You’ll see that the underlying reason in almost every case where the Mac lost out to Wintel doesn’t have anything to do with rational arguments based on cost, performance or functionality. Instead, Wintel proponents are shown as consistently fudging such arguments as rationales for decisions already made.
Macintosh Justification
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
Twenty years ago if you had asked Apple if they would be satisfied with three present of the personal computer market they would have told you no, vigorously. Apple HAS fallen behind Wintel. It’s especially strange that Paul Murphy is trying to claim the figures are misleading due to exessive profit on the part of the Wintel companies–they’re the ones with the razor-thin margins thanks to Walmart-style economies of scale.
It’s also strange that Mr. Murphy accuses the Wintel crowd, personified by his “friend Bernie” of being over-defensive. This is sheer psychological transference.
Apple does make the better product, by far, and most people know this. People would just rather spend less money, or they need software that only runs on windows, such as business software, or most games. Those are indeed “rational arguments,” whether Murphy wants to admit it or not.
Despite their disappointingly small market share, Apple is doing well selling upscale products. Indeed they just sold one to me. I’m typing this on the Mac Mini that arrived today. VERY VERY cool machine. I have room for my feet, silence in which to think, stability, and the world’s best gui.
Will the Mac Mini increase Apple’s market share? Time will tell. But if it does, will Murphy claim the figures are misleading due to Apple’s exessive profits???
I think the real reason behind people not buying Mac lies at an uncounscious level. People fear that either
1. Not one of their relations will have one and so they’ll be in an island, and they fear there may one day be something they’ll miss because of that
2. Everyone will switch as well and then either/both
a) The platform will deteriorate
b) They can switch after others
All in all, I think it has very little to do with pricing or power. In NeXT’s heyday, ordinary people could not buy them. Now, even if Apple’s prices were higher, people can afford them. If you can afford price X, you can afford X*a, a between: 1 and: 2.
It’s not rational to take Apple’s relatively small market share as a guage that the Wintel platform is superior. While I’m sure Apple would love for every household to own a Mac, they’ve positioned their superior product at those who can afford it. Ford sells a lot cars than BMW, but I don’t know of anything who thinks that a Ford is better; they’d be buying BMW’s too if they could afford it.
This should help people decide if Apple and a Mini is right for them
http://www.macintouch.com/perfpack/comparison.html
You have your mini? Cool!!
>>”…rational arguments based on cost, performance or functionality…”
Businesses may have a claim to basing purchasing decisions on cost, performance and functionality, but merchants and advertisers learned long ago that all of us ordinary consumers make our purchasing decisions on emotion, not logic. Typically, we find something we want, and then we decide if we can afford it, and if it can do whatt we want it to do.
So, it’s based on rationalization, not rational logic. The “I want that” comes first, followed by the justification.
Apple knows this. That’s why they focus so much on design, style and visual appeal. That’s why people buy $3000 Macs instead of $900 PC’s.
No they wouldn’t. Many people drive tracks and BMW doesn’t make them.
I’d just like to point out that The author was not referring to profit, but rather revenue. Wintel hardware resellers are simply selling more stuff because the vast majority of what they sell doesn’t remain serviceable as long as comparable Apple equipment.
You people don’t get it. If you and I comprise 100% of the total computing population and then you and I both buy computers and you replace yours 3x as often, that means that you have 75% more “market sahre” than mine.
MARKET SHARE is a figure that is gauged by SALES…
It is NOT the total proportional number of computers in use between platforms. You are thinking install base when you are thinking market share.
While Apple’s install base is still small, its no where near as long as their market share.
The fact that PC users have had to replace their computers more freequently only ads to the misunderstanding of this statistic.
The author pretty much laid this fact out for you and yet you still chose not to understand.
I’d just like to point out that The author was not referring to profit, but rather revenue.
That is true but my point still applies. The author claims Wintel companies’ market share seems higher than it is because they increased the rate at which they sell machines (measured in dollars) faster than Apple. Murphy derides the faster rate of sales growth of Wintel machines as “churn” :
“Apple’s declining relative market share measured in dollars has been due more to the expense of Wintel product churn”
But Apple also has had a declining relative market share measured in units. If anything, Apple’s higher prices exaggerate Apple’s market share, when you measure machine sales in dollars instead of units.
Anyway there’s no evidence that people buy Windows machines more frequently because they don’t last as long. Maybe they buy more of them because they can afford to.
I just purchased another mac. Powerbook 15″ G4. I don’t cream over processor speed that much any longer, which the wintel crowd crows about. Heck this think is much faster than my G4 tower. I love the machine. It has everything. I love the fact when I booted it the first time it asked me if I wanted to transfer everything from my existing mac. Sure! An hour later, everything on my tower was on my powerbook. Everything! 35 gigs of data. Down to the last setting. My God! Can you do that Windows? Uhhh…with perfection?
It does everything I need and more. iLife 5 is great. iWorks is great. My Omni apps. Mail.app. Today, Pages has opened all of my complex word docs with no problem. Man, it’s all beautiful. I demand that. Windows is ugly, bloated and just to unpredictable.
Some people are mac users. A few bucks here and there just don’t matter me, when I use something everyday. Windows is freaking Ginsu man.
I just want to reiterate that I agree that Apple makes far better products than the Windows-based competition, regardless of market share measured in dollars or units, or installed base. And Apple has plenty enough business to sustain it and allow it to continue to lead the market in terms of quality and innovation. And my Mini is sweet!
Agreed.
This article seems a bit over the top. Personally I have never had that many problems with Windows XP.
By the time his buddy has learned GNU/Linux enough to be as productive as in Windows, he probably could have rebooted his Windows boxen atleast 1,000 times.
The author may have an agenda. Maybe he is one of those Mac evangezealots. So what? Why is it so bad to have an agenda. Sometimes iI wish i were moreso. I use a homebuilt athlon 900 machine running Ubuntu, and a brand spanking new iBook. Personally I think my friends who actually use a computer for work would benefit greatly from using either paltform. But for those who arent cli geeks, and don’t think that accomplishing work also means a few hours tweaking your machine weekly, I would recommend a mac hands down.
I would agree with the arguments supporting the fact that mac users tend to use their machines longer than wintel users. I have a cousin who has a 3 yr old powerbook he is still in love with and it seems i speak with mac users on 500-800 mghz hardware quite often who are still happy with their old hardware. It may be that macs age more gracefully than their x86 oounterparts. AFter all with the expl;osion of x86 processor speed it was only natural that people would write programs for these fast new boxes, making old boxes seem sluggish and “old” by comparison.
“1. Not one of their relations will have one and so they’ll be in an island, and they fear there may one day be something they’ll miss because of that ”
It’s simpler than that. People just follow, it doesn’t matter what it is. You just have to give them other people to follow. Reasoning and logic are a last ditch effort when there is no one left to follow!
“By the time his buddy has learned GNU/Linux enough to be as productive as in Windows, he probably could have rebooted his Windows boxen atleast 1,000 times.”
