 million. You've gotten your marketing concepts all switched around. In any case, you've conceded this point.

Of course I'm right, that's because I don't use a Mac. Are the people who make money off of video and photo editing more than 25% of the Mac user base? No

You'd rather I go to Dell for the comparison? I gave you a huge benefit by going to Alienware, a company notorious for its ludicrous markups. Why would you want me to go to an even more affordable provider? Are you just a troll or do you actually have no idea what you're talking about?

Two processors may help rendering, but I've never seen a benchmark that places performance gains above 25% for having that second processor in even the most heavy loads. You may as well burn a big pile of money.

Remember, this is Mac vs PC, not Mac vs high-end server (in which case the high-end server will always win on every front).

okay, last issue. no one buys mac ram, or at least they shouldn't. i bought all my ram third party. why, because mac, like other manufacturers overcharges for things like ram. thats fine, thats their business to do that. however, like any diy, you buy it third party. same with hard drives, video cards and anything else.

Umm how many people DIY a Mac??? I'd go with slim to none.

 

[theblackbox]

Originally posted by: zerocool84

Originally posted by: theblackbox

Originally posted by: Eeezee

Originally posted by: theblackbox
what if i need more then 4 gig of ram in your setup? a second processor? i didn't see that in your build. mac pro uses a 5000x based board, i believe.

half a billion vs 300 million. nice play on words. say it 500 million vs 300 million, not that much. u r clever, not me.

and you are right, there are gamers that make money off gaming. are they more then 25% of the microsoft windows pc user base? most gamers do it for fun.

i didn't say there were not good alternatives to mac software, i think avid is a great package for video, and pro tools is not bad, and 8 is supposed to be better. but...


and back to newegg. we are back to the do it yourself market. i'd love to see you spec a workstation from dell at the same as the base mac pro.

and i checked newegg too.

the E5440 harpertown runs 738.00
the macpro uses the 5462
so 738x2 is 1476

dual lga 771 motherboards run about 300 bucks. i'm at 1776 now
starts adding up fast if you do a fair comparison of similar items.

never said two processors made things faster, but with leverage it sure does help rendering and processing video.
pushing calculations it makes things a lot smoother.

Then install 8GB in the PC. Apple charges a huge markup per extra GB of RAM, further solidifying my point. You do NOT need a second processor; if you do, then you should be purchasing server hardware, not Mac Pros. Your PC needs two processors as much as a fish needs a bicycle.

Half a billion actually sounds like less than 300 million. You've gotten your marketing concepts all switched around. In any case, you've conceded this point.

Of course I'm right, that's because I don't use a Mac. Are the people who make money off of video and photo editing more than 25% of the Mac user base? No

You'd rather I go to Dell for the comparison? I gave you a huge benefit by going to Alienware, a company notorious for its ludicrous markups. Why would you want me to go to an even more affordable provider? Are you just a troll or do you actually have no idea what you're talking about?

Two processors may help rendering, but I've never seen a benchmark that places performance gains above 25% for having that second processor in even the most heavy loads. You may as well burn a big pile of money.

Remember, this is Mac vs PC, not Mac vs high-end server (in which case the high-end server will always win on every front).

okay, last issue. no one buys mac ram, or at least they shouldn't. i bought all my ram third party. why, because mac, like other manufacturers overcharges for things like ram. thats fine, thats their business to do that. however, like any diy, you buy it third party. same with hard drives, video cards and anything else.

Umm how many people DIY a Mac??? I'd go with slim to none.

you'd be surprised, almost all mac pro owners do, check macrumors, apple support or any other forum, even if you look at the anand reviews. it's no surprise. putting ram in the mac pro is the easiest thing in the world. you pull out the riser boards, put it in and you are done. with 8 slots available, you got a good amount of expandability. if you really feel like it, feel free to upgrade the cpu's also.
there is even a good article about running nvidia 280's in the pro. on the windows side, that is.

 

[theblackbox]

oh, and i hate to say, half a billion sounds like a lot more then 300 million. if you think it's the other way around, your concept of large amounts of money is construed.

 

[shoRunner]

apple is over priced...

13" $999 MacBook

equally spec'd Dell Inspiron 13 with no coupons, $849 and it has a larger HD (160GB).

