Anyone here like Macs?

[SoundMix]

people might be willing to pick up a Mac over a new Vista machine, knowing if they dislike the OS X experience, they can always put Windows on it,

Or I guess using that logic they could get a PC and just put OS X on it.

It much less expensive going the PC route. And you can get exactly what you want for components. You can upgrade anything in a PC, processer, motherboard, power supply, firewire, USB, etc. I can't do that with my MACs.

 

[XtreMe_G]

Or I guess using that logic they could get a PC and just put OS X on it.

that's what project osx86 is all about. BUT, you cant just simply get any pc. The easiest route would be to get one with components that are "similar" to the mac, otherwise it would be a pita to get the drivers to work. imo this is why macs work so well, the os is optimized to run on a specific set of hardware.....unlike a windows, which has to be able to support many many different kinds of configurations.

 

[Eugene]

I've used both among other systems. The best of all worlds now is to buy PC hardware and install Linux on it. You get rid of all the windows issues without having to lock into apple hardware whose quality is quite overrated.

 

[DieselDave]

We've had a zillion Apple vs PC threads over the years. To my memory this is the first one that took a critical view on Apple. I think the rest of the threads were in the Cafe which by the way is where this one should be but it's been so refreshing to see both sides discuss it objectively I believe this thread needs to stay here.

 

[James S]

to answer one of the original questions again, you can add ram to any mac, you always have been able to. There has never been a mac you couldn't add ram to yourself without any danger to the warranty. There is some confusion in the wording of the specifics, what it says is that if you damage the equipment while adding ram that damage will not be covered. But it does not void the warranty for anything else ever on the machine.

Most macs you can add drives to also, the older iMacs and the older iBooks it was very difficult, but it is easy on all the newer models of everything. I just spent all of 7 minutes popping new memory and a bigger hard drive into the new MacBook that I bought for my mom. The modern iMacs make it terribly easy for you to add memory yourself. The case can be opened with a couple of screws on the bottom, which are captive so they can't even fall out and get lost, and then it just slides off. Definitely designed for the user to change the ram.

I've been a computer programmer for 15 years now, I write software for Windows occasionally still so nobody can tell me I dont understand XP and Vista. Given all that I choose to do all my work on my Mac. Including the development for windows.

 

[StevieRay]

Using Apple Computers since 1979.

Have to use "WINDOZE" at work.

 

[ringzero]

I've always been a PC guy, and I still like the PC for its open architecture, and ease of upgradability. Lately, though the newer Macs like the iMac are very appealing.

I've been tempted by various Mac desktops over the years, but in the end they never sold me. In terms of "best bang for your buck" and inexpensive upgradability Macs can't really compete.

However, for the next notebook I'll carefully consider the available Mac offerings. Notebooks in general are more expensive, harder to work on and upgrade, and offer less "bang for your buck."

Now that Mac notebooks are offering an easy dual boot capability - Bootcamp? - and work with the MS Win OSes,
there's really no reason for me not to get one.

.

 

[James S]

I've been tempted by various Mac desktops over the years, but in the end they never sold me. In terms of "best bang for your buck" and inexpensive upgradability Macs can't really compete.

However, for the next notebook I'll carefully consider the available Mac offerings. Notebooks in general are more expensive, harder to work on and upgrade, and offer less "bang for your buck."

Now that Mac notebooks are offering an easy dual boot capability - Bootcamp? - and work with the MS Win OSes,
there's really no reason for me not to get one.

There have always been cheaper PC's, but in the last several years, and especially today, if you actually want a high end model, the Macs can be be cheaper.

Apple has never had an interest in the sub $500 market. They dont even try to compete there. THere is no $300 Mac and there wont ever likely be one. But if you're going to spent a grand or 2 on a higher end model you will get more bang for your buck buying a Mac, laptop or desktop than the Similarly configured Dell.

Dual boot is pretty much a no brainer now if you want that. I have used it in the past for debugging windows compiles of things. Virtualization is more fun for me anyway. You can boot the same partition as your dual boot config in a virtual machine under OSX. One of the 2 companies whos name I forget has actually got hardware acceleration working, meaning DirectX 9 (is that the latest number? I forgets) games now get similar framerates running in virtualization as they do when booted natively. Thats a pretty good trick!

Forgot to mention, as far as upgradability, apart from a few specialized USB with no mac drivers any and all hard drives, CD/DVD drives, printers, memory whatever will all work in your Mac exactly the same as they will in your PC. You can even upgrade the processors on many of the models if you really want to. So the upgradability issues are non-issues now days too.

 

[flashy bazook]

I have to be honest with you - personally I avoid all Apple products. By far the biggest reason is that they try to do everything about and around their products in the most proprietary way possible. The end result is that you have to keep buying stuff from Apple to keep the products running - one glaring example being a minor version upgrade to the Mac operating system (itself by the way based on an open freely available version of unix) costing $119.

It's not surprising then that over time software offerings tend to be sparse from 3rd party developers. Even microsoft, hardly a charitable organization, is more open than Apple. (I won't even discuss Linux, other posters have already done an admirable job of doing that already).

And what about that iPhone?? Talk about overpriced! In fact its main purpose is to keep iPOD users and iTUNES music buyers within the Apple fold, charging them plenty for the priviledge all along the way.

If they had opened their operating system to 3rd party developers, allowed easy access to similar add-ins, opened their hardware drivers to open source developers, made their iPODs easily compatible with other formats...

I think you get the picture - at least as I see it!

