“Apple has filed for a patent that suggests the company is working on a new mobile device capable of supporting multiple users. Either that or it’s cunningly trying to outflank Microsoft’s lead on fast multi-user switching by retrospectively patenting the technique as its own. The application, number 0030107606, is entitled ‘Multiple personas for a mobile device’. It describes how a computer system’s settings can be immediately changed to reflect a new “persona” when the user chooses from a list of available personae using a graphical user interface displayed on the computer’s screen.” Read it at The Register. Elsewhere, Think Secret published the fourth installment of its “Inside Panther” series.
Apple Attempts to Patent Fast User Switching
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
Roberto, note that if you say anything bad about apple in OSNEWS, you are labaled as a troll. Not by Mac users, but by the kool-aid drinking pompom-girls of the forum. The ones that have a fixation with Jobs and cannot even concieve or tolerate that someone doesn’t like Macs or Apple products or Steve jobs. Sheesh.
The Maczealots immediatetly label you of idiot, dumb@ss, you named it, all cuz you rightly know that the stinch coming from Apple is centered in Steve Jobs and his slughish MacOSX fully 32bit ripoff to be sold on an excellent 64Bit HW to unsuspected users. They call it flower power, you know the less the user know, the better.
This is why Apple wanted to patent: trash cans, translucent blue, and round corners on a subpar computer.
< Read my previous post…..and then why don’t you go troll somewhere else so we don’t have to keep reading this crap you keep spewing. >
Im not trolling, Im stating fact. Whereas all you stated in your post was a bunch of pro-Apple crap, Oh well, I understand whats wrong with you, You have poor loser syndrome.
“Roberto, note that if you say anything bad about apple in OSNEWS, you are labaled as a troll.”
Roberto, of course thats not true. This individuals is making the broad generalization because he keeps spouting troll like comments and we keep busting him for it and now he’s feeling resentful
“Not by Mac users, but by the kool-aid drinking pompom-girls of the forum.”
I don’t know where you would get that sort of description from any of the posts here. nobody is rooting for Apple beyond that which the company deserves nor is anyone a cult follower that would deem that type of description. (Actually, I take that back, there may indeed be some that resemble that description, but not enough (or any to my knowledge) that past frequently enough to make such a generalization such as that.
“The ones that have a fixation with Jobs and cannot even conceive or tolerate that someone doesn’t like Macs or Apple products or Steve jobs. Sheesh.”
That’s a pretty bold statement. I haven’t seen anyone post that would warrant that type of description. You must be trolling again.
“The Maczealots immediatetly label you of idiot, dumb@ss, you named it”
If the shoe fits…
“the stinch coming from Apple is centered in Steve Jobs”
Does Steve have BO? I haven’t heard that one.
“and his slughish MacOSX”
Jaguar is not sluggish. You must be mistaking the “sluggish” adjective and attributing it to one of the previous versions, of which had an interface which was indeed sluggish. Not any more however.
“fully 32bit ripoff to be sold on an excellent 64Bit HW to unsuspected users.”
i think you misunderstood the article you are referencing. Assuming the report is true, Panther will be a an operating system that runs its finder in 32 bit mode and applications in either 32 bit or 64 bit. That’s full 32 bit speed (no slowdown as a result of emulation or any other reason and full 64 bit (for the applications written to take advantage of the new capability.
“They call it flower power”
You’re mistaken. We don’t call anything flower power other than one of the first series iMacs that went by that name.
“you know the less the user know, the better.”
So far you’re the one that has exhibited a lack of knowledge and certainly not the mass of Mac users that represent the readers of OS news…
“This is why Apple wanted to patent: trash cans”
Apple never wanted to patent trash cans. They wanted to patent the trash icon and its associated use. Considering the fact that it was an idea of which they invented (along with many MANY other windowing concepts and GUI medaphores) they were right in their attempts to patent them.
“This is why Apple wanted to patent: translucent blue, and round corners on a subpar computer.”
Apple never wanted to patent translucent blue and round corners. They wanted to patent the trade dress of a very unique design for a computer they called the iMac.
Any company certainly could have (and can) use translucent blue and round corners. In fact, many do. Apple doesn’t litigate them because they aren’t infringing on Apple’s trade-dress.
“Im not trolling, Im stating fact.”
Mixed with a whole lot of unfactual statements many of which are written in a fashion that exhibits troll-like behavior.
<i.”Whereas all you stated in your post was a bunch of pro-Apple crap”[/i]
I don;t see much of any pro Apple comments (let alone pro Apple crap in these comments. However, there have been several comments made which correct your misstatements and troll-like comments.
“Oh well, I understand whats wrong with you, You have poor loser syndrome.”
Here’s a perfect example of a troll-like comment. You have repeatedly chastized others for calling you names (many of which were rightfully given mind you) yet you return those comments just as easily.
By Anonymous (IP: —.ph.ph.cox.net)
“The Maczealots immediatetly label you of idiot, dumb@ss, you named it”
If the shoe fits… ”
And I suppose that is not trolling. You are intellectually dishonest. And now the shoe is not what fits, its the pompom that fits you, you go girl!
Fact, Apple fought for patents on trash can(icons, i.e. color pixels) translucent blue and curves.
I know that Steve comment hurt you girl. To avoid further injury just wear those knee-p@ds of yours and drink some more translucent indigo koo-aid. What a punk!
The facts about Apple patent claim track record can be found here:
http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,21423,00.html
Mixed with a whole lot of unfactual statements many of which are written in a fashion that exhibits troll-like behavior.
Nope everything I stated can be verified by the web and through court documents. nothing I stated was unfactual.
There is nothing special about Apple, Apple steals, MS steals everyone does. It is called business. If someone has an idea that MS and Apple can use, guess what they use it. Steve Jobs isnt a saint neither is Bill Gates. Thats the name of the game. If you were to do a 100% audit of all of Apples proprietary software and of Microsofts software you will find ” borrowed ” code from someone else. Apple is not any different from any other computer company, the only difference between Apple and the others is that you have a used car salesman promoting Apple.
mistake jugular is still trolling.
Get a friggin life, your posts here are nothing but projections of your feeble lil misearable life.You should be ashamed to have wasted 4 plus hours on this thread throwing out garbage posts.There is a pattern emerging from your posts that reveals a truly sad lil boy.
All the anti-Apple losers on these boards really need to get laid, or get an f*ing life. Now that is one FACT you can’t argue with.
What is it with Roberto ad Mistik? You guys hate Apple and Mac yet the only news stories that you comment on are predominantely Apple and MacOSX related? And you don’t make one comment, you post like 20 times in one day!!!
What is the fascination? You guys seem to be more obsessed with Apple than most Mac users. You guys say how great Linux is yet you don’t even bother with Linux news, your too fixated on everything Apple. Poor Linux not getting attention from the Likes of Roberto and Mistik.
Don’t drink all the kool-aid save some for us Mac heads. You guys are falling hook line and sinker for Apple marketing. Its certainly generating a buzz even among the haters. It borders on obsessive. You guys are addicted to everything Mac regardless of weather you wanted it to be that way or not. Before you know it either of you jokers will pickup a Mac of some sort “so you can run Linux on it”, well see. Thats how it starts anyway. Drink the kool-aid in moderation boys and enjoy. LOL!
Back to the topic, Panther looks like it is shaping up to be one hell of an upgrade. I can’t wait. I’m gonna wait on G5, I just bought a G4 and am happy with it.
“Back to the topic, Panther looks like it is shaping up to be one hell of an upgrade. I can’t wait. I’m gonna wait on G5, I just bought a G4 and am happy with it.”
Good for you! You care about not wasting your money, great. Now I suggest to ALL Apple users to follow macster example.
