OSNews

nice guide. I personally would like to own a mac but like most people like me they cant justify the price.

I'll eventually own one when i am better off as far as money.

My only gripe about osx is finder. If only i could replace it with gnome or KDE - i'd be in heaven

No, you don't need Gnome or KDE. What you need is Path Finder: http://www.cocoatech.com
That file manager rocks.
BTW, the new Finder for Panther, is pretty good too, worlds better than the previous Jaguar version.

Dell laptops and homebuilt desktops do me fine.

Please don't fall for the rumors - they are based on earlier speculation about a Mojave processor from IBM, based on the 750GX and incorporating a VMX implementation. However, no evidence to back up that this is what's in the iBook has been shown, and given that IBM has been putting larger L2 caches on the G3 line, I'd say it's almost certain this is a 7445.

I sincerely doubt Apple would call anything without VMX a G4; that's pretty much its defining characteristic. Instead we have a bunch of paranoid people getting their shorts in a knot because Apple chose not to advertise AltiVec here. Well, it actually makes sense - Apple needs to differentiate the iBook and the 12" PowerBook, and not advertising it as a speed machine too much can help.

Please, don't engage in FUD though without due evidence. If Apple says it's a G4, then it's a G4 until solid proof is delivered to the contrary.

look very nice...

No, I don't really want to own Mac. PC-hardware still envolves faster, has much better price/performance level and more choices. I'm a programmer, UNIX/Linux-pretty-fanatic-pro, and I'm pretty annoyed of "OS X" way of doing things - Somehow just disgusting that operating system assumes me to be stupid and retarded who doesn't know anything. Of course it's BSD at heart, but with screwed up fhs. Linux on x86 hardware gives most flexibility, choices and freedom... Of course those Powerbooks look extremy pretty But iBooks look like a cheap blastic toys...

and of course, a dual Opteron too.

And yes, why not? I want a dual G5 Power mac.

These babies could give a real boost in my home network (and a big burst in my account).

Well, serious, I don't think that apple prices are unfair (at least in USA) and no, don't try to compare apples with bananas (Dell). ( Ok, just kidding, no flame war ;-) )

Sure seems like one. I keep on thinking that Eugenia is making fun of those that have fallen influence to the Steve Jobs' reality distortion field. Either that or some kind of hybrid review/advertisement. Strange stuff in any case.

IBM Thinkpads work best for me.

From the looks of this campaign Apple sales are sliding again.

No, it is not a joke, NEITHER is an advertisement. It is an article that I felt like writing tonight, because Star Trek: Enterprise was airing a re-run, so I thought I should write something.
I truly believe that Apple now has more competitive prices, and people who were "closer" to purchase a Mac but they didn't decide it at the end, they might want to reconsider, because Panther is a GOOD OS.

The one reason that I think that most laptops suck is because they don't have the pointer-thingie(nipple) that only Thinkpads and I believe some dell laptops have. Since I can type properly I look at touchpads as absolute ergonomic brain damage.

... to SWITCH.

I've had the opportunity to use the iBook for almost a year now, and even though I've always been a PC user, when the G5 came out... I couldn't keep myself from bying it.
And yes it was expensive, but I know it will be worth it (I haven't recieved it yet.
I think Mac OS X is the best OS ever - perfect balance between the *nix environment and the simplicity (?) with Windows.

i've told my sister to not buy a mac because there is no compelling reason to do so.

last night, after seeing the ibook updated to a g4, i told her, if she wants to get a mac, get the ibook. not too expensive, and more than enough for what she plans to do. i do wish she'd get one, then i can play around with it, password-protect it, and hand her my thinkpad t30 =D

"The one reason that I think that most laptops suck is because they don't have the pointer-thingie(nipple) that only Thinkpads and I believe some dell laptops have. Since I can type properly I look at touchpads as absolute ergonomic brain damage."

I can touch-type, too. So what? What on earth does that have to do with the ergonomics of touchpads? They are certainly less obtrusive to typists than the trackpoint situated smack in the middle of the keyboard.

I think one of the things not mentioned about the iBooks is that up to now they seem to run more coolly than the 12" PBs; probably due to not having the casing operate as a heatsink. I wonder if having a G4 implanted will up the temperature somewhat.

Nice story. I switched this past July and I'm very happy with my PowerBook and OS X. The PB is wonderful to look at and a lot of fun to use. As long as Apple keeps making great hardware and the best OS I have ever used, I'll stay with them.

I'm really looking forward to Panther which should come this friday.

Oh, just go back to your hole and leave us alone. I am not a promoter for Apple, I have nothing to do with them. The part you don't understand is that for many years here at OSNews people are trolling to each other on how the Apple prices are high. Today, Apple prices are better than any other time, and that is something to celebrate, because I have eaten the trolling in the face all these years as part of OSNews. In fact, I am one of these people who still claim that some Apple products are stupidly expensive (e.g. the G5), but there are other products that ARE reasonable priced, and hence my article with the opportunity of the iBook and eMac new releases.

Do you get it now, or do I have to spell it to you in Russian?

