Back to Mac?
Not if they fucking paid me!!! Shiny overpriced crap.
I'll build my own computers, with blackjack and hookers..
Next Wednesday, October 20, Apple will host an invitation-only event on its Cupertino campus that is apparently intended to remind its iOS-obsessed fan base that, yes, it still makes personal computers. Jobs & Co. sent out invitations this Wednesday to a media soirée entitled "Back to the Mac" — and in true Jobsian fashion, that …
Not if they fucking paid me!!! Shiny overpriced crap.
I'll build my own computers, with blackjack and hookers..
They aren't going to pay you. Nobody cares.
Had bad experience with one or simply spouting the usual anti-Apple stuff that most people who've never used one, always come out with?
I use Linux so I couldn't give a monkey's personally!
Ahh, forget the whole thing...
well we don't want you either
And forget about the computers and blackjack...
Terminator - shiny metal ass etc...
No, seriously, buy one. It's clear you've never used one.
I have worked with MS products since MS DOS 3.20, and from Worries for Workgroups all the way to Vista. Which is when I decided to write a book, and bought a Mac. As an aside, I have also used almost all common UNIX variants on the planet, and started with Linux when Slackware still came on floppies and the whole "URL" concept had not been invented yet.
Since I bought the Mac, I have redefined "*using* Windows as *suffering* Windows because, sorry, it can't hold a candle to the usability of the Mac, only marred by the lack of navigation keys. I don't get interrupted by yet-another-update every possible time of the day, and it works the moment I open the lid (MacBook). And when I'm ready I close the lid. Simple. It never loses a setting - with Windows I have to define monitor size and position every time I as much as sneeze, and I have long given up supporting friends with their machines because I want to keep them as friends.
With Macs it just bloody works.
If I then look at the cost of my Sony VIAOs (on which you lose hours erasing all the crap that Sony likes to pollute its installation with), a MacBook is actually cheaper, and it's damn good engineering.
And *if* I use Windows, it's like returning to London and waiting for an hour for your luggage - you get instantly reminded why you left. It was worth it.
Actually, the most irritating thing about the Mac is the realisation I could have done this a lot earlier. The second irritation is that I may be seen as a fanboy - like your reaction. It's what kept me off Macs until now (and I had Linux) - I have as little time for indiscriminating idiots as anyone else in my specific profession. However, credit where credit is due. It works, and less worries about virus infections is also helpful - which is why I have seen a number of Swiss private banks switch over to Macs. For me, that trend may continue.
It's not perfection, but it's damn close to what I want a computer to be: useful. With Windows, that purpose has gradually been eroded over the years, and I'm through paying for software that is actually perpetually in beta test. I have work to do.
who are 'we'?
Expensive - yes.
Value for money - yes.
Personally I wouldn't buy one (I like to tinker and hack), but for the average person (who can afford the initial cost) Apple products are a better choice than just about any Windows based equivalent* and probably work out at the same price (if not cheaper) in the long run.
You may not agree with me and that's fine. We all have different needs, values and pockets. A company shifting that many units cannot be "crap" and it's certainly not "overpriced" as the market evidently accepts that price. If you don't like the price/ethos/whatever - simple don't buy one.
*There is no Linux equivalent as yet it's almost impossible to buy Linux boxes from a major OEM without sacrificing a goat to the great IT gods.
A Bugatti Veyron also has damn good engineering... cant Justify the price of that... or of Apple computers. It really is that simple. Having seen the number of times the Macbook pro my partner owns has been back to Apple, I have concluded that they seem no more reliable than the cheaper x86 PCs.
Nice.. I'll grant you that... but over-priced. If they ever come down to a more realistic level... Id seriously look into moving over - but until then Ill stick with my old Toshiba and Suse.
Mines the coat with the empty pocket...
'less worries about virus infections is also helpful - which is why I have seen a number of Swiss private banks switch over to Macs. For me, that trend may continue.'
If that trend does continue, the benefit will be lost as ot will actually be worth writing malware and viruses
Also all of Sony's stuff is overpriced - so whats your point!
Finally, you admit to moving to Vista at some point, then moan about using beta software when the issuse with Vista were well known before release.
who speak in a manner that reminds us of the good old MAC vs PC flamewars.
with all your experience, if you "suffer" windows, you're not worth your salt in IT, it's as simple as that. Even IT professionals that *never* work with windows, can use it just fine. stating the "facts" like you do sounds an awful lot like the "facts" i stated during those flamewars. i got older though. i realised there's no "better" OS, all of them have their perks and all of them have their downside. dismissing Windows makes no sense, just because you seem to be unable to properly work with it doesn't mean it's the same for everyone else.
...because if you did, you'd find there is no option for it on a Mac, despite hordes of Mactards repeatedly asking Apple for this one, small, feature: A tickbox in the mouse properties, labeled "Disable mouse acceleration".
You know - like the one in Windows?
Oops. Seems if you want accurate pointing, you're still better-off with the OS from the chair-smashers in Seattle. You can also run the complete Adobe suite on Windows, whereas Mac users are still left out in the cold. Even many gamers who switch to Macs end up sheepishly buying Windows licences to play their games on, because the poor dears keep getting fragged by their PC-owning competitors.
Depends on what you want, really. For some things (design, ease of setup, etc) Macs are great. For others (usability, or anything more complicated than surfing the web), they're not so great.
If someone has a half decent job, a mortgage and a car, chances are that a slight tweak to their budget would allow them to get a Mac if they wanted one. Just getting the 1.8l instead of the 2.0l. or a 3 year old car instead of a 2 year old car would save you that kind of money.
Almost nobody can afford a Veyron. You're comparing things that are three orders of magnitude apart.
'If that trend does continue, the benefit will be lost as ot will actually be worth writing malware and viruses'
That argument has little credibility. In the late 1990's, Mac OS 9 had many viruses and both a lower number of machines and a lower percentage market share than the current MacOS incarnation. Were your argument to hold water then the current version of OSX /should/ have more viruses and malware than OS 9 ever did.
You see Fred, I am currently with my third Mac laptop, I need them to test my programs in MacOS, and that's the one thing I use them for. I somehow managed to avoid this mac epiphany everyone talks about. For me the mac experience feels like wearing a straight jacket.
Can't you operate a mouse properly, Ollie? Silly boy, tell the class what parts of the 'complete Adobe suite' that 'Mac users are still left out in the cold' with? Twunt.
Interesting amount of thumbs up there, thanks.
I'll sum up my response in one message:
My Windows expertise: present, but irrelevant. That's the whole point, the Mac does the work so I don't have to (partly simply by design). I *know* how to keep a Windows box secure as I've been in this fight for the last 20 years or so, but it's a full time job all of its own. That's *not* what I call a modern OS, even Windows 7 STILL needs anti-virus training wheels to go anywhere near the Net. My problem is that most of my friends do NOT know how to keep a machine safe, so there's no way I will recommend a Windows box for them.
From a usability perspective, it's just different. Some things are better, some things I don't like (lack of cursors, Skype having different windows), and some things stay the same, like confirmation windows popping up where you can't see them so you think an application has hung.
Straightjacket feeling: initially, yes. Until you work out where the controls are. I have on one laptop Windows XP, Ubuntu and OSX, because I thought I needed it. Here's how you find out just how much crap Microsoft finds to replace each week: keep a machine offline for 2 weeks, and watch what you have to fight through before you can work. I actually force the Mac to update every so often because years of Windows has made me nervous :-)
Yes, I do simple Office things on this Mac. It has Omnigraffle to replace Visio, the whole iWorks because I was curious, MS Office because the Mac version is still usable (you can keep the ribbon, thanks), Truecrypt, a whole compiler setup to port some Linux programs I like, a VPN to London because I watch things on BBC's iPlayer when abroad, and I mostly use a Logitech Anywhere MX mouse because I find it easier than the trackpad to draw things. Oh, and did I mention it automatically backs up when I'm at home because I have a hard disk hanging off my access point? It just does it, easy.
So, in summary, it works for me, despite me knowing what I'm doing in Windows, Unix and Linux. To me, that is the only criteria after value for money...
" Just getting the 1.8l instead of the 2.0l. or a 3 year old car instead of a 2 year old car would save you that kind of money."
The obligatory pointless Apple/car analogy within the first few posts! Well done.
"A tickbox in the mouse properties, labeled "Disable mouse acceleration".
You know - like the one in Windows?
You chose the wrong example there... There are over 60,000 search results for 'winxp disable mouse accel'.
It seems that even tho there is an option for turning off mouse accel in windows, it does not actually turn off mouse accel. Funny that right? Something in Windows not working as expected?
> No, seriously, buy one. It's clear you've never used one.
Quit swimming in the cool-aid. To know it is not necessarily to love it.
> With Macs it just bloody works.
Only if you have very simple needs.
If you stray the slightest bit off the garden path then things quickly get nasty. It no longer "just works". This could be slightly interesting devices or use cases that the people in Cupertino didn't account for.