That’s a very ignorant comment. Perhaps it takes you hours to understand simple concepts, but for most people it happens rather quickly.
Try being a Linux/BSD person and talk to Windows users about security, they amazingly spin wild excuses for their OSes lack of security. Please, software is not like a bridge, the more people who use it does not mean its automatically going to become insecure.
umm… dude… if you are not aware.. most people are not too slick upstairs.
(that is not a barb at the poster Kyle was referring to, just a reality check for Kyle’s utopian idea that all people are as “quick on the uptake” as he is.)
That’s a very ignorant comment. Perhaps it takes you hours to understand simple concepts, but for most people it happens rather quickly.
Right, that is why more than 90 percent of the worlds computers are shipped with GNU/Linux.
I am an avid XP user but I love the Mac OS. I think both have strengths and weaknesses haha except Mac has maybe a bit more advantage in that area. But I like fast stuff. I really want my computer to run fast and it does not seem so far that Mac hardware is able to do that. I hope that Mac fixes all their hardware problems with thermal and power issues and comes out with something thats as kickbutt as the FX series of AMD prcoesssors…and oh yeah games!!! NEED GAMES!
to see some hard data independently reproduced by several non-partisan groups/researchers/whatever that shows that PC users upgrade any more frequently than Mac users.
I talked with a little old lady two days ago that wants to replace a 9 yr old Windows 95 box. She bought a $329 PC from Circuit City http://weeklyad.circuitcity.com/circuitcity/default.aspx?action=bro…
I know plenty of users on both platforms that upgrade rapidly (power users always wanting the latest and greatest) and I likewise know plenty on both that run old dogs until they will not run any more. Hell if I can come up with a clear winner.
Its an old wives tale that PC buyers as a whole upgrade more frequently than Mac buyers. Instead of just repeating mindlessly, why not show some proof?
I resent Mr. Murphy’s lumping OSX with free distributions of Unix as if they are “spiritual brothers” in some sense.
I view the Apple “lifestyle” as an unacceptable alternative to the propriatary world of EULAs and Product Activation that is the Windows world. At least Microsoft doesn’t control the hardware their system runs on in any direct way. If Apple’s product is truly better, then why do they rely on anti-competitive measures preventing commodity PPC systems from becoming commonplace? Because Apple’s business model relys on ripping off their blindly loyal customers. Despite recent “cooperation” with the open source community, Apple is still very much a propriatary busniess. I believe moreso than Microsoft.
Did anyone else find it odd that Mr. Murphy repeatedly referenced some dedicated Microsoft supporters? I’m not sure what world he’s living in, but in the world i live hating Microsoft is a forgone conclusion. In my expirience, if there is any “shouting from supporters”, its Apple supporters. This is because Apple spends so much of their time marketing a “lifestyle”, a “digital hub” to the point where their customers (and indeed, some of their competitors) think the comparison is truly “Ford vs Porche”.
In reality, Apple’s hardware is over priced and under performing. The G5 is a powerful chip without question, but an equally powerful AMD64-based system could be assembled for about half the cost. This is the part of the argument where Mac Zealots say “but it doesn’t look as nice!”. That is a matter of personal preference. Although i am impressed by the various iMac designs, the PowerMacs are little more than standard midtowers. There’s plenty of commodity cases that look just as attractive.
Although i personally believe the future of the desktop lies with Gnu/Linux, I don’t believe OSX is the current leader by some kind of landslide. Its true that Panther has quite a level of slickness missing in the compeition, but that doesn’t translate into increased productivity. I have an iMac and I often feel that OSX makes terrible use of screen space. Perhaps this is so they can sell more $3,000 24″ Widescreen LCDs? … No, Apple would never do that to their loyal customers.
I understand why people use macs, and To Each His Own. But this Murphy fellow starts with “Apple is the Best”, and draws his conclusions from that central point. I refuse to believe that such a mindset “goes without saying”, certainly not without argument.
“In other words, it’s Wintel’s rapid upgrade cycle that’s been getting progressively more and more out of line with norms for industrial or retail electronics products, and therefore not falling interest in the Mac, that’s behind the numbers. Think about this for a minute: If PCs remained usable as long as Macs do, industrywide total revenues (aka customer costs) would be nearly two-thirds lower.”
Back that hogwash up with some facts!
I say he’s two-thirds full of it….but don’t ask me to prove it with data. Just take my opinion on it.
“In reality, Apple’s hardware is over priced and under performing. The G5 is a powerful chip without question, but an equally powerful AMD64-based system could be assembled for about half the cost.”
see this http://www.circuitcity.com/rpsm/catOid/-12962/N/20012961+20012962+4…
$750 or better yet $899 for a machine with a CPU that runs well against a $2500 dual 2.0GHz G5
see these benchmarks: http://pcnmac.com/benchmarks.htm
“With the Athlon 64 3400+ AMD has effectively killed any reason to shell out the extra bucks for an Athlon 64 FX; the 3400+ is basically as fast as the Athlon 64 FX 51 at a lower price point.”
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=1941&p=1
The performance diff is ALMOST negligible.
ChanMan’s benchmarks are very relevant.
Ummm, So the parts in a PC are crappier than a Apple? Really, boy am I glad those chips are comming out of different factories with different process — NOT. This is an age old farce – the parts in Macs are just as junky as those in PCs if not more. You know Apple has had recalls (and plently) for shoddy parts (and that which is from Apple).
By the way my PC is ~6 years old – AMD 700 – granted it does not run Windows – but you know – no major failures I have updated the HD and added a DVD burner though.
Also this comparison of Apple to BMW and PCs to Ford (or generic car company – Kia) is over rated. Well maybe in price. However you can say a PC is like Honda, Toyota, or Hyundai – there are differences. And guess what? European cars are over rated and have more mechanical problems than a Japanese car – (and I think Consumer Reports said even more than some Korean cars – go figure).
All, in all though the Mac Mini is the first competitive PC available from Apple to the average Joe – and by average the Joe that does not have deep pockets and shops at Walmart of the day.
By the time his buddy has learned GNU/Linux enough to be as productive as in Windows, he probably could have rebooted his Windows boxen atleast 1,000 times.
I think one of the points is that he would have had to.
well i choose a wintel over a mac because:
– windows was widely adopted
– intel cpus were more widely used (more industry standard – i didnt know if the mac processor woudl still be around)
– it all came from one company (i dont trust one company to handle everything in the world)
other than that i loved using macs in libraries and schools.
thanks
ONE company pushing Mac
MANY companies pushing Wintel
MANY companies pushing Linux (Hard though because windows is already well established on the desktop but linux rules on servers)
Who gets more publicity?
Plenty of people can afford Macs but simply don’t want them. Many wealthy Australians drive locally built Ford or GM vehicles because they are better suited to local conditions and have more dealers than exotic imports.
In the PC world everyone knows an ‘expert’ who can install software, upgrade etc usually at no charge. Almost every suburban shopping centre and small town in Australia has a PC repair and sales shop. In some places in Australia the nearest Apple dealer is 1000km away.
