Would you buy a Apple Mactel?

[glougloumouth]

OK,

 

Several rumor sites said the first Macs to get an Intel processor would be the Mac Mini.

 

If you take a look at the current specs of the Mac mini and assume that you will have a 2.5 GHz latest low power Intel chip (early 2006) instead of the current G4. Assume the rest remains equivalent (memory & al and mostly the PRICE) although we could expect a better video card.

 

Let's also assume that a announced, Apple won't make any move to prevent you from installing Windows on the box and dual booting would be possible if you want.

 

Now the question: would you buy one?

 

Don't forget that with the Mac you will have iLife and the OS X licence and no fuss about cracking OSX to make it work on a non-Apple machine (which you will have to do every 3 month when service packs, euhh, system updates e.g. 10.4.2).

 

So, compared with a Dell, with the Microsoft tax (Windows included :-) and having to pirat and crack OS X, is it worth it?

 

I know I will buy a Mactel as soon as it is confirmed that it can also run Windows and I will have a single comouter at home. Think of a iMac 20" with a nice 3GHz Intel inside and 1.5GB RAM...

 

I WANT ONE!!!

[rohde]

I'm pretty convinced that my next system will be a Macintel. Of course it depends on the price as well, but it really is a nice OS I must say.

[zorxd]

You prefer the Apple Tax over the M$ tax? Not me (because the Apple tax is and will remains higher)

 

I will continue to make my PCs from pieces (free of taxes from any company). A mac mini is WAY to expensive for what it is and it would still be even if you replace the G4 with a pentium M 1.86 GHz. For that price you could at least get a 17" CRT, keyboard and mouse.

It's against my values to buy all my hardware from the same vendor, so immagine how it is to buy hardware + OS (in fact OSX isn't an OS at all, it is only a GUI over a modified freeBSD called Darwin which is also free) from one single company?

[bartman101]

Apple should stop focusing on their over-priced PCs and allow OSX to run on any system. They could still sell their own sytems and they could market them as guarenteed to work with OSX, and provide cheap or free support if you're using OSX on an offical Apple computer. Dell already publicly stated they would sell desktops with OSX, what's the problem? Is making money a bad thing for Apple? Steve Jobs is the DUMBEST businessman of all time, he has a good product but he won't make it available to the masses.

[ajebbatson]

So long as it dual boots Windows and Linux, allows me to use regular x86 graphics cards (obviously only those with OS X x86 drivers) instead of "Mac" edition and XCode remains free, I'll be buying a Mac x86 desktop at least.

[llothar]

I'm just going to switch from my iMac G5 back to a mac mini today (at least i buy the mac mini if i find it here in Chiang Mai's airport plaza - otherwise i must fly to Bangkok tomorrow).

 

First i doubt that a mac mini would be made so fast, Apple has a strong product base line and the mac mini must be one of the slowest products. But nevertheless i will buy one.

 

They canceled a deal about US$ 4500 (2x2,3 Mac + 2x20" Cinema Display), as i would normally have bought a new Power Mac, now my main development will use WinXP and i will switch later.

 

And by the way, i don't like Apple nor do i find MacOSX so superior, and also the prices are snobbish overpriced, but hey the Apple customers have money and they spend it. So i need a good computer to get in touch with them.

[CapAmerica]

Buy a MacMini or Build my own I'll go with build my own.

Buy a MacTower or Build my own I'll buy the MacTower.

 

I love how Apple products look. So when I have the money I'll buy them.

The MacMini is cute and all but I can't upgrade it so It loses my sale there.

 

Buying a Mac is like buying a car.

Sure you can be cheap and buy a Kia Rio or you can buy a Ford Mustang. Both will get you from point A to point B, just one look a whole lot cooler.

 

And as one of my friends put it;

"If you want to build on by hand for cheap, don't come crying to me when it breaks."

[DJx]

I'm perfectly satisfied with my PC as for now. So I will just upgrade mine or buy a new one and run Vista on it.

[tauge]

only if it is 64 bit and not as expensive (like the mac mini which barely came with anything) ... otherwise OSX with a white box is good enough for me

[Steven P. Jobs]

I'll be looking into the PowerBooks... they'll be sweet looking and fast as sin.

 

I'll bet on the PowerBooks getting the first round of Intel Processors. PowerBooks have everything going for them except the fact that they run very hot and aren't fast enough to do high high end HD motion graphics and editing. The gap between the iBooks and the PowerBooks is getting smaller because Apple is always trying to upgrade both models, even though they're running out of things to bump up. Shortly after the PowerBooks are Inteled, the Power Macs get Inteled, with dual dualcore processors making them truly powerful, because a year from now, an Intel PB could possibly whip a G5's bum. This keeps the Power Macs from looking weak.