If you are happy with a G4 and find Jaguar to be adequate, WAIT, DO NOT buy a G5, wait until MacOSX is fully 64bit, Panther is 32bit, you will be wasting your money. With a 32bit OS running on a mostly wasted 64bit Computer. Don’t fall for it!
If you are not happy with G4 and Jaguar, please post your ecxperiences here and WAIT, DO NOT buy a G5 until MacOSX is fully 64bit, less you be disappointed again with Panther which CAN”T FULLY TAKE ADVANTAGE of the excellent G5 hw.
However if you need the 64bit HW power AND intend to run AIX or Llinux, real 64bit Os, Then by all means buy the new G5 when available.
Hey mistik,
Do me a favor. Go look at that article you’ve linked at least 10 times, pick the find/search command, type in “patent” and start the search. What will you come up with? I’ll save you the trouble. NOTHING.
Stop claiming the article you link ad nauseum is about patents, because it is not. Patents are something you have to apply for with the government. “Trade dress,” which is what that article is about, has nothing to do with patents. Apple did not patent the shape of the iMac. They were not defending a patent.
Half your comments state “The facts about Apple patent claim track record can be found here: ” and give that link. This article we are all commenting on is about patents. YOURS IS NOT. So stop talking about it as if it is.
Dude what are you talking about?
You don’t mean this article:
http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,21423,00.html
Do you?
If you read carefully, which you obviously haven’t, I have posted at least 3 different links.
The point of the article is Apple claims of IP, whether they patent it or not, is irrelevant, is their sleazy track record that is reveal within the article.
Berkeley alma mater. Peace out!
“If you are not happy with G4 and Jaguar, please post your ecxperiences here and WAIT, DO NOT buy a G5 until MacOSX is fully 64bit, less you be disappointed again with Panther which CAN”T FULLY TAKE ADVANTAGE of the excellent G5 hw.”
What aload of crap. Most architectures I am aware of have always had hardware go 64-bit before the OSes went completely 64-bit. To endusers, in particular Apple’s target market, most of them won’t care nor will need to use 64-bit support.
As long as what ever OS mac ships on a G5 can make available to the Apps all pf the 8 GB of memory. What difference does it make.
Fact is the G5 is exteremely fast on 32 bit apps when compared to the 1GHz g4. A dual powermac g5 is $2999, the dual powermac g4 is $3200 on apples website. The g5 har some of the latest technology SATA, PCI-X, AGP 8x. Whay would some one buy a g4 over a g5 just because the OS isn’t “fully” 64 bit? A 64 bit OS just allows for the capability of addressing more than 4 GB of memory.
Get this most 64 bit hardware don’t even implement full 64 bit addressing many only use 42-44 bits for physical addresses. Because it is cheaper to implement and memory configs of 16 terabytes don’t even exist, why bother adding more pins on the chip if no one needs it.
” If you are happy with a G4 and find Jaguar to be adequate, WAIT, DO NOT buy a G5, wait until MacOSX is fully 64bit, Panther is 32bit, you will be wasting your money. With a 32bit OS running on a mostly wasted 64bit Computer. Don’t fall for it!”
Mistik, got to disagree with you on this point. Regardless of weather Panther is 64-bit or not there are lots of people out there that will benefit from G5. The speed increase alone is worth the upgrade. Then you have the great specs of the hardware. There are numerous benefits to G5 that will not be hampered by Panther being 32-bit.
Yes Mistik, I know you have 3 links. But there is one you have linked many, many more times than the other, hence what I said and I quote “Go look at that article you’ve linked at least 10 times.” For the record, you’ve posted the link a ridiculous 14 times now, in addition to the entire article.
You do not seem get the slant of the article you have linked so many times. Why don’t you look at the first few lines of the article itself:
“When you walk into a room and see a curvaceous, translucent-blueberry computer, you know right off the bat it’s an iMac.
It could be an E-Power PC, an eOne PC, or a Sotec e-one PC — not one of which is made by Apple Computer.
That’s awfully irritating to the folks at Apple.”
Sounds to me like the article is saying Apple has a point, people will be confused and think one of the lookalikes is an iMac.
The article talks about what Apple will have to do to prove its case, and how easy/difficult parts of the case will be. No where does it say the suit is frivolous. I have no idea how you see this article as saying Apple has a sleazy track record.
As for Apple’s track record, they had enough evidence that more than one judge granted a preliminary injunction. This can only be done if the judge feels the company seeking the injunction will be harmed without it while waiting for trial. The judges in the Apple cases would likely not agree with your claim of a “sleazy track record,” since they believed Apple’s cases had merit.
From reading the Wired article carefully, more than once, I don’t believe Craig Bicknell would agree with you either.
If your gonna post bits of the article, you might as well post the whole thing kiddo:
Apple Defends its Blueberry Bush
Craig Bicknell
Story location: http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,21423,00.html
03:00 AM Aug. 25, 1999 PT
When you walk into a room and see a curvaceous, translucent-blueberry computer, you know right off the bat it’s an iMac.
It could be an E-Power PC, an eOne PC, or a Sotec e-one PC — not one of which is made by Apple Computer.
See also: Apple Sues iMac Clone
That’s awfully irritating to the folks at Apple. Tuesday the company filed its third lawsuit in less than two months against an alleged iMac knock-off artist, this time against Japanese computer maker Sotec.
The string of suits shows Apple is willing to fight to protect its blueberry patch. The question now is, will it win?
Apple and the accused companies aren’t talking, but legal experts say the question isn’t easily answered.
“Whether Apple will succeed or not is very hard to judge in advance,” said Jim Sobieraj, an intellectual property lawyer for Brinks Hofer Gilson & Lione in Chicago. “You can’t say that it’s a no-brainer whether they’ll win or lose.”
To prevail, Apple will have to prove that the supposed knock-offs infringe on the iMac’s “trade dress.” Trade dress is the legal term for a product’s distinctive aesthetic design features.
Apple will have to prove that the new machines look so much like iMacs that consumers could think Apple made them.
It might seem perfectly obvious that eMachine’s eOne — translucent-blue, rounded at the edges, with the monitor and CPU in one unit — is dressed an awful lot like an iMac. However, the similarities may not constitute legal infringement.
“The details count here,” said Mark Dickson, a partner at the Palo Alto office of Arnold White & Durkee.
First, Apple will have to prove that the iMac’s design features are distinctive. That will probably be the easy part.
“When we see an iMac computer, even without the name on it, we think of Apple,” said Mike Sobel, an intellectual property attorney with Graham & James in Palo Alto. “It’s becoming an icon.”
But distinctiveness alone won’t mean doo-dah if eMachines can prove that its design features are not merely aesthetic, but a product of function. Design features dictated by function can’t infringe on trade dress — one plane would not be infringing on another because it had wings.
EMachines might argue that its translucent shell is necessary so that users can see what’s going on inside the computer, for example. It might argue that its shapes and curves serve other important functions.
While there’s no obvious functional reason to use colors, it’s hard to win a trade-dress case on color alone, lawyers said.
Even if Apple convinces a jury that the eOne and the E-Power are design knock-offs, it will still have to prove that the knock-offs confuse consumers. Here, eMachines and Future Power, which makes the E-Power PC, might argue that consumers can’t get confused because the eOne and the E-Power run Microsoft Windows.
How could consumers confuse a Windows machine with a Macintosh?
“The defense will probably say, ‘Consumers are sophisticated. They know they’re not buying an Apple,'” said Sobieraj.
To counter such a defense, Apple will likely have to produce surveys proving that customers can’t tell the difference.
In the end, the iMac’s undisputed distinctiveness will likely give Apple the upper hand, at least in this first round of lawsuits, lawyers said.
A year ago, there were no curvy, colored computers, then there was the wildly successful iMac. Suddenly there are a bunch of competitors that seem to be catching a ride on Apple’s coattails. Judges and juries won’t be blind to that, lawyers said.
