Why don't PC users buy Macintosh?

Well, from my standpoint, a Mac has always been my main machine since I jumped from my Apple IIe. But about a year ago, I gave up on trying to use it for gaming (since I prefer PowerBooks over desktops). My PowerBook 667 is still my prime machine, but it was a *lot* less expensive to put together an Athlon 200+ system than it would have been to buy even the least expensive PowerMac desktop (and I still get better performance when gaming than a good friend's brand-new PowerMac).

I'm not saying I like Windows better; I don't. But if you're asking why educated people look to the Wintel platform, it's simple. The price for high performance is much less.

I'm a big Apple fan, but until they significantly lower their prices or do *something* to get a lot better performance (i.e. use IBM instead of Motorola for high-performance processors), I can't justify gaming on the Mac platform. I still think that Mac laptops are a lot better value than Wintel, but on the high end, the Wintel laptops are capable gaming machines, while PowerBooks are not. This is being said without my seeing the new PowerBooks in action, so don't try fighting that one with me; I simply don't care. I'm not going to spend $3,300 on a gaming laptop when I put together a much speedier AMD box for around $900. I have a machine just barely bigger than my G4 Cube (a Shuttle box - 7"x8"x12"), performs better than the top-of-the-line G4 towers (for gaming at least), and weighs only 12 pounds.

I still think the Windows OS doesn't perform as snappily as Mac OS (especially X), but that really doesn't factor into the equation when using a Windows box means that I can afford to play my favorite games (Warcraft III, UT and UT2003, and a few others) at an acceptable speed.

OK, I know I'm hitting that from a gaming standpoint, but a lot of the same arguments apply in a business setting. If I'm a small business owner who can buy ten new mid-range machines for my employees for $1,200 apiece, why would I go out and look at a competitor who's selling their mid-range machine for $2,500+? In a small business, most owners won't look at the ongoing support and productivity costs, which are probably significantly higher in a Wintel shop. In large companies, the support technicians have a vested interest in recommending machines they're specialized in - generally Wintel. It's a vicious circle, but Apple has to get their performance up and lower the prices when they do so! The days of 20% margins need to end for Apple. It's great for shareholders in theory, but if the company fails because they're not staying competitive, what good are they doing anyone?

In my opinion, Apple's one true sweet spot is the 12" iBook. Many of my IT friends purchased this as their first Mac because it's easily portable, fairly powerful, runs UNIX (yep, we're geeks), and HITS THE PRICE "SWEET SPOT." I think the 12" PowerBook will win some followers, but for now, Apple needs to make some changes before a lot of people will adopt the platform.
 
I just found it much cheaper buying a console than any PC or Mac for my gaming needs. And with the exception of XBox (which I stay away from) I don't contribute to the Bill Gates fund. :D

Plus you can rent console games before you buy 'em to make sure you like it before dropping $50 for a new game! A big plus! :)
 
Since i already went through a mess of explanation above here is a awkward conclusion:

Apple needs to advertise their operating system on television in addition to the switch ads. This will attract miffed pc users and the newcomer.

Computer users need to face the facts that the console market is becoming the replacement for pc games. There is a huge limit in the genre's for the pc games. Some of them are rehashes of console games others find a niche in a certain genre. It is more likely games coming to the macintosh would be diversions on your day off or while your producing a project.

A low budget has been an excuse for the pc user for the longest time. I'm suprised they can afford cars, college, or to live in the house or apartment they are in. If they can spend money on those what is different from spending it on a mac? Lower prices is not the key, it's less demanding consumers. Until people understand the computer is not for fun and ms office alone the sooner they'll buy a better computer.
 
my uncles dont buy a mac cos they dont have money. but htey hate microsoft so they are pre-switch = mostly linux now :D

i could say i cant find my fav games for pc. heh, all my favs are either mac or *x :D
 
My second friend has jumped to Windows for the games. For a second time the Windows systems couldn't work with the games/graphics cards. So now my friends are stuck with systems that on paper look great but can't actually do anything. Funny having them come over to my place so they can see games like Ghost Recon, Rogue Spear and Quake III up and running for more than 5 minutes at a time without having to reboot.

