OSX vs. Windows

eddiejoepopcorn said:
...I go to my Pentium III, 233 Ghz...
Click to expand...
Any computer running at 233 Gigahertz is going to blow the doors off of any currently-shipping Macintosh computer. That's almost 200 times as fast as the top-end Macintosh!

That's an insanely fast computer you got there, so perhaps that's why the Mac seems so slow in comparison!

;)
 
ElDiabloConCaca said:
Any computer running at 233 Gigahertz is going to blow the doors off of any currently-shipping Macintosh computer. That's almost 200 times as fast as the top-end Macintosh!

That's an insanely fast computer you got there, so perhaps that's why the Mac seems so slow in comparison!

;)
Click to expand...

God I'd hate to see the heat sink mechanism on that sucker!!! I would probably melt if I were standing next to it. ::ha::
 
lurk said:
Then you would be mistaken. Intel and Apple are putting all sorts of DRM doodads into the OS to make it very hard to run on a non-Apple kit. There is a reason the hacked version out now are hacked.
Click to expand...



Then their computers better preform and cost around the same as the computers that you can build yourself, cause that is a major, unbelieveabl plus to windows, believe it or not.


It has its drawbacks yes, but if you aren't dumb its nifty.

In order to increase sales, they'll have to drop their prices significantly to sell more units. It is really the only way they can leverage anything against MS or anyone else.

I'd buy a mac right now, but they're more expensive than my custom built comp that does exactly what I need it to...
 
Yeah -- because Apple's price points right now just absolutely suck, and no one is buying their machines.[/sarcasm]

Apple's computers aren't priced any higher than a comparatively-spec'ed Intel- or AMD-based machine. There have been plenty of comparisons of equally-configured Apple/Windows machines, and the Apple machines end up costing roughly the same (+- 5%) as their Windows counterparts. If you take into account the price of the freely included software that comes with every Macintosh purchase (iLife, operating system, etc.), the Macs actually cost less than a similarly-spec'ed Windows machine.

The only drawback to Apple machines is that you can't get less than what they sell. You can't take out the optical audio port if you don't need it, and you can't purchase the computers without a hard drive or RAM installed. That's the only reason bargain-basement crappy home-built systems cost less.

In addition, if your hard drive goes out, who are you gonna call for a warranty repair? Western Digital, of course... and if the video card goes, that's another call to ATi... and if the memory craps out, call Crucial.

If anything goes wrong with your Apple computer, you call Apple. One phone call = multiple problems fixed. Apple, according to Consumer Reports, was ranked extremely high in customer service and repair service. They're not perfect, but nobody is, and Apple is doing many, many things to improve their already stellar customer service.

[/rant]
 
Hmm?


I like the Imac, but for 1,000 dollars I built what they would have gave in for 1,300.



Not including monitor I suppose, but I got that free, along with a stereo system, and some software.
 
128shot said:
I like the Imac, but for 1,000 dollars I built what they would have gave in for 1,300.

Not including monitor I suppose, but I got that free, along with a stereo system, and some software.
Click to expand...
Add in the cost of an operating system (Microsoft Windows XP Professional), and you're sitting right at $1300. Add the cost of a monitor and you're higher than the Macintosh. Don't forget the remote control, FireWire camera, wireless networking and bluetooth.

A free OS like Linux would keep you below that, but Linux vs. Mac OS X isn't even a comparison. Windows XP is at least a competitor.

I guess it's just my opinion that even though Apple computers seemingly cost a lot more, you get what you pay for (and a lot more). Communities like this... free GOOD software... free operating system... cutting edge components... nifty deign...

All that is worth an extra ~$200 from me. And Apple actually helps me get a portion of that back by having an outperforming stock that has gone against naysaying for quite some time now.

If all you're looking for is raw number-crunching performance, then it would be silly to purchase a Macintosh computer. Number-crunching is cheap: a motherboard, a processor and memory. A few hundred easy.
 
ElDiabloConCaca said:
Apple's computers aren't priced any higher than a comparatively-spec'ed Intel- or AMD-based machine. There have been plenty of comparisons of equally-configured Apple/Windows machines, and the Apple machines end up costing roughly the same (+- 5%) as their Windows counterparts. If you take into account the price of the freely included software that comes with every Macintosh purchase (iLife, operating system, etc.), the Macs actually cost less than a similarly-spec'ed Windows machine.

