Alessandro17 Posted October 18, 2007 Share Posted October 18, 2007 people that switch from PC's to Macs are happy enough that they don't have to worry about viruses anymore. Everything else is just frosting on the cake That single advantage comes too expensive. I am selling my previous hackintosh (Bad Axe 1, Core 2 Duo E6600, ATI X1600XT, a beautiful case, two quality DVD burners, 320 GB HD...) for €500. Linux is absolutely free. Now I can imagine what you are going to say about Linux, but a growing number of ordinary people are quite happy to run Ubuntu. Personally I absolutely detest it, but if it can bring people to Linux, so be it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nips Posted October 18, 2007 Share Posted October 18, 2007 I tried Osx86 and it doesn't seem to be what people say. It's a little hard to use. For example try to enlarge a window with "+": you have to resize it manually, the doesn't fit to the screen. Try to close an application with "x": it remains active and you have to close it from dock or top bar! Try to reduce an application such as messenger: mac creates such a virtual disk...very strange. Windows in this aspects is very simple and usable. If you click "enlarge" the window fits automatically the screen. There is a bar with reduced application apart closed application. There is a notification area where you can find application in activity such as a download manager, msn, and so on... That's because you're expecting Mac OSX to act like MS Windows. Mac OS IS NOT MS Windows. The + Button on a Mac OS X window is not the same function as "Maximize" on Windows. It doesn't make the window the same size as the screen, it makes the window as large as it needs to be to effectively show the most of the data you're looking at as possible. After a while, I've come to like this better. When I'm looking at a web page, I want to be able to see the whole page, so I always maximize in windows. Now, if I need to focus another window, I'm alt-tabbing or clicking on the taskbar or minimizing my web browser. If it only opened to the size it needed to, I could still get to windows behind it. It's a very usable feature. If you "reduce" or "Minimize" an application in Mac, it either appears in the minimized tray to the right, or it collapses into the application icon on the dock. This is JUST LIKE the feature in windows xp that stacks windows from the same app into one listing on the taskbar. There's not a large difference here. I do agree with the whole "closing the last window doesn't kill the app" argument. This drives me nuts about OS X as well, after being so used to windows. However, I'd still take os x anyday. And take a look at Growl for app notifications. OS X really does grow on you, but if you've been a MS user your whole life, it DEFINITELY takes getting used to. It's worth the effort. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apowerr Posted October 18, 2007 Share Posted October 18, 2007 Again: Price to Performance is everything. No matter how good the OS is, it's the hardware that counts. Apple Desktops have always been overpriced, and the MB is slowly slipping behind the bar. Overall though, the MB and MBP are still fairly decent deals, but you can find better (like I posted previously). Hardware aside though: OS X Leopard is going to be amazing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~pcwiz Posted October 18, 2007 Author Share Posted October 18, 2007 Thats for sure Nips, I have a question for you: Why are you talking about minimize and maximize buttons? I don't know if this is news to you but theres a whole lot more to an OS than the 3 toolbar buttons...Just wanted to make sure you are aware of that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
consolation Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 Again: Price to Performance is everything. That's only ONE person's opinion, don't state it as fact, unless you have evidence to back it up. Given that Apple's US sales grew by 37% for this quarter (highest of any PC maker in that market by a country mile), I think you'll find that your statement is clearly untrue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
empreality Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 That's only ONE person's opinion, don't state it as fact, unless you have evidence to back it up. Given that Apple's US sales grew by 37% for this quarter (highest of any PC maker in that market by a country mile), I think you'll find that your statement is clearly untrue. That is a complete retarded comparison, because Apple is basically the size of Microsoft... Of course it would be high in market shares than any other PC maker, because there is like a million of them... Apple - billion dollar company, making OSX, macs, ipods, iphones, etc. Known to be virus free, cool...etc. Dell - computer manufacture... HP - computer...manufacture... And thousands more..... Basically you are comparing a OS and System creator with companies that just build the system...They have only the system to advertise...Apple can advertise with their Operating System being amazing...It's not like Dell has their own DellOS or something... Also, "Given that Apple's US sales grew by 37%" Is that counting for the iphone and ipods as well? I don't know...How exactly can you compare iphone sales with a thousands of system manufactures? Basically don't irreverent facts, makes you seem like a retard and makes your response weaker than ONE person's opinion... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cdnalsi Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 I've had the greatest time on my Mac since July when I bought it, and I must say I don't have buyer's remorse. A good friend of mine has a saying (it's in romanian, but I'll try to translate anyways): "Pay a buck, sit in front". And it has actually been that way for me. I'm a musician, I compose and perform live. It's so awesome to not have to deal with windows crashes, lost projects, stopped sound on stage for a change! It's like: "Phew" Okay so I paid a lot of money for that "Phew". Yes, but now I can finally say it. And I really needed it in my line of work! So no, I personally don't think Macs are overpriced. It's worked for me alright, of course that doesn't have to mean it's working for you. Just a personal statement! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~pcwiz Posted October 19, 2007 Author Share Posted October 19, 2007 Everyone has an opinion about this and the majority seem to think that Macs aren't overpriced but most of the new posters here have just read the last page of the topic. Read the entire topic and you'll find very good reasoning for the fact that Macs are overpriced. BTW: Used macs are cheap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedSox Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 Regardless of performance, there are significant differences between a Mac Pro and a Quad-Core hack. You can't, for example, put FB-DIMMs in a hackintosh unless you build it with an Intel 5000-based workstation/server board, at which point, for the same CPU speed, it'll probably cost the same. FB-DIMMs might work slower in practice, but you have the flexibility to add ridiculous amounts of RAM without sacrificing performance, and you also have ECC. That might not make much difference to you, but to the average person buying that grade of machine, it does. You also don't usually get the PCIe flexibility (and I'm not talking about worthless SLi here.) You also don't get a machine that's as quiet as a Mac Pro without shelling out a lot of money. You can't compare a hackintosh to a Mac Pro. Look at competing workstation systems from PC OEMs and you'll see a lot less price difference. Plus, I bet none of those even is as quiet as a Mac Pro (which would mean a lot to a recording engineer or others in the music industry, for example.) That withstanding, most people here would probably rather have a Q6600-based hackintosh and overclok the bejesus out of it for a quarter of the money (myself included) - remember, the likelihood is that you're not the person Apple is trying to sell a Mac Pro to. Plus, ask yourself - -how many Laptops have FW 400? Or DVI output? Dual Layer? And the new OS will give a speed boost of 30%+ whereas if you look at Vista Benchmarks, the 32 bit vista is faster than XP, but the 64 bit version is slower, plus, as it is now, I think OSX is a better OS, and now Leopard coming out? And it took Vista 5 years and you have to shell out a fortune just to get all the perks of the complete (yet intrusive) OS. I was a PC defender for a long, long, long time, (386 anyone) and I feel like OSX/Leopard is made with USERS in mind whereas Vista is made to keep MS more secure for them, not the end user - to me, there are no, NONE, 3rd party apps that work tightly integrated such as that of any Apple software - - all their programs work together, one exports to anothers format and vice-versa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cdnalsi Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 Everyone has an opinion about this and the majority seem to think that Macs aren't overpriced but most of the new posters here have just read the last page of the topic. Read the entire topic and you'll find very good reasoning for the fact that Macs are overpriced. BTW: Used macs are cheap I have read the entire topic. I've been reading these forums since July 06 I just didn't get a Mac until recently, and that's why I wasn't posting... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apowerr Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 That's only ONE person's opinion, don't state it as fact, unless you have evidence to back it up. Given that Apple's US sales grew by 37% for this quarter (highest of any PC maker in that market by a country mile), I think you'll find that your statement is clearly untrue. I meant in terms of being a smart consumer. Look, I like Macs. A lot. But right now the only Macs I can justify purchasing are the MBP and maybe MB after the next update. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~pcwiz Posted October 19, 2007 Author Share Posted October 19, 2007 Well, thats one way of looking at it but the point is that you can do most of what you can do on a Mac with a PC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cdnalsi Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 Well, thats one way of looking at it but the point is that you can do most of what you can do on a Mac with a PC. There's lots of things you can do on a Mac and cannot do on a PC and vice-versa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
