# I hardly see any threads about MACs in here.



## PHATSPEED7x (Sep 20, 2008)

Is MAC OSX really that great? Never use it first hand myself.


----------



## chibicitiberiu (Sep 20, 2008)

I did used before Mac OS. It's not bad let's say, not yet targeted by viruses, so there are very few (viruses). Also it is Unix-based (using the Darwin kernel). It is very similar to windows, but there still are some differences. The Minimize, Maximize/Restore and Exit buttons are in the left side of the title bar instead of the right one, and in a different order, and i can't say too much. Just search on YouTube for some vids with screen captures of this OS and you'll see how it is.

Me? I don't like it. Since this Microsoft vs. Apple war, they both do really horrible OSs. I like Ubuntu. It offers almost same windows does, and it is also free. But of course use windows, because the number of games, programs is much bigger on windows than ubuntu/linux...


----------



## scooter (Sep 20, 2008)

PHATSPEED7x said:


> Is MAC OSX really that great? Never use it first hand myself.



Not that great! Not that bad!!

Overhyped like so many other things.


----------



## StrangleHold (Sep 20, 2008)

*I hardly see any threads about MACs in here*

Considering only about alittle over 3% of computers worldwide are its not to strange.


----------



## patrickv (Sep 20, 2008)

some members have Macs here. Maybe they don't post thread cause they hardly get a problem with it, or of they do.. the forum can't even help... that's my personal view on the matter.


----------



## jdbennet (Sep 20, 2008)

Apple have some nice ideas, and it looks sweet, but i dont find it particularly productive (whats up with the lack of a maximise button! and one button mice!). Also its tied to apple H/W, poor HW support, not that much software available, and its costly.

And yes, this is from someone who actually owns a mac.


----------



## mep916 (Sep 20, 2008)

Most of the Mac stuff is in the Desktop Computers section.


----------



## cohen (Sep 20, 2008)

Yeah i like to use the mac OS, i like it, i just the like the features etc, photo booth is cool to have a play in, i will be getting a mac when i get older. i'll add vista onto it as well


----------



## T3hk1w1 (Sep 23, 2008)

I am a lifelong Mac user, and just got my first windows machine. I'm quite fond of the Mac OS, as it it difficult to accidentally mess up or crash it. The lack of malware aimed at the Mac goes a long way toward balancing out the dearth of games for it. On the other hand, the computers, while nice, are a PITA in that they are mostly unupgradeable, and sacrifice function for form in some ways(No Expresscard slot? WTF?) one-button Mice? The Mac keyboards are also pretty short on function keys/media keys.


----------



## cohen (Sep 23, 2008)

T3hk1w1 said:


> I am a lifelong Mac user, and just got my first windows machine. I'm quite fond of the Mac OS, as it it difficult to accidentally mess up or crash it. The lack of malware aimed at the Mac goes a long way toward balancing out the dearth of games for it. On the other hand, the computers, while nice, are a PITA in that they are mostly unupgradeable, and sacrifice function for form in some ways(No Expresscard slot? WTF?) one-button Mice? The Mac keyboards are also pretty short on function keys/media keys.



Yes i can agree with you there, mostly with everything you have said.

The mouse does getting annoying after a while. But if i spend say, an hour on a mac surfing the net and then go onto my laptop, i start treating it like a mac, by using the 2 finger scrolling.


----------



## Quiltface (Sep 23, 2008)

the last "mac" i used was an Apple II

It wasn't that good


----------



## T3hk1w1 (Sep 23, 2008)

Cohen, I solved that problem completely by getting a Logitech VX Revolution for it 
Quiltface, I've got an Apple IIe in the attic if you want it lol


----------



## jdbennet (Sep 23, 2008)

they sell for a  lot on ebay


----------



## speedyink (Sep 23, 2008)

I dunno, maybe it's the whole 3% market share thing.  

Oh, and the fact that they're SOO easy to use


^  Sorry for the blatant lie....


----------



## Quiltface (Sep 24, 2008)

kind of like all those im a mac and im a pc are blatant lies as well...

they should have a mac and pc commercial where the pc says "o yeah butt head, im going to take away support for MS Office... now how cool are you"   (which has been pondered by microsoft)

or they should have one that has a pc installing all kinds of software and the mac skimming through a bunch of programs until it finds one it can understand.... you know something that doesnt have an "i" infront of it.