I am personally thinking of buying the Dual G4 Powermac, I believe that it is a great value for the money/performance, and I wanted to make people who want to run Mac OS X more aware of intelligent purchases they can do without shaving money for expensive stuff like the G5 or the Powerbooks. I wanted to explain to people that you can purchase capable hardware with less moeny.
That doesn't make the article an advertisement, no one is paying anyone here. In fact, I am the one who will have to shove off $1600 to Apple to buy that PowerMac, not the other way around.

>Why spend top dollar on a Mac when you can get an open better Linux machine for less money?

Because Mac OS X offers a FAR better desktop experience than Linux and it does more, better (home video editing, elegant iApps, Watson/Sherlock apps, iTunes and the list goes on and on and on). Oh, and it "just works", I don't have to get pissed off with the system every 20 minutes about things.

So, get off your high horse, for now. Linux is coming along, but it is not offering the same quality desktop experience as OSX --or even Windows-- does.

An info taken from Theo de Raadt website :

" P5/120 PCI 32MB, 2GB:
OpenBSD/i386. Adaptec 2940 PCI SCSI controller, DEC-chip ethernet, ATAPI CDROM, and nothing else really worthwhile talking about. My main test machine. "

The first time I read the above specs, I was surprised. Then I realized that all the sysadmins and techies that I know don't spend a lot of money on computers, especially new and fancy ones.
I wanted to own a Mac years ago but couldn't, due to high prices. Now that they are affordable, that desire has disappeared, replaced with reality : most of my computing needs are satisfied by an old Pentium II (450 MHZ, 256 MB of RAM, 10 GB hard disk, Mandrake 9.0).
It's too bad for Apple they're just realising people buy computers in order to use them, not to put them in vaults and take them out (once in a while) to display them to amazed visitors.

The open choice is Linux on a Mac.
A dual boot is the sweetest option you can get:
www.yellowdoglinux.com -- an authorized reseller of apple hardware,
i.e. your warrenty is still valid.

This is the best of all worlds.
Mac iApps plus OS X Panther, Linux on a PowerPC, and VirtualPC for windows apps unavailable on either Linux or Apple.

Check out sony tr2. Small, fast, bright and long battery life. It's more laptopy that any other laptop on the market

First of all,

<<Rich Mac culties might want to realize not everyone lives in the USA, can buy one iBook instead of two x86 machines, and happily spends billions to blow up other countries and then billions more to fix them.>>

Is it just me or are those two sentences not connected?

By the way, one good thing about OS X is that it has ZERO viruses! And it has been around since March 01'

XP on the other hand, maybe 30,000?

You got the price thing right Eugenia. BUT I paid for 10.3 today - academic version - and the New Zealand price has dropped about 20% over what I was quoted last week. This is good. Now about $120 USD. Regarding h/w pricing in New Zealand, here is the low-down...

PowerBook 12" 800MHz...all prices in New Zealand dollars.....
$3400 bought in NZ
$3140 Australia
$2765 Hong Kong
$2652 USA

Yup, I could fly to the US and get one for the price difference. What a rip-off!

If anyone wants to bring me a PowerBook from the USA to New Zealand, I would be happy to accomodate them near Wellington for a few nights in return.

Won't Apple US ship overseas?

Whoops. That was supposed to be 1GHz, not 800MHz. Sorry!

Summary: G4 iBook good for its price, great notebook for satchels and backpacks. Would probably settle for a centrino laptop if buying bigger screen real estate (less travel).

The release of the 12" G4 iBook signals one thing very clearly, the 14" XGA (1024x768) notebook is dead.

With an altivec enabled consumer machine, Apple now competes with wintel notebooks in the above form factor still marketed with, typically low end, Celeron, P4 and P4-M machines. The P-M will soon triumph over its x86 rivals due to power consumption.

That form factor will only continue to sell as long as the Office users buy them. The future is going to be Pentium-M (Dothan) machines with centrino wireless. Why lug around the LCD technology of your last business laptop when 1400x1050 15" machines are competitively priced? Otherwise 14" is too big.

In my mind, there are 2 main markets left. Small and Large.

XGA <= 12" The powerbook, iBook, IBM X Series and panasonic toughbook (durable magnesium).

'til now the altivec has been something of an issue with OSX and iBooks; no longer. The IBM model has a crummy video card, but the option of a really light notebook 1.6kg vs. 2.2kg has some appeal. Does everyone need the option of watching DVDs and burning CDs in an Apple notebook? I'd be content with a lighter machine with which I could install CD based software over a network. Surely this is possible with Open Firmware?

Overall, the G4 iBook wins on price, and the fact intel haven't yet released linux drivers for the centrino chipset. Though quiz Apple on how much more the 12" Powerbook costs to manufacture now that the iBook has a superceded G4 CPU and uses the same DDR (PC2100 SO-DIMM, I believe).

Idle G5 speculation: By Christmas 2004 IBM will have a mobile G5 on a smaller die. This 64-bit chip will differentiate the 12" powerbook from the iBook. Not bad news for consumers, as around the same time a "G4" from IBM will be released the infamous Mojave 750VX, which will still be competitive at the low end of the market - good battery life, 1MB cache, IBM's altivec impl (hopefully more finely tuned than the current G5, which is rumoured to be worse the motorola's altivec).