“I’d feel a lot better being Apple than eMachine,” said Ron Coolley, a partner in the Chicago office of Arnold White & Durkee.
Over time, however, more and more companies will make incremental steps towards iMac’s racier design — be it shape, color, or translucence. Those incremental steps by themselves won’t constitute trade dress infringement, but once they’re taken, they’ll foster the next step.
Apple’s lawyers most likely think different.
“A dual powermac g5 is $2999, the dual powermac g4 is $3200 on apples website. The g5 har some of the latest technology SATA, PCI-X, AGP 8x. ”
I see your point Apples are too damn expensive. With those prices more reason for people to WAIT for Apple to have a fully 64bit OS buying buying an expensive 64bit hw to run a 32bit OS.
“Whay would some one buy a g4 over a g5 just because the OS isn’t “fully” 64 bit?”
Indeed why. It makes no sense, they should wait and save some money. Give the money to the poor, there are so many worthy causes out there, help fight aids, cure world hunger. You are right, kiddo.
So Mistik, apparently I should quote the whole article and rudely make everyone scroll through an article you’ve already posted once, but you feel free to cut out only pieces of Raptor’s comment out of context, claim Raptor is making a point he/she is clearly not, and pretend to agree with the point, when it is really your point and you are distorting what Raptor is saying to make it seem like its Raptor’s point.
Quite disingenuous.
The people that complain about Macs being expensive are usually the ones that can’t afford them. Macs cost more, this is old. You might as well bitch about Mercedes, Corvettes and large homes as well.
Think of this good Mistik character as a program will will continue to flood this forum with these articles as long as you attempt to engage him in attack. So you can see the only way to win is to stop fighting.
The people that complain about Macs being expensive are usually the ones that can’t afford them. Macs cost more, this is old. You might as well bitch about Mercedes, Corvettes and large homes as well.
We can see why Apple doesn’t lower its price. A high price leads to an “elite” feeling, where people value the exclusive club they’ve joined. Not everyone of course, but many Mac owners do as a status symbol.
If you speak with software companies who price low to undercut their competition, customers treat them worse. They nitpick and shout. Whereas with multimillion-costing systems like Broadvision or Vignette, customers almost desire difficulty. They will defend the company’s right to patent what they want, or to act against their customers.
“I see your point Apples are too damn expensive. With those prices more reason for people to WAIT for Apple to have a fully 64bit OS buying buying an expensive 64bit hw to run a 32bit OS.”
I did not say Apples were expensive. You kept saying buy a G4 with jaguar, and wait till Apple releases a fully 64-bit OS to buy the G5. I was countering your argument that the G5 is a better machine and is cheaper than a G4 running Jaguar.
Disclaimer: I don’t own a mac, never have.
But they must be doing something right. If a person like me, a UNIX kernel engineer wants an Apple product (I never thought I would). Acutally a lot of us/them do, I see a lot of diehard UNIX guys buying macs for the first time in their life. MacOS X is sexy, UNIX + a decent GUI + X11 compatability. X on most UNIXs and linux doesn’t perform very well or as well as MacOS X or Windows , because it is single threaded. At least Apple had the balls to write a new GUI layer and do away with X (they do provide an X server but don’t fully depend on it).
I am waiting for the so called Open Source innovators to do that sometime. Don’t get me wrong Open Source software is great and has very talented programers. They seem to keep re-implementing closed source or similar software though.
“And I suppose that is not trolling.”
it would have been if the shoe didn’t fit.
“You are intellectually dishonest.”
Give me one example when I’ve been intellectually dishonest.
“And now the shoe is not what fits”
Yes… it fits you.
“its the pompom that fits you, you go girl!”
Are you calling me a girl, or a cheerleader? What is that supposed to mean?
“Fact, Apple fought for patents on trash can(icons, i.e. color pixels)”
Yes, among many other things. Nobody has said otherwise.
“Fact, Apple fought for translucent blue and curves.”
Not a fact. If they did, and won (which they did0 then PC manufacturers wouldn;t use blue curves in their designs. Apple didn’t so they can. Rather, Apple fought for its tradedress.
“I know that Steve comment hurt you girl”
Nothing you have said to me has hurt me… and I’m a man thank you very much.
“To avoid further injury”
No current injury.
“just wear those knee-p@ds of yours”
Another troll I see…
“and drink some more translucent indigo koo-aid”
And yet another.
“What a punk!”
Look in the mirror when you make that statement.
“The facts about Apple patent claim track record can be found here:
” rel=”nofollow”>http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,21423,00.html”
Yes they can. I suggest you read them this time around as they support my argument. Not yours.
suggest you read this:
http://www.mackido.com/Interface/ui_history.html
There is absolutely NOTHING from that site that is true and honest. Its a complete sham and a very slanted view of history.
“Nope everything I stated can be verified by the web and through court documents. nothing I stated was unfactual.”
Examples please.
“There is nothing special about Apple”
there is much special About Apple.
“Apple steals, MS steals everyone does.”
What has Apple stolen?
“If someone has an idea that MS and Apple can use, guess what they use it.”
Using ideas is one things. That’s not stealing… that’s, well, “using ideas.” However, when a company steals something that is specifically patented is Microsoft has done to many, then that is stealing.
“Steve Jobs isnt a saint neither is Bill Gates.”
Whoever said either of them were?
“If you were to do a 100% audit of all of Apples proprietary software and of Microsofts software you will find ” borrowed ” code from someone else.”
Microsoft’s definately. (Its been proven time and time again. Until we find evidence against Apple, there’s no reason not to give them the benefit of the doubt.
“Apple is not any different from any other computer company, the only difference between Apple and the others is that you have a used car salesman promoting Apple.”
Huh?
“If that’s the case, then so are PCs because Macs are either only slightly more expensive, the same price, slightly less expensive or significantly less expensive when comparing both hardware and software to a PC configured with the exact same compenents (or as close as possible)
For 1 you can’t configure a mac in most circumstances to match a PC. So yes they are more expensive due to this simple fact. Until I can buy a loaded Mac tower for under $1000 don’t ever tell me that Macs are priced the same as a PC. They might be priced the same in some small 1% of all configurations possible but mostly they are priced higher compared to the amount of choice you can get on the PC.
“market share has no bearing on whether or not a computer is suitable for consumer (or any market) use.”
Bullcrap. Consumers don’t buy mass quantities of something if it dosen’t work. The PC would be long dead if it were some unusable and unsuitable product for the consumer market. Basic economics here dude.
“Good for you! You care about not wasting your money, great. Now I suggest to ALL Apple users to follow macster example.”
And how is buying a G5 wasing money?
“If you are happy with a G4 and find Jaguar to be adequate, WAIT, DO NOT buy a G5”
Of course. Nobody said otherwise. If you’re happy with what you’ve got, stay with it. If you want/need more power, buy a G5.
“wait until MacOSX is fully 64bit”
Why? Assuming the news from The Register is true, OS X users could take advantage of 64 bit applications. That’s all they would need anyways. No need to wait.
“Panther is 32bit, you will be wasting your money.”
Panther supports 32bit and 64 bit. It would certinly not be a waste of money.
“With a 32bit OS running on a mostly wasted 64bit Computer. Don’t fall for it!”</i.
How would it be a wayse? Panther’s 64 bit applications will be able to take full advantage of the G5’s 64 bit capeabilities.
[i]”If you are not happy with G4 and Jaguar, please post your ecxperiences here and WAIT, DO NOT buy a G5 until MacOSX is fully 64bit”
Why should anyone wait? If the want the added speed that the G5 will bring them, they should certinly upgrade and take advantage of the 64 bit software that Panther will be able to fully support.
“less you be disappointed again with Panther”
How can someone be disapointed *again* with a a product they tried only once? Thankfully, Pather seems likely not to disapoint anyone. Those of us using the Panther preview can surely vouch for that. OS X just keeps getting better and better.
“which CAN”T FULLY TAKE ADVANTAGE of the excellent G5 hw.”
Well, if the Finder were 64 bit, it might actually be slower. There is really no need to integrate 64 bit capeabilities into something like the finder. Thankfully, Panther will be able to take full advantage of all 64 bit applications that are written for it.
“However if you need the 64bit HW power AND intend to run AIX or Llinux, real 64bit Os, Then by all means buy the new G5 when available.”
Or us OS X, as it will be able to run 64 bit applications as well.
“The point of the article is Apple claims of IP, whether they patent it or not, is irrelevant, is their sleazy track record that is reveal within the article.”
But Apple doesn;t have a sleazy track record. What are you talking about?
“The iMac was the number one selling computer of all time. The MAJORITY has spoken.”
Commodore sold close to 35 million C-64 systems. I believe its still listed in the guinness book of records as the best selling personal computer of all time.
“Apples are too damn expensive.”
Of course they’re not. What would give you that idea?
“With those prices more reason for people to WAIT for Apple to have a fully 64bit OS buying buying an expensive 64bit hw to run a 32bit OS.”
Apple’s prices are very reasonable and thankfully, Panther will be able to take full advantage of 64 bit applications. There is no reason to wait.
>>>”Whay would some one buy a g4 over a g5 just because the OS isn’t “fully” 64 bit?”<<<
“Indeed why. It makes no sense.”
Sure it does. Assuming the news is true, only the FINDER wont be 64 bit, and application that doesn;t need to be 64 bit and as a matter of fact would probably benefit from being 32 bit as many believe that being 64 bit might slow it down. Thankfully, Panther will be able to FULLY take advantage of 64 bit applications written for it
“they should wait and save some money.”
No reason to wait if you need the power.
“Give the money to the poor”
Giving money to the poor is always a noble cause, but buying a new computer would not only help the economy but also speed up your work flow.
“there are so many worthy causes out there, help fight aids, cure world hunger. You are right, kiddo.”
Agreed. All are noble causes. Buy that G5 and use the extra speed to be more productive and make more money… money that you can donate to these worthy causes.
“Think of this good Mistik character as a program will will continue to flood this forum with these articles as long as you attempt to engage him in attack. So you can see the only way to win is to stop fighting.”
We defenders of the truth will continue to refute his FUD as long as he attempt to engage us with such.
“We can see why Apple doesn’t lower its price. A high price leads to an “elite” feeling, where people value the exclusive club they’ve joined.”
if thats true its only a side affect. its certinly not the reaon why mac users buy their computers. Rather, they buy them for the increased productivity that the machine provides them over the competition.
“Not everyone of course, but many Mac owners do as a status symbol.”
While many may in fact do this their numbers probably run in proportionate parallels in user base to those who do so on the PC side. These individuals are certinly in the minority.
“If you speak with software companies who price low to undercut their competition, customers treat them worse. They nitpick and shout. Whereas with multimillion-costing systems like Broadvision or Vignette, customers almost desire difficulty. They will defend the company’s right to patent what they want, or to act against their customers.”
Now you’re just drawing inconclusive parallels in hopes of trying to support your argument. (Something tells me this is the same Troll that was posting the other garbage.) If this is in fact a different roll.. forgive the accusation
“Don’t ever post a thing from mackido. There is absolutely NOTHING from that site that is true and honest. Its a complete sham and a very slanted view of history.”
Everything I’ve read on mackido has checked out with other sources I’ve read on the Web.
“[/i]For 1 you can’t configure a mac in most circumstances to match a PC. So yes they are more expensive due to this simple fact.”[/i]
No, it only confirms that PCs are more configurable, there fore the fact remains: Macs are either only slightly more expensive, the same price, slightly less expensive or significantly less expensive when comparing both hardware and software to a PC configured with the exact same compenents (or as close as possible)
“Until I can buy a loaded Mac tower for under $1000 don’t ever tell me that Macs are priced the same as a PC.”
That’s a rediculious argument.
Apple may choose not to compete in some markets, but in those that it competes, Apple’s hardware are either only slightly more expensive, the same price, slightly less expensive or significantly less expensive when comparing both hardware and software to a PC configured with the exact same compenents (or as close as possible).
“They might be priced the same in some small 1% of all configurations possible but mostly they are priced higher compared to the amount of choice you can get on the PC.”
This is an incorrect statement.
The vast majority of Apple’s computers are either only slightly more expensive, the same price, slightly less expensive or significantly less expensive when comparing both hardware and software to a PC configured with the exact same compenents (or as close as possible). PC’s however ARE more configurable.
<<<“market share has no bearing on whether or not a computer is suitable for consumer (or any market) use.”>>>
“Bullcrap.”
No, actually thats very true.
“Consumers don’t buy mass quantities of something if it dosen’t work.”
Nobody is saying that PCs don;t work. The accusation was that only computers with large market sahres are suitable for consumer use. That of course is not true.
“The PC would be long dead if it were some unusable and unsuitable product for the consumer market. Basic economics here dude.”
Nobody has said otherwise.
“Everything I’ve read on mackido has checked out with other sources I’ve read on the Web.”
You might want to read things other than typical mac propaganda then.
I stopped reading Mackido when I read their little history of Visual Basic on windows. VB DID NOT come from MacBasic and Hypercard. It came about when a guy by the name of Allen Cooper created what was called the “Ruby Forms Engine” on contract for MS as a possible UI for Windows 3.x. Someone had the brilliant idea of mating “Ruby” to the QuickBasic compiler and Visual Basic was born. Mackido never mentioned any of this amazingly enough. Cooper’s name is even listed in the about box of many VB versions. How they laid out the history of a programming language without naming the most important person behind it was beyond me.
Read about their little history of the Mac OS. You’ll walk away feeling as if Apple invented Pascal which is far from the truth.
That site is a breeding ground for lies and true ‘kool-aid’ crap. It should be wiped from the net.
“Commodore sold close to 35 million C-64 systems. I believe its still listed in the guinness book of records as the best selling personal computer of all time.”
I read somewhere (actually in several locations) that the iMacs was the number one selling computer of all time. However, if you can prove otherwise I would certinly retract that statement.
“You might want to read things other than typical mac propaganda then.”
Nothing on Mackido is propaganda.
“I stopped reading Mackido when I read their little history of Visual Basic on windows. VB DID NOT come from MacBasic and Hypercard. It came about when a guy by the name of Allen Cooper created what was called the “Ruby Forms Engine” on contract for MS as a possible UI for Windows 3.x. Someone had the brilliant idea of mating “Ruby” to the QuickBasic compiler and Visual Basic was born. Mackido never mentioned any of this amazingly enough. Cooper’s name is even listed in the about box of many VB versions. How they laid out the history of a programming language without naming the most important person behind it was beyond me.”
If you have evidence to the contrary, why didn;t you send it to Mackido’s David K. Every?
Additionally, why don;t you provide us with some links?
“Read about their little history of the Mac OS. You’ll walk away feeling as if Apple invented Pascal which is far from the truth.”
I didn’t get that impression at all..
“That site is a breeding ground for lies and true ‘kool-aid’ crap. It should be wiped from the net.”
Not at all. Its a wonderful resource for information.
“No, it only confirms that PCs are more configurable, there fore the fact remains: Macs are either only slightly more expensive, the same price, slightly less expensive or significantly less expensive when comparing both hardware and software to a PC configured with the exact same compenents (or as close as possible)”
Thats the point. You can’t configure a mac ‘as close as possible’ in many circumstances. Therefore you are stuck in the position of having the mac being the more expensive between the two. If you want a tower with expansion for say $700-$1000 you can easily get it on the PC. If you look at the mac its not an option until you hit $1200 or higher. Thats what is called “more expensive”. Its also limiting in choice, which is just as bad.