----------



## Quiltface (Sep 24, 2008)

> Quiltface, I've got an Apple IIe in the attic if you want it lol



yes i do... i have a copy of oregon trail here that i havent seen on a black and green screen in ages.


----------



## Kill Bill (Sep 24, 2008)

Macs are just easy so we don't have have problems with them.


----------



## Twist86 (Sep 24, 2008)

StrangleHold said:


> *I hardly see any threads about MACs in here*
> 
> Considering only about alittle over 3% of computers worldwide are its not to strange.



Bingo.


Sadly mac is more talked and fought about then actually used so it appears larger then it really is.


----------



## Quiltface (Sep 24, 2008)

http://marketplace.publicradio.org/display/web/2008/04/23/mac_users/


----------



## gamerman4 (Sep 24, 2008)

Because Macs aren't really able to be disassembled (something we deal a lot in this forum is about individual parts of computers)


----------



## Ethan3.14159 (Sep 24, 2008)

Of course there aren't many Mac threads on here. Instead of upgrading hardware on a Mac, just buy a new one. Any software is a simplistic version of Windows software with less features.


----------



## tlarkin (Sep 24, 2008)

Apple has way more than a 3% market share, you guys should use google for once to check your statements.

http://apple20.blogs.fortune.cnn.co...ples-us-consumer-market-share-now-21-percent/

They have the fastest growing market share and they also have like a 40% market share in the University level, meaning 40% of college kids own a Mac laptop world wide (or maybe that is nation wide I am not sure).

They are targeted for viruses and spyware, hell you would get so much bragging rights for writing the first self propagating virus for OS X.  In fact, they had a contest and invited the smartest and best hackers in the world to remotely exploit a Mac and they even offered a $10,000 prize for the person to do it.

They had to bend the rules and allow software to be installed for it to be exploited and it was, but it was a java security exploit through webkit browsers which technically isn't solely Apple's fault, and has since been patched by Sun and Apple.  If you don't use webkit browsers you are fine.  So the only way to exploit it that the hackers found was through the user hitting a malicious website and it using a webkit exploit to root the machine.

http://arstechnica.com/journals/apple.ars/2007/04/21/mac-hacked-for-10000

OS X is definitely not bullet proof, just read their security update white pages about what the security update fixes.  There was a nasty little bug in the ARD client that allowed privilege escalation which has since been patched.

Is it better?  Sure in some ways, but most of it is probably preference.


----------



## gamerman4 (Sep 24, 2008)

Here at my college we have 24 Macs......with Windows XP 
Macs are used in these places because it is a convenience. One cable from the back and thats it, don't have to put people to work on connecting stuff to stuff.


----------



## tlarkin (Sep 24, 2008)

gamerman4 said:


> Here at my college we have 24 Macs......with Windows XP



I have 6,000 Macbooks that dual boot


----------



## Ethan3.14159 (Sep 24, 2008)

My college is Mac only, so I'm on a Mac just as much as I'm on my PC. There are tons of little things that just annoy me with Macs. I'm sure that works both ways with PCs for Mac users.


----------



## Quiltface (Sep 24, 2008)

tlarkin said:


> I have 6,000 Macbooks that dual boot



i thought i had too many computers.


----------



## Quiltface (Sep 24, 2008)

> Apple has way more than a 3% market share, you guys should use google for once to check your statements.



From the article...


> According to IDC, Apple’s worldwide market share grew from 2.4% in 2006 to 2.9% in 2007.





> In the consumer market, where Apple does compete, he estimates the Mac’s share is now 10% worldwide and an impressive 21% in the U.S.



The 21% is only US consumers... so in reality it is about 3-5%


----------



## tlarkin (Sep 24, 2008)

Quiltface said:


> From the article...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Last I read it was right around 6% world wide if you count all customers from consumer, student/education, enterprise, etc.

Those macbooks aren't mine they are on my network at work, heh like I even have room in my apartment for 6,000 macs.


----------



## StrangleHold (Sep 24, 2008)

tlarkin said:


> Apple has way more than a 3% market share, you guys should use google for once to check your statements.
> 
> http://apple20.blogs.fortune.cnn.co...ples-us-consumer-market-share-now-21-percent/


 
I said alittle (over) 3% world wide. Not just in the US.


----------



## jdbennet (Sep 25, 2008)

The rest of the world is not the US. On my comp sci course, out of 400 people, there is less than 5 with macs, although 70% have an ipod.

In the UK i only know of two people out of all my friends and colleagues who own macs.


