What is wrong with the press and Apple?

By on April 12, 2006, 3:45 AM
Opinion I have to admit I was one of those who were really bothered by Apple's commercial announcing they were switching to Intel technology (watch it here). I must also admit I used to call myself an Apple hater a few years ago. After all, what good a computer is if it can't run over 80% of the software available out there, it's slow, not to mention way overpriced? (the last which still remains true today).

Things have changed a bit for the past couple of years though. It's a commonly known fact that iPods saved the company from yet another failure, and OS X has proven to be a great piece of work. However, does that really make Apple the best computer company in the world? For some reason journalists seem to be obsessed with Apple, and they also seem to ignore the fact that their market share in the computer world consists of less than 5%.

I will not pretend to have all answers to these journalists’ claims, but articles such as these can drive any truthful PC enthusiast nuts any given day.

Read the complete editorial here.
I’m certainly no Microsoft lover either, after all who likes getting a security bug fix two months late. Nevertheless it is hard for me to stand comments on how Windows is not getting an overhaul after several years, while OS X has. Well, at $130 for each cosmetic update and add-on you give to your OS, Apple’s updates are far from being perfect. Not to mention we PC users are used to see thousands of application releases every month from developers worldwide, so we don’t have to depend on the OS provider for new added functionality (e.g. Desktop search is one of the latest big features in OS X, which can also be done in the PC through the use of free tools from Google, MSN or Copernic).

There is also the spyware argument. In such case I would say Windows’ success is its own worst enemy. Give OS X at least a decent share of the pie (which it lacks), and we wouldn’t have to wait long until malware and viruses for the platform start popping everywhere and in quantities. Not to justify Microsoft’s petty efforts on combating malware in XP, but that doesn’t make Apple a better company. Linux in the other hand does have the edge of being free, which OS X is not.

Then you have another guy calling Apple’s Intel-based $1299 computer superior to PCs in terms of performance? Can you believe these people writing in a technology column? After Apple’s continued failure to prove themselves better and faster than PCs, they feel obliged to move to x86 technology. So now that we can finally compare oranges to oranges, same processors, similar platforms… you still have to pretend there are faster components inside the stylish yet proprietary overpriced box with the Apple emblem?

Finally, you can call the Boot Camp project a gimmick or anything you want, but the truth is Apple’s hardware is not faster or better than any well-built DIY system. Apple users have wanted the compatibility of Windows for years, and that is understandable. Windows users have at many points in time desired to run Macintosh/OS X on their x86 machines, and I can bet that is not too far from happening, even if it is not with Apple’s permission to do so.

Back to the TV commercial, can you possibly understand how Apple dares to call PC duties "dull little tasks"? After claiming for years they have got the better technology they switch to x86 hardware, eating their own words and slapping a following of loyal customers on their face? Certainly the people making the commercial are either very good liars or simply have not used a PC since the 386 days, whichever is the case I happen to like this version of the advertisement much better. Enjoy.

Julio Franco is the Editor in Chief at TechSpot.com.

He also happens to own an iPod, a Mac, along with a few PCs. No flaming necessary on Apple’s user’s side as I am one, too. Just trying to put some fairness on the entire BS you can come across out there.




User Comments: 37

Got something to say? Post a comment
mentaljedi said:
Wow. Totally agree. Apple is nothing without its ipod and that won't last long; take my word for it.
intrepid said:
Julio Franco, my new Idol. In one editorial you summed up the views of the IT-educated world. WHEN the iPod era ends (yes mentaljedi is right), Apple will be back to where they started and will have to develop another gimmicky product."iPod - the TAZO of the new millenium."
DragonMaster said:
[quote]how Apple dares to call PC duties "dull little tasks"? [/quote] They're trying to tell that the same f'ing programs for Win or Mac x86 are using more processor power on OS X? They say that the processor has an easy life in a PC. It might be true : The OS X UI is taking(Waisting in this case) more processor power than any games for Win. ;-b[quote]Well, at $130 for each cosmetic update and add-on you give to your OS,[/quote]That's what, the price for a Win license?Their OS is based on UNIX, which doesn't cost a lot ;-), and they make LOTS of money out of it...[quote] whichever is the case I happen to like this version of the advertisement much better. Enjoy. [/quote]Nice !------You can now run Win on Macs. How is it better than a PC then? More expensive(Better PC cheaper), less compatibility, can't even put a PS/2 device or FDD or have a parallel or serial port, stuck with most hardware...Yes, it has the white under transparent design (Which I'm getting bored to see, they've used this for YEARS! -- and they still win design contests...)Worst of all, there's no AMD Mac. I like PPC more than Intel BTW(The only thing I liked from Mac). -- I don't matter about performance, I just prefer alternatives to big ones. (Less BS, marketing, there's something better)And iPod, don't talk about this one. Marketing, DRM, ... Why not a disposable iPod to make more $$$?