 

Next, iMac gets Inteled, then the iBooks. Because the iBooks are the low end, there should be a delineation between them and the PBs. This changes because the consumer Macs should be in the same bracket. Mac mini comes last, because anyone who buys a low low end system needs to get nothing more than that. By next year, the minis should be still PPC G4s around 1.5 GHz, enough for mom and dad to send email, do digi photos... whatever. eMac is offered once again to only educational outlets...

 

Prices...

12'' 2.0 GHz Intel PowerBook- Starting at $1399

15'' 2.3 GHz Intel PowerBook- Starting at $1799

17'' 2.7 GHz Intel PowerBook- Starting at $2299

SuperDrives standard, 1 GB RAM standard at least 80 gig HD.

 

3.7 GHz Intel DC DP Power Mac- Starting at $1799

4.0 GHz Intel DC DP Power Mac- Starting at $2299

2 GB RAM standard, SuperDrive, 350 GB Perpendicular HD.

 

17'' 2.5 GHz DC i(ntel)Mac- Starting at $1199

20'' 3.0 GHz DC i(ntel)Mac- Starting at $1399

 

12'' 1.5 GHz Intel iBook- $849 (Combo drive)

14'' 1.7 GHz Intel iBook- $1099 (SuperDrive)

 

1.6 GHz Intel Mac mini- $349 (Combo drive)

1.8 GHz Intel Mac mini- $499 (Superdrive)

[darkten]

in fact OSX isn't an OS at all, it is only a GUI over a modified freeBSD called Darwin which is also free) from one single company?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

This statement is fundamentally wrong in almost every way. Its like saying that WindowsXP isn't an Operating System, its a GUI over a a modified VMS.

[darkten]

Steve Jobs is the DUMBEST businessman of all time, he has a good product but he won't make it available to the masses.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

This is not the focus of Apple. Apple is designed, run and does R&D around a core concept that really escapes about 90% of the population, in *every* market and product segment (this phenomenon is not limited to "computers") and it its this:

 

Most != Best.

 

If you think an all-you-can-eat buffet is "better" than a meal prepared by a skilled world class chef, for example, this concept is anathema to you. You cannot grasp it.

 

Longer life vs Better Living...More Space vs Better Neighborhood...More Pop vs Skilled Virtuoso...

 

Its really that simple. If you think "More = Better", instead of the (arguably?) more accurate "More = More; Better = Better" then the chances that you are NOT an Apple customer is about 90% as far as general personal computing is concerned.

[Gloomy]

Ehh.. In fact it's not so important for me PPC or x86. Linux run on both platforms I do not use Windows at all for about 3 years, so i will buy PowerBook whetever Intel or PPC. PPC even more enteresting for me right now. I can compile GNU software under MacOS, i can make dual boot with Linux. Cool. And about the prices... The PowerBook prices is not too hight comparing with high end Asus notebooks for example.

[johan]

i don't think i will buy the osx computer

 

i have used the osx for a week now and when i compare it to windows xp i am not shure osx is for me

 

osx look great with the nice icons and animations, but i miss some things

 

i mis the windows start bar to launch applications fast

 

i miss the windows taskbar, it may not look as good as the osx one , but it is faster to work with

 

and i miss using keyboard commands like ctrl copy

 

i also have the feeling that windows xp is a faster os compared to osx

 

[rohde]

i don't think i will buy the osx computer

 

i have used the osx for a week now and when i compare it to windows xp i am not shure  osx is for me

 

osx look great with the nice  icons and animations, but i miss some things

 

i mis the windows start bar to launch applications fast

 

i miss the windows taskbar, it may not look as good as the osx one , but it is faster to work with

 

and i miss using keyboard commands like ctrl copy

 

i also have the feeling that windows xp is a faster os compared to osx

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

All fair points. I just have a few comments.

 

Have you tried Exposé (click F9)? I find it extremely effecient and productive.

Instead of CTRL-C for copy you use ?-C etc. (on my machine ? is the Alt key).

 

(the ? was supposed to be the symbol for the command key)

[handojin]

nada... next build for me will be the iwill zmax dp sff with dual opterons...upgrade to dual dualcore opterons when i can afford.

 

operating system of choice for me will be media center 2005

(mainly because all the apps i use work better on xp.. drivers for all my hardware wont come for a while either)

 

probably will do a multi boot with vista and osx 86 on partitions but xp will remain my main os for doing work (audio stuff cubase/nuendo/pro tools ect)

osx might be promising for me in the future but core audio core midi and au plugins are still in their infancy stages and on the xp platform the asio/vst equivilents have had the time to mature and work nicely. all features i rely on everyday

if all i did was browse internet check emails id switch to osx right away..

it defintaly looks better... only if it worked as good as it looks

[Proteo]

Apple can count on me, I'll get a Mactel when available (depending of the price, of course!)