----------



## tlarkin (Sep 26, 2008)

jdbennet said:


> The rest of the world is not the US. On my comp sci course, out of 400 people, there is less than 5 with macs, although 70% have an ipod.
> 
> In the UK i only know of two people out of all my friends and colleagues who own macs.



40% of University students in the US now have Mac laptops according to the last statistic I read.


----------



## jdbennet (Sep 26, 2008)

thats in the US

noone buys macs hardly in europe because they are like double or triple the price of pcs, seems apple just swap the $ for a £


----------



## tlarkin (Sep 26, 2008)

jdbennet said:


> thats in the US
> 
> noone buys macs hardly in europe because they are like double or triple the price of pcs, seems apple just swap the $ for a £



yeah and over in China they have more honor roll students than the US has total students, so it just a drop of water in the Ocean.  That doesn't mean it is not significant though.  I mean Apple had pretty much 0% market of laptops in Universities 7 or 8 years ago.


----------



## Quiltface (Sep 26, 2008)

I love a good mac/win war


----------



## gamerman4 (Sep 26, 2008)

In America (and most any other place) convenience comes at a premium and iMacs are easily the most convenient computers to set up (regardless of what OS you use.)
I've seen labs that used iMacs because they were easy and I've seen labs that just used really expensive Windows laptops because they are easy. An iMac and a desktop-replacement laptop are roughly the same price ($2000+) and around the same performance.
No one wants to deal with the cords and that is why Macs are chosen in universities and places where they need less clutter.
Mac may be marketed to consumers but it is the bigger places that have a better use for them since consumers like cheap goods and Macs are not cheap.


----------



## tlarkin (Sep 26, 2008)

gamerman4 said:


> In America (and most any other place) convenience comes at a premium and iMacs are easily the most convenient computers to set up (regardless of what OS you use.)
> I've seen labs that used iMacs because they were easy and I've seen labs that just used really expensive Windows laptops because they are easy. An iMac and a desktop-replacement laptop are roughly the same price ($2000+) and around the same performance.
> No one wants to deal with the cords and that is why Macs are chosen in universities and places where they need less clutter.
> Mac may be marketed to consumers but it is the bigger places that have a better use for them since consumers like cheap goods and Macs are not cheap.



While I won't disagree with your point that the all-in-one system is easy to deploy, but Apple doesn't consider itself a enterprise level company.  So mass deployments are not as common as say, HP business class machines in the enterprise world.  Now, that doesn't mean that the "easiness" is over looked in such deployments.  

iMacs are not $2,000 either.  They start at $1200, and the $2100 model has a 24 inch LED LCD screen so that can not be compared to a laptop.  What laptop has a 24" LED LCD screen?  Most laptops don't have as high end screen, and people forget that those screens alone probably cost $350 to $400 to upgrade.  They are not the same specs, which people seem to conveinently forget to acknowledge.  They may have the same processor and RAM and video card, but that is about it.  Now when it comes to an all-in-one system Apple does pretty much make the best one in existence.  I have worked with many other low profile systems (or all-in-ones) and for the most part they have sucked compared to the iMac.  

If you go build a spec for spec desktop compared to an iMac and include the cost of the high end monitor built in, I bet the iMac comes out cheaper almost every time.

Macs are not over priced they are just higher end machines.  It would be same thing to call a Porsche over priced, it isn't over priced it is just high end.


----------



## gamerman4 (Sep 26, 2008)

tlarkin said:


> While I won't disagree with your point that the all-in-one system is easy to deploy, but Apple doesn't consider itself a enterprise level company.  So mass deployments are not as common as say, HP business class machines in the enterprise world.  Now, that doesn't mean that the "easiness" is over looked in such deployments.
> 
> iMacs are not $2,000 either.  They start at $1200, and the $2100 model has a 24 inch LED LCD screen so that can not be compared to a laptop.  What laptop has a 24" LED LCD screen?  Most laptops don't have as high end screen, and people forget that those screens alone probably cost $350 to $400 to upgrade.  They are not the same specs, which people seem to conveinently forget to acknowledge.  They may have the same processor and RAM and video card, but that is about it.  Now when it comes to an all-in-one system Apple does pretty much make the best one in existence.  I have worked with many other low profile systems (or all-in-ones) and for the most part they have sucked compared to the iMac.
> 
> ...