SSavage said:
Try a mac you'll never come back to your dull littles boxes. To bad you were not smart anoff to learn another langage at school. IT educated world... What a joke! It is quite the opposite that we see in such a statement. Holding to your job I guess... Pc mob.
monoclast said:
Know what drives *me* nuts? Articles from supposed "journalists" full of incorrect and inflammatory information. You call this a good article?*You* say Macs are still overpriced today - I disagree. The truth is that similarly configured PCs are very similar in price. Put your money where your mouth is. Show everyone here a small form factor PC that has _every single feature_ that the Mac mini Intel has, and is _significantly lower_ in price. And don't cheat - be sure to include all the software that comes with the mini.The $130 Apple charges for major Mac OSX releases are hardly just, as you state, "cosmetic updates". On the contrary, there have been significant updates "under the hood" for each major release of Mac OS X since it's inception. These "under the hood" updates and additions aren't the most publicized, of course. Desktop search? Mac OS X has had that from the very beginning. Easy metadata search, on the other hand, is still an area where Mac OS X is miles ahead, even today with Google Desktop Search et. al. For crying out loud...you're an *editor* and you didn't bother to do a little research on this?? Shame. I suppose an "editor" such as yourself, who only relies on marketing hype for background information wouldn't know this stuff. Still... *slap on wrist* ...you are *not* excused. You say *if* Mac OS X had more market share, then Mac OS X users would encounter more malware. That may have some truth to it (although personally I think there are many more factors than just market/mind share to that equation); but it seems it's just an attempt to make less of the fact that Mac OS X *is* more secure today than any Windows system. According to you, anyone who claims that Apple's current $1299 iMac Intel hardware is faster or of better quality than your average (eg. Dell) $399 PC hardware is automatically and unquestionably "pretending". Hello? The guy who wrote the article you commented on didn't claim that PCs with *similar specifications* couldn't compete. The fact is the average PC out there is indeed significantly less capable than the iMac, because Apple throws more into them, and that's why they are more expensive than your little $399 Dell. I guess this is just more of your brand of "journalism"...
asphix said:
Great article and very level headed perspective. I agree!We should see more opinionated articles like this around here! They're most enjoyable!Also, to the guy above, for 1200 I could piece together a PC that would blow the socks off of apples offering.. I believe that is what the author was getting at.A dell XPS laptop for 1400 beats apples intel based ibook in price and performance.
monoclast said:
[b]Originally posted by asphix:[/b][quote]Great article and very level headed perspective. I agree!We should see more opinionated articles like this around here! They're most enjoyable!Also, to the guy above, for 1200 I could piece together a PC that would blow the socks off of apples offering.. I believe that is what the author was getting at.A dell XPS laptop for 1400 beats apples intel based ibook in price and performance.[/quote]Is the article level-headed or opinionated? It's not both; so make up your mind.Until you *prove* that you can piece together a PC that would have all the same features of the $1200 iMac and would "blow the socks off it" (provide links to prices etc.), we'll just assume you, like the "editor" are just talking nonsense.Does your Dell XPS laptop have a Core Solo or Core Duo? No? Just a Pentium M? Boooo... Does it come with Bluetooth? A DVD burner? An ATI Mobility Radeon X1600? MS Office? [color=red]Edited because of language--Mictlantecuhtli[/color]
nic said:
Interesting how blind and biased Mac users can be. They have such strong brand loyalty that they will convince themselves that all is great in mac land, giving themselves a self sustaining pat on the back for making the right choice and buying a Mac.Well done...give yourself another pat on the back...you deserve it...
PWO said:
-JulioIf you did it on purpose, very clever. If not, well, you've fallen into the same trap other writers have - and answered your own question."What is wrong with the press and Apple?"Simple - so many writers base their stories on bad information, or even worse, conclusions drawn from looking at the Macintosh through Windows-colored glasses.I'm not speaking of debatable things like DIY-to-OEM performance comparisons, or even the heated pricing argument. I'm speking of glaring items like "$130 for each cosmetic update and add-on you give to your OS" this is opinion, not fact, and to pass it off as such (intentional, or by leading statements) is disingenuous. Fact: the second dot position in OS X 10.X is as significant a change in the Mac universe as '95 to '98 or XP to Vista in the Windows Universe.Ensure your facts are correct and admit when you are speculating or drawing a conclusion of your own, and the zealots, no matter the ilk (Mac or PC) have no platform to throw flames at you.To your credit however, I too didn't understand why apple supported the "Dull Little Tasks" line. Seems a bad idea to insult a potential market.
intrepid said:
Really. Turtle-neck fans everywhere are probably crying after this article. And to all the Mac users who think that your Mac is faster than a Windows PC of the same dollars - IT'S THE SAME HARDWARE! Yes that's right, your PowerPC chips that have ALWAYS been 'faster' were actually slower (note Apple slogan - Same Mac, now twice the speed).And to Frenchy 'SSavage'. I live in Australia and speak English, French, German and some Jap. But that has nothing to do with computing really... does it. Maybe you use French to hide your 'half-truths'.