 

[flash_bang]

Macs are awesome! I've never had anything in my house since I was a kid that wasn't a mac! If you have the money, macs are definately awesome, kinda have to check out the forums like Macaddict.com/forums for info on the new models and such.
Flash

 

[flash_bang]

that's what project osx86 is all about. BUT, you cant just simply get any pc. The easiest route would be to get one with components that are "similar" to the mac, otherwise it would be a pita to get the drivers to work. imo this is why macs work so well, the os is optimized to run on a specific set of hardware.....unlike a windows, which has to be able to support many many different kinds of configurations.

bingo :goodjob:

 

[James S]

I have to be honest with you - personally I avoid all Apple products. By far the biggest reason is that they try to do everything about and around their products in the most proprietary way possible.

There is a group of people that feel this way. But it's hard for me to really understand the strength of the conviction. I've been using Macs for a long time and there has never been a time I couldn't go out and buy hardware pieces from anybody and connect it up. There aren't any hard drives I can't use, there isn't any 3rd party memory i can't use, there are a bazilliong USB devices I can use and a million cards and addins and cameras and just about everything works. It would be easier to make a short list of the things I know dont work than to list what does. How is this proprietary? I cannot buy a motherboard from a third party, so I suppose that is the sticking point? But since Apple is a hardware company thats kind of like asking why I can't buy a Dell motherboard from HP...

The end result is that you have to keep buying stuff from Apple to keep the products running - one glaring example being a minor version upgrade to the Mac operating system (itself by the way based on an open freely available version of unix) costing $119.

Yup, lots of stuff based on BSD, pretty much everything you can run in a terminal window or an X-Windows session. But everything else is theirs, so they shouldn't charge you for upgrades? A new OSX update that you have to pay for comes out on average every 18 months but nobody makes you buy it. Apple is supporting OS versions as old as 5 years ago for security and other such important updates. These aren't minor updates either. The last major update was from 10.3 to 10.4. I'm a little confused as to why they number things the way that they do, but this is comparable to the update from XP to Vista, not comparable to the update between XPsp1 and XPsp2. All the point upgrades to an OS are free. I'm currently running 10.4.9 and expect to have to shell out the $119 bucks for the update soon just because I actually use new features. But if I dont I could easily wait 2 or 3 upgrades before I purchase one and I would still get security and other such updates from them for free.

It's not surprising then that over time software offerings tend to be sparse from 3rd party developers.

heh, but I AM a 3rd party developer for Apple To people that say things like this I'd like to know just what you're looking for that you can't find? I'll help you find an alternative if there is something you need that you can't find a mac version of. It does happen every so often that I see something I'd like to do that I can't, those are often times I start writing a new project to sell myself

Even microsoft, hardly a charitable organization, is more open than Apple. (I won't even discuss Linux, other posters have already done an admirable job of doing that already).

but this doesn't scan with me at all? A portion of the Mac OS is actually open and free. You can go download it it right now form darwin.org and compile it for various platforms as a server OS or as a unix OS minus the Macintosh portions. The development tools are free and can be downloaded from Apple.com for all of the OS and the API is fairly well documented. How is this less open than MS?

And what about that iPhone?? Talk about overpriced! In fact its main purpose is to keep iPOD users and iTUNES music buyers within the Apple fold, charging them plenty for the priviledge all along the way.

Actually it's not overpriced, well, it IS overpriced but then all the high end smart phones are overpriced. You will pay the same for any of the comparable models. Again apple doesn't bother to play in the low price zone. But once you decide you want a high end tool the Apple ones dont cost any more than the competition.

I think you just dont like Apple And thats OK

If they had opened their operating system to 3rd party developers, allowed easy access to similar add-ins, opened their hardware drivers to open source developers, made their iPODs easily compatible with other formats...

I have to totally agree with you 100% on the stupidity of not opening the iPhone to developers. One of the reasons pay the premium for a top of the line smartphone is to run apps on it. But this isn't written in stone and Apple has already mentioned in various press releases that they were rather floored by the reaction to this. So perhaps they will do the right thing and open it up before they release the product. Hard to tell just how it will be when there is no shipping product yet. But I"m with you that not opening those API's as well is a huge mistake.

 

[abvidledUK]

iMac...it just works...

 

[hank]

I went from a Powerbook 100, to a Powerbook 150, to a Powerbook 180, to a Powerbook 540c (first lemon, first two years of AppleCare Hell); they eventually charged me another $1000 to replace the 540c with a Lombard, after several years of delay during which I relied on the older Powerbooks. The Lombard was a lemon; three more y ears of AppleCare Hell, never solved its crashing problem; after six tries they charged me another thousand to upgrade to a Pismo. That was flaky for three years and five AppleCare visits (one of which got me the SevenDust virus, but they closed down their New York Applecare depot after that debacle and moved service to somewhere in Texas). After AppleCare expired, I was able to open the thing up myself with no further risk of a warranty violation, and pulled out the original Apple brand memory card it had come with -- which they'd never touched --- and replaced it with a third party chip.

No problems since then.

I'm still using the Powerbook 150 and 180, and once I get my soldering skills to where I can replace those teeny little motherboard fuses, I'm going to be using the 100 again; found some little tiny lead-acid rechargeables that even fit into the case and give me portability.

You wouldn't _believe_ how fast the 100 boots OS 6, and the 150 and 180 boots OS 7.5.3, and Word 5.1 comes up in a couple of seconds and just works fine on all three. And the 180 has a monochrome screen that's completely readable outdoors in full sunshine.

Far faster than any newer computer, for the simple stuff

Then again, I'm also still using DOS 3.11 and WordStar (grin) when I really want to write something without worrying about anything but the text (yes, on the Powerbook 150/180, in emulation).

So, yeah, I like Macs. I just don't like Apple all that much.

I'll probably buy a Mini next time, just to be able to use something newer than X 10.3.9, and for bigger graphics files. I think the iMac is too closed to be easy to work on, and the big boxes are too noisy and the hardware's changing too fast to spend all that money so often.