I feel for them, they invested money where they thought they would get the most out of their systems, but when you can't keep a system playing games for more than a couple minutes and that was the main reason for having a PC, it sure seems like a bad platform choice to me. I would rather play my games at frame rates equal to or better than your average motion picture for as long as I want than move to PCs getting all the games first running at 300+ frames per second but have bad quality or only about 5 minutes of game play.

Hey, at least they have great systems on paper though. :D Specially when they are being used as paper weights. ;)
 
Here's an interesting bit,

Here in Egypt, people really think that Bill Gates
1 invented the internet (because of IE)
2 owns IBM
3 owns Intel and makes the chips specifically for Windows

People all stand in awe of my old tangerine iBook, they simply have no concept that there is any other choice in personal computers.

Apple still exists in the States because of their investment in the education market. Students are exposed to them and therefore consider them as consumers. In the rest of the world (perhaps the larger market for pc's) they are unknown
 
I'll throw in the things I usually hear:

- Price
- Speed
- Don't want to get locked into a proprietary solution (wait guys, don't laugh yet)
- Software availability
- Hardware availability
- Everyone uses Windows

I can't really argue with price or speed, sorry guys...

As far as the proprietary solution, I have to admit that I can understand where some people are coming from with this. There are definitely upsides to the tight-control, vertical solution thing, but I'd probably be even more uncomfortable with Apple if they controlled 95% of the market than I am with MS right now, as much as I like Apple as a company. I certainly wouldn't mind seeing 1/3 or 1/2 market share, though =)

Software avail, not so sure how relevant this is. Nearly everything I need/want is on both platforms (there are things I want that Mac has and Windows doesn't, definitely), and I'd bet 50+% of people at home just use their PCs for web browsing, email, and word processing. Yeah, games are missing from the Mac, but I usually have a seperate system for games anyway.

Hardware avail, I'm split on this one. I really DON'T like the limited peripherals/choices and premium prices, but I definitely appreciate the simplicity and compatibility that comes along with it. I like freedom, but I also believe computers should work as reliably as my TV (which IS reliable, if you're wondering =), so I'm completely on the fence with this one.

Nearly everyone I know has a PC, and we use Windows pretty much exclusively at work. There certainly is a simplicity that comes with everyone using the same/similar thing. (Sort of the same simple comfort most Americans have in that nearly everyone we know speaks the same language. Personally, I'd rather be multi-lingual =)

With all this said, I own two Macs. =)

*chink* my $.02 in the pile.
 
I had just purchased a 14" Ibook and I've been using M$ products for the last 10 years. So its been an interesting change going between the two platforms. I love the way the Macs are set up and the ease of use of OSX. However there are some points that STRONGLY irritated me.

- Mac's DVD player doesn't support the use of closed captioning while nearly every DVD software for the PC does.

- I cannot mount a DVD image on Mac's image loader but I can on the PC with Daemon Tools.

These two applications are critical for my use of the laptop since I already have the perfect desktop for my use. If Apple can release an add on pack for the DVD player or have other software DVD players play on the mac then that will solve a lot of problems to start with... perhaps with some time and luck something can be found to work!! =)
 
so, people don't buy macs because they're not good DVD players? that's about equivilent to the games argument. seems like you can buy a real DVD player for cheap and watch them on a real screen with much better quality.
 
Ed,

I agree, I never understood the "watch DVDs on your VGA monitor" thing, it makes more sense to go buy an $80 DVD player and a $130 19-inch TV.

...Except the argument that works goes: "Why would I want to buy and carry a seperate DVD player on a plane when I already have a perfectly good Powerbook with a much bigger screen?"