There is not much difference in stability and useability of linux distros such as SuSE, OSX10 and Windows XP.
Windows has a vastly larger array of hardware support and software than the alternatives.
Please do not make sweeping statements or generalisation of issues because assumption is often incorrect
So in your friend’s book, a terrorist is an arab who strapped explosives in his body and an american is a rich beer guzzling pot bellied man ???
That is not right so pls refrain from making assumption of what you think why user choose a certain platform
” Oh, and I could get a 30″ LCD for my Dell too … ” <– this is utterly pointless and did i notice just a tinge of bragging?
Btw, I do not even own a mac
Are you from the same Earth as I am? Yes G5 isn’t the gaming dream that Athlon is, but only Athlon is that gaming dream. So far, CPU’s hardly make a noticable difference though if you get the high end, and buy a good graphics card. A 2GHz G5 should have no trouble running any Mac game well.
I can’t imagine you’d really care about 90fps verse 70fps… I live with 30!
But for games selection, Windows still is it. Even though I have two games I can’t run in XP:
Sid Meiers Civil War
Klingon Academy
If anyone got a Mini already (didnt know it was available already), feedback please. Two weeks talking about the performance. I want to hear from the people with the actual machine in their hands. Things happen. Mac didnt get the market at one time. Z80 didnt do it( I love that MP) either. Let us see what happens 20 years from now. Will somebody else comeout? Will Apple rise? We’ll see.
I was first introduced to Apple products in 1993 and have used them ever since. I liked them so much I even took a gig at the company to help move it forward. Recently, however, I’m starting to reconsider my affiliation. Not because of pricing or quality, but because of attitude. I’ve seen Apple take on and incorporate products from 3rd party developers (e.g. Watson, Konfabulator) and was a bit saddened. I fully understand that they are a business but the machiavellian attitude towards those developers really disappointed me.
I don’t know if there are any linux variants that are as friendly as the mac is today, but I’m willing to endure some growing pains and hitch my wagon behind an OS that won’t leave developers out in the cold.
“CPU’s hardly make a noticable difference though if you get the high end, and buy a good graphics card. A 2GHz G5 should have no trouble running any Mac game well.
I can’t imagine you’d really care about 90fps verse 70fps…”
Read ChanMan’s benchmarks.
1 Intel P4EE 3.2 GHz
vs
2 2.0 GHz G5
1GB ram each
Radeon 9800 each
[P4EE | Dual G5]
UT2003 334 fps 80 fps – 254 fps diff
Jedi Outcast 133 fps 72 fps – 61 fps diff
Quake III 501 fps 404 fps – 97 fps diff
Do you care now?
The majority of the posts here are doing exactly what the article discussed. Wintel user’s justifying why they shouldn’t use a Mac.
Its a sense of duty almost. If for example someone was thoroughly getting their ass kicked, I’d be compelled to help.
I hate to see people waste money. Let me help.
500-800 mhz? dont make me giggle. I use a 350 mhz G3 for my day-to-day stuff. And its quite enough to run Adium, firefox, and thunderbird at once(tolerably), with 512 mb RAM of course. I would not expect this from a pentium II at the same clock speed: Macs have extremely long useful lifespans.
“I use a 350 mhz G3 for my day-to-day stuff. And its quite enough to run Adium, firefox, and thunderbird at once(tolerably), with 512 mb RAM of course. I would not expect this from a pentium II at the same clock speed: Macs have extremely long useful lifespans.”
Considering Apple was shipping new 350MHz G3 Macs in 2000, why don’t you compare it against a comparable PC cpu from the same time frame:
Intel had the Pentium III running at 1.13GHz in mid 2000.
AMD had the K7 Athlon Classic running at 1GHZ in early 2000.
There are tens of millions of people still using 5 yr old PCs with cpus of that class and even slower. Please try again.
Whenever anyone uses the fact that more apps are available for windows than the Mac I always equate that out to the same thing with consoles and games… Like how the Playstation has more games than anyone else, but it also has 10x the crap that the other systems have. And the same thing with windows too, Sure it has lots of software but for every 1 that someone actually uses regularly there are thousands that people don’t wether its quality or just that its plain crap.
500-800 mhz? dont make me giggle. I use a 350 mhz G3 for my day-to-day stuff. And its quite enough to run Adium, firefox, and thunderbird at once(tolerably), with 512 mb RAM of course. I would not expect this from a pentium II at the same clock speed: Macs have extremely long useful lifespans.
As chanman pointed out, and you as a Mac user should be well aware, MHz IS MEANINGLESS!
At the time Mac reps were duping customers into buying these (i worked at circuit city at the time), they were claiming you multiply the “G” number by the Mhz, and that’s the real performance number. Now you want to compare a 350 PII to a 350 G3?!?
Also, you’re definition of “tolerate” is a bit skewed. I have a 500Mhz G3 and i can no longer “tolerate” its turtle-like speed in Firefox. I am going to sell it and put the proceeds towards an Athlon based laptop.
I guess this one was based off of everything I was thinking, but couldnt say so well. Alot of techs under-estimate the power of the Mac. Alot of opinions form without ever using one. From a guy who uses Intel,AMD,G5, G4 and every OS under the sun, I have to say the more the better. Personally I like em all, for various reasons that would take far too long to explain.
500-800 mhz? dont make me giggle. I use a 350 mhz G3 for my day-to-day stuff. And its quite enough to run Adium, firefox, and thunderbird at once(tolerably), with 512 mb RAM of course. I would not expect this from a pentium II at the same clock speed: Macs have extremely long useful lifespans.
A friend of mine’s running XP on a Celeron 400 with 512mb of RAM that I built her (from old spare parts of mine; cash is a serious issue for her family), and it runs Office, Firebird, Thunderbird, and whatever other basic productivity software she needs just fine. Older PC hardware runs stuff just fine, provided you give it enough RAM.
Speaking as a person that can afford several BMW’s but instead go for the Ford (mhmmm, actually Toyota), I can honestly make an argument that Ford/Toyota is better than BMW. Toyota get’s me from point A to point B just as well as the BMW. In addition to serving the same function, it does it much cheaper, and is far easier to mantain. So what exactly do I get if I buy a BMW? My honest opinion, a whole bunch of image and perceived brand value.
Well, the same is true about the Mac versus PC. PC is far cheaper, far more open, and has much more software. Furthermore, the majority of development happens on the PC. The only thing the Mac has going for it is the perceived brand value. So even if the Mac was just as cheap as the PC, I’m afraid I’ll still go with the AMD 64.
I would be interested in a Mac, but I just don’t see a reason for it.
slash, I see your point, and I didn’t mean to imply that the only people who don’t own Macs are those who can’t afford them. However, there is a segment of the market for whom HOW they get from point A to point B is very important, not only on their comfort level, but also on their image level. This is an important part of branding these days. For some people the computer is just a tool and it doesn’t matter–if Wintel does basically the same thing cheaper, then great. For others, style, image, comfort-level, all matter greatly–and that’s Apple’s market. They’re probably the same people who are going to buy a Bang & Olufson hi-fi system instead of Sony or Panasonic.
Of course, it’s not just about style. For some uses, Mac is a superior computer and platform; for other uses, Wintel is superior. It depends on what tools you need for what trade.
Benchmarking ATI cards on Mac and PC doesn’t show anything other than that ATI’s OS X drivers suck just like their linux drivers. In addition many of the games are benchmarked in direct3d on windows, while in openGL on the Mac, something that doesn’t take in account ATI’s history of producing sucky openGL drivers.
Quite amusing all those passing analogies.Cars,HI-FI,friends,power-cows.Is MacOsX a good OS?Sure, why not.Is it the holy grale?Absolutely not,it doesn’t exist,it’s invented to keep the masses busy/buying.A man who advises his friend to spend even more money although he knows his friend is in a financially precaire situation isn’t my friend.I have more feeling with the guy who refurbished that celeron 400 because he knew money is a serious issue for his friend.Some poster said he liked the Amiga because it had a soul.Well yes let’s put another gallon of oil on the fire for the marketing trolls.You will never have the biggest,best,smartest;car/HI-FI/PC,friend,power-cow etc,there’s allways one above.BMW?,yak,let’s go alpina.Alpina?,yuk,let’s go drag-racer,drag-racer?,yuk still to common,let’s fly to the moon.
A computer is as smart as it’s breakfast.It’s soul is what you yourself have put into it.Everyone with a lot of cash can buy allmost anything.But in the end it’s all specs and you still have to use it,that difference is something you can’t buy.I believe in right and honour.Here in Europe they introduced the euro currency.Do you think that was in the interest of the majority of the voters?Hell no,everything became more expensive.Lately they introduced 10 more member countries.Very social from them to do that because 9 of ten have poor economies,you would say.Just good for economy,poor country gives much lower salary expectations,lower salary expectations gives more profit,more profit does benefit the share holders.Whose economy?It’s sad to see all that plastic these days.Ironically a lot of people still can’t read or write,yet they know coca-cola,mercedes-benz.
Someone should inform the author that the plural of “anecdote” is not “data.”
I’ve been using a Mac since 1998.
The only regret I have, is wasting time, talking with discontented Windows users, and people whose computers don’t work, who are thinking about the alternatives.
They ask me about the differences between tha two platforms, and I answer their questions.
I invite them to take my Mac for a spin, try to crash it, edit a video, build a spreadsheet, a database, surf for porn, burn a few discs, anything they want to do.
Nobody ever made it that far.
I run into them a week or two later, and ask if they got their computer fixed.
The stories are alway the same.
“I’ll just stick with what I know. I bought a new computer down at BIG BOX.”
“I talked with my neighbour who’s a computer expert, and he says Mac’s are crap.”
“I know a guy who can upgrade mine for less than the Mac.”
“You can’t upgraade a Mac.”
“All my friends use Windows, I should to.”
“PC’s have more megahertz.”
This one blows me away!
“There is more software available.”
Well if there’s so much uber cool software, why the feck do the PC crowd, always argue about IE and Firefox all the time?
So much software! Only two browsers?
Sheep! No other word for it.
Scared sheep!
Like one fellow up the thread stated, “most are followers.”
I’m the only person I know, that’s actually happy with my computer.
I’m also the only person I know, who hasn’t had my computer apart, or in a shop, hasn’t had to upgrade, hasn’t had to replace a part, or deal with thousands of security issues.
(no value there)
Potential switchers, please don’t bother me anymore, unless you’re serious.
Otherwise, just go to BIG BOX, and buy a cheap PC.
Save your pennies, cause you’re gonna need them, the next time your computer goes for a crap.
My PC runs fine (well, actually not at the mo, but that’s ‘cos of PCI interrupt conflicts that I inflicted on myself to some extent), and my gf’s Mac runs fine- faster than my PC at half the clock rate, but all that’s irrelevant to my point…
PC Churn is a fact- large businesses (>1000 employees) across Europe, Asia, and America turn their PCs out regularly, through malfunction etc, and then embark on constant upgrade programs as well, and then periodically embark on total replacement schemes where every desktop PC is replaced in the company over a specific period (3 months to 2 years, say).
The number of users at the company stays the same (or drops, if “increased efficiency” from the hardware means fewer people needed to do same number of jobs), whatever OS they’re using.
PC recycling & refurb schemes are only just getting off the ground really, over the past 5 years, compared to the volumes of equipment being churned. A lot of business in the UK, for example, don’t give their redundant but working equipment away because they think they’ll be hit for taxes.
Hard-core gamers often upgrade the upgradeable when they can pay for it (PC or Console).
Home users often don’t think about upgrading, just replacing (My telly works, no need to replace it “just because”, same with the computer) or buying new (new bed for the baby ‘cos they didn’t have one, for example). Sometimes the replacement is better than the original (eg, new PC or new telly). Sometimes it does exactly the same thing (eg bed).
Long and short of it, sales figures aren’t user figures.
I must agree that integration of hardware and software is superior in almost all products sold by Apple, but I must disagree in terms of longevity of usage. I currently own a pair of IBM computers a Thinkpad R40 and a thinkcenter A50p, great machines. Bought them because they are well supported and do not break. I agree that software glitches have caused me a few, but very few problems, when using XP professional, but the machines are upgradable and I plan to have them for years. I used my last Thinkpad for 5 years, and it was used and outdated when I got it. The Powerbooks, which I even took a trip to an Apple store to see, do not allow for changes much. They are very expensive and flimsy to the touch. I spend most of my time typing and net surfing, the interface of the MAC is not worth the expense to me. Meanwhile, at work ( I am a teacher), our network is down again, due mostly to the ineptness of the fools that attempt to fix it, I take my thinkpad and laugh at those dependent upon the HP crap that the school bought. Yes, IBM products are more expensive than HP, less than MAC, but the cost differences are easily weighed favorably against the frustrations of the one and lack of upgradability and interoperability of the other. I don’t want to constantly have to redo all my files to be compatible with the rest of the world. I do not use Office or Outlook, I use Lotus software and am thrilled with it. I have upgraded both of my computers, changing them to my way of doing things, not me to theirs as my needs change…..for me that was the major selling point of the platform. I appreciate the fact that MAC users use their equipment a very long time…..so do I.
The computer center is empty,
Silent except for the whine of the cooling fans.
I walk the rows of CPUs,
My skin prickling with magnetic flux.
I open a door, cold and hard,
And watch the lights dancing on the panels.
A machine without soul, men call it,
But its soul is the sweat of my comrades,
Within it lie the years of our lives,
Disappointment, friendship, sadness, joy,
The algorithmic exultations,
The long nights filled with thankless toil,
I hear the echoes of sighs and laughter,
And in the darkened offices
The terminals shine like stars.
— Geoffrey James, The Zen of Programming
In 1982, IBM developed the PC and spent hundreds of millions of dollars promoting it. In 1990, the mass-media hyped Win-3 to the moon, and the US defense firms adopted HP Vectra type machines that ran DOS. The CP/M developers had a platform to sell from and didn’t want to learn something totally new, IBM knew that. There is one cause/effect hypothesis that seems logical: reality distortion fields have probably indirectly caused more auto related deaths than any random act of “terrorism”.
Apple’s business model is far too much like Microsoft, in that it is monopoly pronel Apple is based on closed system computers, whereas microsoft is based on a closed system OS.
That doesn’t mean that apple’s os isn’t great at what it does and that the user experience isn’t fulfilling, it just means that Mac isn’t as experimental a platform.
The main competitor’s to me in terms of most open to most closed run like this…
Most open- Linux > Microsoft > Apple – most closed.
I think that’s what it really comes down to. I have a feeling people will be moving more into a more open direction instead of the other way. That doesn’t mean that Apple will not always have a nitch market, but it will likely never reach dominance or close to it.
PC Churn in corporate environments isn’t all to do with PC speed. My company (BNP Paribas – 80,000 employees) has a turnover of 3 years. It’s not to do with speed for us, it’s to do with depreciation. The cost of the PC (and the few Macs we have) is written off over 3 years. Same for servers. We only buy servers with good warrantys. A HP server comes with 3 years next day onsite support as the crappiest warranty. After 3 years you have to pay AU$200 a month to keep the same level of warranty. The server has been written off and it costs us more to keep the server going each month. It’s cheaper for us to buy the current latest and greatest and get the associated performance boost (our average low end server is about AU$6000).
I’ve used both Macs and PCs and have been happy with both. On the Windows side I really like the fact that parts are widely available and generally inexpensive. The selection of hardware is great and XP is a fine OS. What I generally use the PC for is gaming and using apps not available on the Mac which in my instance is not very much. I don’t have spam problems because I use Apple Mail and I do not have adware, malware issues because I use FireFox on the PC and Safari on the Mac. The Mac gets used a majority of the time so viruses are not an issue. WIth that said , until the Mini I can see why people choose PCs over Macs. Cost, availability and selection of hardware and software. As an alternative to WIndows the Mac is an excellent choice but not for everyone. I will stick to using both. I can afford to and it gives me the best computing experience.
That’s the silliest statement I’ve ever heard…
First of all, if people aren’t buying Macs, how then is Apple still in business?
If people aren’t buying Macs, how do you explain the hundreds of empty Apple Macintosh Boxes lying around my offices?
In the article itself, it mentions that the unit sales of Macintoshes increase each year.
In unit sales, Apple sells more computers than Dell or Gateway.
I own both Macs and PC’s. My 10 year old PowerMac 8500 still works great!
It runs OS X, and at a nice speed. And it was trivial to upgrade it from a 604 133mhz G1 processor to a G3 350mhz Processor.
I think we have a LOT of Anti-Apple Trolling in this thread.
I think when the difference in mhz is pretty big, and it is in this case, then the clock speed is definitly important. If feels kinda good to still be using a machine that a lot of my friends with 3 ghz P4’s laugh at. And its capable, windows redraw very quickly, the genie effect sucks ok but i expected that, it certainly looks better and runs better than the new machines in my dorm (mostly because they have windows and are taken care of by morons). I probably should have compared it to PC’s with 350 mhz processors, i didnt realize that the difference was so big between machines of that era. i knew the pc’s would be faster in terms of mhz, but not that much faster. my bad.
Also, you’re definition of “tolerate” is a bit skewed. I have a 500Mhz G3 and i can no longer “tolerate” its turtle-like speed in Firefox. I am going to sell it and put the proceeds towards an Athlon based laptop.
@Mike
What?
You got 128mb of RAM in that thing?
That’s the ONLY way a 500mhz G3 is going to be slow.
My 350mhz G3 Blue and White with 256mb of RAM is PLENTY fast in Firefox…
And would get faster yet if I kicked it up to 512mb.
And… If you are selling a Mac to buy an Athlon (which I doubt… Sounds more like Trolling to me.), you deserve it.
Not that there’s ANYTHING wrong with a nice Athlon System.
But, if you are going to bite your nose to spite your face to put yourself through the hassle of transferring all your data, bookmarks and email from a Mac Environment to a Windows Environment, when you could buy a Mac Mini and just copy your user Directory over and go….
That doesn’t sound real to me.
I doubt you are actually a Mac user, since your relation of the experience of using a G3 500 doesn’t jibe with reality.
And NO user of ANY platform would so casually switch to another totally different OS. Especially not for speed concerns..
Speed concerns mean you stay with the same OS, and get a faster platform.
Trolling concerns mean you make up a silly excuse to be able to troll..
Oh, and BTW… a $40 PCI Video card will make that G3 500 MUCH snappier with Firefox. I don’t have one. But, if I wanted to kick up my G3, I’d get one…
I am OS agnostic, I have 6 PC’s at my desk. 2 Macs and the rest are X86 Boxes running Windows XP, MEPIS Liunx, Linspire, and Windows 98SE.
I use all platforms, because I like to learn new stuff all the time.
So, don’t dismiss this as a post from a “Mac Zealot”.
I just want people not to lie about the various Platforms.
A G3 500 is a nice box. It is still VERY useful. Heck! I just got a G3 266 Wallstreet from someone. That’s a nice machine too!
The problem with M$ zealots is for them computer==PC and operating system==Windows. They never tested another computers or operating systems and think they can opine about other platforms.
Well, sure…
There’s a LOT more software on the PC side than the Mac Side.
But, the question that isn’t asked is…. So what?
On the PC, I use:
– Internet Explorer or Firefox
– Microsoft Word
– Microsoft Excel
– Quicken
– iTunes or MusicMatch JukeBox
– RealPlayer
– Quicktime
– Windows Media Player
– Yahoo! IM
– AOL IM
– Microsoft IM
– Various Games
On my Mac I use:
– Safari or Firefox
– Microsoft Word
– Microsoft Excel
– Quicken
– iTunes
– RealPlayer
– Quicktime
– iChat
– Yahoo! IM
– AOL IM
– Microsoft IM
Mostly, the SAME software….
That there may be more software on the PC side doesn’t matter.
The important programs that I need to use EVERYDAY either exist as the exact same version, or there’s an equivalent.
The only place where there’s a huge difference in availability is games.
Some games I like on my PC aren’t on the Mac, and vice-versa…
And not every person plays games…
It’s not the amount of software that matters, it’s whether what you need to be productive is available.
And on the Mac, it’s all there…. And more..
I easily counter the software argument when someone who is considering a Mac, says: “But, my friend told me there’s not a lot of software on the Mac…”.
I ask them, “What Software do you need?”
The ALWAYS say: Word Processing, Spreadsheets, Music, Web Browsing, eMail, watching downloaded movies or video, and games…
All of those exist on the Mac, especially the category leaders…
So, this Software Argument is like the Mhz myth..