At the hardware level Macs are overpriced, even my Mac-loving friends will admit that. The entry-level macbook (starting at $1100) doesn't even have 2GB of RAM. My $450 laptop has 3GB of RAM, a 2.0Ghz dual-core cpu, a 200GB HDD, and an 8200M. The only thing that the mac has over it is a better LCD screen and a meager 100Mhz extra CPU. The only way that macs screens can be that much is if they employ Eizo to make them.

I know it isn't enterprise, which is why i specifically did not say "large companies"

Also, I said the $2000 iMac because the $2000 laptops used at a computer lab I worked at, regardless of screen "size" still had 1920x1200 resolution (the same res of a 24" monitor)


----------



## jdbennet (Sep 26, 2008)

they are overpriced in the UK

a mac mini is £499. Thats $918 ish - They are $799 in the USA.
For just over half that price you can get a batter specced dell with a sceen!


----------



## tlarkin (Sep 26, 2008)

gamerman4 said:


> At the hardware level Macs are overpriced, even my Mac-loving friends will admit that. The entry-level macbook (starting at $1100) doesn't even have 2GB of RAM. My $450 laptop has 3GB of RAM, a 2.0Ghz dual-core cpu, a 200GB HDD, and an 8200M. The only thing that the mac has over it is a better LCD screen and a meager 100Mhz extra CPU. The only way that macs screens can be that much is if they employ Eizo to make them.
> 
> I know it isn't enterprise, which is why i specifically did not say "large companies"
> 
> Also, I said the $2000 iMac because the $2000 laptops used at a computer lab I worked at, regardless of screen "size" still had 1920x1200 resolution (the same res of a 24" monitor)



Man I must sound like a broken record.  Does your $450 laptop have an LED LCD screen?  No it doesn't.  Does it have SMS sensor, bluetooth 2.0 EDR, ABGN wireless, media remote, USB, Firewire, DVI video out (HDMI compliant), digital audio out, built in web camera, Gigabit Ethernet, mag safe ac adapter, and a multi touch track pad?

Granted, I am not trying to say your laptop sucks, and I don't care if you like Mac or PC or what you spend your money on.  It is your money and your choice to buy whatever you want.  I am just pointing out it isn't over priced because you are getting a ton of standard features that sub $1,000 laptops don't have.  In fact most PC laptops don't have these features, and LED back lit screens are more expensive than cold cathode ones, and they are also more environment friendly since they don't contain any mercury in them.

If every system were simply judged on processor, RAM, video card, and storage capacity then people wouldn't care about software and other features.  

So there is really no way to compare a $450 PC laptop to a Macbook.  You must remember that they only use high end parts, while I am sure your $450 laptop was the lowest bid components on your printed circuit boards which make up your hardware.  Apple also designs everything from the ground up.  Their engineers create the hardware configurations instead of just sending specs to a manufacturing plant and letting them make it as cheap as possible while maintaining your desired specs.

Screen realestate also counts for a lot, and you can't compare a laptop that runs the same resolution as an iMac because it is just resolution.  What happens when you need to run 6 desktops and have like 12 active windows on each desktop?  The 24" screen is way nicer in that scenario and a laptop screen can't compare.  So you can't really compare the two, they are just different things all together.


----------



## tlarkin (Sep 26, 2008)

jdbennet said:


> they are overpriced in the UK
> 
> a mac mini is £499. Thats $918 ish - They are $799 in the USA.
> For just over half that price you can get a batter specced dell with a sceen!



Yeah outside the US Apple does get quite expensive, I totally agree with you there.  I know that Europe and Asia kind of get screwed in that way.  Once they get a bigger market share outside the USA I can see them lowering their foreign prices.

Again, Dell doesn't sell a 6" by 4" computer.  The mini is a niche market.  I think that Apple should sell a mid tower desktop that offers a C2D or C2D quad processor, 2 gigs of RAM, 400gig HD, decent video card, and the ability for the customer to add whatever optical drive they want, some expansion slots and whatever video card they want.  However, Apple doesn't make that.  The Mac Pro is their only desktop and it is way over kill for any average user, or even a gamer.  What in the hell would a gamer want with to quad-core Xeon processors in a desktop?


----------



## jdbennet (Sep 26, 2008)

quad core xeons might be pretty good for gaming actually. Got 2x dual core opteron in my server, may try and benchmark it against a friends phenom.