Of course, then there's people like me, who have the PC hooked up to their HDTVs because the video quality looks better than it does off of a progressive DVD player (and I needed some way to justify spending the money on my "super-system" =)
 
The reason why to use it as a DVD player is because I want to try an experiment... having all forms of entertainment under one platform, like movies, music, internet, console games and emulators, etc... and then hook it all up to the TV... much easier than having to lug around all of the console systems, dvd players, etc to a friends house or car or whatever...=)
 
maybe it's been said already - but a bit of a hang-up for me is the fact that I have $1,000's worth of software for my PCs that i've accumulated over the years. granted, I've realized as of late (about the same time I decided that I MUST have the 17" PB) that most of the apps I use regularly can be counted on 1 hand (not the 2 cd books that I have in my computer desk), and half of those are freeware!

so I wouldn't say the lack of software, but the fact that you have to repurchase stuff you've already got. it's kind of a bummer, but when you stop to realize all that Jaguar includes, you're pretty good to go...

just my $.02
 
IF i were a pc user, i think your answer would be my biggest concern quiksan. which is one reason i think the concept of being an adder, rather than a switcher makes a lot of sense to most people when they first transition. not only is there an investment of money in those old apps, there is an investment of time and effort in learning them and the m$ way of doing things. even older mac users face this issue to a lesser degree when transitioning to os x from an older os. it's not cheap and there is a short, but immediate, learning curve. it took me a couple of months to make the switch to full time os x user when i first started.
 
I saw something very interesting on TV last night. They were showing all the technology used to put together NFL Films. This elaborate facility built to house a giant network of computers to track and access archived films and information (all windows based) but ALL this information was funneled to just 3 little Macs for editing and creative. GO APPLE!

We can all get along!
 
Maybe they believe the innacurate 'tests'/'results' - PROPAGANDA - instead of a more accurate accounting of the tests.

The following came from a smalldog.com newsletter......

GATEWAY GAFFE

Last week I mentioned the Gateway commercial comparing their flat panel machine to the iMac. Aside from the fact that they had to use animation to give their computer move anything close to the degree of motion an iMac has, Gateway apparently also had to fudge their testing to make the claim of speed advantages! Not surprisingly, the Gateway testing said that the iMac was really slow compared to their entry. Well, Jason Wooten at Visual Dynamics (an Apple Specialist) took a closer look at the testing. With the caveat that Jason's testing was informal, here's his report:

+---------------+

The report compares a Gateway (iMac rip-off -- you've probably seen the commercial), iMac 700 CD/RW, the high-end Gateway, and the 17-inch iMac. All four were compared in four separate "speed" tests.

1. 3D Video performance, using Quake III demo
2. Java web page loading, using iBench 3.0
3. Boot-up timing
4. Time to load a 2.41M 104 page PDF into Acrobat Reader 5.0

According to the results of the test, strangely enough, the low-end Gateway beat the iMacs in all of the above by far. (Imagine that!)

Our experience with the iMacs didn't match up with Gateway's results. Off and testing we went.


1. Quake III Tests

What they say: Their testing shows frame rates on the 17-inch iMac around 42 fps, and on the 15-inch iMac around 29 fps, and the Gateways were up around 120-140 fps.

What the reality is: etestinglabs, in all of their wisdom, didn't (and still doesn't) understand that Quake III Demo (from 1999) is NOT an OS X product. Therefore, they installed it and ran it in Classic mode under X. Duh. I emailed and confirmed this with them. Even though it was *clearly* pointed out to them that they are running this test in an "emulated" OS, and they acknowledge it, their excuse is "...the tests focuses on the typical home user...who expects the computer to work as-is, out of the box." Of course, which typical home user "out of the box" knows to go to the internet, search for the Quake III Demo (from 1999), download it, install it, and then determine that the frame rates are slow? And then not think to see if there are any updates? You know, if they can download the software, they can probably (in most cases) figure out there is an update.

Our testing shows that when you run Q3Demo on a 17-inch booted into OS 9, it cruises at about 80 fps (double what they reported). Additionally, if you install Q3 with the OS X update and check the fps, you are well over 100 consistently.

Bottom line: Their tests were bogus.