15" 1400x1050+ higher on some machines

Apple is competitive for its operating system. As a cross platform Java developer, I'd probably buy a centrino with more pixels. And wait 6 months 'til Intel supports Linux.

Sure, I don't know what I'm missing out with having not owned an OSX machine, but I can get a bigger LCD for nearly $AUS1000 less than the 15" AlBook. The overall quality of an Apple laptop is almost certainly higher. But for less I can get more pixels. Quantity of pixels vs widescreen Quality.

Goldstein, what happend to you?
I have read your posts in the past and had some respect for your opinions. But now? This post puts you in the nutter catagory.

Someone who reads OSNews ought to be interested in actually learning about other OS's.

I've compared prices here in the UK and I find that mac notebooks are no more expensive than the XP machines.

The thing that happens all the time is that people only compare processor speed and memory. But ibooks and powerbooks are also really good on the form factor. The 12'', the cheapest are really light and in the x86 world, that's something that costs a lot. plus, they've always had a very favorable battery life.

So I'll get one for the house really soon, once the offering is a bit stabilised.

I think they have agreements with their suppliers. In NZ there is a one-company monopoly on importing them and you must toe the line! If not, they get rid of you (and apparently did so recently with one parallel importer).

I take it you like Macs.

You can't please everyone, Eugenia. Some are just sour.

I'm going to get the e-mac for my dad. It'll be his first computer. As good as KDE has gotten, I just don't see it for him. (Honestly, it's going to be an effort to teach him to use the mac!)

The G4s towers have become very tempting price-wise, especially if you shop around for a factory refurb or open box. However, a year ago, I upgraded the cpu on my 3 year old G4 400, making it an 800. Perhaps I'll upgrade the videocard with http://eshop.macsales.com/Item_MailList.cfm?ID=5753&Item=APL661NV4M... (OWC, $75), when I buy Panther. That should keep it going for another 3 years.

Of course, what I really want is to replace my main computer, my TiBook, with the 17" powerbook. But this is just "rich mac cultie" lust. The Ti has served me well over the past year, and I suspect it will serve me for another three or foour years.

I guess that's my point. These Apple computers last, in my experience.

You Linux fanboys crack me up! Reality check time, No single OS is the right OS for every one. When will you people start to realize that fact?

I tried Linux RH 8 and 9, Debian and Lycoris. Linux was fun for awhile but that fun wore off. I got tried of things not working. I got tried of editing config files. I got tried of the endless security updates with RH. In my time with RH there were four kernel updates and countless other security updates.

I also tried FreeBSD and while I like it better than Linux, it still takes more effort to get a fully working desktop than I'm willing to put in.

I wanted a fully functional desktop but also have the power of unix and OS X gives me that.

> I take it you like Macs.

Don't we all wish to some degree that we were running OSX instead of dual booting windows and Linux(*BSD)?

The point of the article is whether their hardware/price ratio is compelling. If buying a portable I would consider a maxed out iBook and weigh, literally concerns over size in buying a 15" centrino. Particularly if as a developer I installed a free unix on said machine, seldom booting into Windows.

1) They're more expensive. There is no doubt about it. The G5 is fairly competitive for a 64-bit system, but then again, I'm not planning to buy an Athlon64 machine until I can buy a motherboard + CPU combo on pricewatch.com for $300. Computers are commodity items for me. I don't keep one around for more than a couple of years. Because of that, I don't need a fancy case, super advanced cooling system, features I'll never use (GigE, PCI-X, etc). I just need the highest gigaflops/dollars ratio. If you're careful about the PC hardware you buy, you can get away with paying very cheap prices without giving up any quality. I've been buying name-brand, but cheap hardware for years and I've only run into problems a few times. Meanwhile, the only Apple product I've owned (my iPod, which I love dearly) has already needed replacement.

2) I don't like OS X. They got rid of a lot of the well-tested usability features they had in OS9, and replaced it with eye candy. For god's sake, tabs look like buttons in Panther! OS X isn't fast. It feels very solid, because of features like double buffering, etc, but its not fast in the way BeOS (or even Win2K on modern hardware) was fast. Also, the kernel design is so baroque, that it leaves me with a dirty feeling. Lastly, there is a kind of schism between the GUI and UNIX (painfully reflected in the filesystem layout with the duality between names like /bin and /lib and /Library, etc) that you don't have in BeOS or Linux.

I really have nothing against Macs on principle. I think they're fine machines, and very appropriate for when you want to get work done, or need a very well-built machine (say a laptop). But Apple is never going to attract commodity PC buyers until they swallow their pride and sell commodity hardware.

I think Eugenia is wrong when she say "Bad points: ... no CPU cache.".
The Apple site state very clearly:
"# 1GHz PowerPC G4 processor with Velocity Engine
# 256K on-chip level 2 cache at full processor speed"

I'm writing here from an iMac, and fail to understand this quality desktop experience about Macs that everyone has been brainwashed into believing. It's pretty. That's all I will give it. But the experience is not entirely different from any other desktop experience I've used and definately not better. Macs overhyped, overpriced and overly restrictive. If you are a multimedia proffesional this definately is your platform of choice. If you are a home user, get KDE/GNOME/Linux. You are definately not missing out on anything.