DragonMaster said:
[quote]To bad you were not smart anoff to learn another langage at school. [/quote]You don't seem to know English very well, or you make lots of typos in almost only in English![quote]Know what drives *me* nuts? Articles from supposed "journalists" full of incorrect and inflammatory information. You call this a good article? [/quote][quote]Simple - so many writers base their stories on bad information, or even worse, conclusions drawn from looking at the Macintosh through Windows-colored glasses. [/quote]They're not supposed journalists, they're REAL journalists, that's their job, they learn at university to make you believe that they know the subject very well and in fact they say anything... Every persons that know something about a certain subject will find that the journalists tell a lot of incorrect info.[quote]Show everyone here a small form factor PC that has _every single feature_ that the Mac mini Intel has, and is _significantly lower_ in price. [/quote]Mac Mini's something else, you can't find a mini PC. Take the equivalent Mac models to the PC. I don't think that PowerMacs are cheaper than a normal ATX PC. [quote]The $130 Apple charges for major Mac OSX releases are hardly just, as you state, "cosmetic updates". On the contrary, there have been significant updates "under the hood" for each major release of Mac OS X since it's inception. [/quote]What are M$'s Service Packs? Some apps can't run without them. It means that they have lots of under the hood changes too![quote]Does your Dell XPS laptop have a Core Solo or Core Duo? No? Just a Pentium M? Boooo... Does it come with Bluetooth? A DVD burner? An ATI Mobility Radeon X1600? MS Office? Again, I call bullshit until you provide links to prove your bullshit story.[/quote]Does your Dell or Apple has an AMD? No? Just an Intel? Boooo... Ain't Bluetooth integrated even in micro-wave ovens(OK...) since 2003?(Lots of older PC laptops DO)The MS Office that was coming with iMacs 2 years ago was only a DEMO, is it still the same? Oh, and are you running a Mac not to use M$ software? And I guess that those telling that are browsing the Internet with IE...An X1600? Not the greatest! A PCI-Express X1600 costs around $100. DVD-RW? That's almost sub-standard. When are Blu-Rays and HD-DVDs for Mac coming? Dell's not the greatest you know? [quote]And to all the Mac users who think that your Mac is faster than a Windows PC of the same dollars - IT'S THE SAME HARDWARE! Yes that's right, your PowerPC chips that have ALWAYS been 'faster' were actually slower (note Apple slogan - Same Mac, now twice the speed). [/quote]It seems that they think that the OS makes part of the machine I think. They ask you if your computer is a Mac or Windows. The hardware's nothing important. Only the box and UI. Oh, and maybe the Mac mini is cheaper, but if something breaks down, can you fix it, or it's an other usual Apple-priced repair that costs as much as a new Mac?Could someone use REAL arguments? Not ones that can be destroyed by à la 1st grade ones like some I used here? Discussions would be more interesting!"Dull little tasks"... Some say this just because Apple told it and strongly believe it! It's amazing to see how powerful is Apple's marketing!
monoclast said:
[b]Originally posted by DragonMaster:[/b][quote][quote]Show everyone here a small form factor PC that has _every single feature_ that the Mac mini Intel has, and is _significantly lower_ in price. [/quote]Mac Mini's something else, you can't find a mini PC. Take the equivalent Mac models to the PC. I don't think that PowerMacs are cheaper than a normal ATX PC. [/quote]Finally, we are getting closer to the truth - you readily admit that Apple's cheapest computers, the Mac minis, are *not* more expensive than PCs. Thank you.Just for the record, I never said all Macs were always cheaper. I simply said that similarly-equiped PCs are *not* significantly cheaper, as the "editor" who wrote this inflammatory article suggested. Apple these days does not overprice their hardware. That's a thing of the past - let's move forward.[quote][quote]The $130 Apple charges for major Mac OSX releases are hardly just, as you state, "cosmetic updates". On the contrary, there have been significant updates "under the hood" for each major release of Mac OS X since it's inception. [/quote]What are M$'s Service Packs? Some apps can't run without them. It means that they have lots of under the hood changes too![/quote]Did I ever question whether M$ OS updates have "under the hood" changes? Nope, I did not. The point of my statement was that the "editor" who wrote this article was wrong in suggesting that Apple's OS updates are nothing more than superficial updates. That is simply a load of crap. [quote][quote]Does your Dell XPS laptop have a Core Solo or Core Duo? No? Just a Pentium M? Boooo... Does it come with Bluetooth? A DVD burner? An ATI Mobility Radeon X1600? MS Office? Again, I call bullshit until you provide links to prove your bullshit story.