consolation Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 I meant in terms of being a smart consumer. Look, I like Macs. A lot. But right now the only Macs I can justify purchasing are the MBP and maybe MB after the next update. OK, the point I'm trying to make is; that you rarely reach 100% capacity of your computer. What proportion of time does your computer run with all the cpus on 100% load, or the graphics card screaming? Not often, so; to an average consumer the SMART choice is the computer that will offer the best user experience. The intangibles, like excellent design and hassle free OS; that is what Apple markets and charges a premium for - a seamless hardware/software ecosystem with a dash of elitism. To an average consumer that IS what will make them happiest with their purchase, therefore it is the SMART choice. I'm not some fanatical apple apologists, of the four computers in our household, only one is a "real" mac and only two run os X. But, you are approaching buying a computer from a gear heads point of view, not from a casual user's. For them, they are buying an appliance - a smart choice is one that looks sleek and will give them least hassles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~pcwiz Posted October 19, 2007 Author Share Posted October 19, 2007 There are debates on both sides but it seems that overall Mac is winning. However, not counting design, the price of Macs is not justified as OS X is a $129 OS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apowerr Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 Just so you guys know, my next computer purchase will most likely be a Macbook. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~pcwiz Posted October 19, 2007 Author Share Posted October 19, 2007 erei33, A MacBook's not a bad choice for running OS X and doing the basic stuff but in terms of specs to price ratio it is sorely beaten Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apowerr Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 erei33, A MacBook's not a bad choice for running OS X and doing the basic stuff but in terms of specs to price ratio it is sorely beaten Hells yea it is. I'm waiting for a bump up to a 2.2 Ghz C2D and an 8400m GS or 965GMA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~pcwiz Posted October 19, 2007 Author Share Posted October 19, 2007 Is there going to be a bump in specs? Maybe once Leopard comes, they will be forced to increase the specs to match Leopard's needs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glassJAw Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 Please find me a notebook that is around 13.3 inches that has substantial value compared to the Macbook. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apowerr Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 Is there going to be a bump in specs? Maybe once Leopard comes, they will be forced to increase the specs to match Leopard's needs. ThinkSecret reported that in late November there would be at last a proc upgrade (hopefully to 800Mhz 2.2 Ghz). I'm hoping they bump up the vid card when that happens. HP dv25004t: 14.1 Inch Screen Processor: Intel C2D T7500 @ 2.2 Ghz RAM: 2 GB 667 Mhz Ram HDD: 160 GB 5,400 RPM HD Video: Nvidia 8400m GS w/ 64mb vram Wifi, Bluetooth, Microphone, Webcam Built in $1,489 Macbook: 13.3 Inch Screen Processor: Intel C2D T7400 @ 2.16 Ghz RAM: 2 GB 667 Mhz RamHDD: 160 GB 5,400 RPM Video: Intel GMA950 Wifi, Bluetooth, Microphone, Webcam Built in $1,649 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mumford Posted October 20, 2007 Share Posted October 20, 2007 http://configure.us.dell.com/dellstore/con...cwfk1&s=bsd dual quad core for $729 (select the quad core upgrade for $0 and second quad upgrade for $0) Anyone want to build an 8 core OSX86? Looks like Apple products are priced "high" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~pcwiz Posted October 20, 2007 Author Share Posted October 20, 2007 LOL Is that a mistake or is it really true? Someone should order one and choose 8 cores. They can't charge extra cause thats what it says on their site. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
consolation Posted October 20, 2007 Share Posted October 20, 2007 I'm hoping they bump up the vid card when that happens. Apple has a long history of putting sucky video cards in it's computers. Their market doesn't include many gamers (and the pro crowd can afford to pay top dollar for apple's "upgrades"/pro laptops), so it hasn't been an issue for them. Personally, I nearly laughed when I read that they put gma 950 into the macbook/ 17" imac. (Having said that, GF has one and it doesn't seem to be a problem for what she uses it for - except that she needs to have CIV on minimum settings.) But this has been going on for a while, back in the day, my Quicksilver powermac came with a crappy mx4. My point is, I expect when they do upgrade the video card on the macbook, it will be something equally disappointing. On a tangent, this has indirectly benefited us hacky users. Apple's stinginess created a booming scene in flashing PC card for PPC macs. Many of the people responsible for developing the osX86 community cut their teeth doing that, their skills now let us have things like 8xxx support and 7xxx 512MB cards - to name just a couple. The ruins of a once glorious empire are here (don't post there, it's a dead board) the refugees having fled to here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~pcwiz Posted October 21, 2007 Author Share Posted October 21, 2007 I agree. Mac video cards have never been good. My 2001 iMac G3 came with a wimpy 16MB ATI Rage 128 Pro, while there were 64 and even 128MB cards in that age that were being used in PCs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts