Are Mac's too expensive?

[canucklehead]

LOL!!!
How pray tell can a 'free' OS be judged in a paying market ????
Linux isn't about making money, except for a couple distros you have to pay for. There are over 100 linux distros and only a couple you pay for, so of course this maket share is very small.

You claim to have gone to business school, no?
Linux is MEANT to be FREE, not sold!
How could you miss this point?.....


Oh and the OS does not suck.
Actually it's considered even more stable than a Mac and comes now with several thousand FREE apps and programs in the repos.....a few more than Mac, NO?......

You have much to learn yet, young grasshopper......

Well young grasshopper i can compile anything on a mac u can compile on Linux ... so who has more free software .... apt-get is great .... ports and fink are great ... This argument can go on and on .... like i always say there is always someone that will like something else.
As far as work and stability i prefer a hardware company that makes software..... Apple and OSX, Sun Solaris and now Open Solaris ..... why because if i am buying a server and for what ever reason i get a new model and it has a new RAID card i do not have to waste two days writing and compiling the drivers..... osx will work with every version of xserve and solaris will work with any sparc or x86 box or AMD box out of Sun.... time is money. I love Ubuntu and i find it handles disk I/O better then OSX ever did and has the support of a great community... but in production when it goes bad and sometimes it does ... it goes very bad. I will take stability and reliability of future hardware purchases over newest and fastest...

 

[WoodPeckr]

Well young grasshopper i can compile anything on a mac u can compile on Linux ... so who has more free software .... apt-get is great .... ports and fink are great ... This argument can go on and on .... like i always say there is always someone that will like something else.

LOL!
Agreed, was just giving bottie the business for trying to compare a free 'not for profit' OS with 'for profit' OS's like M$ & Mac in market share comparisons.
You are correct, this argument will go on and on ........
Each one has something to offer for everyone.

 

[canucklehead]

Most Linux distros do sell support contracts... plus Mac OS never asks for a serial

 

[Goomer]

I'm amazed how long this thread has continued! Obviously people have their strong opinions, and it looks like the arguments about Mac vs. Windows have been settled since the discussion has now veered towards Linux vs. Mac now!

 

[friendz4evr]

Ya, like the average computer user in India & China has an inkling what M$ is?

As usual, the Chinese and Indian computer user is underestimated. The hundreds of thousands in the Information Technology industry world-wide would disaggree.

 

[WoodPeckr]

..... the discussion has now veered towards Linux vs. Mac now!

The two superior systems no doubt.....

As usual, the Chinese and Indian computer user is underestimated. The hundreds of thousands in the Information Technology industry world-wide would disaggree.

Wonder if there is a reliable breakdown there?
Most other countries in the world use Linux much more than N America and China and perhaps India also, have no doubt the most pirated versions of M$ running.
It would be interesting to see how many use Linux, M$, Mac and pirated M$ copies in China.

 

[skymano]

Porsches are expensive too, but there is a reason why people are willing to dish out the extra cash. Made the switch to Mac a year ago and can't imagine going back to the PC world. The stability of my imac is just insane. NEVER had this flawless, seamless and pleasurable experience with a PC. Money well spent indeed!

 

[onthebottom]

LOL!!!
How pray tell can a 'free' OS be judged in a paying market ????
Linux isn't about making money, except for a couple distros you have to pay for. There are over 100 linux distros and only a couple you pay for, so of course this maket share is very small.

You claim to have gone to business school, no?
Linux is MEANT to be FREE, not sold!
How could you miss this point?.....


Oh and the OS does not suck.
Actually it's considered even more stable than a Mac and comes now with several thousand FREE apps and programs in the repos.....a few more than Mac, NO?......

You have much to learn yet, young grasshopper......

As usual, it's you who missed the point - I'll type slowly so you can understand.

Market share is measured by how many people (computers in this case) use it, not how many people paid for it - so at FREE the OS has gained less than 1% market share - not exactly a success or even relevant.

When you say PC you're really saying Windows (99% of the time) and then you're saying buggy unstable OS.

OTB

 

[onthebottom]

Well young grasshopper i can compile anything on a mac u can compile on Linux ... so who has more free software .... apt-get is great .... ports and fink are great ... This argument can go on and on .... like i always say there is always someone that will like something else.
As far as work and stability i prefer a hardware company that makes software..... Apple and OSX, Sun Solaris and now Open Solaris ..... why because if i am buying a server and for what ever reason i get a new model and it has a new RAID card i do not have to waste two days writing and compiling the drivers..... osx will work with every version of xserve and solaris will work with any sparc or x86 box or AMD box out of Sun.... time is money. I love Ubuntu and i find it handles disk I/O better then OSX ever did and has the support of a great community... but in production when it goes bad and sometimes it does ... it goes very bad. I will take stability and reliability of future hardware purchases over newest and fastest...

And now a software company owns the hardware (Oracle buying Sun).....

OTB

 

[onthebottom]

Porsches are expensive too, but there is a reason why people are willing to dish out the extra cash. Made the switch to Mac a year ago and can't imagine going back to the PC world. The stability of my imac is just insane. NEVER had this flawless, seamless and pleasurable experience with a PC. Money well spent indeed!

While I think this is a good analogy from a design perspective, I think it's a poor one from a performance perspective.

Porsches combine good design (opinion) with good performance at a high price. I think Macs combine good design, average performance with idiot proof manageability.

Geeks can get better performance for the dollar out of Linux if they are willing to manage it - Windows is really the worst of all worlds, average performance, average to low price, shitty design.

OTB

 

[WoodPeckr]

When you say PC you're really saying Windows (99% of the time) and then you're saying buggy unstable OS.

However when you put free Linux on that PC, all those problems vanish and you didn't have to spend a penny.....

 

[WoodPeckr]

Geeks can get better performance for the dollar out of Linux if they are willing to manage it...
OTB

Nothing to manage really. You just turn it on and run it.
Like a PC was meant to be.....

 

[Goomer]

However when you put free Linux on that PC, all those problems vanish and you didn't have to spend a penny.....

But you still don't get the engineering of a Mac. Specific examples include unibody design, lightweight (ie. Macbook Air....thinnest/lightest full powered laptop in the world), backlit keyboard, slim sleek designs (ie. sleek metal finished with no plastic mouldings, stickers etc.), LED fully green displays, 7 hour battery life etc. Should I continue with examples of engineering brilliance?

You also get a very stable and secure OS that can run pretty much any other OS that you want to run, on top or side by side to OSX through virtualization. This includes Linux as well! This gives you access to literally thousands of additional apps, or pretty much any app currently available in the world!

You also get iLife '09, which in itself makes a damn good argument to get a Mac!

Lastly, you also get Snow Leopard for only $29 more in the Fall when it's released. An OS that will take advantage of true 64 bit processing, which has been completely rewritten and will improve performance by up to 50% over the current spectacularly performing Leopard.

Now please explain to me how you get all of that by simply installing Linux without having to spend another penny????

I have been saying repeatedly in this thread that buying a Mac does not just give you a superior OS, but you're buying into engineering and design, something lacking in pretty much every other computer out there.

Sure, some PC makers make some snazzy looking computers. But are those the ones on sale for $599? I don't think so! If not, then the argument about Macs being more expensive than PC's is moot, don't you think? For example, Dell released their version of the Macbook Air, the Adamo. They are selling their 1.2 Intel Core2Duo model for $1999, while Apple is selling the 1.6 Intel Core2Duo model Macbook Air for $1499! This is $500 cheaper, .4 gigahertz more powerful, and is also 1lb lighter to boot (a major difference when you're fighting to be the world's thinnest/lightest laptop!). The Adamo weighs in at 4 lbs, while the Air is only 3lbs, yet packs a more powerful processor and is cheaper!

http://www.businessinsider.com/dell-adamo-vs-macbook-air-the-side-by-side-comparison-2009-3

So again, I will ask the question: How does simply installing Linux give you all of that, without spending a penny?

 

[onthebottom]

However when you put free Linux on that PC, all those problems vanish and you didn't have to spend a penny.....

Yet that happens less than 1% of the time.

OTB

 

[antaeus]

This goomer is a shill: "brilliant, spectacular......"

All of goomer's brilliant spectacular Apple features are available on various other name brand pc's, just with their criminally bad aesthetic design.

All of the name brand PC's engineering is on a similar level including the brilliant spectacular Apple. Apple does excel in creative, aesthetic design whereas other name brand pc makers are criminally bad. Of name brand computer makers I would actually list Apple as the worst electro-mechanical integration engineering, but that's a specious use of 'worst'; they're all pretty good. The reason, this is what I do, I've worked with some of these companies and their myriad suppliers.

Key there is name brand, Toshiba Fujitsu Lenovo Apple etc., not corner store Wang's computers or some home built screw-it-to-a-plank monster.


Generally, average performance pc's are less expensive than Apple computers.

High performance mathematically computation intensive pc's are more expensive than Apple computers but its not a realistic comparison as Apple computers don't have many applications to do this sort of work, hence most aren't bought or used for it.

The comparison someone made on page 1 of somewhat high performance machines is accurate, although the pc I bought was about $6000, mostly due to special 1gb video card and 4X ram. My other pc was about $4000 5 years ago, updated once for $80, and remains more powerful than all the average machines advertised today.

 

[moresex4me]

This goomer is a shill: "brilliant, spectacular......"

All of goomer's brilliant spectacular Apple features are available on various other name brand pc's, just with their criminally bad aesthetic design.

All of the name brand PC's engineering is on a similar level including the brilliant spectacular Apple. Apple does excel in creative, aesthetic design whereas other name brand pc makers are criminally bad. Of name brand computer makers I would actually list Apple as the worst electro-mechanical integration engineering, but that's a specious use of 'worst'; they're all pretty good. The reason, this is what I do, I've worked with some of these companies and their myriad suppliers.

Key there is name brand, Toshiba Fujitsu Lenovo Apple etc., not corner store Wang's computers or some home built screw-it-to-a-plank monster.


Generally, average performance pc's are less expensive than Apple computers.

High performance mathematically computation intensive pc's are more expensive than Apple computers but its not a realistic comparison as Apple computers don't have many applications to do this sort of work, hence most aren't bought or used for it.

The comparison someone made on page 1 of somewhat high performance machines is accurate, although the pc I bought was about $6000, mostly due to special 1gb video card and 4X ram. My other pc was about $4000 5 years ago, updated once for $80, and remains more powerful than all the average machines advertised today.

It's not just the device itself, which is leading-edge design being copied by others, but the OS and software that comes with it, relative security, ease of use, etc. All I know is I'm spending a lot less time using Google to trouble-shoot issues and keep my computer clean, and more time researching other things that are more gratifying on Terb!

 

[WoodPeckr]

Lastly, you also get Snow Leopard for only $29 more in the Fall when it's released. An OS that will take advantage of true 64 bit processing, which has been completely rewritten and will improve performance by up to 50% over the current spectacularly performing Leopard.

Now please explain to me how you get all of that by simply installing Linux without having to spend another penny????

I have been saying repeatedly in this thread that buying a Mac does not just give you a superior OS, but you're buying into engineering and design, something lacking in pretty much every other computer out there.


So again, I will ask the question: How does simply installing Linux give you all of that, without spending a penny?

Hey Mac makes a very pretty box and a decent OS, never questioned that but you have to pay more for the glitz. You must work for Apple and demonstrate their glitzy market appeal that is helping sell their boxes by mainly smearing hapless M$ who shoots themselves in the foot better than most but still remains Number 1.

You can make the same argument about a Rolls Royce and the other luxury cars but in the end they only sell to small minority market and always will.

64 bit Snow Leopard comes out this fall.
Fine. I've been using 64bit Linux since this past april '09. It's quick, you will enjoy it in a couple months also.....providing Mac has the needed drivers all squared away.

Here's just one example of how Linux doesn't cost a penny.
My brother just got into PCs. A niece gave him an old stripped down P4 Dell from 2002 with 256 RAM running XP. Well XP runs crappy ...... needs more RAM. Plus it has only a few apps.
Just put Ubuntu 9.04 in that old Dell and it runs great and didn't cost him a penny. He now has two OSs available being a newbie and they suit him fine for his purposes. He is amazed how intuitive and well Ubuntu runs. He thought he would have to buy lots of sofware for XP until I showed he the Linux repos and the thousands of free apps, programs there for the taking.

Being a newbie to both, he thinks linux is easier to move about in than M$......plus likes the fact it didn't cost a penny.....

 

[WoodPeckr]

Yet that happens less than 1% of the time.

LOL!!!
Not surprised are you?
M$ & Apple have to make money so they won't even mention Linux except to smear it!
It's competition to them.
Look at netbooks, the new craze.
M$ extended the deadline on XP because too many new netbooks would be using Linux. M$ feared once folks start using Linux and see how great it runs they would dump M$.
Hey but if your happy and content to have your pockets picked by Apple.....just keep bending over for 'em....

 

[Goomer]

Hey Mac makes a very pretty box

This is what I've been arguing since the beginning. Apple does not make a pretty box. They don't make boxes at all (except for the Mac Pro line). Their desktop machines are true desktops....they actually get to sit on your desk, unlike the vast majority of PC's, which are big clunky boxes that pretty much have to sit on the floor! With an iMac, there is no clunky box, because the computer is built right into the monitor! The Mac Mini is about about the size of 5 or 6 stacked CD cases....will easily fit on just about anyone's desk.

The Macbook Pro is no pretty box. It is an engineering marvel with a unibody design (from one single slab of aluminum), backlit keyboard, LED screen, 7 hour battery life etc. How is this just a pretty box? This is a lightweight, strong and sturdy machine, that is the most green friendly laptop you can buy, with the best battery life out there for a full powered laptop. If you're going to use the term "pretty box", this would better apply to a Windows laptop, since the vast majority of them have stickers placed all over them, and lots of plastic mouldings to make these clunky machines look prettier. A Macbook Pro is a sleek elegant machine, with clean lines, and no disguising mouldings and stickers. And have you used the new touchpad with its multi-touch features? Another feature that you won't find in the $599 laptop market!

Yes, Macs are generally more expensive. But you're getting more for your money, and it ain't just a pretty box! lol

On another note, no I don't work for Apple or do I currently own Apple stock! lol I'm just someone who believes in their products, and just like the Linux crowd on this thread, I enjoy debating the points.

 

[5hummer]

As usual, the Chinese and Indian computer user is underestimated. The hundreds of thousands in the Information Technology industry world-wide would disaggree.

I'm not under-estimating the intelligence of India & China. ANd, I'm sure there are hundreds of thousands of IT people in the world.

But in India & China you have 2+ billion computer users. You think even half that amount will be computer literate?
Will know M$?
Or even care?

Think about it -- Most people (DVD player) just care about four functions: Play, Forward, Rewind & Stop.