It’s a distortion of reality.
Since 1999, I had 3 PCs running Win 98, 2K and XP. Just to keep up with those frequent non-compatible software upgrade. And during these years, I use the same old Mac with OS upgraded from OS9 to OSX. That’s a difference.
http://img34.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img34&image=middlefinger7dg.jpg
33% of Windows software sold is virus software, software uninstallers, etc. Things Mac users don’t need. As the old saying goes, “how many word processors do you need?”
If you want to play games, buy a gosh darn console. You get to play them on your TV with controllers dedicated to it. (Usually) no crashes at all. Much nicer experience.
Use whatever suits you. That’s that.
Anyone can write a virus for any system. I doubt the number is really 33%, but maybe if Apple had more than a 3% market share, crackers would spend more time creating malicious apps for that system. Granted, things like MyDoom are probably less possible on OSX/*nix, but the development of viruses are unavoidable.
And its interesting that you suggest Console gaming as a viable alternative to PC gaming. Online console gaming hasn’t been a serious viability until very, very recently (Xbox Live, Dreamcast kiddies hold your tongue). Games like Battlefield 1942 or (oh god) Starcraft simply don’t exist, or wouldn’t be at all fun with console controller. Its not the same thing, and Mac’s overall impotence in that arena cannot simply be excused by playing console games.
The article is poor. It contains slurs such as “wingots”; it dismisses valid concerns as irrelevant.
Windows makes sense for gamers, people who want certain specialised apps, and people who are used to it and hate change.
Macs are slower, and traditionally, more expensive. They’re proprietary; hardware is more closed, but some of the layers of the software are more open than Microsoft’s. They have less apps; for a huge percentage of people, this is really a non-issue.
People who claim to be “power users” and need the platform with the most software are more amusing than anything. There’s far more software for even the mac than I’ll ever have time to so much as start, much less try. If you need specific apps that aren’t available on a Mac, that’s a perfectly valid reason not to use one; a vague “lack of software” is questionable.
Linux is an open system. It’s reasonably solid, reasonably secure, etc. It works; it has a fair number of apps. It’s nowhere near as easy to configure new apps, ad-hoc wireless networks, power saving, etc on as a Mac is – it will take more of your time if you’re a user beyond the email and word processing only level.
My main system is Linux; I prefer KDE to OSX in terms of user interface. Warped, perhaps, but true; I miss features like virtual terminals when I’m on my mac – there are programs which allow you to have them, but one thing that macs are supposed to be good at is good defaults. The need to install third-party apps to get what I have grown to consider a basic feature irks me.
I’d rather use either Linux or a mac than Windows; between Linux and a mac, for the moment, I find Linux better; but between really cool APIs and impressive, polished apps (iTunes gained points by letting me browse the music collections of everyone who had been using it in the building, without a single click on my part; the system monitor shows things like open files, and has some basic profiling support….), the mac is growing on me.
I’m not a gamer; I’m not an artist; I don’t need Turbotax. For me, as for many people, non-windows platforms are viable.
Mike, I see you have a slot loading iMac. That will accept PC133 RAM up to 1GB. It may help with some of your speed issues. I use an iBook G3/500 daily for field service work and it is good enough for email, internet, running network utilities, pretty much everything I need to do. Is it fast? No way but I am surprised MacOSX runs as well as it does. Drop a spare stick of RAM in there and a faster HD will make a huge difference. Also try a custom install of MacOSX, you won’t need all of those other localization files. If you decide to get the AMD thats going to be good machine too.
A) Macs being similar is *better*.. it means cheaper components.. imagine if mac didnt support pci.. no ati or nvidia.
b) Macs being different is worse… less driver support.. almost no technical improvements over the pc platform because of economies of scale.
c) Macs costing more is *worse*.. because something is more expensive does not make it better only idiots believe this. Is the Apple DVD burner provided by apple any different from the same model DVD burner bought for pc?
I think not. (same for hard disks cpus everything)
d) Software Counts but both have enough software
e) Stability counts as does drivers .. but Apples lack of ability to provide stable drivers for its meager support of hardware (in comparison to windows and linux) is historical fact. All platforms have a similar amount of problems.. (why not go to a mac audio or graphic forum and read for yourself )
f) Ease of use is not always better.. Some people drive manuals some people drive automatics.. ill leave the reader to decide who is who.
Glenn Sweeney
“You Mac users just go ahead and keep pepetrating the “Macs are Superior” myth even though you’ve no kind of figures to back it up. Stay in your reality distortion field and continue to feel good about buying Steve Jobs another Lexus or whatever while you stare at your pretty computer. Too bad they don’t come in pink, huh?”
What’s wrong with you? I always see these hateful posts from people who can’t even find the power button on a Mac. If you can afford a Mac whats wrong with that?
A relative of mine, after years of making fun of me for sticking to the Mac platform ( ” Apple is going down man!”) , recently switched to a Mac and he has never looked back.
Why? Although his Dell laptop had a “faster” laptop in terms of Mhz than his new PBook, he was sick and tired of how slow it was. A PC runs great after a clean install. A couple of months later it just slows down. A year later, its crawling. Fragmentaion issues, virii, system bloat, etc.
Another interesting thing to note was that when I showed him the iLife apps while he was still a PC user, he kept saying “ive got programs that can do that”
Now that he is using them daily he can’t stop raving about them. I think it takes a month or two of daily use to really understand and appreciate the benifit of owning a mac.
Ironicly, the eye-candy is the least impressive aspect of OS X. It just takes a certain period of usage to understand this.
PS: I am also the tech support of the family (as most people here can appreciate) for all patforms. The Mac users require far less atention than the PC users. hardly a scientific analysis, I know, but its the truth.
At the end of the day for me, Macintosh is just another computer. Its no less or more impressive than any other system i’ve ever used. There’s an initial appreciation of the slick modern compositing effects, but the more i use it, the less impressed i am.
So overall, I just can’t see why i would want to pay double the price for an underperforming, less compatible, less customizable machine.
I wouldn’t feel so strongly about it if i didn’t know so many Mac people who talk as if its gospel that Mac is the endall of personal computers.
I finally got one (the iMac) and i still use my Windows machines a lot more. Hell, i use my Ubuntu and Slackware machines a lot more.
First off some of you think that some cheap beige box will totally smoke a top G5 line
http://barefeats.com/pentium4.html
Second most businesses dont build there own machines due to warranty and reapir issues. Just not a chance worth taking.
I run a pre-press department for a small/mid size printer. I had the option of switching to a PC’s. After all said and done MAC for many reasons we decided on. One of which is ease of networking, font useage, and speed.
I would say though, if Apple styed with the G4 chip any longer in desktops we would be in a sea of PCs at our shop 🙂
Look, I’m a Mac guy, but his ending remarks are fantastic.
“He’ll die of a stress related heart attack.”