“That’s a rediculious argument.”
No a ridiculious argument is trying to claim that a mac is “slightly more expensive, the same price, slightly less expensive or significantly less expensive” when any halfwit who can add 1+1 can go into any store and see it all for themselves. I want a Mac tower for $1000. If I can’t get one for that then its more expensive than the PC because I have that option on the PC. Get it ?
“Apple may choose not to compete in some markets, but in those that it competes,”
I don’t care what niches apple is aiming for. If apple dosen’t have similiar choices in all the price ranges than you’ve got nothing to compare against other than what they offer. In many cases what they offer is more expensive than what you can get on the PC for the same money. You are a bit on the slow side here hos.
“The vast majority of Apple’s computers are either only slightly more expensive, the same price, slightly less expensive or significantly less expensive when comparing both hardware and software to a PC configured with the exact same compenents (or as close as possible). PC’s however ARE more configurable.”
I think I got it the first time you cut and pasted this statement. No need to do it 16 freakin’ times.
What does the option of being more configurable do for a computer ? Why it drives prices down! How amazing! Due to that configurable option you can get more for less.
“Nobody is saying that PCs don;t work. The accusation was that only computers with large market sahres are suitable for consumer use. That of course is not true. “
I misread the post obviously. This I agree with.
“Nothing on Mackido is propaganda.”
You keep telling yourself that big guy.
“If you have evidence to the contrary, why didn;t you send it to Mackido’s David K. Every? “
I’m going to waste my time educating this guy for what reason ? I’d much rather just not read anything from Mackido anymore and I’ll never take anything they say seriously again.
“Additionally, why don;t you provide us with some links? “
http://www.cooper.com/alan/father_of_vb.html
Read that. Thats from the man himself who created “Ruby”. Now look at this from Mackido ..
they found an obscure third party company that had already started that project and bought them or the product, saying something like “resistance is futile, you will be assimilated”.
You do the math. Propaganda and bullshit. I’m tellin’ ya. =D
Not at all. Its a wonderful resource for information.
Sure if you want a slanted view of microcomputer history.
>>>“No, it only confirms that PCs are more configurable, there fore the fact remains: Macs are either only slightly more expensive, the same price, slightly less expensive or significantly less expensive when comparing both hardware and software to a PC configured with the exact same compenents (or as close as possible)”
“Thats the point. You can’t configure a mac ‘as close as possible’ in many circumstances.”
Hence the fact that PCs are more configurable.
“Therefore you are stuck in the position of having the mac being the more expensive between the two.”
That argument is as rediculious as me comparing a low priced Mac laptop to a high priced PC laptop. you need to give equal specifications when comparing prices. Everybody knows that.
“If you want a tower with expansion for say $700-$1000 you can easily get it on the PC.”
Exactly. PC’s a re more expandible.
“If you look at the mac its not an option until you hit $1200 or higher. Thats what is called “more expensive”.”
No, that simply means that the PC is more expandible.
“Its also limiting in choice, which is just as bad.”
Agreed.
“a ridiculious argument is trying to claim that a mac is “slightly more expensive, the same price, slightly less expensive or significantly less expensive” when any halfwit who can add 1+1 can go into any store and see it all for themselves.”
You misquoted me. You forgot to mention that the comparison has to be against a Mac with the exact (or as close as possible) specifications in both hardware and software. To your credit, you would be write with the misassociated quote, but then… I never said it the way tou quoted me.
Ya that halfwit will add up the numbers and come to the conclusion that a Mac is either slightly more expensive, the same price, slightly less expensive or significantly less expensive than a PC with the exact (or as close as possible) specifications in both hardware and software.
“I want a Mac tower for $1000. If I can’t get one for that then its more expensive than the PC because I have that option on the PC. Get it ?”
You will end up spending more money because the Mac is less configurable but that certinly doesn’t say that a Mac is more expensive, as everyone knows that to compare prices you must compare hardware of equal specs. Otherwise I could simply say that Apple’s $799 eMac beats out a fully loaded desktop PC. See? That’s not a fair comparison either.
“I don’t care what niches apple is aiming for. If apple dosen’t have similiar choices in all the price ranges than you’ve got nothing to compare against other than what they offer.”
Okay.. and that wouldn’t be a fair comparison now would it. it would only prove that PCs are more expandible.
“In many cases what they offer is more expensive than what you can get on the PC for the same money.”
That’s not true. A Mac can be had for slightly more, the same price slightly less or significantly less than a PC with the exact (or as close as possible) same specs in both hardware and software.
“You are a bit on the slow side here hos.”
Me? LOL. I’ve repeated that statement how many times? (Too many) and yet you STILL haven’t grasped it yet.
“I think I got it the first time you cut and pasted this statement. No need to do it 16 freakin’ times.”
I don’t think you did because you are still saying that because PC’s are more *configurable* that it makes Macs more *expensive*. That simply is not true.
“What does the option of being more configurable do for a computer ?”
It makes it cost more, but what you are implying is that it costs more for an equally spec’d computer. That simply isn’t true.
“it drives prices down!”
EXACTLY and yet the machine still isn’t equally matched.
“Due to that configurable option you can get more for less.”
You’re not getting more for less. You’re getting different for less. Some parts will be more, some parts will be less. However, When the specs are matched you will find that a Mac is either slightly more expensive, the same price, slightly less expensive or significantly less expensive than a PC with the exact (or as close as possible) specifications in both hardware and software.
Now you’re just drawing inconclusive parallels in hopes of trying to support your argument. (Something tells me this is the same Troll that was posting the other garbage.) If this is in fact a different roll.. forgive the accusation
I’m a completely different “roll” indeed. In fact, I’ve come to the conclusion you must be a troll, since you actively egg on Mistik, even though to any observer he’s full of lies. I must only conclude that you are doing this to spur his posts and spread misinformation.
I will grant though, that unlike my other posts, I have no links supporting the assertion that Mac users are more forgiving of bad practices by Apple. In fact, I had one where Apple users were angry about Apple’s blatant copycatting of Watson. So I’m not attached to this point of mine, and will drop it since it’s rather difficult to verify, though many OSNews readers have independently come to this conclusion based on observing Mac zealots.
These individuals [who buy Macs as a status symbol] are certinly in the minority.
So do you have a link for this? All of your assertions, or very close to all, have absolutely no evidence behind them. Please start now. Otherwise drop all points you’re pulling out of your posterior, as I have set an example for.
Also, I will ask you now to provide evidence contradicting mine about Apple copycatting Watson (which you replied by saying that lots of people accidentally happened to independently clone Watson, even though Eugenia herself pointed out it was an obvious copy). Feel free to mix your logorrhea with substantive facts.
>>>“Nothing on Mackido is propaganda.”<<<
“You keep telling yourself that big guy.”
I will. there’s no reason why I shouldn’t.
“I’m going to waste my time educating [Mackido’s David K Every] for what reason ? I’d much rather just not read anything from Mackido anymore and I’ll never take anything they say seriously again.”
Shutting out the facts wont help anything.
“http://www.cooper.com/alan/father_of_vb.html
Read that. Thats from the man himself who created “Ruby”. Now look at this from Mackido ..
they found an obscure third party company that had already started that project and bought them or the product, saying something like “resistance is futile, you will be assimilated”.
You do the math. Propaganda and bullshit. I’m tellin’ ya. =D”[/i]
I didn’t get propaganda from that at all.
“Sure if you want a slanted view of microcomputer history.”
Not at all. I don’t know why you would say that.
“I’ve come to the conclusion you must be a troll, since you actively egg on Mistik, even though to any observer he’s full of lies.”
LOL ROTF. This from the same guy. Same IP number he’s used elsewhere!
