Jump to content

MacMoof

Members
  • Content count

    25
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About MacMoof

  • Rank
    InsanelyMac Protégé
  1. I think the commercial sucks. What sucks even more than the commercial is a phone that costs $600 and only works with Cingular. I don't care if it can tapdance, brew the worlds finest cup of coffee, and and shovel snow. It's a neat gadget, but a TV that only works on 220V and PAL isn't going to do me any good, either.
  2. A bunch of you can shut up now...

    I doubt Apple will license their OS to other hardware manufacturers anytime soon, simply because they make all their money selling the overpriced hardware, not the OS. Apple could make a huge impact on the market if they released an 'all in one' motherboard that fit in an ATX case, and bundled it with a copy of OSX and targeted it to the home builder.. why not? They already have BYOKMM, why not 'Bring Your Own CPU, HD, Case, and RAM"? A move like that, if priced high enough to make it unattractive to OEM's, but low enough to appeal to DIY'ers, would not only all but deflate the OSx86 scene, but also increase their marketshare, without hurting any of their current product lines.
  3. Apple has to be careful with what software they build, because like it or not, for many people Mac Office is a necessary application.. especially when sharing information from the 'business world' that is predominantly Windows Office based. If Apple made a competing 'office' product, Microsoft would likely stop making Mac Office.. and if Safari is any indication, the Apple Office application would probably suck.. and give folks one less reason to make the switch to MacOS.
  4. I'm just going to say that, in my opinion, selling a person a copy of OSX and then telling them you can only run it on a Mac is as absurd as selling a person a copy of Windows and then telling them they can only run it on a Dell.. or selling a person a CD and telling them they can only play it on Sony CD players. Seems to me, the DMCA allows for "adaptation" that is "created as an essential step in the utilization of the computer program in conjunction with a machine". So while making a copy isn't an essential part of utilizing it with a Mac, making an 'adapted copy' of the original disk is an essential step in the utilization of the computer program in conjunction with a 'non-Mac'.
  5. It's too early to tell at the moment, but all indications suggest that no, it won't take over the mobile phone market. First off, I haven't heard a firm release date, second it's expensive since apparently Apple won't let the carrier subsidise the cost of the phone to prevent it from competing with their 'non cellular' products.. altho they might offer cheap service. Third, you're limited to a single carrier. Only way this phone would really dominate the market is if multiple carriers offered the phone, and you could get it cheap with a 2 year contract, like they do with every other phone.
  6. Actually, I did take into consideration that the MacMini was small, and mentioned that point.. and there are, no doubt, people who will pay a premium for 'small'. That still doesn't explain away the price difference, since integrating everything on one board (basically a notebook motherboard) and slapping a notebook sized hard drive and optial drive into a small box doesn't make it any more expensive than a comparably spec'ed notebook sans display. And please, spare me with the 'quality' bit. An Intel GMA950 chipset is the same in a Mac as it is a PC. An Intel C2D CPU is the same in a Mac as it is a PC. The only difference between comparably spec'ed PC's and Macs is the OS they're running and the price tag. The average computer buyer is motivated first and formost by PRICE, second by capability, and what the case it's all in looks like is generally last on the list. Apple hardware has always been overpriced. Try reading thru some of Apples history as told by the employees who regularly mention the computers were priced with a huge profit margin.. some employees have even quit because they worked their butts off to keep the production costs low, but the retail price set by management kept climbing. And let me repeat myself in case it wasn't clear earlier.. I AM a Mac person. I have 4 Macs and a 'Hackintosh'. I just don't ever buy them new, because they're too damned expensive for what you get. I personally could care less about the 'industrial design' of the box all the guts are stuffed in.. I just like MacOS X, it's ease of use, its stability, and it's performance. I've owned several iBooks and PowerBooks.. don't preach to me about any level of 'quality' on those things.. eBay is littered with people selling dead iBooks and PowerBooks for parts or 'as is not working', busted hinges, dead backlights, all the same kinds of problems you have with any other laptop brand. Down the road from me is the local recycling joint with pallet upon pallet of dead G4 eMac and iMac computers most with dead analog power supplies rendering the computer nothing more than a lolly pop colored boat anchor or door stop. With Apple hardware, you don't get anything even remotely approaching any real 'quality' until you get into their high end stuff, like the MacPro or the G5 towers before them. Have a look over at the Mac Rumors site and read all the people with stuck pixels, noisy fans, kernel panic problems, and a host of other 'quality' problems. In the 'quality' department, Apple is no better than any other PC maker. What makes a Mac a 'better' system is the OS, and perhaps most importantly, an OS designed to run on a limited range of hardware.. not the technology under the hood. Which brings this back to the topic of this thread: Apple won't license OSX to run on garden variety 'PC's', because where they make their money isn't in selling the OS, but in selling their overpriced hardware.
  7. Vista more secure than OS X?