----------



## Kill Bill (Sep 26, 2008)

jdbennet said:


> quad core xeons might be pretty good for gaming actually. Got 2x dual core opteron in my server, may try and benchmark it against a friends phenom.



today the standard on mac pro is 8 core


----------



## tlarkin (Sep 26, 2008)

jdbennet said:


> quad core xeons might be pretty good for gaming actually. Got 2x dual core opteron in my server, may try and benchmark it against a friends phenom.



Why gaming code is not optimized for such processors and besides Xeons aren't filled with multi media driven instruction sets.  They are more pure horse power than anything.  I don't see it out performing a Core 2 duo by leaps and bounds because the coding is not written for such a processor, and by design server processors are meant to handle many tasks and services at once.  

I would be curious to see how it pans out, but for pure cost sake they are way over pried for gaming.  heck, a Xeon processor by itself is in the $700 range for just one processor.



> today the standard on mac pro is 8 core



Which is why we were talking about *dual* quad core Xeons, which would total 8 cores, but still only be 4 cores per a processor.


----------



## gamerman4 (Sep 26, 2008)

tlarkin said:


> Man I must sound like a broken record.  Does your $450 laptop have an LED LCD screen?  No it doesn't.  Does it have SMS sensor, bluetooth 2.0 EDR, ABGN wireless, media remote, USB, Firewire, DVI video out (HDMI compliant), digital audio out, built in web camera, Gigabit Ethernet, mag safe ac adapter, and a multi touch track pad?
> 
> Granted, I am not trying to say your laptop sucks, and I don't care if you like Mac or PC or what you spend your money on.  It is your money and your choice to buy whatever you want.  I am just pointing out it isn't over priced because you are getting a ton of standard features that sub $1,000 laptops don't have.  In fact most PC laptops don't have these features, and LED back lit screens are more expensive than cold cathode ones, and they are also more environment friendly since they don't contain any mercury in them.
> 
> ...



I would much rather have a higher performance computer than one with a million bells and whistles that I never use.
Don't need SMS sensor - I don't drop my laptop
don't need bluetooth - my cell phone doesnt even have BT
I have at least ABG wireless
I have a media remote for my desktop, where its practical
Ummm USB? seriosuly? thats a Mac only feature? wow...
Firewire - doesn't account for exaggerated price
webcam - doesnt account for the exaggerated price
every feature you mentioned is trivial aside from the LED LCD
its all standard stuff that comes with any sub-$1000 laptop (other than the SMS, which i seriously hope u dont need)
I would rather keep my $450 with an LCD screen than a $1500 with an LED LCD.

Your screen real estate = your resolution
I would rather have a 20" Computer monitor over a 50" 720P LCD TV
Specifically talking about resolution though, a 24" monitor is better than a 17" monitor of the same res but it doesn't excuse the fact that they still have the same res and thus the same capacity for workspace.

Also, just because they are higher "quality" doesn't mean they don't break. My friend has a macbook pro that is less than 1 year old that just intermittently shuts down for no reason.
Also, since "quality" is an opinion, it is an added price for no reason.

Quote:
"If every system were simply judged on processor, RAM, video card, and storage capacity then people wouldn't care about software and other features. "

But that's how computers ARE judged. What do you think almost every person on this forum puts in their sig?
CPU, RAM, Vid Card, and storage space.

I'm not a PC fanboy, I just state what I see and Macs are overpriced, I'm not saying they are bad, they are great computers, I would get one if I had nothing else to spend the money on, because they are.......overpriced.


----------



## tlarkin (Sep 26, 2008)

gamerman4 said:


> I would much rather have a higher performance computer than one with a million bells and whistles that I never use.
> Don't need SMS sensor - I don't drop my laptop
> don't need bluetooth - my cell phone doesnt even have BT
> I have at least ABG wireless
> ...



Ok, but stop skewing the price, that comes with the $1099 price tag, not the $1500.  Firewire is a constant speed and much more reliable than USB, which is burst speed.  ABGN wireless allows to connect to all radios.  We run 802.11 A exclusively on my work network because we don't want tons of rogue connections.  So, there is a security plus in that and we aren't the only networks that do this.  If you just have B/G then you have to buy a third party card.  BT and the webcam are super handy.  I transfer files from cell phone and blackberry to my Macbook Pro all the time back and forth.  It is a feature I use, does not apply to you apparently.  SMS isn't just for when you drop your laptop, there are many applications for it.  iAlertU is a prime and excellent example of how the SMS is used for application and how the remote is more than just a media remote, and it shows how the camera is more than just a thing to take pictures with.  To say that there is no application for it is ignorant and short sighted.  There are plenty and iAlertU just happens to be the best example of how the camera, the SMS sensor, and the remote can all function as additional features in third party application.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4ojR_qrMy0&feature=related

http://ialertu.en.softonic.com/mac





> Your screen real estate = your resolution
> I would rather have a 20" Computer monitor over a 50" 720P LCD TV
> Specifically talking about resolution though, a 24" monitor is better than a 17" monitor of the same res but it doesn't excuse the fact that they still have the same res and thus the same capacity for workspace.