“I must only conclude that you are doing this to spur his posts and spread misinformation.”
Spread misinformation that I’m correcting? LOL!
“I will grant though, that unlike my other posts, I have no links supporting the assertion that Mac users are more forgiving of bad practices by Apple. In fact, I had one where Apple users were angry about Apple’s blatant copycatting of Watson.”
You did and you posted it as an example of Apple stealing. Apple didn;t steal Watson nor did they steal their ideas. These services were fully available elsewhere throughout the web. Additionally, Sherlock was already creating services such as these far before Watson even got started. Some have suggested that Watson copied Apple.
>>>“These individuals [who buy Macs as a status symbol] are certinly in the minority.”<<<
“So do you have a link for this?”
You made the origional accusation… an accusation that Mac users buy their computers for status symbols. You back up that claime first, then I’ll back up mine.
“All of your assertions, or very close to all, have absolutely no evidence behind them. Please start now.”
I’ll do so immediately after you post evidence to support the claim WHICH YOU STARTED.
“Otherwise drop all points you’re pulling out of your posterior, as I have set an example for.”
Are you saying that you drop all calims that you pulled out of your posterior? If so, I won’t let you off that easy. You’ve done far too much damage. I want you to go back and find ever single instance and apologise for them or leave.
If you believe that I have done the same, find mine as well and I’ll either back them up or apologise for my injustice if I can’t.
“Also, I will ask you now to provide evidence contradicting mine about Apple copycatting Watson (which you replied by saying that lots of people accidentally happened to independently clone Watson, even though Eugenia herself pointed out it was an obvious copy).”
Apple introduced sherlock in version 8.0 of the Mac OS. It grew features with each subsoquent update. Watson was started afterwards.
No, that simply means that the PC is more expandible.
If thats precisely what I need than the Mac is more expensive!
It makes it cost more, but what you are implying is that it costs more for an equally spec’d computer. That simply isn’t true.
Sometimes it does.
EXACTLY and yet the machine still isn’t equally matched.
on what terms?
You’re not getting more for less. You’re getting different for less.
So basically apple offers a small lineup and if I don’t need and/or want things exactly the way they offer them I’m screwed ? Thats what you are telling me?
I’ll have to buy a Mac that “is either slightly more expensive, the same price, slightly less expensive or significantly less expensive” to a freakin’ high end P4 and get a bunch of software and shit that I don’t need when all I wanted was a god damn tower for under $1000 that was expandable and had the basics ?
Thats sounds like an expensive computer that is limited in options and I DOUBT I’m the first guy to walk away with that impression.
You kids keep drinkin’ the kool-aid. Not only did Stevie sell you boys a boat anchor but I think he did permanent brain damage to ya son.
I want you to go back and find ever single instance and apologise for them or leave.
Um, I did: I dropped the claim that Mac users are more forgiving of warts. You asked me to provide evidence, and I decided to drop that single point for two reasons:
1) I want you to finally start providing evidence, so dropping one point will pressure you to put up or shut up.
2) It is rather tedious to find ironclad evidence that “Mac users are more forgiving.” I think I could find some survey, but I am not connected to Lexis-Nexis.
For point 1), I insist on evidence because I provided these links over the course of my argument:
http://www.ozzie.net/blog/stories/2002/09/03/toJoelOnPlatforms.html
http://www.macobserver.com/article/2002/07/29.7.shtml
http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=1390
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20030417.html
You never found a single piece of evidence against any of my points.
Apple didn;t steal Watson nor did they steal their ideas. These services were fully available elsewhere throughout the web. Additionally, Sherlock was already creating services such as these far before Watson even got started. Some have suggested that Watson copied Apple.
You already repeated that many times, now please give evidence that contradicts these links I gave:
http://www.macobserver.com/article/2002/07/29.7.shtml
http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=1390
You made the origional accusation… an accusation that Mac users buy their computers for status symbols. You back up that claime first, then I’ll back up mine.
No problem. So you remember, my claim was, “A high price leads to an ‘elite’ feeling, where people value the exclusive club they’ve joined. Not everyone of course, but many Mac owners do as a status symbol.”
Letting the poor-man buy Apples will damage the brand:
http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=3921
“Apple has positioned itself to a certain type of customer, wealthy people, innovators, people with good jobs, good lifestyle, etc. If Apple targets the poor man type, the trendy guys will stop buying Apples, because everybody can and Apple is not the Porsche of the computers anymore, this would hurt more the brand than maybe the increasing sales because of lower prices…”
Apple’s logo is a status symbol.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/technology/columnists/chi-0304130225a…
That fruit [Apple’s logo] is a status symbol akin to a Mercedes hood ornament or the yellow crest of a Porsche. Sure, they are expensive. But at least they look expensive.
I posted that Chicago Tribune review because of a point under this very topic by a Mac user!
By macster (IP: —.nv.nv.cox.net) – Posted on 2003-07-13 05:02:13
The people that complain about Macs being expensive are usually the ones that can’t afford them. Macs cost more, this is old. You might as well bitch about Mercedes, Corvettes and large homes as well.
The C64 holds the record for the most units sold for a
sigle model of computer.
21M-27M Units sold
It is a hell of a beast running @ 1mhz @ bit(mega hertz are
a myth).
A WOPPING 64K of ram running at full speed.
It can mutitask. (Play music while loading apps)
And can save apps to tape or disk.
And even connect to the net.
Great OS is well. BASIC rom + CBM64 rom
Go C64 (:
anon,
unfortunately some Mac users are elitist others don’t see price as an object when purchasing a computer so they have no qualms about buying a Mac regardless of the price and its not really uncommon for Mac users to have more than one Mac or even a PC.
The majority of Mac users I know are not financially destitute. They can afford an Alienware rig if they wanted to but prefer Macs for a variety of reasons. Most tend to be college educated, professionally employed and are at the least moderately successful in their career.
As far as price I think that Apple has very powerful brand recognition. All over the world people know Apple as an American company and Apple is an American icon like it or not. Heck some of the machines are still assembled in the USA like the G4.
Apples prices have ALWAYS been high. The people that get the sticker shock are not long time Mac users. its the PC users.
Why are prices for Macs so high? I can only speculate on the following but I am sure it is good reasoning:
1. R&D, Apple’s is easily higher than the industry average in R&D than other PC companies. They do R&D on the OS, hardware, creating new devices like iSight and the iPod. New software. Apple creates an OS and software like Microsoft and also designs their hardware.
2. Marketing and advertising, like it or not Apple spends a lot on marketing and adverstising. Just take a look at all the attention Apple gets on OSNews and other sites. So much attention for such a small company. Most of that attention comes from PC users. Even poor Linux and PC articles are neglected by their staunch supporters.
3. Overhead is higher than most PC companies. Dell doesn’t do extensive R&D or maintain stores, nor do they create software or operating systems. Apple has higher than average overhead.
4. Macs are made out of expensive materials. Look at the iMacG4 for instance. The mechanical arm is a non-standard part and probably not readily available. The dome enclosure is not some ATX case you can buy for $25. Then you have the circular motherboard which you can’t buy off the shelf. Apple will use as much off the shelf technology that it can use. This is smart but they also have certain design guidelines that they want to adhere to and I don’t think Apple is against creating new computing form factors even if it costs more money. People say that Apple uses cheap parts, if thats the case why don’t more computers look like iMacG4s or PowerMac G4s or G5s? Even the eMac is a better looking AIO enclosure than most others you see out there. Why isn’t there more PC manufacturers that copy Apple’s enclosures? Apple materials are just cheap plastics right? What PC manufacturer makes a G4 clone case with the swing down door?
Regardless, I think this is just a short list of why Macs cost more. I am sure there are more like shorter or smaller volume production runs, use of custom chips and PowerPCs, etc.
“Apple is patenting pulling a fast one?”