The only drawback to Apple machines is that you can't get less than what they sell. You can't take out the optical audio port if you don't need it, and you can't purchase the computers without a hard drive or RAM installed. That's the only reason bargain-basement crappy home-built systems cost less.

In addition, if your hard drive goes out, who are you gonna call for a warranty repair? Western Digital, of course... and if the video card goes, that's another call to ATi... and if the memory craps out, call Crucial.

If anything goes wrong with your Apple computer, you call Apple. One phone call = multiple problems fixed. Apple, according to Consumer Reports, was ranked extremely high in customer service and repair service. They're not perfect, but nobody is, and Apple is doing many, many things to improve their already stellar customer service.

[/rant]
Click to expand...

Well I think what he was saying is that for someone who is willing to build or have built a custom box and doesnt need the tech support, they can get a much more powerful box for the $$.

If I configured a dualcore 2.3 with 2gig RAM, 7800GT, 250gig drive, DVD burner..etc it would cost $3800 canadian dollars.

If I custom build a dualcore AMD X2 4400 with 2gig RAM, 7800GT, 250gig drive, DVD burner, it would cost $2157 and that would be splurging for a motherboard that the ability to do SLI, has PATA support as well as four SATA channels which are configurable in a number of raid options and also getting 7.1 channel audio. The tower would be an Antec P180 which can hold god knows how many drives, its quiet and cools well and looks good too. This is not a cheapo system. XP pro is also tossed into the equation (OEM Version). For the $1600 or so difference, one can add more drives, a second 7800GT and a widescreen 24" LCD!!
 
Well, those comparisons are always flawed, because Apple gives you a certain amount of configurations, whereas if you build a PC yourself, you have SUCH a wide choice that you can probably build your PC for any price you want. The problem clearly is that if a person is _not_ willing to sacrifice Mac OS X as the operating system, then only a Mac can do: And you're back with what Apple offers.

For years I've been saying (and I still think I'm right): Apple's pricing is good with the iBooks and PowerBooks, but it sucks with the desktops. Well, the mini changed that a bit, of course.
 
fryke said:
Well, those comparisons are always flawed, because Apple gives you a certain amount of configurations, whereas if you build a PC yourself, you have SUCH a wide choice that you can probably build your PC for any price you want. The problem clearly is that if a person is _not_ willing to sacrifice Mac OS X as the operating system, then only a Mac can do: And you're back with what Apple offers.

For years I've been saying (and I still think I'm right): Apple's pricing is good with the iBooks and PowerBooks, but it sucks with the desktops. Well, the mini changed that a bit, of course.
Click to expand...



sooon enough we'll be building laptops too.
 
nixgeek said:
Already there. ASUS has a laptop that you can build yourself, for the most part anywas. :p
Click to expand...



whiteys only make up 5% of the laptop market. So far big companies have been good about not allowing people to build their own.



That'll change as time goes on.
 
ElDiabloConCaca said:
Yeah -- because Apple's price points right now just absolutely suck, and no one is buying their machines.[/sarcasm]

Apple's computers aren't priced any higher than a comparatively-spec'ed Intel- or AMD-based machine. There have been plenty of comparisons of equally-configured Apple/Windows machines, and the Apple machines end up costing roughly the same (+- 5%) as their Windows counterparts. If you take into account the price of the freely included software that comes with every Macintosh purchase (iLife, operating system, etc.), the Macs actually cost less than a similarly-spec'ed Windows machine.

The only drawback to Apple machines is that you can't get less than what they sell. You can't take out the optical audio port if you don't need it, and you can't purchase the computers without a hard drive or RAM installed. That's the only reason bargain-basement crappy home-built systems cost less.

In addition, if your hard drive goes out, who are you gonna call for a warranty repair? Western Digital, of course... and if the video card goes, that's another call to ATi... and if the memory craps out, call Crucial.

If anything goes wrong with your Apple computer, you call Apple. One phone call = multiple problems fixed. Apple, according to Consumer Reports, was ranked extremely high in customer service and repair service. They're not perfect, but nobody is, and Apple is doing many, many things to improve their already stellar customer service.

[/rant]
Click to expand...


if anything goes wrong I'll fix it myself, for the most part, or find someone who knows how to do it. Computers are everywhere. Its not hard to find free good service from a couple friends you have over for a beer or two.


no, they aren't higher, 1,000 plus 78 dollars isn't much (going rate for WinXP Pro..)


