Hey all, sorry for the RANT, (PC vs HacknTosh)

[retroz]

Aunt left me her house, passed away a few years ago, the "will" dissapeared (family has friends in law, courts, etc).

 

Presently, one large client, who I have tried over and over to get him to move (Director) is losing money, which I have him on retainer and it looks like that is about to end.

 

Stressed times.

 

My apologies if I offended. I was just wondering who, after using HacknTosh, bought a mac and prefers it over windows. That is all.

 

Peace.

[nagal]

Sorry for your troubles :pirate2:

 

If it helps any, my next computer will be a Mac, there is no way around it. I love my Hackintosh but I want a Mac

[Alessandro17]

I am also going to buy a Mac once I have enough of this Hackintosh (which is very good BTW).

I hope that in the meantime Apple understands that they must give you more for your money and that they can't charge twice the price for extras and upgrades.

Typical example: they give you the Mac Pro with 1GB RAM and a NVIDIA GeForce 7300.

 

For such a high end computer 4GB RAM and an ATI Radeon X1900XT are my minimum requirements, which I believe are quite reasonable.

Then I need 2 SuperDrives. Total cost of the upgrades: 1350 Eur, enough money to buy a Macbook.

[Forceman]

I am also going to buy a Mac once I have enough of this Hackintosh (which is very good BTW).

I hope that in the meantime Apple understands that they must give you more for your money and that they can't charge twice the price for extras and upgrades.

Typical example: they give you the Mac Pro with 1GB RAM and a NVIDIA GeForce 7300.

 

For such a high end computer 4GB RAM and an ATI Radeon X1900XT are my minimum requirements, which I believe are quite reasonable.

Then I need 2 SuperDrives. Total cost of the upgrades: 1350 Eur, enough money to buy a Macbook.

 

To be fair Apple hardware is designed well, you pay more for better nicer and smaller design. The cheap {censored} you get with a PC design is just horrendous.

[Alessandro17]

To be fair Apple hardware is designed well, you pay more for better nicer and smaller design. The cheap {censored} you get with a PC design is just horrendous.

 

But I don't buy PCs. I buy the best components I can afford and I build it myself.

[bwhsh8r]

thanks for saying sorry, good luck with thewill thing too.

[myzar]

To be fair Apple hardware is designed well, you pay more for better nicer and smaller design. The cheap {censored} you get with a PC design is just horrendous.

 

HuH so the only reason to get an apple x86 clone is a better looking case ?

[Hagar]

To be fair Apple hardware is designed well, you pay more for better nicer and smaller design. The cheap {censored} you get with a PC design is just horrendous.

 

 

Gotta say I disagree with this.. the "neater" design of apple's all-in-one products comes at a price (the use of less-durable laptop components, for example), and the design of pc cases & components is entirely up to how much money you want to spend. The salient point is that with commodity hardware, you get to choose. with a proprietary platform, it's "any colour as long as it's white"(ok sometimes black) and they decide for you.

 

once again, it's up to what you prefer, you can build down to the most bangs per buck, up to your ultimate spec, or opt for one of the pre-configured pc's like the ones apple sells.

[nagal]

To be fair Apple hardware is designed well, you pay more for better nicer and smaller design. The cheap {censored} you get with a PC design is just horrendous.

 

My main issue with this statement is that Apple is using a lot of the same hardware that is found in PCs. Same memory, same processors, same video cards, same hard drives. I am sure the SuperDrive is made by the a company that also makes CD/DVD Burners for PCs with no difference in them at all other cosmetic stuff. The motherboards used in Macs are once again made by the same company that makes motherboards for PCs. There is very little difference in the components. Yes, some PC are utter garbage no way around that but there are some incredible PC out there too and not just the custom built ones.

 

Now, IMO, no one makes a better looking case than the Mac Pro

[jgrimes80]

My main issue with this statement is that Apple is using a lot of the same hardware that is found in PCs. Same memory, same processors, same video cards, same hard drives. I am sure the SuperDrive is made by the a company that also makes CD/DVD Burners for PCs with no difference in them at all other cosmetic stuff. The motherboards used in Macs are once again made by the same company that makes motherboards for PCs. There is very little difference in the components. Yes, some PC are utter garbage no way around that but there are some incredible PC out there too and not just the custom built ones.