No not really, 17 inches versus 24 inches is night and day difference, and that was the point I was making when you were trying to compare the 24" iMac to a PC laptop.



> Also, just because they are higher "quality" doesn't mean they don't break. My friend has a macbook pro that is less than 1 year old that just intermittently shuts down for no reason.
> Also, since "quality" is an opinion, it is an added price for no reason.



Who says they didn't?  where did I say that they don't break?  Hell, Porsche's break down all the time, as well as BMW and every other expensive car you can buy.  I had a German sports car a few years ago and it was freaking awesome, but it cost me an arm and a leg every time it broke down and it broke down probably almost at the same frequency as my piece of crap American Jeep that always ran like crap.  The difference was, my German car ran like a champ when it ran, while my Jeep just always ran like crap and was way cheaper and easier to fix when things broke.  



> But that's how computers ARE judged. What do you think almost every person on this forum puts in their sig?
> CPU, RAM, Vid Card, and storage space.



I will have to disagree.  Products and technology in general are judged on Price, quality, features and benefits.  Obviously you have no need for BT, ABGN wireless, web cam, etc.  So, those will not benefit you, so you ignore them.  Someone who wants those features and will benefit from them will look at something that has them standard, so they can use it as is out of the box with out having to install a bunch of extra crap or carry around extra hardware with their laptops.  People put their specs in their sig to show off and brag, it is more of a status thing than anything else.



> I'm not a PC fanboy, I just state what I see and Macs are overpriced, I'm not saying they are bad, they are great computers, I would get one if I had nothing else to spend the money on, because they are.......overpriced.



Over priced compared to what?  Build a Dell laptop spec for spec versus a Macbook and a Macbook pro, and you will see that the Mac is cheaper sometimes.  Go build a dual quad-core Xeon Dell desktop, Apple's Mac Pros are generally $200 cheaper than those.  You can't compare a Macbook to your $450 laptop, because a Macbook is in a different league of laptops.


----------



## gamerman4 (Sep 26, 2008)

tlarkin said:


> Ok, but stop skewing the price, that comes with the $1099 price tag, not the $1500.  Firewire is a constant speed and much more reliable than USB, which is burst speed.  ABGN wireless allows to connect to all radios.  We run 802.11 A exclusively on my work network because we don't want tons of rogue connections.  So, there is a security plus in that and we aren't the only networks that do this.  If you just have B/G then you have to buy a third party card.  BT and the webcam are super handy.  I transfer files from cell phone and blackberry to my Macbook Pro all the time back and forth.  It is a feature I use, does not apply to you apparently.  SMS isn't just for when you drop your laptop, there are many applications for it.  iAlertU is a prime and excellent example of how the SMS is used for application and how the remote is more than just a media remote, and it shows how the camera is more than just a thing to take pictures with.  To say that there is no application for it is ignorant and short sighted.  There are plenty and iAlertU just happens to be the best example of how the camera, the SMS sensor, and the remote can all function as additional features in third party application.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4ojR_qrMy0&feature=related
> 
> ...


When did I say Dells weren't overpriced? I will go and check it out though. I can build a "Hackintosh" for under $1000 that would kill the $2000 iMac.

Also I said $1500 because thats an estimate about what it would cost to have a macbook with the same performance specs as my laptop but with the LED LCD and other things.


----------



## tlarkin (Sep 26, 2008)

gamerman4 said:


> When did I say Dells weren't overpriced? I will go and check it out though. I can build a "Hackintosh" for under $1000 that would kill the $2000 iMac.
> 
> Also I said $1500 because thats an estimate about what it would cost to have a macbook with the same performance specs as my laptop but with the LED LCD and other things.



No, the LED LCD screen is standard in ALL mac laptops.  That is why they are a bit more expensive, because they all have higher end parts that are standard.

Build your "hackintosh" and compare it to a 24" iMac and make sure you build it the same way the iMac is built, with all the features.  