Oh, and whoever said fonts on linux are ugly should try using a Mac. My GNOME fonts make Mac fonts look like they were created from a chicken scratching the ground. Maybe it's the LCD, maybe not, but these fonts are horrible and little. Oh, and is there a tool I can install that will give me workspaces (ala GNOME)?

My GNOME desktop provides me with a far better experience (this an opinion statement). Better fonts, workspace or what some people call virtual desktops, a media player that can play all media formats known to man( no quicktime can't), an array of great apps, some of which I can't find on Mac (can some tell me a good Jabber client for the Mac), flexibility. And believe it or not, I find GNOME easier to use than Mac. I would definately not purchase the Mac if I had money.

Why you should buy a Mac in order of importance?

1). You are a multimedia professional( Macs are good for video editing and image manipulation)

2). You have been a long time OS enthusiast with a keen interest in apple.

3). The Mac keyboard feels like you are in heaven. (The mouse absolutely sucks!)

4). You want an alternative to Windows, and you just hate Linux/*BSD.

Mac Myths
1) It is cheaper given their attention to quality hardware and aesthetic.

2) It is easy to use.

3) It has a flat learning curve.

4) The Mac desktop experience is better than Linux Multitude Desktop experiences or Windows.

5) It interacts nicely with Windows products.

That said, all these 'quality desktop environment mantra' about Mac is bull shit. I know ten people who would tell you that no desktop experience equals that of Windows. Desktop experience is absolutely subjective. And the Mac Desktop env isn't clearly not the best I've used, though it's much better than Windows. The Mac doesn't look like a home user platform to me.

It's unfortunate that what I regard as the best desktop environment is might be daunting to install for the average home user.

Hah, okay...someone mentioned IBM Thinkpads. I //love// Thinkpads, the only PC laptop I'd own. (in fact, I do - an aging Thinkpad 600 running Slackware) I like having three buttons (Linux use) and prefer the little nub to a trackpad. But that aside, the iBook is //much// more solid then it looks, the thing is very tough and "feels" more solid then any PC laptop I know of. I like. Ooh, and battery life. :-)

I don't think Apple's market share has dropped much, the growth has slowed in the recent past, but most likely not dropped. All the Mac users I've known for years remain Mac users, there are entire segments of the market - like graphic design - thats not going to switch to Linux anytime soon. As much as I like the Gimp, Photoshop is it - and theres no open source replacement for Quark or In Design yet thats even worth mentioning. Don't like Macs? Don't read magazines, or listen to music (most of the groups I listen to tend to be Mac fans, music created on Macs, etc - Trent Reznor of NIN fame used a Mac Plus on the making of "Pretty Little Hate Machine", and that was in the late 80s!), or watch t.v. - Final Cut Pro now dominates, doesn't it? Rich culties indeed. Name any sort of app as powerful as FCP in Apple's price range with its capabilities. Considering how Macs dominater with the printing press industry, stop reading books too. While your at it, throw away any media you have - its like tainted by Macs. :-P

I tend to agree on the monoculture bit, but no one screamed at BeOS users about monoculture, or Amiga users, etc. I've never understood the anti-mac sentiment thats long existed, its wacky. Irrational even. Of all closed platforms I like Apple, their //much// more open then MS will ever be. Mac OS X can be slower then other platforms, but its not due to the underpinnings - Quartz is heavy, but newer Macs and plenty of RAM help tremendously. Apple intends OS X to last another two decades, at the time of 10.0 the hardware hadn't yet caught up to the capabilities of the O.S. - now it has. The G5 is *the* platform to run OS X on, look at those XBench scores - the things snappy and very responsive. Bandwidth helps.

So yeah, I like Apple - their one of my three favorite computer companies (the other two are Sun and SGI), not too many others innovate like they do. Color me a cultie. :-) And leave the politics out, okay?

Again, I find myself in awe. Am I seriously the only person reading this that runs windows, Linux and Macintosh? I tried, oh how I tried, to run linux as a desktop, and it still blows. BSD/Linux make kick ass servers, but I simply lack the patience to deal with LotD. Many of the drivers either suck, or need some serious work - to wit, video drivers.

Windows is the de-facto OS, so having it around is helpful for many things, though with VPC, I use the windows machines in my house less and less. It is noce to be able to buy whatever you want off the shelf and know that you can slap it in your x86 box. However, Windows is insecure, malware and virus laden, and overall not worth much except to game on IMO. Out of any system I run, my windows boxen take the most effort to keep alive. Period.

Mac OSX is an absolutely excellent desktop with BSD "underpinnings" and a somewhat screwy unix-like filesystem. It is however, more or less unix. Add to that projects like Fink, and it really makes a lot of sense to use Macs if you are in a unix environment. They tend to cost a lot in the US, and even more in other countries. You look like a dork whipping out your iBook at a coffee shop, but so does anyone who uses a laptop in a coffee shop -- macs just accentuate the fact. You have a very limited selection of hardware.

FWIW, I currently run win2k, winXP, Debian, and OSX.

I'll buy a mac when the os is released to i386 hardware, like it should have been a billion years ago.