 

Now, IMO, no one makes a better looking case than the Mac Pro

 

keyword

 

There is a difference between a company who MAKES things and a company who SPECIFIES things. To conclude "if Bear Machining makes a part for me and a part for a competitor, then both parts are the same" is absolutely absurd.

 

Mine could be a triple lead Whitworth threaded 1020 rod and his could be a precision ground Grade 3 ACME threaded 400 series Stainless Steel shaft. Niether of which will behave the same way... both of which could be called "a threaded rod"

 

I'm not disagreeing with your point on Apple's stance in regards to aggressive margins, I'm simply saying you can't claim your dry standing in a pool.

 

The pricing situation in consumer electronics applies not only to Apple, but Dell, HP, and IBM... it's Factory versus Homebuilt. Assuming the absence of support, convenience of design, assembly, delivery, manuals, etc is of no monetary value of course......

 

 

EDITED: grammar and spelling errors

Edited February 15, 2007 by jgrimes80

[marliwahoo]

It will be much easier to keep a mac up to date. I have enjoyed my time making my hacintosh work right. I have spent many many hours getting it to work the way I want and keep up to date.

 

Software update may (or may not) break your machine. If you like to tinker with your computer and you enjoy a challange - don't get a mac. If you want it to be easy - spend a few extra bucks and get a mac. In the end it is about learning, time and money. A mac will be less time/effort and more money. This has been fun, but my next machine will be a mac.

[EPDM]

It will be much easier to keep a mac up to date. I have enjoyed my time making my hacintosh work right. I have spent many many hours getting it to work the way I want and keep up to date.

 

Software update may (or may not) break your machine. If you like to tinker with your computer and you enjoy a challange - don't get a mac. If you want it to be easy - spend a few extra bucks and get a mac. In the end it is about learning, time and money. A mac will be less time/effort and more money. This has been fun, but my next machine will be a mac.

 

If the system (OS) is build well then there shouldn't be a need to update so often. My RiscPC uses his RISC OS 4.39 ROMS since I inserted them years ago. I never was forced to upgrade to RISC OS 5 or the upcomming ROS 6 because paint-program X "required" this.

 

In the case of Apple many users kept using classic for ages after OSX had become forced upon them. They swithced when developpers enforced this upon them by bringing out OSX-only apps.

 

In the case of OSX it is the same. Why should it matter of Apparture (or Photoshop 3) runs on 10.4.1 or 1.4.8? It's all Tiger 10.4, isn't it? Why enforce ppl to "upgrade" to 10.4.8? Is it because (to the end user) this particular version is soooo much better? Or is it because Apple removed so much generic code from it so that that particular version is less likely to run as good as prior versions on non-apple PC's.

 

Who is fooling who?

 

In the case of Apple's supposedly well-build hardware. Did I imagine all that turmoil about their Macbook's? Did I imagine all that turmoil about their iPod nano's?

 

Besides I already posted why I wouldn't buy Apple H/W. No reason to explain all over again.

 

Cheers,

 

EPDM

[Ferret-Simpson]

I have to say it, I buy quite alot of hardware. My current portable is an iBook G3 700, my Desktop is a PowerMac Yikes! 400 and I just bought a Flatmate a G3 in conjunction with another flatmate.

 

Now, what's the thing you have to notice there? Yep, it's all old!

 

Apple hardware was flat out fantastic. I love it. Everything from the G3 Powertower to the G5 PowerMac and the G3 iBook. But recently, the hardware has been deteriorating as fast as the OS is improving.

 

G4 iBook: Cheap and nasty casing, unreliable batteries, although I'll give it that they're fast.

 

G5 + Intel iMac: UGLY in a piece of technology. The LCD G4 iMacs were a much nicer design.

 

MacBook: The ease of access is a big improvement, but they've kept the cheap looking G4 iBook shells, and the hardware has been proved ridiculously unreliable.

 

Macbook Pro: Wow! Finally you get a GRAPHICS chip! Something that £350 laptops have. How much are they? Woah, > £1500? OH MY GODS! And they're STILL unreliable.