I think you are arguing the fact that Apple puts features on their machines that you wouldn't want or use, and you think they are over priced because there is no option to get a stripped down model.  That is how Apple does business.  While, I agree and they should offer a barebones type mid tower, but they don't.  Therefore, you can't say that they are over priced but they are just not geared towards how you would use a computer.

They design it so out of the box you can do the following, and they are good at it:

-sync cell phone w/ contacts, calendars, music + other media, etc
-edit video
-record and master audio
-author a DVD
-connect to any type of camera and organize your photos and build a photo library
-automate any task with automator to make it more effeicient
-create calendars and appointments which can tie in to just about anything
-all in one pretty looking 3D driven desktop environment

Now, that is not to say they are not with out fault.  They do break and they do have their faults.

Now sure you can cut corners and build a computer that may be similar to an iMac but you couldn't build an iMac spec for spec and it be a ton cheaper either.  My point is, that they aren't over priced, they are just high end because they all those features that you may or may not want.  Personally, I like them because out of the box I can sync my cell phone contact instantly to my computer, and the use the BT in my laptop to make phone calls and send text messages by using my laptop.  It will use the built in speakers and microphone and I can make phone calls and send text message right from my laptop and don't have to have some crappy ear piece in my ear, or have the cell phone up to my brain slowly giving me cancer.


----------



## gamerman4 (Sep 26, 2008)

I will go to newegg, dell, and apple websites and find out what I can get (performance-wise because I like speed) for a budget of $2500, software and extras stuff like mice and KBs included. I'm not going to do it now because this argument really isn't a big issue for me but I think it will be fun.


----------



## tlarkin (Sep 26, 2008)

gamerman4 said:


> I will go to newegg, dell, and apple websites and find out what I can get (performance-wise because I like speed) for a budget of $2500, software and extras stuff like mice and KBs included. I'm not going to do it now because this argument really isn't a big issue for me but I think it will be fun.



I wouldn't call it an argument, more of a debate.  Either way, you aren't going to be able to build one spec for spec and make it cheaper.  Trust me I have tried many times.  They are typically all around the same price give or take, and if you are lucky and get lots of rebates then they are cheaper.

The only and cheapest LCD LED back lit monitor I saw on newegg is like $500 and it is only for a 22".  Just to give you an idea.


----------



## Shane (Sep 26, 2008)

yeah theres not alot of Mac users in here,only a few OSX users.

ive used OSX once and i liked the simplicity and looks of the Os.


----------



## gamerman4 (Sep 26, 2008)

tlarkin said:


> I wouldn't call it an argument, more of a debate.  Either way, you aren't going to be able to build one spec for spec and make it cheaper.  Trust me I have tried many times.  They are typically all around the same price give or take, and if you are lucky and get lots of rebates then they are cheaper.
> 
> The only and cheapest LCD LED back lit monitor I saw on newegg is like $500 and it is only for a 22".  Just to give you an idea.



lol, i would call a debate pretty much an intellectual argument.

I said spec for performance as well as obvious feature (LED LCD is not an obvious feature that everyone would actually care about or even know it existed) and also, it wont be spec-for-spec, it will be what I get for the price (i set it at $2500 because that is a huge price and will guarantee high end). An LED LCD is just as good as a high-quality normal LCD when it comes to what matters most (refresh rate and color accuracy). Also, their LCDs aren't uber great, the iMacs in my college lab have slight bad colors from any angle except directly in front (blues turn more and more green as you look at it from an angle.)


----------



## Kill Bill (Sep 27, 2008)

gamerman4 said:


> lol, i would call a debate pretty much an intellectual argument.
> 
> I said spec for performance as well as obvious feature (LED LCD is not an obvious feature that everyone would actually care about or even know it existed) and also, it wont be spec-for-spec, it will be what I get for the price (i set it at $2500 because that is a huge price and will guarantee high end). An LED LCD is just as good as a high-quality normal LCD when it comes to what matters most (refresh rate and color accuracy). Also, their LCDs aren't uber great, the iMacs in my college lab have slight bad colors from any angle except directly in front (blues turn more and more green as you look at it from an angle.)



Any monitor you look at from an angle will have an effect


----------



## gamerman4 (Sep 27, 2008)

Kill Bill said:


> Any monitor you look at from an angle will have an effect



OLED displays (of the ones i've seen) look no different from an angle. Good LCDs may get brighter from the side but the colors should stay the same or relatively close.