2. We couldn't duplicate the iBench 3.0 tests because you have to have an iBench server to do the tests. Hmmmm.


3. Boot-Up Time

What they say: The Gateway boots from a power-off condition to power on and ready to use in about 27 seconds. The iMac(s) took about 1:20.

The reality: After a visit to the Gateway store, we couldn't find ANY Gateway that booted and was ready to use in 27 seconds. The ones we tested averaged around 40 seconds. The iMacs came in at approx 54 seconds -- so the Gateways were faster on this test: However...

Bottom line: How often to does a user have to wait for a Mac to boot? Is this even a valid test? We realize that booting a PC occurs more frequently, due to saaaay, crashes / blue screens / illegal operations / installing drivers etc. etc. Does the fact you don't generally have to boot a Mac over and over again come in to play?


4. Load a 2.4M PDF

What they say: The Gateways load a 2.4M PDF in about 5 seconds. The iMacs can take as long as 13s on the 15-inch and almost 8s on a 17-inch.

The reality: What? Are these guys nuts? Our Mac tests made it really clear. We decided to open a 6M 232 page (Apple LaserWriter service manual) PDF on the iMac 17. It opened in 4 seconds flat. A little longer on the 15-inch. The iMacs smoked the Gateways in opening PDF documents. They should have opened a 20M PDF and seen the difference. iMac = 7s, Gateway, after 2 illegal operations, took 18s (about a minute if you include the illegal operations).

Bottom line: The guys probably tested opening the file in Acrobat 5 in Classic. The results they provided on the iMacs were wrong -- way wrong.


More info:
1) The new Gateway computers do NOT swivel like the iMac -- they only tilt up and down.
2) The 999 Gateway apparently (according to their site) doesn't include a modem. It's $30 more.
3) The 999 Gateway doesn't include a CD/RW. It's a standard CD drive. Add another $100 for this.
4) There is no Superdrive option on any of the new Gateways.
5) To get your Gateway, add approx $85 in shipping.
6) Gateway doesn't include Quicken (another upgrade).

Our tests were informal -- We just took a 15-inch and 17-inch iMac out of a box, updated them to 10.2, installed Quake III Demo, and did the above tests. We matched our "test-bed" to be as close to etestinglabs.com's as possible.
 
Originally posted by MacLuv
...why PC users don't buy Apple products...
Click to expand...
Why don't people who live in small towns with a lot of character shop in their downtown five and dime instead of Wal Mart?

Why do people buy $.99 fat-laden food at MacDonalds when they can get real food served by well treated/paid employees across the street?

Why isn't the entire planet more enlightened?



Fact is... people are cheap and don't really know what is good for them!


Now I would never say that to their face nor off this board because I think all people deserve respect... but you asked?


The only real question here is why you "need" to "know" this unknowable thing so badly?
 
I'm currently running on an old PC...300 MHZ Pentium 2...and i'm planning on buying a new computer soon. Up until the last few months, i was the 'macs suck' common PC user. I was judging this statement from the Apple computers that i had used in elementary school...I think they were OS8. Well, those computers actually did suck, they crashed alot and were slow. When i discovered OSX and used it for about 10 minutes at the Apple store, i was impressed. It looked nice, ran smoothly, and had a bundle of useful applications that came with the OS itself. Not to mention the awesome design of the computer itself (iMac). I'm still debating if i should purchase a new PC or a new Macintosh. Mainly for a few reasons..

Lack of software/games -- You just don't have the endless range of applications. Go to a store and look through the software section...it's all for Windows. Not to mention the amount of free/pirated software available for windows.

Upgradability -- With my PC, i can buy anything new and just slam it inside. Or, i can build my own PC from scratch. (I'm not too sure about upgrading a PowerMac tower or something, but the iMac or eMac don't seem to be very openable. :p)

...I'm sure there's a few more that i can't think of right now.
What it really comes down to, is fear that you won't like your -NEW- system. I've never owned a mac before, if i buy one, and decide i can't use it like i can use my PC, it's a great waste of money.