Bad points: Not enough RAM in the cheaper model and also s-l-o-w RAM, expandability only through USB 1.1 or Firewire 400, no CPU cache.

1) There is CPU Cache; 256K L2 Cache ( Look inside the system profiler )
2) Most people don't need fast memory. I certainly don't notice any difference between running Eclipse on a P4 with the fastest memory and an eMac running using just the standard 133Mhz. Massive bandwidth is of only give any benefits either when playing games, which I don't, or editing videos, which I don't do either.

It would kill Apple, their primarily a hardware company. Besides, I like PPC. :-)

hehe i relly like the ppc platform and im switching most of
my computers to ppc hardware. i do have phanter installed but mostly to mess around but mostly i boot in to my gentoo enviroment, i must say that linux on ppc is relly nice.

and ordered the new G4 laptop, (12") it's exactly what i wanted in a mac and the price! woot..

5) I can't run any of my software
[...]
If I want my next system to be something other than a PC, I'd consider an AmigaOS or RISC OS system long before a Mac.

I'd be fascineted to know what software you have that runs on AmigaOS and/or RiscOS and _not_ OS X.

1. Games. I'm not into games like I used to. This the biggest reason why people still stay on the Windows Platform and why the Linux desktop user base isn't taking off.

2. Higher quality. I have had 7+ more PCs, 1 Amiga and 1 Mac. All but one of the PCs (the Tandy) have failed me. They are more trouble than they are worth. The Amiga power supply died of a power surge and was sold long ago. I sold the iBook because I want a more powerful one (Power Mac G5).

3. Better stuff. The first time I saw the iSight with my own to eyes my jaw dropped on the floor. The Windows side still has nothing on this thing.

My next PC will be an IBM compatible (Power Mac G5)

Why settle for an Honda Civic when you can get a BMW for a couple of $$$ more? I guess some people don't value quality. I do.

> My only gripe about osx is finder. If only i could replace it with gnome or KDE - i'd be in heaven
IMO, Finder is MUCH better than Konqueror or GMC
>PC-hardware still envolves faster, has much better price/performance level and more choices.
There is a big difference between Evolution and Speed Increase. Did you take Reliability and Longevity into consideration in your price comparison?
>But iBooks look like a cheap blastic toys...
Polycarbonate is what they make Bullet-Proof glass out of.
>Steve Jobs' reality distortion field.
Reality is a subjectiove thing anyway.

I'm ecstatic with the iBook I bought last year, it's just been Superceded, but after 12 months, is that really surprising.
Wouldn't it be nice to hook your Bluetooth Mobile Phone to your GNU/Linux Box, or not even have to reinstall printer drivers when you plug your USB printer into a different USB Port. or are you still only using Landlines ro call people, and have an old Serial Line Printer.

An info taken from Theo de Raadt website :

" P5/120 PCI 32MB, 2GB:
OpenBSD/i386. Adaptec 2940 PCI SCSI controller, DEC-chip ethernet, ATAPI CDROM, and nothing else really worthwhile talking about. My main test machine. "

The first time I read the above specs, I was surprised. Then I realized that all the sysadmins and techies that I know don't spend a lot of money on computers, especially new and fancy ones.
I wanted to own a Mac years ago but couldn't, due to high prices. Now that they are affordable, that desire has disappeared, replaced with reality : most of my computing needs are satisfied by an old Pentium II (450 MHZ, 256 MB of RAM, 10 GB hard disk, Mandrake 9.0).
It's too bad for Apple they're just realising people buy computers in order to use them, not to put them in vaults and take them out (once in a while) to display them to amazed visitors.

Well, for me the only reason to move from a PIII 550Mhz to an eMac with a 1Ghz PowerPC G4 was because it took ages for large projects to compile, apart from that I really don't need anything more powerful than what I have now.

As for Linus, it wasn't until recently when he was given a computer when his main work horse for development was not a particularly power machine.

People who develop and complete real work put system speed down the list right next to tail fins for the case and whether they can squeeze and extra 0.0000000000000000000000001fps by tweaking the BIOS.

I develop using Java and I certainly don't feel the need to spend the amount of money and time required to assemble a decent FreeBSD Workstation with Java setup and working with Netbeans.

I see alot of posts with the question of why one should buy a Mac and get MacOsX when you can buy a PC and run Linux. I have been a PC-person all of my life but a year ago I bought a Mac and the reason for this is the wonderful development environment.

I have always had a fascination with the NeXT development plattform, it seemed so much better than every other available and now that this plattform is available for a much more affordable price (compared to NeXT-workstations).

Cocoa is a really great API which has no real comparison on other unixes or windows. Other unixes have KDE which is quite great also but the problem with this is that is just one of maaany available, so even if you are running <preferred unix> with KDE your system if probably infected by gnome, xforms, tcl/tk applications as well.

I know, choosing your desktop system depending on how its development environment looks may seem a bit dumb for must users, but I do believe it isn't, the development environment very much decides the quality of the software created for the system.

(as a sidenote, I would really like to see an operating system built around KDE and only KDE, done right, this could perhaps begin to compete with windows and macosx)

People like DAIMONI really bugs my ass off.
"oOO, im a unix pro, therefore apple sucks.. apple is too damn easy for me!"