[/quote]Does your Dell or Apple has an AMD? No? Just an Intel? Boooo... Ain't Bluetooth integrated even in micro-wave ovens(OK...) since 2003?(Lots of older PC laptops DO)The MS Office that was coming with iMacs 2 years ago was only a DEMO, is it still the same? Oh, and are you running a Mac not to use M$ software? And I guess that those telling that are browsing the Internet with IE...An X1600? Not the greatest! A PCI-Express X1600 costs around $100. DVD-RW? That's almost sub-standard. When are Blu-Rays and HD-DVDs for Mac coming? Dell's not the greatest you know? [/quote]Dell represents an average PC. I was simply responding to a comment - a reader commented that he could get a Dell XPS laptop for $1400 that would "blow away Apple's offering". So I ask for proof of that and I am still waiting...Show me a $1400 Dell XPS that comes with a Core Duo or better, a better video card than the ATI Mobility Radeon X1600, a top-notch display like the MacBooks, DVD-RW, Bluetooth, 802.11g, a word processor, graphic app, a photo management application like iPhoto, DVD burning software like iDVD, a audio app like Garage Band, a web / blog app like iWeb, etc., all for $1400 or less. Show me the money.[quote][quote]And to all the Mac users who think that your Mac is faster than a Windows PC of the same dollars - IT'S THE SAME HARDWARE! Yes that's right, your PowerPC chips that have ALWAYS been 'faster' were actually slower (note Apple slogan - Same Mac, now twice the speed). [/quote]It seems that they think that the OS makes part of the machine I think. They ask you if your computer is a Mac or Windows. The hardware's nothing important. Only the box and UI. [/quote]The hardware - software integration is what makes up the Mac experience. PC users simply cannot understand that experience because they have no such experience with their Windows PCs. Put simply: you wouldn't understand.[quote]Oh, and maybe the Mac mini is cheaper, but if something breaks down, can you fix it, or it's an other usual Apple-priced repair that costs as much as a new Mac?[/quote]Yes - you can fix most everything on it - that said, as with PC laptops, it depends on what breaks. The Intel Macs use standard Intel motherboard with standard 945G chip set components on them, standard hard drives, RAM chips, standard case fans, etc. So yes, they are just as serviceable as Wintel PC laptops.
OTD said:
Not a DELL, but my own configurationAerocool Extremengine 3T (250mm fan on side) $105Ultra X-Finity 500W Power Supply $70Asus A8N-SLI NVIDIA Socket 939 ATX Motherboard $129AMD Athlon 64 X2 3800+* $330 Crucial Dual Channel 2048MB PC3200 DDR 400MHz Memory (2 x 1024MB) $185Western Digital Caviar SE16 WD3200KS 320GB HDD $129Pioneer DVR-R100A Beige 16x DVD±RW Dual Layer Drive $35eVGA GeForce 7800 GTX 256MB $435Total = USD$1418
monoclast said:
[b]Originally posted by OTD:[/b][quote]Not a DELL, but my own configurationAerocool Extremengine 3T (250mm fan on side) $105Ultra X-Finity 500W Power Supply $70Asus A8N-SLI NVIDIA Socket 939 ATX Motherboard $129AMD Athlon 64 X2 3800+* $330 Crucial Dual Channel 2048MB PC3200 DDR 400MHz Memory (2 x 1024MB) $185Western Digital Caviar SE16 WD3200KS 320GB HDD $129Pioneer DVR-R100A Beige 16x DVD±RW Dual Layer Drive $35eVGA GeForce 7800 GTX 256MB $435Total = USD$1418[/quote]If you want to do this nitpicking, we can; but seriously, Macs really are price competitive these days - you apparently choose to see only what you want to see. But this argument is getting old fast...That may seem like a nice system to you, but it's lacking a lot of things Mac users take for granted. Here are some features included in the $1400 iMac that your $1418 system is missing:- an operating system (how much does Windows XP cost? Every Mac comes with Mac OS X latest version.)- a 17" widescreen TFT active-matrix liquid crystal display (140° viewing angle, 250 cd/m brightness, 500:1 contrast ratio)- high quality web camera (1/4-inch color CCD image sensor, 640x480 VGA resolution, auto-focus from 50mm to Infinity, full motion video at up to 30 frames per second, IEEE 1394 (FireWire), integrated dual-element microphone with noise suppression — in other words not your average $30 piece of shit web cam)- EFI - 667MHz DDR2 memory- 802.11g- Bluetooth 2.0+EDR - a microphone- stereo speakers- tons of freebie apps like iPhoto, iMovie HD, iDVD, iWeb, GarageBand, Quicken 2006, Comic Life, Omni Outliner, Front Row, Photo Booth, Mail, iChat AV, Safari, Address Book, QuickTime, iCal, DVD Player, Xcode Developer ToolsAdd all that stuff and I guarantee your system will be more than $1400, or you'll end up giving up some features up, like that 2 GB of RAM, maybe a smaller HD, etc. Again, Apple's hardware is indeed pretty competitive with Wintel PCs with similar feature sets these days.