I love it…
USE MAC OR DIE
🙂
I’ve worked in Europe for a couple of years and there I was obliged to work on a Mac. For me it was great at the beginning but a little latter I realized it was a waste of money and I couldn’t do what I wanted (mainly because of the limitations of OS9).
Then, with OSX (that wasn’t ready), it would be a lot better, but I still could do even better with a much cheaper Athlon + Suse Linux as I finally did when I could convince my boss to acquire one for me.
Back to Brazil I see this great announcement that finally Apple will act on lower prices… and just today I’ve knew the cheapest Mini (1,25GHz,40Gb) will arrive here for a little over a thousand dollars.
With this price I get two more powerful PC’s, with monitor, keyboard, etc…
Who is not being rational???
”
500-800 mhz? dont make me giggle. I use a 350 mhz G3 for my day-to-day stuff. And its quite enough to run Adium, firefox, and thunderbird at once(tolerably), with 512 mb RAM of course. I would not expect this from a pentium II at the same clock speed: Macs have extremely long useful lifespans.
”
nt
The problem with M$ zealots is for them computer==PC and operating system==Windows. They never tested another computers or operating systems and think they can opine about other platforms.
It happens all over, though. For Mac users, a PC==Windows Computer. Where the PC really shines is with Linux, IMO. I realize it’s not for everyone, but I got a PC two years ago for $700 and it still runs my modern version of Linux with all the bells and whistles at blazing speed. It’s a P4 2 Ghz, 756 Meg RAM two NVIDIA (1 PCI, 1 AGP) for dual display.
All OSS…totally set up to my liking. Running Arch Linux…a simple “pacman -Syu” upgrades the whole system.
Yes, it has its disadvantages (it requires that you actually be familiar with the sys), but neither Wintel or Mac can offer what I get out of Linux on PC. I’ve had no problems with this machine, and I don’t anticipate having to upgrade for a few more years…blazing fast so far. I don’t use GNOME or KDE, though.
To each their own.
Far-fetched as it may sound, I think some mainstreamers (especially conservatives and paleo-libertarians) shy away from Macs because of their perceived leftist user base….academics, artists….heck even Al Gore is on their board of directors.
Mac Mini starts at $499 ($450 at Target)
Many people (Mac zelots or not) will honk on about how speed isnt everything, very true.
But if you work in an area where you need to get data prosessed in as small a time as you can, then speed is quite important.
Though Windows isnt that fast I agree,
You can argue that Amiga and mac if the 80’s work better then XP- Your right But 3.11 was also quite snappy.
I think its just a choice MS has made, people want features and most normal people wont worry if it takes a bit longer.
Mac has gone this way a bit too- OsX isnt that fast from using it.
I use an X86 cos I can crunch data at the best speed possible.
I use linux/x11/icewm to get the best performance with little overhead, insert Gnome or KDe and Id be about the same as XP.
As far as I can see- OsX/Gnome/KDE/XP are all too bloated,
It seems thats what ppl want.
Tho Im happy not to use an environment.
Im just happy I can use new software that runs as fast as it used to.
umm… Rush Limbaug uses Macs and always has.
when ever he can he promotes Macintosh… he even asked Steve Jobs if he could run Apple commercials during his show… apparently Jobs can not separate business from politics as well as Rush can because Jobs turned him down… and apparently Rush was gonna give them a good deal on air time.
I finally got an IBM ThinkPad E series with XP professional. I also have a PowerBook G4. I can affirm what other Mac users have been saying: XP is no match for Os X or even Os 9. What irks me most is the Pop-ups by Windows reminding of this and that. Also, every time I try to do something Norton is in my face.
Many PC users are realizing that fighting daily with the PC is just not worth it. I think this is the best time to switch. In a few years only one or two name brand PC vendors will be around (IBM sold its PC division a few weeks after my ThinkPad purchase). At that point PCs will be as proprietary as Macs.
When I started in computers, I got my CNE That was back in 3.11 days
I also got Microsoft certified and I worked on AIX boxes (go SMIT).
I had an Amiga, it was a great little machine, the new OSx reminds me a little of it.
Most of my life was making machines work, I finally decided to get a computer that just worked. I got a MAC
I do not play gameson my mac, my PS2 is for games. I do web surfing and financials on it
It’s not mega fast, but I have not had to re-install as many times as I have had to do on Windows PCs
I tried Linux and while it’s great for students, programmers and servers, for the average end user it is rather annoying. Also try to find decent finanical programs.
I didn’t get a mac to be fashionable, if you saw me you would see I am not fashionable.
If you like your Windows/Linux/Amiga/BSD box and it makes you happy then enjoy.
So they rode a huge wave, without competition. had IBM chosen Unix and offered a Gnome or KDE like user experience, and offered the blueprint to the market to emulate, Microsoft would probably be as big as Apple now.
Now, Apple is probably one of the top hardware manufacturers by market share worldwide. 1-2% of the worldwide shipment is gigantic. I realise it’s probably less, but a lot more than say Mesh in the UK or other local assemblers. And they have bigger margins.
But in terms of platform, you get less friends to exchange tips with(or software, let’s be honest), yahoo messenger is less advanced (even worse in Linux of course) and you can’t be sure you’ll find that specialist software the day you will be looking for it.
The reason it will not change ? Microsoft was there first gathering (indirectly through IBM) support from ALL hardware makers. People consider the OS as integral part of the machine, same as they consider the OS of their settop box as integral part of the box. Switching OS is for most people as grotesque as attempting to change the engine of their car for another model’s engine. Not worth the hassle. So it should be no surprise that they are now completely unmovable from that position.
Many people (Mac zelots or not) will honk on about how speed isnt everything, very true.
But if you work in an area where you need to get data prosessed in as small a time as you can, then speed is quite important.
Dude, you are seriously confused. NO ONE is arguing that speed doesn’t matter. Speed is the most important thing. The reason Clock Speed doesn’t matter is because clock speed doesn’t dictate speed!
That’s the whole reason AMD has switched to the “Product Ratings”. The P4 is a high clock, low IPC (Instructions per cycle) CPU, and the Athlon is the opposite.
@Mike
So overall, I just can’t see why i would want to pay double the price for an underperforming, less compatible, less customizable machine.
I wouldn’t either…
And you don’t when you buy a Mac.
Generally the “Apple Premium” is only about 10 or 20%.
You can only artificially create this “Double the price” myth, when you compare VASTLY different systems, not only of different speeds, but different quality of equipment.
That I can build a cheap PC for $150.00, doesn’t make the Mac Mini overpriced.
It just means I picked the cheapest NO-OS components to build a system with…
Why do you have this Anti-Apple Agenda???
You keep posting lots of negative things that just aren’t true.
Don’t you have anything better to do with your time?
@Getúlio Brasil
Back to Brazil I see this great announcement that finally Apple will act on lower prices… and just today I’ve knew the cheapest Mini (1,25GHz,40Gb) will arrive here for a little over a thousand dollars.
With this price I get two more powerful PC’s, with monitor, keyboard, etc…
Who is not being rational???