    Locks only keep honest people honest.. which is to say, all the security measures in the world wont prevent someone from messing with it if they want to get in bad enough. If a mortal man coded it, a mortal man can break it. We Mac folks can brag about how secure our OS is, and how no viruses exist for the Mac, but while it may be true OSX is inherently more secure than Vista, the real thing we've got going for us is not many people care. Try to find new video releases on BETA. If your idea is to write a bug that will circulate across the globe.. what platform are you going to attack? The platform that runs 80% of the desktop personal computers in the world, or the platform that runs less than 15%? Viruses don't get written for OSX not because it's impossible, but because Macs have less than 15% marketshare compared to Microsofts 80%. Not to mention coders generally write in the environment they're comfortable with. How many people are seriously going to go out and buy a whole new computer, spend months learning how it works looking for exploits, then spend a few more months writing a bug just to mess with less than 15% of the people out in cyberspace? I have no doubt that within 12 months Microsoft will have egg on their face and releasing critical security patches for Vista.. it's a great big fat juicy target. MacOS? The guys writing the bugs and exploits just don't care.
  8. You know, I thought since the theory of Macs being overpriced had been 'debunked' by going to Dells website, i'd check Dells prices. Now we know the MacBook sells for $1099, with a 13" display, has 64MB Video RAM, 512MB System memory, a 1.83 C2D CPU, and a 60GB Hard Drive.. also included is a 24x DVD-ROM/CDRW drive. So what does Dell offer? For $1100 Dell will sell you a notebook with a 15.4" display, has 128MB Video RAM, 1GB System memory, 1.83 C2D CPU, and a 120GB Hard Drive.. also included is a 8X CD/DVD Burner (DVD+/-RW) with double-layer DVD+R write capability. So for $1 more, you get 2.4 inches more screen, twice the video RAM, twice the system memory, and twice the hard drive space.. AND a DVD burner! All for $1 more than the MacBook. Now the next level up MacBook has a 13" display, has 64MB Video RAM, 1GB System memory, a 2.0 C2D CPU w/ 4MB cache, a 80GB Hard Drive and a 6x double-layer SuperDrive... that sells for $1299. We bump our Dell up to a 2.0 C2D CPU w/ 4MB cache, and we're still getting 2.4 inches more screen, twice the video RAM, 40GB more hard disk space, 2x faster optical drive, and it's $1156.. or $143 cheaper than the MacBook. Now let's compare the 17" MacBookPro at $2799. It's got a 17" screen, 256MB video RAM, 2GB System Ram, 2.33Ghz C2D CPU, 160GB Hard Drive, and a 8x double-layer SuperDrive (DVD+R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW). What can we get from Dell? For $1766, Dell will sell us a notebook with a 17" display, 256MB video RAM, 2GB System Ram, 2.16GHz C2D (fastest they offer in that line), 160GB Hard Drive, and a 8x CD/DVD burner (DVD+/-RW) with double-layer DVD+R write capability. That makes the Dell $1033 cheaper than the MacBookPro. Is 170Mhz more CPU speed worth another $1000 dollars? Finally.. let's compare the MacMini At $599 you get a 1.66Ghz Core Duo CPU, 512MB RAM, 64MB GMA 950 graphics, 60GB Hard Drive, and a 24x DVD-ROM/CD/rw drive.. no monitor, no keyboard, and no mouse. What does Dell offer? Nothing that slow. The next level up is the 1.83Ghz MacMini with 512MB system RAM, 80GB Hard Drive, 64MB Video Memory, and a 8x double-layer SuperDrive (DVD+R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW) at $799. Closest Dell we can find in that range is a 1.86Ghz, 1GB system RAM, 250GB Hard Drive, 256MB Video Ram, and a 16x DVD+/-RW Drive. It also includes, keyboard, mouse, speakers, and a 17 inch E177FP Flat Panel LCD monitor for $909. So for $110 more, you get twice the system memory, 3 times the hard drive space, 4 times the video memory, a DVD burner that's twice as fast, AND a 17" LCD Flat Panel display. Again, it's not in that neat little MacMini case.. but holy {censored} that's a lot more stuff for just $110.