Windows is a lame alt. to OS X
Linux has too much child-diseases.
Unix is expensive, and its not a product that fits for the consumer.

So, OS X runs them over, twice.
A great core, with lots of oportunities. And a sleak nice GUI wraps it all in the best way.

There are too many freaks in here that are fucked up by the mhz-race. Get over it. Its proven that less is often MORE.

I've thought about getting a mac for home - in fact, I've pondered deeply about it.

When you consider what you get for the money, it all sounds great, but then you think - hmmm, for $1000, what kind of PC could I buy ?

The answer is of course a very powerful one that would in most cases be faster than the mac.

Then of course I have to remember what I use my home computer for and for the most part, it's gaming, 3d editing and watching movies/listening to music.

The mac can do all of these things, but gaming is not quite up there with PC simply because not all game dev companies make mac ports of thier games.

For now, if I feel the urge to 'mac' about, I can just use one of the imacs at work.

I have money invested in applications I use. Some of these applications can be run on the Mac without a problem. However, what about the software that can't? My concern is the software cost. Switching platforms, you shouldn't just compare the cost of the hardware...maybe someone should provide an article clearly defining what Windows, and for myself, Linux users have, and what the Mac platform provides for them.

I for one think this would benefit a switcher more than hardware specs about cache (though, that's important to some people).

I'd love to switch, honestly. I like OSX, but until more companies start releasing Mac versions of games i'm being held in M$-ville.

:(

Good article.

I can't belive that Apple would be SO stupid as to market something other than a AltiVec enabled processor as a G4. The amount of bad publicty such a move would generate.......it dosn't bear thinking about.

Yeah, yeah. Macs are slow. Macs are expensive. Apple should run on Intel. Apple should port OS X to Intel. Its not going to happen folks. Get over it.

I own an iBook G3 700mhz. Its slow. But it does everything I want. Except for video editing. Its painfully slow there. I develop on it. I run Tomcat on it. I run Apache. I run PHP. I run PostgreSQL. I run X Windows. In fact I have only two complaints about this platform. One, Apple doesn't support Ogg Vorbis in iTunes or on the iPod. And two, Open Office doesn't run natively on OS X.

I'm a Systems Administrator. I oversee about 10 Linux servers. I run Linux on my desktop at work. I love Linux. But OS X is just easier to use. Easier to configure. Easier to connect to networks. I just wish there was more open source native OS X software. I have a problem with all this $5 and $10 shareware that is so pervasive. It reminds me of the Windows world.

I'll never run anything thats Windows. It is the biggest piece of crap I've ever seen. Too many problems. Too many viruses.

I always have built my own computers at home. But I'm tired of that. I want something totally integrated between the hardware and software. Thats why I'm getting a dual G5 next spring. Yes, Apples are expensive. But look on Ebay at how much used ones are going for. In the long run, they really aren't any more than a PC. Try selling a 2 year old PC on Ebay. Its like comparing a Chevrolet with a Honda. The Honda is more expensive initially, but which car will hold its value better in 5 years.

> Dell laptops and homebuilt desktops do me fine.

Before you invest in Dell, you'd better read this:

http://www.newsforge.com/business/03/10/20/194207.shtml?tid=85

A cynic is someone who knows the price of everything and the VALUE of nothing

The entry level eMac costs 799$? Really? In some better world perhaps...
Here it should cost a little over 3000 in local currency, but it costs, surprise!, a little over 6000. That's right, two times more! And no customs exist by which you can explain this. It's all thanks to apple.pl
So, no thanks, I can have a MUCH more powerfull pc, with which I can do significantly more for half of that price (the price that the eMac should cost...)

As long as Apple won't get this it will not exist on the markets outside of the US. It never had also...

of ourse I can have a machine that can do same thing as eMac for 1/3 of it's price - and in a country where average monthly salary is significantly below that 1/3.
As I said, Apple is nonexistent.

To all you people who say macs are too expensive.

You can't run your wintel games?? Simple solution don't sell your wintel. I am planning on buying a powerbook, for power, size, battery life, and looks. I own a p4 2 ghz running windows. my computer before that is an athlon 550 running suse 8.2 I am only going to try and sell my Dec Alpha. Simple solution to all you money whiners don't sell, just take it one step at a time. I am not rich. I just barely get by living one month at a time. But I can afforad a mac, I am not a student so I don't get discounts.

Many of you have missed the point of Eugenia's article. Whether you like Macs/Apple or not, what she was trying to demonstrate is that Apple has now achieved a goal it was woefully short on - the price /performance of the Mac consumer models (plus the good deal on the G4 tower you can still get). To me, this is a story because it has been such a point of contention. She was not comparing Macs to PC's, she was commenting on Apple.

Many of you are too young to think about another thing - families. Most people who buy Mac consumer models are not OS fanatics like us. They are families with children. More than even people like us, buying a home computer is a big investment. If you want to have video cameras and digital cameras so you can preserve vacation memories and special occasions, you can't beat the Mac with the software in the box. That is a big selling point just in itself. And, if you join .Mac, any newbie can make a slideshow website on .Mac and share these things with other family and friends scattered around the country or world. And, because they come with AppleWorks and bundles like World Book, a family may not have to ever buy a single software program as all their needs are being met. When a family is trying to decide what kind of home computer to get, these are the important things. And, if it costs a little more, it may be worth it to them so they can easily do these types of things. Unfortunately, the public is not well informed of this type of thing either. All they know is "everyone" uses Windows and are terrified at the idea of using something else. It's too bad as choice and being informed is good.