This is why VLC is such a popular MacOS download. It makes up for the self imposed limitations of Quicktime. It's a lot easier than sorting out Quicktime plugins manually and dealing with variations that the pundit community might shout you down for wanting.
"Quit swimming in the cool-aid" As opposed to the crap that Stallman spouts? I love how a blatant fanboy like JEDIDIAH has the temerity to accuse someone else of drinking the "Kool-aid" (NB JEDIDIAH: Note the spellig. If you going to slag someone off with a tired meme, at least get it right!)
"Only if you have very simple needs." WTF is that supposed to mean? Are you really suggesting Linux is better because it harder to use*? Fuckwit.
"This could be slightly interesting devices or use cases that the people in Cupertino didn't account for." Such as?
"This is why VLC is such a popular MacOS download. It makes up for the self imposed limitations of Quicktime. It's a lot easier than sorting out Quicktime plugins manually and dealing with variations that the pundit community might shout you down for wanting." VLC is popular on *all*
platform for the same reason and 'sorting out Quicktime plugins manually' is simply a matter of adding and removing .component files from a folder!
*Linux, Mac and Windows are all about the same in terms of usability. Each has it's strong points, and each has it's limitations.
- slightly cheaper hardware (within the same PC performance class not by more than $200 typically, and at the top end Macs are in fact cheaper, sometimes even than building one as the 27" iMac is an example)
- lots more time investment
- expensive software than mostly can only be used on 1 licensed machine (Have to buy office Pro now to use Exchange, Apple does this free out-of-the-box for example). Very little can be done on a PC without investing in additional software, especially for photo/video editing which is the big hot thing with families.
- very low or zero resale value after just 3 years.
- lots of stuff works with it, but very little legacy software works with Windows 7, about as much works with a Mac, have to virtualize windows on windows to have full compatibility.
- Desktops are more flexible, but most lower end ones are not as upgradable as commonly believed, and since most have all the ports common people would add in the end, very few ever get more than a HDD or RAM upgrade in their life cycle, especially in business and simple home (non-game) deployments.
- slightly more expensive hardware. No bottom end options under $600. Expected for nothing less than multimedia use cases so that's OK (drop to web-only use cases, and Mac OS doesn;t do anything Linux or Windows, or a smartphone can't), its a market they care nothing for and choose not to compete in).
- easy to set up, easy to maintain, easy to recover from software issues. Mostly effortless, and backed by world class support (that will actually support the OS, not just break-fix for parts).
- Most Mac Software is family licensed or not encumbered by DRM at all, and is licensed for any one mac concurrently, not a single install on one machine (there is a difference). Office is not required to access Exchange servers meaning the Student and teacher office edition provides the same functionality to a Mac user as the pro version costing $200 more does to a PC user. US upgrades also cheaper and no "pro" version there at all. Stock software accommodates the needs of the vast majority of users.
- resale for as much as half the original purchase price after 3 years is COMMON. (check eBay...) Replacing a Mac with a new one factoring in resale is almost guaranteed to cost less than buying a new PC, even one of inferior performance.
- Legacy apps through rosetta. Windows not only also runs on it for legacy app support, but Coherence visualization actually makes that easy (treat a Mac and a VM as a single machine, not 2 separate systems, including winning Office on a Mac as if it was installed native without ever seeing Windows 7 underneath, and most games can even play inside a VM).
- memory upgrades are a snap, HDDs in most models (though ample external HDD options make that a non-issue). Less flexible hardware except in the pro series. If you need GPU flexibility, or specialied IO cards, a Mac is not for you. Thankfully less than 1% of people who buy a PC ever change a GPU so its not really a big deal unless you;re the slim market who play PC games or work in sciences (and then a Mac pro if often on par pricewise to top end water cooled rigs anyway).
In the Power days, Macs were priced very high and had very little compatibility. If you didn't need one, you didn't buy one. Current Macs are prices very close to competing hardware and often run Windows with better performance than similarly priced PCs. As they continue to gain popularity, software vendors are coming back to mac as well. Native 64bit, every model with a GPU, 8+GB RAM support in every model, VT on every chip, GPGPU and more. Blizzard and bungie are releasing every game going forward on Mac and PC. Even Microsoft/Turbine have multiple Mac games, and are coding Halo for Mac OS X as we speak.
Macs cost a bit more up front, but over time actually have as much as 66% of the TCO, given a 5 year lifespan. Businesses, not that most internal legacy apps have Java and SOA front ends, are starting to see they're easy to maintain in networks (ADP is an awesome tool suite), have native AD and LDAP support, and can save the cost of MS Office deployment for a large user base. Downtime is less, patching time is less, Security hardening scripts are simpler, meeting DOD standards is easier. Macs on dekstop actually make more sense than Linux, and Mac minis draw very little power, make little noise, and cost LESS than Dell or Lenovo Business marketed SFF PCs. Governments and school districts figured that out a few years ago. Walstreet is learning.