  9. I'm using this build after having been quite happy with the previous beta. Only reason I even bothered to upgrade was because this most recent build supports disc burning, and I needed to burn some .cdi files in Disk Juggler. 3.06 P4 w/ HT, 1GB RAM and I have to say it runs XP sp2 just fine.. as well as it ever ran on any 'straight PC' i've ever run XP on.. maybe even a tad bit better.
  10. I have the latest Beta build of Parallels (3150), and I really like it.. I started with I guess it was Build 3094 and my only complaint was that occasionally it would tell me I couldn't start it because it was already running.. so i'd have to restart the Mac to get it to go.. but I haven't had that problem since upgrading to the latest 3150 build. I tried Fusion before getting Parallels, and I didn't like it much, and seemed to run kind of chuggy. I'm running a 3.6Ghz P4 with HT, 1GB RAM and OSX 10.4.7 and using XP under Parallels, mostly just because I have a few apps I need to use from time to time that are 'Windows Only'. Hopefully this rig will last long enough until I get enough cash saved up to bag a used MacPro.
  11. Yea.. don't get me wrong.. i'm a hard core Mac fan and user.. having to use a Windows machine makes me physically ill.. so my price comparisons aren't from the viewpoint of a Windows or Linux 'fanboy'.. i'm just a guy who knows the stuff is too damned expensive for what you get. Their hardware new has just always been way, way overpriced when compared to the 'PC'.. altho before the switch to Intel hardware it was a little harder to compare machine to machine.. or explain the price differences away by saying the hardware in the Mac was far more superior. But with the Intel switch, it's the same hardware in a Mac as it is in a PC.. same chipsets for audio and video, same mainboard/logicboard chipsets, same Intel CPU's, same everything.. just in a pretty box with a different OS installed.
  12. Let's compare the 17" MacBookPro to a comparable HP. A 17" MacBookPro with 256MB video memory (1680x1050 max res), 2GB RAM, 160GB hard drive and an 8x Double Layer SuperDrive will set you back $2799 with a 2.33GHz 4MB cache Intel Core2Duo CPU. For $1599, or $1200 difference in price, you can bag a HP 17" notebook with 256MB video memory (1680x1050 max res), 2GB RAM, 160GB hard drive and an 8x Double Layer drive, and a Core2Duo 2.0Ghz, 4MB cache CPU (which is the fastest they offer in that series). So maybe .33Ghz of speed (about 330 Mhz) is worth another $1200 to you, but to most customers, it isn't. In fact, we can jack the HP up to twice the video memory (512MB), drop in a High Definition burner, and up the hard drive to 320GB, and still be out the door for $2473, or $326 cheaper.. and that's with twice the video ram, a HD burner, and twice the hard drive size. Now let's compare the lowest priced Macintosh Apple offers.. the Mini. At $599 you get a 1.66Ghz Core Duo CPU, 512MB RAM, 64MB GMA 950 graphics, 60GB Hard Drive, and a 24x DVD-ROM/CD/rw drive.. no monitor, no keyboard, and no mouse. Closest I can get to that on HP's site is a 1.86 Core Duo CPU, 1GB RAM, 64MB