I'm 100% certain, that if I looked I could find a $649 laptop with equal spec's to the $999 MacBook

 

[TridenT]

Originally posted by: theblackbox

Originally posted by: zerocool84

Originally posted by: theblackbox

Originally posted by: Eeezee

Originally posted by: theblackbox
what if i need more then 4 gig of ram in your setup? a second processor? i didn't see that in your build. mac pro uses a 5000x based board, i believe.

half a billion vs 300 million. nice play on words. say it 500 million vs 300 million, not that much. u r clever, not me.

and you are right, there are gamers that make money off gaming. are they more then 25% of the microsoft windows pc user base? most gamers do it for fun.

i didn't say there were not good alternatives to mac software, i think avid is a great package for video, and pro tools is not bad, and 8 is supposed to be better. but...


and back to newegg. we are back to the do it yourself market. i'd love to see you spec a workstation from dell at the same as the base mac pro.

and i checked newegg too.

the E5440 harpertown runs 738.00
the macpro uses the 5462
so 738x2 is 1476

dual lga 771 motherboards run about 300 bucks. i'm at 1776 now
starts adding up fast if you do a fair comparison of similar items.

never said two processors made things faster, but with leverage it sure does help rendering and processing video.
pushing calculations it makes things a lot smoother.

Then install 8GB in the PC. Apple charges a huge markup per extra GB of RAM, further solidifying my point. You do NOT need a second processor; if you do, then you should be purchasing server hardware, not Mac Pros. Your PC needs two processors as much as a fish needs a bicycle.

Half a billion actually sounds like less than 300 million. You've gotten your marketing concepts all switched around. In any case, you've conceded this point.

Of course I'm right, that's because I don't use a Mac. Are the people who make money off of video and photo editing more than 25% of the Mac user base? No

You'd rather I go to Dell for the comparison? I gave you a huge benefit by going to Alienware, a company notorious for its ludicrous markups. Why would you want me to go to an even more affordable provider? Are you just a troll or do you actually have no idea what you're talking about?

Two processors may help rendering, but I've never seen a benchmark that places performance gains above 25% for having that second processor in even the most heavy loads. You may as well burn a big pile of money.

Remember, this is Mac vs PC, not Mac vs high-end server (in which case the high-end server will always win on every front).

okay, last issue. no one buys mac ram, or at least they shouldn't. i bought all my ram third party. why, because mac, like other manufacturers overcharges for things like ram. thats fine, thats their business to do that. however, like any diy, you buy it third party. same with hard drives, video cards and anything else.

Umm how many people DIY a Mac??? I'd go with slim to none.

you'd be surprised, almost all mac pro owners do, check macrumors, apple support or any other forum, even if you look at the anand reviews. it's no surprise. putting ram in the mac pro is the easiest thing in the world. you pull out the riser boards, put it in and you are done. with 8 slots available, you got a good amount of expandability. if you really feel like it, feel free to upgrade the cpu's also.
there is even a good article about running nvidia 280's in the pro. on the windows side, that is.

LOL, How many Mac Pro users are there? Hardly any, and they are production studios mainly. OF COURSE THEY WILL UPGRADE THEIR OWN RAM! They have tons of technical specialists for all of their needs. You don't go buying a $10,000 computers as toys.

 

[JC86]

I think ATOT is probably the worst forum to try to and convince people that Mac's products are better than PC but in some areas, they really are. I am only on this forum because I used to be an avid gamer and custom built many PCs. I have no problem using XP, Vista, or OSX, I think they're all pretty good operating systems in their own right.

I will be the first to concede that Apple overprices a lot of their products. By this, i'm referring to the $50 proprietary cable or $30 plastic dock etc. However, I honestly don't think they're overpricing their laptops. I can't speak for the desktops because I don't have one. I just bought a unibody Macbook for $1299. With a student discount, it was about 1300 out the door. While the parts may be the same as cheaper PC laptop, the build quality isn't. Attention to detail in small areas gives the impression that a lot of thought was put into the design of the product. My best example is the exhaust fan/port. When I turned on the laptop, I couldn't find the exhaust fan or port anywhere. I then realized it was hidden behind the hinges of the rear of the laptop. Since you don't need to dissipate heat when the computer is shut down, blocking the port when the screen is down makes the overall look more elegant. The fan and HD noises is negligible. I can only hear the exhaust fan spinning if I put my ear all the way up on the exhaust port. One of my favorite things about OSX is that when its in sleep mode, the screen and OS comes alive the instant you flip it open. This comes in useful when I'm running to and from different classes and don't have to wait for the computer to come out of hibernation or sleep, sometimes taking minutes to do so.