[setec]

I own a Mac Mini now, so I would gladly buy an intel version of that.

[legaldude]

i can't wait to get one! why don't they just release something tomorrow!!!!

[bartman101]

This is not the focus of Apple. Apple is designed, run and does R&D around a core concept that really escapes about 90% of the population, in *every* market and product segment (this phenomenon is not limited to "computers") and it its this:

 

Most != Best.

 

If you think an all-you-can-eat buffet is "better" than a meal prepared by a skilled world class chef, for example, this concept is anathema to you. You cannot grasp it.

 

Longer life vs Better Living...More Space vs Better Neighborhood...More Pop vs Skilled Virtuoso...

 

Its really that simple. If you think "More = Better", instead of the (arguably?) more accurate "More = More; Better = Better" then the chances that you are NOT an Apple customer is about 90% as far as general personal computing is concerned.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

This is different, a skilled cheif is rare, so you have to pay him more, thus raising the price of the food. Better neighborhoods are harder to find, raising the property values of the homes. (The concept I hear all the time) A BMW uses higher quality parts and more time goes into making them than a hyundai, thus making BMWs more expensive. OSX is an operating system, to reproduce it you copy the CD/DVD and put it in a box, just like windows. There isn't any reason why mass producing OSX would cost any more than mass producing another OS. That arguement doesn't work. Jobs sells his products to as few as possible to make them feel special that they have a mac, and they don't have as many virures, because no one bothers writing a virus for 10% of the PCs out there, not becuase OSX is any more secure. I could make a OS and only sell it to 2 people and claim it is the most secure OS in the world. Why? because no one will spend the time to hack an OS that's only on 2 computers. Jobs' ego prevents Apple from making more money, thus he is the DUMBEST business man ever.

[Neuron Basher]

If VMWare creates a MacIntel port, I will absolutely move to MacIntel when they're available. If not, I'll have to keep some Windows systems around for work requirements. (particularly MS SQL Server)

[natefrogg]

i would possibly buy one, it depends, we'll see when they actually come out

 

i would, however, prefer to build my own and install the mac os onto it, if that ever becomes a legal option

[myzar]

what do you mean with buy a mactel, buy apple hardware ? y would i want to buy normal pc hardware from apple at an overpriced price and prolly it would be sucky hardware being an intel combo.

 

I don't give a rat ass about how my case looks so no way in hell.

 

Apple should just make osx run on any hardware because their hw business will surely go to hell in the future.

 

The x86 business is another world where people don't buy a stupid looking case , It's way different from the zealot mac circle.

[zorxd]

This statement is fundamentally wrong in almost every way. Its like saying that WindowsXP isn't an Operating System, its a GUI over a a modified VMS.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Then where can I download or buy that modified VMS because I don't like the XP GUI anyways?

 

 

 

In the old times of win9x, everybody was saying it wasn't a real OS because it still worked on top of DOS. It was true.

 

 

 

Mac OS X still works on top of darwin. Windows XP works on top of the NT kernel but there is no other OS that uses the same kernel (I don't count win2k as a different OS, it's the same OS, only a different version)

 

 

 

 

 

You can install Darwin without installing OS X. And Darwin is free. When you pay for OS X you are actually paying for a GUI and some apps because the kernel is free.

 

 

 

OS X is nice, but that doesn't mean it's a full OS. Saying OS X is an OS is like saying KDE and GNOME are two OS.

 

 

 

KDE is a desktop environment that can run in X11 on top of a lot of different kernels including Linux, freeBSD and Darwin

 

OS X is a desktop environment that doesn't rely on X11 and runs only on top of Darwin

[rohde]

Then where can I download or buy that modified VMS because I don't like the XP GUI anyways?

 

 

 

In the old times of win9x, everybody was saying it wasn't a real OS because it still worked on top of DOS. It was true.

 

 

 

Mac OS X still works on top of darwin. Windows XP works on top of the NT kernel but there is no other OS that uses the same kernel (I don't count win2k as a different OS, it's the same OS, only a different version)

 

 

 

 

 

You can install Darwin without installing OS X. And Darwin is free. When you pay for OS X you are actually paying for a GUI and some apps because the kernel is free.

 

 

 

OS X is nice, but that doesn't mean it's a full OS. Saying OS X is an OS is like saying KDE and GNOME are two OS.

 

 

 

KDE is a desktop environment that can run in X11 on top of a lot of different kernels including Linux, freeBSD and Darwin

 

OS X is a desktop environment that doesn't rely on X11 and runs only on top of Darwin

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Some people just talk and talk without knowing what the hell they are talking about.

 

Obviously you have absolutely /no/ knowledge of how OS X is structured in any way or form. OS X isn't just Darwing with a GUI on top of it. LOL. Not that it would matter anyway because your point makes no sense at all.