Julio said:
In general, the discussion has taken a path that goes beyond the real point made in my rant. It is not about Apple product themselves, or its loyal customers (who BTW love to protect the brand often with good, and sometimes with real bad arguments)...The story was more about the ridiculous statements made by Apple and its marketing team, and the deficient (and sometimes retarded) coverage made by so-called technology journalists, who don't seem to look beyond what the manufacturer claims.All of a sudden is "Apple is using Intel processors... Wow!!! Double the speed!". When in reality the story should go like this: "Because PowerPC was no longer a viable platform for performance computing, Apple has switched to Intel after claiming they had the better technology for years".Furthermore, normal PCs have been using Intel processors forever, and nowadays we happen to like AMD processors better because of the better performance and less heat generated (Pentium M derivatives being the exception which is what Apple is using for now).With this I'm still not saying Apple has bad products, they used to fall behind in many areas (never admitting so), many of which have been either discarded or improved. OS X is truly a masterpiece, and a good example they are doing things better nowadays.
monoclast said:
[b]Originally posted by Julio:[/b][quote]In general, the discussion has taken a path that goes beyond the real point made in my rant. It is not about Apple product themselves, or its loyal customers (who BTW love to protect the brand often with good, and sometimes with real bad arguments)...The story was more about the ridiculous statements made by Apple and its marketing team, and the deficient (and sometimes retarded) coverage made by so-called technology journalists, who don't seem to look beyond what the manufacturer claims.[/quote]"Pot Calls Kettle Black"Sorry; but you do exactly the same as these "so-called technology journalists, who don't seem to look beyond blah blah blah" when you make statements like:- Macs are "slow, not to mention way overpriced? (the last which still remains true today)"- "at $130 for each cosmetic update and add-on you give to your OS, Apple’s updates are far from being perfect"- "Desktop search is one of the latest big features in OS X"- "you still have to pretend there are faster components inside the stylish yet proprietary overpriced box with the Apple emblem"You made all of these statements based on information you never bothered to investigate for yourself. If you would have, you'd have seen (as I have clearly shown) that these are all false assumptions.Tsk tsk...[quote]All of a sudden is "Apple is using Intel processors... Wow!!! Double the speed!". When in reality the story should go like this: "Because PowerPC was no longer a viable platform for performance computing, Apple has switched to Intel after claiming they had the better technology for years".[quote]Oh you mean like this article in PC World (http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,124323,00.asp), where Steve Jobs himself says:"It's not a secret we've been trying to shoehorn a G5 [processor] into a notebook, and have been unable to do so because of its power consumption," Jobs said. The Core Duo processor provides roughly five times as much performance per watt of power consumption as the G4 or G5 chips, he said.Or like this CNET article where Steve Jobs himself explains:"As for why Apple was making the shift, Jobs pointed both to past problems and to the PowerPC road map, which he said won't deliver enough performance at the low-power usages needed for powerful notebooks.Two years ago at the same conference, Jobs introduced the first G5-based Power Macs and promised developers that the company would have a 3GHz PowerMac within 12 months. The company still doesn't have a machine that fast. "We haven't been able to deliver," he said. Nor has Apple been able to introduce a G5-based laptop--something Jobs said "I think a lot of you would like."Things weren't looking better in the coming months, Jobs said, saying that IBM's PowerPC road map would only deliver about a fifth the performace per watt as a comparable Intel chip.Jobs said there are a lot of products Apple envisions for the coming years, but "we don't know how to build them with the future PowerPC road map."Seems to me Apple was just as forthcoming as you say they weren't. I call bullshit again. The least you could do is do google search before writing tripe like this. Seriously, you are hurting nobody but yourself here![quote]Furthermore, normal PCs have been using Intel processors forever, and nowadays we happen to like AMD processors better because of the better performance and less heat generated (Pentium M derivatives being the exception which is what Apple is using for now).[/quote]Yeah? And? So what is your point?[quote]With this I'm still not saying Apple has bad products, they used to fall behind in many areas (never admitting so), many of which have been either discarded or improved. OS X is truly a masterpiece, and a good example they are doing things better nowadays.[/quote]Show me a successful company that does admit their own products suck while those products are still selling in the marketplace. :) That's a rare occurrence, I think we can all agree. Get over it - Apple has moved on - why haven't you?
nic said:
monoclast: why don't you tell us exactly what makes Macs so good? Why should PC users switch to Macs? What advantages would this bring, other than cosmetic? Please also list some disadvantages if you feel able to do so without bias...Give us a sales pitch free from bias and without selectively leaving out the bad bits.
monoclast said:
[b]Originally posted by nic:[/b][quote]monoclast: why don't you tell us exactly what makes Macs so good? Why should PC users switch to Macs? What advantages would this bring, other than cosmetic? Please also list some disadvantages if you feel able to do so without bias...Give us a sales pitch free from bias and without selectively leaving out the bad bits.[/quote]Why bother? You guys already have your mind made up. :) If you were *truly* interested, I'm sure you could find that kind of information on your own. Or you could plunk down the measely $500 and try a Mac mini out for yourself. But I doubt there's any real interest here; so I wouldn't want to waste my time trying to sell you anything.Besides, if you would rather use a Windows system that's perfectly fine with me. Don't mistake my wanting to set the record straight when a journalist tells flat-out lies for me giving a hoot what OS you use. I really couldn't care less what you use. As long as I can use Mac OS X, I'm a happy camper. :)
asphix said:
meh, I dont want to spur this much further... but Monoclast is missing the point over and over again in his selfrightous defence of his opinion.Not to mention picking apart someones argument bit by bit, instead of addressing it as a whole, coupled with jabs at how someone phrases somethign without an attempt to grasp the point behind what they're saying doesnt entice someone to consider what you say in response.Julio was basically saying, 2 years ago Apple journalists and fans woudlnt shut up about how the Power PC architecture netted much better performance than the x86 alternatives. Photoshop, Premiere, Final Cut pro.. were all claimed to run faster on PowerPC based systems.Now, all the marketing is admitting that x86 based processors are faster and more beneficial than PowerPC thus the switch.Monoclast, you missed the point entirely on how the actions TODAY contradict the claims of yesterday horribly. Instead, you go to quote jobs admitting how great a move adopting x86 into the apple product line was, FURTHER ADDING WEIGHT TO THE POINT YOU FAILED TO GRASP.The fact that you cant read something and grasp a point, nor accept someone elses opinion, makes pretty much everything that flows out of your mouth (or fingers in this case) easily disregarded in turn. I have a right to think PC's offer more than Macs for the same, or less money. I wont get into technicalities as to exactly why.. as its my opinion and it wont make a difference to you since your opinion is obviously different. When it comes down to things such as "Oh this one offers an awesome webcam! That justfies a little extra money! And these awesome speakers, stickers, mousepads and an instruction manual to-die-for", to justify one product over the other... it falls directly on opinion. So dont rebute this statement with a "how can you state one is better than the other based on opinion and not fact..." or something along those lines when obviously, both have their positives and negatives, leaving you deciding which positives appeal to you and which negatives dont effect you resulting in a final decision based on opinion. So why dont we grow up, stop picking apart posts bit, by bit, and try understanding the general point people are trying to get across, and respond to that. If not we all just sound like 13 year old fanboys on a message board arguing for the sake of pride and point, rather than trying to actually learn and broaden our opinions.Last but not least, Monoclast, are you really so surprised no one is listening to you? Instead of attacking someones claims, the validity of their opnions and again, picking apart their statments (all of which will IMMEDIATELY cause someone to go on the defensive and close all doors), why dont you throw your opinion, your gathered facts, and your argument up for consideration... let the parties involved read it, process it and apply it. Maybe then you'd see some people actually consider your words and we'd see a mature NORMAL discussion.Its like you're trying to feed a dog by prying its jaws open and throwing food down its throat, rather than filling a bowl and putting it in front of the animal. Of course the dog is going to resist having somethign shoved down its throat. Are you really that surprised?[Edited by asphix on 2006-04-13 09:59:57]
Julio said:
[b]Originally posted by monoclast:[/b][quote]Why bother? You guys already have your mind made up. :)[/quote]Correct (applies to those users who won't see beyond Macs, too), and that is ok. Which is the reason why I won't bother responding to your examples on why I haven't done the proper research, when in reality I have worked on both Macs and PCs during the past few years... and to be even clearer, some of those are Apple claims, which had been transcribed by some journalists, which is the point behind my opinion article.
monoclast said:
To Julio: I think it's good you've had occassion to use Macs and PCs in the past few years. I'm glad you have more than just Windows experience - more people should. Myself, I use Windows XP Pro, various flavors of Linux, Mac OS X, Solaris, and embedded systems daily (I work for a major embedded chip maker on their cross-platform software development tools). My first computer was a PC. I have built a few of my own by hand, and have well-rounded knowledge of all of the above mentioned platforms. I prefer Macs because I prefer Mac OS X. I'm sorry if you don't like me picking apart things you said in your article; but you could easily prevent that in the future by simply not making inflammatory, lie-based statements in the first place, no?I don't mind if you choose not to respond to my comments, because I doubt there's much you can say now to clear yourself anyway. My advice (not that you want it): Own up to what you said that was wrong and learn not to say things like that without making sure first that you are correct. (Isn't that like journalism 101 anyway?)To asphix: It's not that I missed the point you or the article are making; but that the article made many more than just that one small point. It's all of the B.S. in the article that I wish the author would not have written. So I felt the need to clear the air of those points.I agree with you that Apple did indeed market the PowerPC as a strength, even in the latter days when it was obvious to all that the PowerPC could not keep up with Intel and AMD in terms of raw performance. I do, however, think the PowerPC, even for it's relative slowness, is in many ways still a superior design. Yes, Apple did, and still does, slant their marketing to their own advantage. I understand you feel that's unwarranted, or extreme, but really, what company doesn't market their products in a good light whenever possible? I think that's why so many people have contempt for marketers. Just don't make the mistake of claiming Apple is the only company that does it.Lastly, no, I'm not surprised at all by your reaction. But your reaction doesn't make my points any less valid. And truthfully, I don't care how you take what I say. My aim was to reveal the lies and inconsistencies in the article and in comments others have made. I know I'm right, and that's all that matters to me. You can take it or leave it for all I care. You can label my attitude a "13 year old fanboy" attitude if you want. Me? I call it "I don't really care what you think because you've already proven you'll flat out lie and avoid any real facts just to make a point".