Microsoft loves it too (since 80% of Macs end up with Windows and half of those with Office, and the majority of home PCs come only with OEM and free licenses. its a fact that the average Mac is more profitable to Microsoft than the average Dell sold to a home or college user. They're 100% behind apple, and moving more and more of their product line to Mac native.
Partners current civil service pay cheque doesnt run to list on a new mac , and thats with a 12 year old 1.2 litre car.
My point was that when people justify the ridiculous cost of a MacBook by pointing to engineering - my response is that the price tag of that is as unrealistic to the average home user as a Veyron is to the average driver.
Its overpriced.. even mac users I know are honest enough to admit that.. Id love to know what it really costs to build one... I suspect the margin on them is far greater than the speculated 30%
Where did you get this fact from?
While I agree with most of what you have written, your statement quoted above is twaddle.
I support between 70 and 80 Macs - only 2 of them have windows on them in VMs. None of them use bootcamp. 2 of them run an Access database and sage accounts using Wine.
There are five Macs in this place. Accordingly, 4 of those should be running windows. But they don't - and never will.
My £2400 MacBook Pro 17" is *good* value for money. It's an excellent device, very fast, loads of storage and memory. It also costs a lot less than the tools in a plumber's van.
As a *professional* I don't care a jot about what amateur users think or purchase. As a *professional* I care passionately about being given the choice to purchase a decent high-end machine.
Please go down to Dixons and buy your £500 plastic, dog-slow, crapware-laden, pig-ugly, large, heavy, unreliable, shell of a computer that runs WinDos. I'm very happy to use a device that makes me feel good every day I use it.
Or, to put it into your words, you drive your 12 year old 1.2 litre car; I'll drive my new Range Rover (albeit that they're hideously ugly).
There's no way it could be called that, it's just such a lame sounding release.
Perhaps the graphic is insinuating that Apple are turning their backs on the 'feline' name convention?
Perhaps it'll just be plain old "Mac OS 11" ?
Perhaps it'll be "Mac OS X Simba" or "Mac OS X Lion King" or "Mac OS X Loopy Lion" and news that Apple are teaming up with Canonical and will be releasing a Linux based Mac OS.
You just can't re'lion the rumour mill...
How about that other Lion King though... OS X Aslan?
Am I right in thinking El reg has again not been invited to play in Steve's rainde... Big Cat games?
Mac OS Jeffrey Archer? Well he was found out to be lion wasn't he?...
They could then spin off the iOS variants;
iPhone iOS 4.2 Pumbaa
iPad iOS 4.2 Timon
Maybe an iOS powered iMac.
an OSX powered iPad
One of these days I'll be able to afford to go back to Mac.
The uni I work for just got quotes to replace a PC lab. Due to the specs required for win7, the individual machines are actually more expensive than an equivalent iMac. Note that these are general PC labs so are mainly used for word processing etc
When I was at uni we had a Mac lab and I remember the maintenance guy saying that the problem with the Macs was the expense if anything breaks. With a PC if a CD drive or hard disk drive breaks then it is a tenth of the cost of purchasing the equivalent hardware from Apple...
do you mean equivalent hardware or some definition of equivalent using product numbers?
"The uni I work for just got quotes to replace a PC lab. Due to the specs required for win7, the individual machines are actually more expensive than an equivalent iMac."
Sorry mate, that has *got* to be bullshit. I'm no Windows fan, but Win7 runs nicely on everything I have that used to run XP (they all still dual-boot Kubuntu). This desktop cost half what a basic iMac costs, and it runs Win7 just dandy. My laptop cost £500 three years ago - it's not even that nice - and it runs Win7 just dandy.
Either Apple are suddenly selling iMacs for half what they were before, or someone at your Uni's been bullshitted mate.
Whoever does procurement at the uni you're in needs a hefty boot in the scrotum then.
Typing as a university employee, the cheapest iMac Apple offer is just under £750 with academic discount. That assumes a bog-standard configuration, no Applecare, and minimum spec (1GB of RAM, which will result in it being a painfully-slow piece of rubbish when you do anything even slightly system-intensive with it). In contrast, a bog-standard D*ll desktop and 20" monitor can be had for ~£400, including 3-year on-site NBD warranty.
> Due to the specs required for win7, the individual machines
> are actually more expensive than an equivalent iMac.