No, I don't play games at all.

But I think I have to eat, buy new clothes sometimes or pay for appartment etc.
Nice to see that you apparently don't have to and can spend all your money on 3 times overpriced computer...

Well, right now I'm seriously thinking of selling my x86 machine-- In order to buy me a nice Mac. But I'm still trying to find out whether I can get enough EE for my little machine... Do hope so

Me wants a mac!

Well, I'd say that the point of the article is valid ONLY in the US. Here MAcs have unacceptable price/performance ratio.
I guess that Eugenia have left Greece far too long time ago...

And about second acapit of your post, Jay, that doesn't apply here - because in those 6000zl (or 1600$) for entry level eMac is basically MacOS X PL only. If you want programs for video edition, you have to buy it separately (luckily in that case price is very reasonable, but still...and anyway pc is much cheaper anyway; not to mention that most people have unlicensed copies of...everything.
Sad reality, but true - not only prices of Macs aren't adjusted to fit peoples salaries)

zima, that is unfortunate, it really is.

zima (IP: ---.rawicz.sdi.tpnet.pl) - Posted on 2003-10-23 12:19:57
The entry level eMac costs 799$? Really? In some better world perhaps... Here it should cost a little over 3000 in local currency, but it costs, surprise!, a little over 6000. That's right, two times more! And no customs exist by which you can explain this. It's all thanks to apple.pl
So, no thanks, I can have a MUCH more powerfull pc, with which I can do significantly more for half of that price (the price that the eMac should cost...)

Why should Apple try and work around your countries tariffs and protectionism. For an Apple eMac in Australia, low end, the price has dropped by $500 to $1349. IMHO, that is VERY cheap for a quality name brand computer.

Anonymous (IP: ---.147.119-193.newsouth.net) - Posted on 2003-10-23 12:02:58
> Dell laptops and homebuilt desktops do me fine.

Before you invest in Dell, you'd better read this:

http://www.newsforge.com/business/03/10/20/194207.shtml?tid=85

The sadest part is the fact that if you look at IBM's pricing for their ThinkCentre PC range, one questions why one would purchase from Dell especially with all the problems regarding technical support.

Microsoft is worse, imagine ringing up for an activation code just to end up with a person with an American accent who doesn't understand a person with a New Zealand accent? imagine then demanding to be put through to someone who can understand; Australian, Brit, someone who can understand English.

I am not surprised at the support or there lack of.

I don't think it is fair to say that we never see "advertisements" like this for, say, Dell machines. Whether you buy a Dell, another brand of x86 or build up your own is basically irrelevant - it's just a platform on which to run your favourite OS. But if you want to run OSX you HAVE to invest in Apple hardware (unless someone seriously starts to work on BasiliskII heheh) so this article was relevant to discussion of OS's.

It hasn't convinced me to switch (you really don't want to know what those things cost in South Africa, trust me), but lay off Eugenia, this time she's on target.

good post. I have to agree with Eugenia the price/performance ratio of apple's products is looking better. Just as importantly, the absolute prices of the products are also looking better (they are lower).

The improvement will bring more people into the apple world but its not going to open up the flood gates, which is obvious from the reaction of pc/linux fans here.

I encourage the PC crowd to observe the trends here. Apple is making itself more accessible and has been doing that for a while. They still can't go out and buy commodity garbage like you'd get for $350-450 in the pc world but i suspet they will continue to lower absolute prices and improve price vs performance ratio.

The pc fan boys are missing the big picture as usual. Apple is becomming more competitive and they are taking steps (slowly) to increase market share. MACs WILL get cheaper and cheaper.

and on another note. I suspect we've seen the true cause of hostility towards apple. Apple's pricing makes them like the attractive person that everyone lusts for but can't or won't date. Hence the bitterness.

Well, I'd say that the point of the article is valid ONLY in the US. Here MAcs have unacceptable price/performance ratio. I guess that Eugenia have left Greece far too long time ago...

And about second acapit of your post, Jay, that doesn't apply here - because in those 6000zl (or 1600$) for entry level eMac is basically MacOS X PL only. If you want programs for video edition, you have to buy it separately (luckily in that case price is very reasonable, but still...and anyway pc is much cheaper anyway; not to mention that most people have unlicensed copies of...everything. Sad reality, but true - not only prices of Macs aren't adjusted to fit peoples salaries)

I've just had a look at the apple.com.pl, that has to be the worst website I have ever seen, heck, Apple has put effort into their Russian, even, if their Ukrainien one is in a better state. So I can understand from what side. However with that being said, why should they adjust their prices and make a loss just so that the prices reflect the percapita income of Poland?

"t's too bad for Apple they're just realising people buy computers in order to use them, not to put them in vaults and take them out (once in a while) to display them to amazed visitors."

With bazzar statements like that, Apple must be doing something right.

