Posted 04 February 2006 - 02:11 PM
1) a small introduction.
I'm into computers since 1982. I'v experienced everything from ZX81, ZX Spectrum to Acorn Risc PC. From Apple II to CBM Amiga to PowerMac. From 8088 PC to Dual Core P4 PC.
This also means that I experienced many companies coming up and going down. Many of them were quite unique and should have remained in the computing world. But alas.
2) With regards to Apple being too expensive for "poor students"
An Apple Mini Mac is not expensive and gives plenty of Apple fun for your money. It might not have the specs that you admire but specs don't mean anything in the Mac-world. In fact most PC users are just so obsessed with technology that they forget how fun computing should be (especially for consumers whom use their computers at home)? I, personly, wouldn't mind trading MHz for a less troublesome computing experience. In fact I still prefer and use my ancient 208MHz StrongARM equipped Risc PC running RISC OS 4 for many tasks than the 3GHz P4 system running Windows XP professional next besides it. Ofcourse (as many in-the-field would say) I am indeed spoiled because that old Acorn machine I'm talking about was in it's time far ahead concerning system-desing, OS-design and user experience (the fun aspect).
So to all the potential buyers whom can't wait and might try to get a Mac Mini. Just do it. It might be the last "classic G-series" Mac you'll get for a bargain price. It's still a lot faster then many older iMac's and it runs the latest Mac OS X which can't be said from my old Beige G3 which costed a fortune. In fact it might be possible that in the future collectors asks and arm and a leg for those old PPC-macs like some do for a ancient motorola 68000-equipped macintosh (classic). And who knows... you might even enjoy the Mini ;-)
3) I've posted this on another thread where someone asked why Apple wouldn't sell Mac OS in shops for the general public.
What all of you ppl don't realise is that a few years ago Micro$oft saved Apple by donating a few millions $. Obviously this was done with some mutual agreements between the 2 companies. I 'm convinced that one o/t agreements was that OSX would never arrive in shops to be bought by the general public. Ofcourse we will never know what exactly was agreed upon. But we must realise that the ppl at Microsoft are not stupid; they know how easy a Unix variant can be ported to another architecture as demonstrated with Linux, and they already have enough competition from this. Where Linux started the battle for the server market; OSX86 is where the battle for the desktop begins.
Anyway over time it was clear to Apple that PPC-processors would not keep up with current trends in general computing and therefore they had no choice then to look for another company to source cpu's for next-gen machines. Unfortunatly this lead them to Intel who is in the best position as far as performance processor technology is concerned (they nicked the StrongARM technology from Digital and PA-Risc technology from HP remember?).
So I'm sure Apple is in a very awkward position now. Since their next-gen Macs bear a slight resemblance with orinary PC's and they therefore unwillingly opened their own Pandora's box. They're balancing a very thin line now. One mistake and they face huge lawsuits from Microsoft. I'm sure of this. So they can never openly allow Mac OS X86 to run on joe public's PC.
Nor will they sell OSX as a retail package for general PC's. Unless Steve Jobs ends the mutual cooperation between Apple and Microsoft and really wants a war with his old time buddy, Bill Gates >:->
Unfortunatly for Apple some of us are sick of Windows and really DO want a war between Apple and Microsoft. I'm one of those ppl because I still regret it that the superior RISC OS platform was killed by the dubious penetration of the inferior Intel-Windows combo. In fact we all have our own reasons to dispise Microsoft otherwise we wouldn't be here, would we? My point of view is this. As long as Microsoft , Apple and whoever is out there with their propreriaty platform are on different hardware systems, it's no use to bluff who's best. Things really changes when all these OSes are on the same hardware platform. Then they truelly have to put their money where their mouth is. And like they say in that movie... there can only be one.
So what would happen if this popular well-known (even by many non-OSX users) and well-respected OS would fully migrate to their PC's at home or at work? Microsoft would end-up facing serious competition and its role as former saviour of Apple could be reversed.
Think about this.
Posted 04 February 2006 - 03:15 PM
Posted 04 February 2006 - 04:01 PM
I also agree very much that the speed/power issue is a marketing ploy. I use some very up-to-date gear in my work but when I travel I've been using a 1.2GHz Windows laptop which throttles back to 400MHz on battery. I was surprised to find it's fast enough for almost everything I do. When I travel I don't need to composite sixteen video tracks or work on a 35-layer illustration, and most Mac Mini-owning students don't either.
And if speed is so important, read this on overclocking your Mini (haven't tried it but there's no reason why it should't work). http://www.fastermin...m/overclock.htm
Posted 04 February 2006 - 05:06 PM
Posted 04 February 2006 - 10:07 PM
Posted 05 February 2006 - 12:18 AM
Good points. IMO we should support apple, if you have an apple os running on your pc you could support them by buying osx in a box even even if you never open it, and buy apple software for it. It's buggy on a pc but a lot of stuff works fine and it gives us something to play with and learn.
You're right! It's curious - although we are ostensibly pirates because we are running OSx86 on PC hardware against the wish and intent of Apple - many forum members support Apple in various ways. Several people in the forum have confessed to buying PPC OSX even though they can't run it, to show their support and 'pay' for what they're enjoying just as you suggest. Many people here own real Macs or intend to buy real Macs. When dual-booting of the Intel Mac becomes a reality a lot of people here say they will buy them instead of PC hardware. I certainly plan to do that just to explore the possibilities.
We've already had various philosophical discussions about salving our pirate conscience by giving Apple money when we're stealing their OS. We also looked at the legality of buying OSX and then running a pirate version. I don't want to reopen that debate. Our previous conclusion was that it is a nice gesture, it makes the individual feel better, but we're still breaking Apple's licence agreement and probably the law too. Helping Apple out certainly makes it seem sweeter though.
Posted 05 February 2006 - 12:35 AM
Posted 07 February 2006 - 07:42 PM
I like that low-end mantra, and I love the Mac Mini for all of that. My main Mac at home (real Mac) is an iBook (16MB VRAM) 600MHz G3. It's plenty fast for everything I do (except play recent games, which I do on my low-end 2.8GHz Dell PC). That includes writing music in Geniesoft Score Writer, word processing in Apple Works, web surfing in Safari, and whatnot.
use the right tools for the job. Don't overspend. Let the real "pros" buy the super-duper high-end stuff you don't need, and if you're a "pro", then buy the high end - it IS the tool for the job.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users