DragonMaster said:
[quote]and nowadays we happen to like AMD processors better because of the better performance and less heat generated[/quote]Less BS too... Intel often claimed they were better even it they weren't in reality.Show me a successful company that does admit their own products suck while those products are still selling in the marketplace. That's a rare occurrence, I think we can all agree. Get over it - Apple has moved on - why haven't you?
DragonMaster said:
[quote]Show me a successful company that does admit their own products suck while those products are still selling in the marketplace. That's a rare occurrence, I think we can all agree. Get over it - Apple has moved on - why haven't you? [/quote]Forgot to quote this one in my last reply![quote]The hardware - software integration is what makes up the Mac experience. [/quote]I don't like to have everything integrated, you can't change anything. The only Mac that you should compare to PC is PowerMac.Do you compare an Honda Civic to an F-150? OK, I'll do this: someone told that Mac was cheaper than PC(And talked about Mini) ?When I told that there were cheaper Macs than PCs, I seriously thought that Mac mini was at the same price as PCs for a few moments, until I saw the specs. Mac mini, for $600 gives you this :"1.5GHz Intel Core Solo processor2MB L2 Cache667MHz Frontside Bus512MB memory (667MHz DDR2 SDRAM)60GB Serial ATA hard driveCombo drive (DVD-ROM/CD-RW)Built-in AirPort Extreme and Bluetooth 2.0Apple RemoteIntel video chip with 64MB RAM"Here I'm trying to get as near as I can in price to the cheapest Mac mini:Case X-Blade 450W (real)PSU $50Seagate Barracuda 120GB SATA $70MSI K8NGM2-L micro-ATX motherboard (integrated 7.1 audio and GeForce-6 series video) $601GB Lifetime Warranty Corsair ValueRAM $72AMD X2 3800+ $295.00Lite-On DVD-RW Lightscribe $44The only thing missing is a remote(Get a TV card, you get TV in bonus) and wireless(It's not portable, who cares!), but you've got more than twice the CPU power(Even dual core), a GPU that can do something else than 2D, twice the RAM and twice the HDD space. Yes, PCs have Firewire, and you get PCI slots, a PCI-Express 16x slot to put a good video card, a parallel and serial port, more than 2 chan. audio, can have a floppy drive, more than 120GB of HDD space, you can have more than one HDD and optical drive, 4 RAM slots, etc. "The PC with the specs closest to Mac mini was $300.
nic said:
Repairing a PC is cheap, simply go buy a new part. Try doing this for Mac, it's not possible for mainboard and Apple will charge you several hundred pounds to repair it for you. Now that's what I call added value...Also, OS-X upgrades seem to come around too quick and at $130 a pop, way too expensive. Windows OS are usually good for several years and service packs are always free! OS-X is based on BeOS so Apple didn't have to write it from scratch and it still costs a too much. It looks pretty, but it is a resource hog and slows down the hardware too much. Most PC users are looking to trim back the fat, not add it back on...It does look good and is simple enough for non-computer literate users to learn.[Edited by nic on 2006-04-13 17:50:28]
DragonMaster said:
Vista will be fat too.
DragonMaster said:
[quote] Vista will be fat too.[/quote]At least you will be able to choose between XP and 3D desktop style. I hope you can switch to classic... Ugly, but it works!
monoclast said:
[b]Originally posted by nic:[/b][quote]Repairing a PC is cheap, simply go buy a new part. Try doing this for Mac, it's not possible for mainboard and Apple will charge you several hundred pounds to repair it for you. Now that's what I call added value...[/quote]Ok I'll bite. :) What exact part of a PC Intel motherboard can you replace compared to the same unreplacable part on an Intel Mac?[quote]Also, OS-X upgrades seem to come around too quick and at $130 a pop, way too expensive. Windows OS are usually good for several years and service packs are always free! [/quote]Apple's 10.x upgrades are major upgrades that bring tons of new features to the OS, and often change the overall look and behavior of key elements of the OS. Major OS updates such as these usually happen about once a year. Just because Microsoft can't deliver timely additions to their operating system doesn't mean the rest of the world should do the same.Apple's "service patch" upgrades are 10.4.x updates that, like Microsoft's, are free and available for download and in their automatic software update service.[quote]OS-X is based on BeOS so Apple didn't have to write it from scratch and it still costs a too much. [/quote]Really? Be OS? You sure about that? :) For a Be OS copy, it's funny how it looks and behaves nothing like Be OS. Do you think Apple just moved things around in a graphics program or something to make it *appear* different before re-releasing this Be OS copy to the public?[quote]It looks pretty, but it is a resource hog and slows down the hardware too much. Most PC users are looking to trim back the fat, not add it back on...It does look good and is simple enough for non-computer literate users to learn.[/quote]Wow! How absolutely clever of you! You know all this derogatory information about Mac OS X without actually knowing any of what you are saying! You are simply magical, sir! ...Can you also read my mind?