I accidentally burned out my old Sony Vaio when I clamped the screen shut after class and put it in my bag. Apparently XP froze and didn't go to sleep properly and all the fans and heat was building up in my bag. When I tried to take it out a few hours later, I almost burned my hand and literally fried my computer. Since then, whenever I put a pc laptop into sleep mode, I make sure I hear the HD spin down and the lights go off before I put it away. My macbook falls asleep immediately after i clamp the lid and as far as I can tell, I don't have to worry about the hanging sleep mode burnout.

OSX is great for what it is, a simple, easy to use interface for those that simply need to check their email, buy the occasional gift from Amazon and web browse. It puts everything a basic user would want right at their fingertips. Could Windows do that? Of course, but the end user would have to set up everything first when OSX does it for you. When I first turned on my macbook, it asked me for my basic information like home address, name etc. After I saved that information, whenever I needed to fill that information in different applications or registrations, OSX did it for me and saved me some time. It's the little things here and there that makes life easier for the user. While those of us on ATOT would never need to have all this convenience built in for us because we're all pretty computer savvy, I'd venture a guess that 95% of the computer users in the world aren't and would like to have this all setup for them.

Maybe i'm just not familiar with OSX but I can't seem to figure out how to browse files through the OSX directory. Anything that is not saved in the documetns folder or apps folder just seem buried to me. I miss windows and its directory system that i'm more familiar with.

back to my main point. Can you find a similar spec'd notebook cheaper than the macbook? Absolutely but would it have a unibody aluminum enclosure? While critics would smirk and say this is a marketing ploy and that you don't need it, the structural rigidity in the macbook is unmatched with any other laptop that i've ever owned, including my old vaio titanium laptop. Plus, there doens't seem to be any obvious heat spots where heat builds up. I guess the entire enclosure acts like a giant heat sink dissipating the heat.

The analogy I like to use is the difference between a lexus and Toyota. For the most part, they share the same parts but Lexus adds the leather, trim, driver adjustable seat settings, quieter cabin and smoother ride than a Toyota. You just have to pay the premium. I'm happy with my purchase and would do it again. I don't feel the need to go on a crusade to convince every PC user to switch to Mac although I think many would not go back to a PC after using a Mac

I hate the Mac ads as much as any of you. For the record, Blackbox, they're a lot more prevalent that the Mojave Windows ads. I'd much rather prefer Apple to save the money they're spending on advertising and lower the prices on their products. I think that if Apple was comfortable enough in their brand, they woulnd't have to spend millions belittling MS and the PC. That's just my opinion. Plus the ads just further the image and stereotype of the smug apple user. While they definitely do exist, I don't think i'm one of them and I find it insulting for many of you to say all mac users are douchebags or whatever term you choose to use.

 

[fatpat268]

Originally posted by: theblackbox

Originally posted by: Eeezee

Originally posted by: theblackbox
what if i need more then 4 gig of ram in your setup? a second processor? i didn't see that in your build. mac pro uses a 5000x based board, i believe.

half a billion vs 300 million. nice play on words. say it 500 million vs 300 million, not that much. u r clever, not me.

and you are right, there are gamers that make money off gaming. are they more then 25% of the microsoft windows pc user base? most gamers do it for fun.

i didn't say there were not good alternatives to mac software, i think avid is a great package for video, and pro tools is not bad, and 8 is supposed to be better. but...


and back to newegg. we are back to the do it yourself market. i'd love to see you spec a workstation from dell at the same as the base mac pro.

and i checked newegg too.

the E5440 harpertown runs 738.00
the macpro uses the 5462
so 738x2 is 1476

dual lga 771 motherboards run about 300 bucks. i'm at 1776 now
starts adding up fast if you do a fair comparison of similar items.

never said two processors made things faster, but with leverage it sure does help rendering and processing video.
pushing calculations it makes things a lot smoother.

Then install 8GB in the PC. Apple charges a huge markup per extra GB of RAM, further solidifying my point. You do NOT need a second processor; if you do, then you should be purchasing server hardware, not Mac Pros. Your PC needs two processors as much as a fish needs a bicycle.

Half a billion actually sounds like less than 300 million. You've gotten your marketing concepts all switched around. In any case, you've conceded this point.