Free shipping and handling is almost standard nowadays. If you know how to find a good deal, you'll get one, and I hate to say it, but Macs aren't always it...
 
Actually I own one of those Asus laptops. I picked it up a year ago. Its a cenrino 1.6, has 768mb ram at the moment and a 5400rpm 60gig drive, firewire, 3 usb 2.0, built in card reader, 1x pcmcia, combo drive, intel 10/100 ethernet and 802.11g. Its a 12.1" laptop and weighs 3.4lbs :) http://www.ynot2k.com/products/laptops/m5n/m5n.ht7.jpg

its basically a bare bones when you start off. No processor, no ram, no HD but it has the rest. Nice laptop. The fan in it is a bit louder than I'd like when its going at full speed but aside from that its nice.
 
128shot said:
if anything goes wrong I'll fix it myself, for the most part, or find someone who knows how to do it. Computers are everywhere. Its not hard to find free good service from a couple friends you have over for a beer or two.
Click to expand...

So.... I fail to see your arguments and I think you're just trolling. Firstly, you're saying that Macs are more expensive because you can cobble together a PC for cheaper. As Eldiablo pointed out, Macs don't cost too much compared to similarly configured PCs. Such cobbled together PCs aren't used by the majority of PC users, only the enthusiasts like yourself. By the above quote, you've basically agreed since how many home users know how to fix PC problems?

What would you pay for a machine that was easy to maintain and you didn't need to ask for favors from a technologically knowledgeable friend? Compared to Dells, HPs, and other large PC manufacturers, Macs don't cost too much.

Apple isn't the be all end all of computers. If they don't suit you, go elsewhere. Just because it doesn't fit your needs, doesn't mean it doesn't fit the needs of other people.
 
Apple isn't the be all end all of computers. If they don't suit you, go elsewhere. Just because it doesn't fit your needs, doesn't mean it doesn't fit the needs of other people.[/QUOTE]

I can't agree more with that phrase. My opinion is many PC people come into the Mac and windows argument with that attitude. Maybe because M$ is so dominate they feel anything else is challenging. My opinion is my Mac fits my style, what I am comfortable using, and solves my day-day solutions. In the end, it is a preference. I prefer the Macintosh over a PC for several reasons. Design of the computer, stability & reliability, and mostly I prefer OSX over other OSs, particularly windows. With this said, it does not mean windows is not useful, or that I could not get my work done on a PC. It is just means I prefer Apple.
 
Browsing is faster on Windows XP than Mac OS X [but the PC is 512 MB while the iBook is 256, so I don't know if that has any effect], but nearly everything else about Mac OS X is better now. I only turn on the PC when I have to burn a DVD or leave [something] downloading over night. It's such a chore to use.
 
My issue has never been with PC hardware. I absolutely LOVE PC hardware. This is why I use it to run Linux or other open source operating systems. My issue has always been with Windows. Just using it, in my opinion, is akin to that feeling you get before you go to work on a Monday. :p You have to do things in Windows' way even though your way might be the most optimal. That, and all of the useful stuff that is lacking in it (security, performance, etc.). The only thing that it has going for it is games.

I love having control of my system, and Unix variants help me do that on my PC. Mac OS X also lets me do that, but it goes way beyond what even the other Unix variants have yet to accomplish: a wonderful user experience on a robust Unix system.
 
nixgeek said:
I love having control of my system, and Unix variants help me do that on my PC. Mac OS X also lets me do that, but it goes way beyond what even the other Unix variants have yet to accomplish: a wonderful user experience on a robust Unix system.
Click to expand...

To be honest, I've found that the latest stable GNOME release is very very usable. It's been very user friendly (IMHO) since 2.8 and I would move to Linux in a heart beat if I wasn't saddled with a Powerbook :).
 
Viro said:
To be honest, I've found that the latest stable GNOME release is very very usable. It's been very user friendly (IMHO) since 2.8 and I would move to Linux in a heart beat if I wasn't saddled with a Powerbook :).
Click to expand...

I'm doing just that on my HP laptop from work using Ubuntu. I'm quite impressed with Gnome 2.12, especially now that someone had the brains to include the hierarchical tree list in spatial view. This is the only thing that was missing from spatial view that made it worth using, something that the Mac OS in its Classic day had for a while.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top