What specs? A Quad Core with 4G and a very respectable GPU will set you back less than a Mini.
The idea that anyone would need to spend more than an iMac for a secretary's PC is simply absurd.
If you are not trying to cram components into a laptop sized chassis, PC parts are dirt cheap.
That disparity died with the Intel Mac evolution. A HDD is a HDD. RAM is not proprietary. The only expensive part in a mac is typically the motherboard. Guess what, try buying a motherboard from Dell or anyone else; better get out the lube, you're about to learn a new fetish... The Apple slimline DVD writers used in iMacs and Laptops cost a bit more, but so do laptop drives in general. The repair cost is in line with any other OEM, and many of the parts are obtainable on NewEgg as industry standard. The Intel Motherboard used in the power Mac is a server board and costs $465 from Tiger Direct if you wanted to build your own machine. It's only $389 as an apple replacement part.
Also, warranties from apple are cheap.
Companies and schools do not buy bottom of the line machines, because of contracts and bids, they buy a bit ahead of the curve. Keep in mind, those machines not only need to run Win7, but 4 years from now they STILL need to run it, without any IT hands touching the boxes for upgrades. The labor to add 2 RAM sticks on 1500 machines is not worth it, they pay more and include it now. The SFF and simply machines sold by Dell and HP and Lenovo for schools and businesses are $1100-1400 per workstation (monitor included), plus the business warranty with is more expensive than retail ones. You can upgrade a home PC for free, a school pays $50-110/hour for that privileged, upgrades are verbotten. They buy mid grade business machines, not cheap PCs.
EDU pricing for a 22" iMac is about $1,000 per machine (less in bulk), and that machine is significantly more powerful than required for the job, but in 4 years will probably meet minimum requirements, and that Mac can connect to Exchange servers for free and runs a $99 student copy of office. Apple's business warranty on that machine is $249 same as the retail one. A PC with Windows Pro (required for domain management) costs about $800 with an EMT64 VT enables i5 and 4GB of RAM (a typical machine being put out now under business pricing), plus a monitor ($200), Office Pro to connect to Exchange ($349 before volume discounts, probably $229), and a warranty from Dell under business licensing on that package will likely be $299. Thats several hundred more expensive. In fact, for the difference, they could get Windows on that machine in parallels for legacy app support. I'm not even including back-office IT management tools which are licenced per client (ARD is licenced per site regardless of number of machines and is WAY cheaper), Corporate AV versions, and more.
This is not BS. I'm a contractor who currently works IT for some large companies, and 2 years ago I was with a reseller doing large business and government bids. I've never sold a desktop station for under $1250 configured. I could easily sell macs for less than PCs to almost any school or business.
"Guess what, try buying a motherboard from Dell or anyone else;"
Well I suppose that if you were doing your own maintenance and were mind-numbingly stupid enough to buy Dell kit, that would be an issue. If you really must buy proprietry kit you should take the warranty, leave fixing it to those wot built it and stick to simple upgrades yourself.
If, on the other hand, you'd done the sensible thing and bought machines built with generic OEM components.....
A mobo costing "only" $389? I know boards *can* cost that much, but I've never spent more than half that. Including taxes and shipping. Way to shoot down your own argument!
Doesn't fit the Macs are expensive rule I suppose.
...that I coughed up to replace 10.4 on my Mini, which has been happily chugging along since 2006....
Well put Richard 81 re: "One of these days"
Apple made stuff appealingly popular as opposed to niche top-enders and look what happened.
Was the world ready for it?
(My ans: Yes)
Was Apple ready for it?
(My ans: Both Yes and No. It seemed to have underestimated demand just a bit)
Should Mac remain elite niche top-end OR go popular?
(My ans: Go Popular as doing so has done Apple no harm a lot of good and catapulted it to an undreamt of mega-leage the likes of which seemed impossible not so long ago.)
At the Apple: Go on Apple! You know it makes sense yes?
You may have a point there. For PCs there are many sources, for Mac there's only one. Not sure they could handle the Mac going popular, from a sheer volume perspective.
As Shakespeare said: Let's kill all the puners (or something like that).
I can afford my own Mac and I'm going to get work to install a lab full of them! (insert stereotypical evil laugh).
Maybe it is a reference to "Lion's Share", which Apple seems to command in just about every place it matters lately. In case you haven't noticed Rik – lately, Apple is deep, deep into the consumer mainstream and that makes calling millions of Apple customers "Fanbois" seem condescending to a lot of non-techie folk (who happen to buy a lot of Apple gear), no matter how happy they are with the product.
I'm gonna stick with real computers not these silly fingerpainting computers