Anyone know if Apple has improved the LCD quality on the latest iBooks ? The ones I've seen in the past weren't all that great - dim and washed-out looking. I believe Eugenia even mentioned this was the case on the 12" Powerbook she reviewed some time ago.

I might be willing to live with some of the limitations of the iBook, but a poor quality display would nix the deal...

The rumors that the new iBook does not have the AltiVec Velocity Engine are not true.

Check out:

http://www.apple.com/education/products/ibook/

In the right hand column, under "What's New" it states:

"Fast G4 processor. The PowerPC G4 with Velocity Engine delivers unparalleled processing power."

So, order up! As a recent convert to Mac from Linux, I can tell you that OS X is the finest operating system around and Apple's hardware is the best. Best decision I ever made!

if i was to buy a computer for my family to use it would be a Mac-G5 i will not buy another OEM PC with Windoze ever again, the only way i will get another PC is to build it and install Linux...

as far as OSs are concerned i would like to see someone take BSD and build a OS-X clone for x86 computers (either that or Linux for the PC), or just spend the extra dollars for a Mac...

"1) They're more expensive. There is no doubt about it. The G5 is fairly competitive for a 64-bit system, but then again, I'm not planning to buy an Athlon64 machine until I can buy a motherboard + CPU combo on pricewatch.com for $300."

It's you teethless, durty people who have the nerve to say Apple is too expensive. Yes I can buy a Kia Rio for 10,000, but its not a chevy, ford, or dodge - and i will have to fix it so offen, its not even worth having.

Guys, Mac's are not TOO expensive if you counter in the time you have lost because you have to fix your hardware every 30 days, or visit a support site because you got an invalid function in model <unknown> in iexplorer.exe and you are looking up memory addresses for pointless evil all day. Sorry, you guys need to lighten up a little, go by an Apple store. As a matter of a fact, the Apple store Oct 24th at 8pm (all of them) will be hosting an event for Panther. Go check things out, please - for the sake of the horrable computer industry. If you are not willing to spend more on your computer than a nice calulator - you deserve what you get.

Why should Apple try and work around your countries tariffs and protectionism. For an Apple eMac in Australia, low end, the price has dropped by $500 to $1349. IMHO, that is VERY cheap for a quality name brand computer.

No, you've missed my point or didn't read what I've said:
And no customs exist by which you can explain this. It's all thanks to apple.pl

There isn't any reasonable explanation for such high prices. Apple pl is adding all customs, VAT tax etc. to the price (before crossing the border) that is somewhere at little over 1200$, not 799!
Macs have unacceptable price/performance ratio mainly because everything else has reasonably, logically calculated customs and taxes, based on the REAL price of the thing before crossing the border.

Mac OS X likes a lot of RAM, it is a Unix after all.

I thought that BSD was, at best, one of the UNIX-likes. Has it actually passed the UNIX certification tests?

Yes, I'd love a dual G5 running a 2Ghz.

No, I can't afford to buy such a beast at this moment.

However... I recently tried to price out a comparable dual AMD64 system, and the prices came in about the same. Most notably however, I was able to beef the RAM up to 2GB on the dual AMD system for only about $100 over the price of the dual G5 w/only 512MB of memory!

Additionally, the AMD setup would have run a nice Raid 0 config for its primary drivespace, which would likely also boost performance over its G5 counterpart.

But money aside, the biggest reason I'm not in a hurry to save money for either platform is the fact that software still isn't out to really take advantage of either.

Yes, Panther has some 64bit extensions, but it's really a patched 32 bit system for now. Perhaps in a year we'll see some true 64bit OS's for the G5 platform.

Similarly, there are some 64 bit versions of Linux, but I've read quite a few horror stories of people trying to get their AMD64 systems up and running using them. Basically hardware support doesn't appear to be a strong point of 64bit Linux, which is understandable. This is a whole new platform, and won't likely be fully understood or supported for at least a year (like the G5!).

Windows64 is around the corner, which on one hand means that you can continue to run a lot of your existing software base (assuming you currently run Windows), and can slowly add in 64 bit applications as they're rolled out, but on the other hand, it means you're tied to the bugs and security holes that Windows brings to the table, as well as the fact that you'll have to invest buku dollars into a Windows license (it's worth noting that 64bit Linux is either free or much cheaper than it's Windows counterparts are expected to be).

Yes, you can probably download a warez version of Windows64, but based on the cracked copies of Windows Sevrer 2003, you won't be able to access the Windows Update mechanisms, which means either a lot of hunting for the patches when they come out (and it's Windows, so we know there'll be patches needed almost the day it comes out!), or you'll be forced to run an unpatched system, which based on the state of PC security right now, is probably not a good idea.

Long story short, if I were to buy now, the G5 would probably get my money due to the fact that you're getting hardware + your OS with it, and it'll be supported by Apple.

In a year, which is the earliest I'm considering adopting a 64bit systems (I just upgraded to a 800mhz 3Ghz P4 less then 6 months ago!), I'm hoping and expecting that 64 bit Linux will be the option for me.

Right now, in my opinion, you're paying a lot for the hardware, and simply hoping for full software support. If I'm going to spend 3 Grand or more on a new PC, I expect to get not only a great hardwa