GMA 950 graphics, 160GB Hard Drive, and a 48x max. CD-RW/DVD-ROM combo drive (48x32x16x48x) for $579. Cheeseball keyboard and mouse included. So for $20 LESS money, you got a slightly faster CPU, twice the RAM, over twice the hard drive space, and a twice as fast CDRW drive, plus a keyboard and mouse. Now granted, it's not all packed in a cutesy little box.. but the average customer isn't nearly as interested in what kind of box the computer is stuffed in.. they want to get the most bang for their buck. Now if we beef up the MacMini to the HP machine specs, upgrading to the 1.86GHz CPU, 1GB RAM, 160GB Hard Drive we jack the price up to $1074! And we still have the slower CD/RW drive and no keyboard and mouse, and we're paying $495 more than the HP box.
  13. Well.. a 13" MacBook with a 1.83GHz cpu with 512MB RAM and a 60GB Hard drive and 64MB GMA950 video is $1099. A 2.0GB 13" MacBook with 1GB RAM and 80GB hard drive with 64MB GMA950 video will set you back $1299. Now for $1064.99 you can get a HP notebook with 14.1" screen, 1.83GHz Core 2 Duo CPU, 1GB RAM 160GB Hard drive and 256MB NVIDIA GeForce Go 7400. That's an inch bigger screen, twice the RAM, almost three times the hard drive space and three times the video memory.. for $35 less money. Add another $100 for a 2GHz Core2Duo CPU and you're at $1164, and you've got an inch bigger screen and twice the harddrive space and three times the video memory and saving $135.
  14. Macs are overpriced. That's where Apple makes it's money.. by selling garden variety PC hardware in a pretty box for a premium price. The profit for them is all in the hardware, so while licensing the OS to 'beige box' PC owners would increase the marketshare of OSX, it would pretty much kill their profits.. especially considering the support nightmare it would create, having to write an OS that'll run on just about anything you try to install it on. Apple tried licensing back in the Scully days.. it was killing their profit margin, because the people they licensed the technology to were building more powerful computers much cheaper.. in some cases, the clones were half the price of the competing Mac products. That's the way Apple has done things since the Apple II.. they make the money on the hardware.. and they can continue to command a higher price than similarly spec'ed PC's because they have the one thing you can't get on a similarly spec'ed PC: MacOS. That's why Apple will fight tooth and nail to prevent any large scale 'clone' or 'compatible' option. If you want to run MacOS, they want you to buy one of their computers because that's where they're making the money. Finally, you can bet that if Apple decided to license their OS to the likes of Dell, Compaq, Gateway, etc. that it wouldn't take but a minute for Microsoft to immediately quit making things like Office, Word, and Excel for MacOS.. much the way Microsoft quit making Internet Explorer for Mac when Apple started including Safari with their OS. Because selling the OS and Software is where Microsoft makes all it's money.
  15. GMA900 package from the Jas 10.4.7

    I used the JaS 10.4.7 Install on my intel board with GMA900 and man it slipped on there like butter, and everything worked right out of the gate.. but for some reason the disc wouldn't boot off my 16x DVDR drive, so I had to install using an older 24x Apple branded CD-ROM drive. There might be other distros that work as well.. but that JaS 10.4.7 Install DVD is like lightning in a bucket.. at least on my hardware, which is as dead on to the original Apple Developer Machine as you can get with 'off the shelf' parts.
×