LOL. Too bad we don’t have the funny meter like in (/.)
I remember when they treatened to a law suit against emachines, for the use of the name and the use of the color blue. Plus the profile, integrated monitor and CPU in a case, which Compaq and others had done a long time ago. Also Panasonic and even Commodore had doen, but didn’t get a Patent.
I think Apple show signs of being desperate despite all the propaganda that one hears about how good they are doing. Oh well, good luck to them.
They weren’t patenting the “color blue”. And the use of a name is a TRADEMARK/COPYWRITE suite, not a patent.
Campaq did not start the whole “all-in-one” concept. And Apple’s implementation was far earlier than the iMac (remember the 128k Mac?).
Apple’s legal team lept into action because other companies were trying to copy the shape, color, “look and feel” of the iMac. The uninformed market (such as yourself) would get confused by these infringements which WOULD cause damage to Apple. Heck, even Microsoft shelled out $150M to help appease Apple in long running legal disputes. That and the “gift” if IE and some bloated Office software for five years (thank you Father Time).
However, courts have begun to grant trademark protection to “stylized” items on the grounds that novel industrial design can communicate a distinctive idea or image. Recently, for example, a court held that a Gucci watch in the shape of a large “G” could be protected by trademark, because it communicated an idea and was not merely shaped that way for utilitarian purposes. It’s an evolving area of the law, lawyers say.
>Link provided by Mistik jogelour
Before the iMac computers were beige boxes. The beautiful industrial design is an important part of Apple products. They spend a lot of time and money designing products that are actually worthwhile. Like Mercedes-Benz and the “crumple zone” safety technology. Now you can buy a crappy Hundai with some of the same concepts Mercedes and other car companies perfected. But if I have a choice…I’d rather trust my life to a ‘Benz…and my computing to a Mac.
At least Apple has products WORTH protecting in the courts!
Just price compared the Apple PowerMac G5 to a Dell P4 3.2.
Both with the same memory, harddrive, 20 inch display( which was cheaper on the Dell ) and DVD-writable drive, and software to burn movies to dvd. As closely as possible.
1) Dell was 600 dolloars cheaper, mostly the Display price.
2) But, dell doesn’t sell a dual, so Apple will be faster, with Dual Altivec units plus the performance of the 2.0 G5s
3) Dell didn’t offer the 1200 dollar Microquill Heap Management software library, which they used to bump up their SPEC scores.
So, again Apple will be faster.
So, it looks like that 600 dollars covers the second cpu and better motherboard you get from Apple, plus an Unix operating system, and all of the IApps.
( Dell does sell Duel Zeon servers, however, not to Home users,
plus you have to pay MS server software prices to buy a Duel Zeon.
Dell doesn’t offer a Linux on Zeon option. )
Looks like to me you get a great machine for a fair price.
<quote>Why isn’t there more PC manufacturers that copy Apple’s enclosures? Apple materials are just cheap plastics right? What PC manufacturer makes a G4 clone case with the swing down door?</quote>
I was under the impression a couple vendors did copy the apple enclosers and apple sued for aethetics infringement or whatever that guy mistik kept rambling on about.
Other issue is, can someone give me an example where macs are <strong>significantly cheaper</strong> then a comparitively spec’d PC. The slightly more expensive, equal to, or slightly less expensive claim I can believe, it’s just that last one that has me confused.
Another wonderful mac article turned in trollwar… thanx mistik and anonymous.
Significantly cheaper only the laptops I believe.
You should be named clevernewbie.
>>>”It makes it cost more, but what you are implying is that it costs more for an equally spec’d computer. That simply isn’t true.”
“Sometimes it does.”
Exactly what I said… “slightly more”
>>>”EXACTLY and yet the machine still isn’t equally matched.”<<<
“on what terms?”
The terms in which the machine isn’t spec’d the same way.
“You’re not getting more for less. You’re getting different for less.
So basically apple offers a small lineup and if I don’t need and/or want things exactly the way they offer them I’m screwed ? Thats what you are telling me?”
I wouldn’t put it quite that bluntly because Apple has a computer for many different needs all in different price ranges, but for the most part… Yes. PCs offer more configuration but that does not mean that Macs are more expensive.
“I’ll have to buy a Mac that “is either slightly more expensive, the same price, slightly less expensive or significantly less expensive” to a freakin’ high end P4 and get a bunch of software and shit that I don’t need when all I wanted was a god damn tower for under $1000 that was expandable and had the basics ? Thats sounds like an expensive computer that is limited in options and I DOUBT I’m the first guy to walk away with that impression.”
Perhaps and yet it still doesn’t mean that Macs are more expensive… lust less configurable.
“You kids keep drinkin’ the kool-aid.”
Keep? I never even started
“Not only did Stevie sell you boys a boat anchor but I think he did permanent brain damage to ya son.”
[roll eyes]
Um, I did: I dropped the claim that Mac users are more forgiving of warts. You asked me to provide evidence, and I decided to drop that single point for two reasons:
1) I want you to finally start providing evidence, so dropping one point will pressure you to put up or shut up.
2) It is rather tedious to find ironclad evidence that “Mac users are more forgiving.” I think I could find some survey, but I am not connected to Lexis-Nexis.
“I insist on evidence”
Sherlock debuts in Mac OS 8: http://216.239.41.104/search?q=cache:RkHjM6IMXGMJ:developer.apple.c…
Watson debuts much later: http://www.karelia.com/pr/pr.html
“You remember, my claim was, “A high price leads to an ‘elite’ feeling, where people value the exclusive club they’ve joined. Not everyone of course, but many Mac owners do as a status symbol.”
Letting the poor-man buy Apples will damage the brand:
http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=3921
“Apple has positioned itself to a certain type of customer, wealthy people, innovators, people with good jobs, good lifestyle, etc. If Apple targets the poor man type, the trendy guys will stop buying Apples, because everybody can and Apple is not the Porsche of the computers anymore, this would hurt more the brand than maybe the increasing sales because of lower prices…”
Thats not evidence that’s opinion.
“Apple’s logo is a status symbol.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/technology/columnists/chi-0304130225a…..
That fruit [Apple’s logo] is a status symbol akin to a Mercedes hood ornament or the yellow crest of a Porsche. Sure, they are expensive. But at least they look expensive.”
That’s not evidence. That’s opinion.
“some Mac users are elitist”
As are some PC users.
“others don’t see price as an object when purchasing a computer so they have no qualms about buying a Mac”
Nor would they have qualms about buying a PC considering the fact that a Mac is not more expensive.
“As far as price I think that Apple has very powerful brand recognition.”
Yes they do, but that does not translate to being more expensive.
“Apples prices have ALWAYS been high.”
They were higher for quite some time. As a matter of fact, they were more expensive for the majority of Apple’s lifetime. However, that is not the case anymore. Apple is VERY competitive on price… unlike before.
“Just price compared the Apple PowerMac G5 to a Dell P4 3.2.
Both with the same memory, harddrive, 20 inch display( which was cheaper on the Dell ) and DVD-writable drive, and software to burn movies to dvd. As closely as possible.”
1) Dell was 600 dolloars cheaper, mostly the Display price.”
Apple can use the Dell’s display and vice versa. Why wouldn’t you match the same components when possible. That’s not fair.
“2) But, dell doesn’t sell a dual, so Apple will be faster”
Again, its not the equivalent hardware. If you’re going to compare duals you probably ought to compare the Dual G5 against the XEON rather than the pentium as the pentium can’t be configured with a dual processor.
“3) Dell didn’t offer the 1200 dollar Microquill Heap Management software library, which they used to bump up their SPEC scores.
So, again Apple will be faster.”
You may want to bump up the processor then.
“So, it looks like that 600 dollars covers the second cpu and better motherboard you get from Apple, plus an Unix operating system, and all of the IApps.”