Of course I'm right, that's because I don't use a Mac. Are the people who make money off of video and photo editing more than 25% of the Mac user base? No

You'd rather I go to Dell for the comparison? I gave you a huge benefit by going to Alienware, a company notorious for its ludicrous markups. Why would you want me to go to an even more affordable provider? Are you just a troll or do you actually have no idea what you're talking about?

Two processors may help rendering, but I've never seen a benchmark that places performance gains above 25% for having that second processor in even the most heavy loads. You may as well burn a big pile of money.

Remember, this is Mac vs PC, not Mac vs high-end server (in which case the high-end server will always win on every front).

okay, last issue. no one buys mac ram, or at least they shouldn't. i bought all my ram third party. why, because mac, like other manufacturers overcharges for things like ram. thats fine, thats their business to do that. however, like any diy, you buy it third party. same with hard drives, video cards and anything else.

i'm not much for benchmarks, because they are just that, benchmarks. i prefer real world experience. Maybe my dislike for benchmarks goes back to the days when futuremark was being ran by optimizations to favor the flavor of the week in gpus.

compare the dell precision with the same exact specs. you say apple overcharfes, well dell charges even more.
dell precision t5400
2 quad core xeon 5440 ( 1333fsb) apple specs 5462 stock (1600fsb)
1 gb ddr2 fb-dimms 667 (apple srecs 2gb 800)
80gb hd (apple 320)
dell charges 3588 for that, but you do get 150 bucks savings.
but no one ever says, gee, dell sure is overpriced. i found a similar spec on the same one on dell with 583 dollars cash back, but it still costs 3528 and comes with the slower fsb, ram, etc.

i'm being kind, compare the dell precision t7400, which costs even more, but at least specs with the same motherboard, fsb, cpu and they even spot you 2gb ram. it only comes in around 4500 after instant rebat of 603.

you can get the dual 2.8 for 2399 usually refurb, or you can get it new from 2500-2700
you can call me a troll, but if you don't believe me, spec it yourself.
hp, even worse.
so is dell really that affordable when it comes to the same exact specs, sorry, but no.

gosh, why'd i buy and apple when i could have spent more and bought a dell....
so you can say things like i'm a troll that doesn't know anything, but unless my math doesn't work in your world, apple is cheaper then dell for the same exact spec, plus with apple you get a 1200 watt ps, dell a little over 850.
and dell is always cheaper, at least thats is what i'm told.

You're forgetting something here. At least Dell gives you choice. Most people will never need server class hardware. Dell sells a wide variety of machines that aren't pure overkill.

But... if you do need a machine like that, perhaps a Mac Pro is your best bet, but you're talking about a different segment of the populace of what we're all talking about.

Originally posted by: JC86
mputer to come out of hibernation or sleep, sometimes taking minutes to do so.


Maybe i'm just not familiar with OSX but I can't seem to figure out how to browse files through the OSX directory. Anything that is not saved in the documetns folder or apps folder just seem buried to me. I miss windows and its directory system that i'm more familiar with.

This is my main gripe when I used OSX... Most of the major stuff is hidden from view and feels confining. Maybe that's just the power user in me... I dunno.

 

[Kaido]

Originally posted by: zinfamous
While I think time machine is brilliant, I question what use it has on my brand new iMac at work...

What do you mean? As far as the iMac not having a built-in backup drive?

 

[Kaido]

Originally posted by: Ns1

Originally posted by: Kaido
Things I hate about Apple:

this. As I always point out, I got a MB and a PC, and I LOVE the MB for chilling on the sofa (sorry guys, MB trackpad = ridiculous), but I'd never think about actually doing WORK on the MB

The problem is that there are problems with Apple, as with any company, and then there are the emotional arguments that people get into about Mac vs. PC and they stop thinking clearly. I love Apple products. I think they're great. But I don't think they're perfect, and I don't think they're for everybody. Microsoft has ruled the workplace since at least Windows 95, so unless developers start porting EVERYTHING to Windows, we're all going to have a hard time convincing our bosses that we need expensive Mac hardware plus a separate Windows license for the VM. Macs have their place, Windows PCs have their place, and that's all there really is to it.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: zerocool84
Umm how many people DIY a Mac??? I'd go with slim to none.

For installing hard drives and RAM, I'd guess it's about as common as it is with PCs. Both platforms have their share of clueless users and more proficient users.