 

Mac Pro: So it looks almost identical to a PowerMac G5. That's ok, except everything inside, that made it a mac, has been stripped out. What, a waste, of time.

 

Apple? Hello? Tell you what would be nice, stop using a crappy processor architecture. Bring back the fun that was in the macs; another Coloured series to match the old iMacs/iBooks and the new iPods would be nice. HappyMac. Resurrect him. Now. So much for your nice GUI that told you if your Mac worked or not, now we have a Microsoft-Rip-Off (Bad idea in itself) in the form of the Grey Screen Of Death. And for sods sake, can you stop using cheap plastic and bring back the days of the Magnesium Alloy iBook?

 

 

Beat THAT for a rant.

 

 

And to the next person who tells me that you pay for the design and "Mac" touches to the motherboard:

 

New macs are all Fnording REVOLTING.

Flashing "OpenFirmware" in place of the BIOS does not a new system make.

[Zulu.Walker]

Personally I don't buy hardware that's all looks. I've always dreamed of having Mac hardware because of all the hype of 64-bit and ease of use and Apple's great marketing campaign, but in the end, I am a power user and demand practicality. Macs are impractical for the most part of the world due to their exorbitant pricing schemes and recently, flaky hardware.

 

The PowerPC architecture is great on paper, but not in real-world situations. I agree on Apple's switch due to the fact that Apple needs to be competitive in terms of performance with their computing solutions. Core2 Duo as an ugly piece of technology? I don't agree. It's the best thing Intel has done with their desktop processors, finally being able to be neck-to-neck with AMD, even beating it in most cases, even stomping Quad-Core G5s. Apple said their 64-bit OS could provide a better and faster solution for audio/video professionals (which is my field), but in reality it was the PowerPC architecture that was holding them back. In comes the new architecture and their words now have truth, proving in 2d/3d applications that they are competitive with the common gray boxes the world has come to hate. And remember those developers? What architecture are most of them working on?

 

Choosing a cheap but stable platform that will provide the best performance for mainstream applications usually ends up with people choosing Windows, but now that Apple has become "less exclusive" hardware-wise and have leveraged this new architecture to take advantage of their great OS, Mac hardware has become a compelling option. A little reduction in their pricing will make help people sway easier to their products. As for me, I'd rather buy a Mac, but would settle for a PC. If only I could ask my bro to loan me some more money...

 

As long as my Hackintosh works, I'm keeping it. If Leopard can still be run on my current hardware, I'm keeping it. Until Apple proves otherwise that I will DIE if I do not run their hardware, I'm sticking to the best bang-for-buck.

 

After all, I have better ways of spending my money than with hardware that I'd only flaunt.

[non sequitur]

Macbook Pro: Wow! Finally you get a GRAPHICS chip! Something that £350 laptops have. How much are they? Woah, > £1500? OH MY GODS! And they're STILL unreliable.

 

Mac Pro: So it looks almost identical to a PowerMac G5. That's ok, except everything inside, that made it a mac, has been stripped out. What, a waste, of time....

 

Apple? Hello? Tell you what would be nice, stop using a crappy processor architecture. Bring back the fun that was in the macs; another Coloured series to match the old iMacs/iBooks and the new iPods would be nice.

well, i have to say that i disagree with you. i love my macbook pro, and i find it extremely reliable. never crashed on me once. external casing and everything is fine. i love the way it looks. and i can play games on it. does this make it not a mac, if i can decide to dual boot windows and os x>?

 

about the mac pro, how does everything being changed on the inside make it not a mac? if you haven't ever seen the insides of a mac pro, it looks plain amazing. everything is organized, the hard drive bays look spectacular, and it doesnt look like green silicon mixed with blue, yellow, and red wires. i think it makes it MORE of a mac.

 

which brings me to my next point. the PPC architecture was all good, but i dont think the fact that macs are now intel destroys the whole "macs are different" philosophy. it may make a psychological difference to you, but it really doesn't matter. unless you can actually tell a difference in how the processor is laid out. but i have to say that the colorful series were cool. however, a mac is still a mac.