When you pair the G5 against an equivalently equipped PC, the price difference turns out to be somewhere in the range of $1,300 in the Macs favor.
“( Dell does sell Duel Zeon servers, however, not to Home users,
plus you have to pay MS server software prices to buy a Duel Zeon.
Dell doesn’t offer a Linux on Zeon option. ) “
Well, it looks like Dell doesn’t compete in that area much in the same way that Apple doesn’t compete in the <$400 computer market.
“Looks like to me you get a great machine for a fair price.”
lest anybody misunderstand, nobody said that the prices weren’t fair.
“can someone give me an example where macs are significantly cheaper then a comparitively spec’d PC.”
Compare the Dual G5 to an equally spec’d PC (XEON). The PCs price will be in excess of $1000.
“Significantly cheaper only the laptops I believe.”
There too.
Regardless, I think this is just a short list of why Macs cost more.
Macster, when saying something is a status symbol, it might be absolutely deserved. A status symbol often needs a perception of quality, and one way to do that is to really have the quality.
The only reason I’m here in this topic is because two posters have created an interesting machine — the nuking of a topic with one playing a troll and the other a zealot. With some modifications, it’s really hard for that attack to defend against. So I entered the fray with about 5-6 posts to learn about it. (Whether the posters think of themselves as trolls or zealots is not the point here.)
If I seemed unusually aggressive, it’s because “Mac-love” occasionally manifests as wealth snobbery. It’s because it’s a brand forced to position itself at a higher price. It’s similar to Linux’s knowledge snobbery, because Linux is unusually painful for most to reconfigure.
But my position has always been that while Macs are absurdly expensive and immature for many common needs, for other uses they’re wrongly ignored in favor of PCs. At the very least, people want machines that have been crafted with pride, which is not true with Dells.
So I entered the fray with about 5-6 posts to learn about it.
BTW, before Anonymous takes things out of context again, I only argued against points that made Apple look bad. There are certain pro-Apple mistruths, that if repeated constantly, make people think that Apple purchasers are delusional.
” BTW, before Anonymous takes things out of context again, I only argued against points that made Apple look bad. There are certain pro-Apple mistruths, that if repeated constantly, make people think that Apple purchasers are delusional. ”
Anonymous always takes things out of context. Apple doesnt need anyone to bring up anything to make them look bad, they make themselves look bad. Apple purchasers are not delusional. They just listen to the wrong people and make poor computer purchases. They cannot seem to come to grips with the reality, that Apple is just another computer company, there is nothing special about Apple and that Steve Jobs could give 2 craps less about them and that if they were to stop buying apple products tommorrow, no one at Apple would care or even pick up the phone to call them, Apple will just find more suckers to sell too.
I still think you all need to have more sex.
To be fair, I think Apples are worthwhile if you make about 5X more money than the average person (or are a business)… It is just that certain insane Mac arguments are so polarizing that it just damages the platform. PC users don’t have to upgrade every year, and since 97% of desktop owners use PCs, they know better than to believe otherwise.
And more than anything, fast user switching wasn’t discussed here once. The problem is that companies need to patent, and occasionally the lawyers don’t notice they’re patenting something realy dumb.
I still think you all need to have more sex.
You can have lots of sex while participating in flamefests. (Well, maybe not at the same time, unless you’re odd.) But admittedly I’m getting over a cold, so my schedule is pretty free…
If you had sex more often, you’d know better than to say that.
Not sure if I feel stupider or smarter after reading all of this…
are so concerned about mac and pc’s that there are more important issues in this world that effect everybody… such things as our digital rights and freedoms, everyday they are taken away bit by bit and nobody here seems to mind. But they moan about a mac they will never use being expensive!
nobody’s worried about the DMCA or the new european versions being drafted up and nobody is worried about the lack of public information that ISN’T in the public domain but kept hidden away by greedy corporations.
OUR IP is restricted and technology which is ours is being taken away from us all because we have what we want already, we’re fat, ignorant and lazy and its happening to somebody else so it isn’t our concern…
Sorry, can’t really compare a Dell 20″ flat panel to an
Apple 20″ flat panel.
Dell: 1600*1200
Apple: 1920*1200
You can’t get Apple’s wide screen resolution from Dell.
So, Dell isn’t $600 US dollars cheaper.
So, in summary,
you can’t get a Dual from Dell, you can’t get the widescreeen monitor, you can’t get Unix or Linux, and you can’t get a faster machine then apple sells from Dell.
So, it looks like Apple is the smart way to go.
You guys are great! I haven’t watched
eadobserved anything this amusing since a demolition derby I went to last month. I need to bookmark this to see how far this thread will stretch. Keep it going guys.
“To be fair, I think Apples are worthwhile if you make about 5X more money than the average person (or are a business)…”
Why would that be the case? Mac’s are competativly priced with PCs.
“It is just that certain insane Mac arguments are so polarizing that it just damages the platform.”
Woa?! What arguments are polarizing? These are certinly not damaging the platform. If anything all the FUD being spread is damaging to the plaform.
“PC users don’t have to upgrade every year, and since 97% of desktop owners use PCs, they know better than to believe otherwise.”
Nor do Mac users. That is the most rediculious argument I’ve ever heard.
“And more than anything, fast user switching wasn’t discussed here once. The problem is that companies need to patent, and occasionally the lawyers don’t notice they’re patenting something realy dumb.”
If you re-read the patent, Apple didn’t apply for the patent but rather it was regranted from many years back.
Apple is in a unique situation that they must patent things like this… not so that they can inflict a legal hammer on all those you might copy it, but rather so that others don’t try to do this to them… As we’re seeing in the frivolous SCO lawsuit against IBM.
If you read the article, you will see that Apple has filed a CONTINUATION of a patent involving user-switching, originally granted in 1995. This is a completely legitimate move on their part. It is arguable that they have owned this technology for years.
Additionally, because it appears that nobody here is able to read the patent. They are not patenting fast user switching per-se but changing application settings and preferences on the fly, such as what location manager is doing.
The patent talks about switching personalities on a pen based system. I, for one, would like to be able to tell my PDA to switch between my work persona and my persona persona, and to keep the calendars separate. The mention of that in the application is a new idea that I haven’t seen done before, and it’s much more intriguing than Apple supposedly trying to hoodwink Microsoft. Here’s the relevant line in the application:
[0082] In the example presented in FIGS. 4a and 4b, the hand-held machine is shown to have two personas. In the case of FIG. 4a, the persona is Stephen Capps, professional engineer, while the persona illustrated in FIG. 4b is provided in for Stephen Capps, private citizen. As shown in FIG. 4a, some information associated with Stephen Capps, professional engineer, includes his company affiliation, title in the company, company address, and company phone number. In contrast, his private citizen persona is shown to include his home phone number, and may include such other information as a home address, etc.
I definitely haven’t seen either Mac OS X switching or Windows switching do something _that_ useful.
< Sorry, can’t really compare a Dell 20″ flat panel to an
Apple 20″ flat panel.
Dell: 1600*1200
Apple: 1920*1200
You can’t get Apple’s wide screen resolution from Dell.
So, Dell isn’t $600 US dollars cheaper.
So, in summary,
you can’t get a Dual from Dell, you can’t get the widescreeen monitor, you can’t get Unix or Linux, and you can’t get a faster machine then apple sells from Dell.
So, it looks like Apple is the smart way to go. >
Yes you can get a Dual from Dell, I have 4 of them, do ypou really need a 20 inch Widescreen LCD ? No, the average consumer does not. You remind me of an idiot that I knew one time that bought a Mac and 2 monitors to go with it, doesnt need that Second monitor, he just bought it to look cool. PC is the way to go, Go with Apple if you want to be an underdog and fit in with a crowd of religous, idiotic and Moronic zealots. Not to mention waste your money.