Of course, i know about OSX's great features, which most people dont even care to learn about...(Mac's suck)

It'd be nice if i could have a mac for a few months to see how i like it before i buy one....I can't decide.
 
Ok,

Before OSX, macs were completely crippled. No command line, process control, took them forever to get multi-tasking, ever try network trouble shooting on a MAC?, appletalk was slow as hell, try minimizing a window on a mac. Yea if macs were so great why did they completely dump their old os and go w/ a unix-based system in one version.

Now for OSX, it uses many technologies used by the *nix community, hell, it is a *nix platform. samba being the biggest most useful for integrating in a windows network environment. Let's face it. MS has the best networking environment, if you can't integrate into it, then your going to cause lots of problems. OSX has inherited all the strengths of the *nix platform. If it runs on *nix it can run on or will soon run on OSX. (Smart move by Apple) I'm sorry anything before OSX was crap. Trust me, I use OS 9 daily and it's given my grey hairs in places you don't want to know about.

also there is this little thing out there called MONEY, MACS cost so much more that the average PC. Yes they do use a higher standard for their hardware, but the average person probably won't notice the difference or even use it to its full potential, you really need a screamer for email, porn searching, muzic downloads. PC parts are so mainstream, you can go just about anywhere to buy the part you need. Mac parts are harder to find(this is changing though). The life of the iMac is basically the life of the monitor, once that is gone your sh*t out of luck.

I like your 'PC users are uneducated' arguement. All those commercial w/ testimonials of people saying 'Yea, PC's are too hard to use, Plug in and get mad, I'm an idiot, blah...blah' well apple's whole sales pitch is that mac's are bonehead proof(people that don't bother reading the manual or haven't discovered pop-up help) I work for a physics department and 95% of our machines are PC's (win/linux) If physicists/engineers are 'uneducated' what are you?

OK,

I really hate pre-OSX machines. But OSX is really cool and I'd like to get one someday. I really don't consider them Macs but rather a very clean *nix box. I really don't see what all the fuss is about "Just use what works" Windoze is OK but it gets boring using it. I really don't see how they get off calling it Windows when it really has the very primitive window management features.

if you use gnome or kde, they have window stacking, virtual desktops, control over window attribute history, etc. Win/OSX don't have these(inately). Some of the professors use OSX, I look at their desktop and they have 20+ windows open! Once one of them was trying to mount a windows share and couldn't, it turns out he had already mounted it but could'nt see it because of all the windows blocking his desktop. duh.

that's all i have to say for now....I have to get to class
 
Originally posted by bigbadbill
I saw something very interesting on TV last night. They were showing all the technology used to put together NFL Films. This elaborate facility built to house a giant network of computers to track and access archived films and information (all windows based) but ALL this information was funneled to just 3 little Macs for editing and creative. GO APPLE!

We can all get along!
Click to expand...


Yea, in the movies you ALWAYS see macs. Usually doing what they are intended for...web browsing and email.
but if you look behind the scenes you see what really makes the world go round. PC's.

In Time mag., you see the hardware used to make all the visual effects for the matrix, cluster of PC's. How do they simulate the effects of earthquakes, PC cluster running linux. what does the mightiest military in the world use, pc's. It's just PC's time to shine right now. I'm sure Mac's will contribute something meaningfull someday. Hey, if switching over to a *nix platform doesn't work for apple maybe they can buy out IBM's OS/2 and run OSXVI on that!
 
Blaqbox...So you would say the previous Mac OS was crap? That's a bold statement. Since Adobe, Macromedia and Quark released their applications specifically for the Mac first. Without the previous system to use for reference we wouldn't have Mac OS X or any of those software vendors behind our platform.

Contribute something meaningful you say?

Any magazine you pick up at the newstand is most likely layed out in mac os 9
A large majority of graphic designers and web designers only use the mac platform
Yes there are movies made on the mac and you probably own one.
Apple changed the "pc world" with the macintosh and it continues today. Otherwise, dell would still be selling brown pc's and you'd have an ugly beige box on your desk.
One more thing, warez is not a meaningful contribution toward society.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top