You aren’t.
The two PC’s you refer to, are nowhere near as powerful, integrated, or useful as the one Mac Mini is…
I can buy two cheap cars for the price of one good one.
They won’t work the same, hold up as long, and especially….
Won’t be as nice to drive.
…….if software is optimized for the CPU and OS. For e.g. Word 5.1 on a 25 MHZ motorolla CPU (LC 475), circa 1992, is faster than Word for X on G4 1.25 GHZ.
I suggest a trip to an Apple store to check out a Mac mini or iBook: open up a dozen programs, run iTunes and Quicktime at the same time while doing other tasks (just don’t use MS Office-it sucks on Os X even with >1 GB RAM. Only this will tell you if the computer will be useful to you.
It’s articles like this that the non-Apple-evangelists find so entertaining about said evangelists. Claiming it’s the other side having to justify their purchases while coming up with, frankly, odd arguments to justify their own choices is amusing. Combine that with the smug idea that everyone who is aware of other platforms will naturally choose to pay Apple money. Absolute nonsense. I’m aware that other platforms exist (I’m typing this on an IRIX system) and Apple offers nothing I want (the hardware and software I need) at any price.
Using a minority platform doesn’t make you better or smarter than those who don’t, despite what Apple’s very good marketing would have you believe.
“Using a minority platform doesn’t make you better or smarter than those who don’t, despite what Apple’s very good marketing would have you believe.”
Apple shipped 1,046,000 Macintosh® units and 4,580,000 iPods during the quarter, representing a 26 percent increase in CPU units and a 525 percent increase in iPods over the year-ago quarter
(http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2005/jan/12results.html).
I am not sure about minority platform!
‘Being aware’ is not the same as ‘having used’. Only then can one comment on the suitability of a platform.
“I am not sure about minority platform! ”
Oh, please. Do you have any clue as to just how large the personal computer market is as a whole? That’s a drop in the bucket – and yes, it is a minority platform.
BTW, since when is a simple music player a computer platform? Why bring up the iPod at all?
“‘Being aware’ is not the same as ‘having used’. Only then can one comment on the suitability of a platform.:
Actually, no. I don’t have to buy a current Mac to know it isn’t suitable for my uses. One can perform *research* for a purchase, not blindly spend money and hope for the best. I wouldn’t buy a computer on the basis of looks (and I don’t find the current crop of Apple products anything to write home about in that department), but on the capabilities and performance of the system for the money. It’s just a TOOL, not a lifestyle.
Oh! An armchair critic! You fit the bill exactly to what the author was referring to!
“Oh! An armchair critic! You fit the bill exactly to what the author was referring to!”
Let’s see, I’m certain (and correct) that Mac OS X doesn’t support the hardware and software I use a computer for, so I’m just being ignorant? What a silly argument you and the author make here.
This article is nonsense. I feel no need to justifiy my choice of Windows XP. The system is stable, reliable, and -most importantly- runs the software and supports the hardware I need. Mac OS X does NOT. There are *perfectly logical* and *rational* reasons to choose Windows over Mac OS X. If you think otherwise, you’re a fool.
Mr. Unix Defenestration (the author) certainly feels a need to make himself feel better about *his* purchase…
“Windows crashes constantly” for instance. That’s incorrect. In fact, that’s nearly insultingly ignorant.
It’s interesting that most of the arguments Apple evangelists make in support of *their* platform fall into the “intangibles” and never are *rational* reasons.
Nobody is imploring you to buy a Mac. You just cannot trash an OS or platform without having used it and only base your allegations on hearsay!
I’m not talking about the mini, the mini i feel is fairly competitive. I would not compare it to a $150 midtower, i would compare it to a flex-atx system. In that comparison, the Mini fares pretty well, not the victor, but definitely a worthy contender.
I’m talking about the powerBook, and especially the powerMac.
The 17″ PowerBook costs $2800. I compared that to Dell’s InspironTM 9200 17″ which i configured to to cost $2260. True, its not double, but $500 isn’t money i sneeze at. It looks much more grim for apple when you compare to the offerings from ibuypower.com, where i was able to configure a machine comparable to the PowerBook for only $1800, a full $1000 cheaper.
On the Desktop side, i found that the AMD64 is considerably faster than G5, or even Dual G5 based systems.
You can see in this benchmark (subtitled: “Not Even Close”), the Alienware Aurora shows better performance than the PowerMac and that system is priced at $1650. Alienware is a premium brand however, and a self-built system could be configured for around $1000-$1200.
http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,112749,pg,8,00.asp
I have no agenda against Macintosh. I already showed you that i personally own a Mac. I’ve said before I wouldn’t be so quick to put them down if their supporters weren’t so adamant that they are the absolute best. Its simply not the case, and its not even close if we compare equally priced systems. To this Mac users will say “you have to pay more for the best”. Well shouldn’t the best perform the best? Or does “the best” mean “looks the best”? Either way, its my opinion that the Macintosh platform has little going for it besides “lifestyle points”, which is just a fancy way of saying they are “trendy”.
“Nobody is imploring you to buy a Mac.”
Haven’t read the article, have you? The author is saying that there is NO rational reason for choosing anything other than an Apple product. That is an indefensible statement.
That is a statement worthy of derision and ridicule.
“You just cannot trash an OS or platform without having used it and only base your allegations on hearsay!”
Hardly. Specifications and “supported platforms” lists are NOT hearsay. This isn’t a religion, coombs, but a tool. It’s fairly easy to determine if a platform is suitable for you without having to BUY IT first. Remember, coombs, you don’t buy an OS to use the OS, but to run applications on the OS. If said application isn’t available for the OS, then that OS is not suitable. Pretty simple, really. Why is this difficult for you to understand?
Just remember: a computer is a tool, not a lifestyle choice.
You chose a minority platform. That doesn’t make you a better person or any smarter than those who made a different decision. They just came to a different conclusion or have different needs.
Excellent debate! You Win! I am humbled by your rational thought. Good luck!!
“Excellent debate! You Win! I am humbled by your rational thought. Good luck!!”
Can’t argue on merit, can you? We must all blindly accept the superiority of Apple in all things! Right. Good luck with *that*.
What is there to argue? I said I agree with you! Give it a rest!
“Apple shipped 1,046,000 Macintosh® units and 4,580,000 iPods during the quarter, representing a 26 percent increase in CPU units and a 525 percent increase in iPods over the year-ago quarter
(http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2005/jan/12results.html).
I am not sure about minority platform!”
Meanwhile on the PC side, 189 Million shipped in 2004. That runs out to about 47 million per quarter (would be higher for the fourth quarter as its got xmas sales).
http://hartford.dbusinessnews.com/shownews.php?newsid=8560&type_new…
1 million for Mac
47 million for PC
I’m sure about minority platform.
So is anyone going to really take any account some sort of a bias in this article. Considering that this is a Linux oriented site I would assume there is some sort of a bias against Windows. This is about as credible as an article from Paul Thurrot.