SSavage said:
What is happening here? Someone erased my comments!? Where are you DragonMaster? What kind of a place is this?
toasty said:
[b]Originally posted by mentaljedi:[/b][quote]Wow. Totally agree. Apple is nothing without its ipod and that won't last long; take my word for it.[/quote]OK anonymous internet poster, I will take your word for it.
Mictlantecuhtli said:
[b]Originally posted by SSavage:[/b][quote]What is happening here? Someone erased my comments!? Where are you DragonMaster? What kind of a place is this? [/quote]This is an English discussion forum. I removed French comments.
brownpaper said:
Linux ($0) > OS-X ($130). End of story. Using OS-X and Macs = slave to company who prices products very expensively. iPods do not even have user replaceable battery still, despite competition already offering that feature, even after all of Apple's success. When my iPod broke, they would not even honor my hardware warranty unless I was "extorted" $50 for extended warranty. The customer reps were rude and discourteous and hung up on me. I do not feel like investing into a company like this anymore. That is why I sold my stocks from Apple a few months ago. I have no confidence in their company; what next, another bell and whistle to their iPod? I'll pass on that. Surely, somebody else took a marketing class besides me to know BS. A lot of the rants about how expensive Apple repair costs are compared to PCs relate back to the ridiculous prices Apple charges to service in the past. I remember reading about how a $1600 Powerbook was malfunctioning. The guy asked how much it cost to repair the laptop, and the price to service was $1200. Might as well buy another Powerbook! Then, when the 1st or 2nd Gen iPod was released, people had their batteries die. Since the iPod did not have a user replaceable battery, people asked Apple for a battery replacement. Lets see...brand new iPod, $400-500. Now what was the cost to replace a battery for an iPod? Around $250 dollars for a tiny little cheap battery. Might as well buy the next iPod! Or not! Not until people complained to Apple did they have their current battery replacement program. Apple's arrogance that they can get away with anything, because of the cult following of their overzealous wannabe tech-nerds, is what feeds Apple's belief system. The marketing is to make Apple users think that they feel much more superior and just so much better than non Apple users, since they are paying a much more expensive price than other users. There is no value in buying an Apple product. Paying more does not necessarily equate into a superior product. Sheep-skin contraceptives are much more expensive than latex contraceptives, but latex ones do a better job. It seems most of the people that use Macs know very little about computers just as much as the Windows users they like to patronize.
DragonMaster said:
[quote] What is happening here? Someone erased my comments!? Where are you DragonMaster? What kind of a place is this?[/quote]They removed French quotes... I do congrat Apple for their marketing tho. It works! There are some persons that have been convinced that something is really the solution, but, in fact, isn't always. There are some persons you'll never be able to make them realize that the pair of $200/foot speaker cables they bought isn't worth more than a $10 one. Maybe even worse than it. Higher price doesn't always mean it's better.
Didou said:
Calm down SSavage. It's pretty obvious this is an English based site & in order to make sure the content posted by the users who visit here respects the user agreement, we ask for the messages to be posted in English. Simple as that.& btw if I go to hardware.fr, I don't post in English. To each website/forum his way.
DragonMaster said:
[quote] To Mictlantecuhtl, then focus on your own little belly. Where is it mentioned that this is a english only forum? What a shame! Not smart anoff to understand french... The wolrd don't start and stop with english, go back to school! J'appelle au boycot de ce sous-produit de forum par tout ceux qui comprennent et apprècient cette merveilleuse langue. Une opinion exprimée en français n'a pas moins de valeur que celle exprimée en anglais. What a bunch of loosers... [/quote]Sigh... You feel so insulted, I have the impression that you use a... Mac(Oh great... It's even true), and do you drive a silver Volkswagen with photochromic glasses? It would just match a stereotype.When the whole site is in English, maybe there's a little sign that you should post in English... If it's in French, you post in French. If it's in German, you post in German.Here they erased the comments instead of just telling you tho... Anyways, we didn't lose important comments.
Spike said:
heh - "Je suis gallois". You don't see me posting "yn Gymraeg" do you?Seriously, it is fairly evident that this is an english language site. That's not for elitist reasons, it's purely for reasons of moderation and upkeep.
DragonMaster said:
[quote] heh - "Je suis gallois". You don't see me posting "yn Gymraeg" do you? [/quote]No.
Spike said:
:D Very concise and witty. nice one.
Load all comments...

Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.