----------



## gamerman4 (Sep 27, 2008)

Alright:

~$2500 budget

Dell
XPS 630
final price: $2469
PROCESSOR	Intel® Core™2 Q9550 (12MB,2.83GHz, 1333FSB)
OPERATING SYSTEM	Genuine Windows Vista® Ultimate
MEMORY	4GB Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM at 800MHz - 4 DIMMs
HARD DRIVE	640GB Serial ATA Hard Drive
OPTICAL DRIVE	Dual Drives: 16x DVD-ROM Drive + 16x DVD+/-RW
MONITORS	24 inch UltraSharp™ 2408WFP Widescreen Digital Flat Panel
VIDEO CARD	nVidia GeForce 9800 GT 512MB
SOUND CARD	Sound Blaster® X-Fi™ XtremeGamer
SPEAKERS	Dell A525 30 Watt 2.1 Stereo Speakers with Subwoofer
KEYBOARD	Dell USB Enhanced Multimedia Keyboard
MOUSE	Dell Premium Optical USB Mouse

Apple
iMac
$2499
PROCESSOR:  2.8Ghz C2D
OPERATING SYSTEM: OSX Leopard
MEMORY: 4GB DDR2-800
HARD DRIVE: 750GB
OPTICAL DRIVE: 8x DVD±R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW
MONITORS:  24" LCD
VIDEO CARD: 8800GS
SOUND CARD: integrated 2 channel
SPEAKERS: integrated 2.1 (i assume its 2.1)
KEYBOARD: mac keyboard
MOUSE: mac wired mouse

Newegg.com
Price: $2506
PROCESSOR:  2 x Quad-core Xeon E5430 (2.66Ghz)
OPERATING SYSTEM: Vista Ultimate 64-bit
MEMORY:12GB DDR2-800 (6 x 2GB)
HARD DRIVE: Seagate 500GB HDD 32MB cache
OPTICAL DRIVE: LG 20X DVD±R DVD Burner
MONITORS: 24" Acer P243W
VIDEO CARD: 8800GT
SOUND CARD: Creative Sound Blaster Audigy SE
SPEAKERS: Creative Inspire T3100
KEYBOARD: Rosewill Super Slim KB
MOUSE: Logitech LX7 wireless
MOTHERBOARD: TYAN S5375AG2NR Server Motherboard
PSU: Antec Earthwatts 500W
CASE: Antec 300

And just for kicks:
ibuypower.com
$2489
PROCESSOR:  Q9650 (3Ghz Quad)
OPERATING SYSTEM: Vista Ultimate 64-bit
MEMORY: 8GB DDR3-1333 (6 x 2GB)
HARD DRIVE: 1TB HDD
OPTICAL DRIVE: LG 20X DVD±R DVD Burner
MONITORS: Sceptre 24" LCD
VIDEO CARD: Radeon 4850
SOUND CARD: Onboard 7.1
SPEAKERS: 60watt 2.1 speakers
KEYBOARD: Logitech Deluxe Keyboard
MOUSE: Logitech Optical
MOTHERBOARD: GB DS3R P45
PSU: 600Watt PSU
CASE: Raidmax Tornado

Synopsis:
The Mac has less raw power for the price.
The Dell is not much better than the Mac, it has a Quad core CPU, lil bit less HDD, and a slightly better gfx card.
ibuypower fared very well, it is an excellent gaming PC with a Quad-core cpu 8GB RAM and 1TB hdd.
The custom build is a processing monster, it easily can be compared to the Mac Pro. Now whether that server mobo supports non-ECC RAM or not is another matter and if need be I can go find one that does or just find ECC registered RAM.

The Dell and Mac are overpriced with the Dell having a better CPU for the price.
The custom build and ibuypower are great for their price and if you want to add bluetooth, firewire, and a webcam, you can shave off about $100-$200 for that and still have a much better system than the Dell or Mac. 

My build only included the OS as software (and for Vista, the most expensive OS). because software doesn't add features because there are tons of free software that does most things just as well as their commercial counterparts. Also, where possible, I used only name brands that are known for quality and reliable parts. Also, that is a lot of stuff so if I made a mistake, tell me.


----------



## Ramodkk (Sep 27, 2008)

Kill Bill said:


> Any monitor you look at from an angle will have an effect



I agree, but Macs show it more IMO. At school we have some iMac's and being in Illustrator, say you have a white cirlce, it looks literally brown from an angle...


----------



## Roncharlespatton (Sep 27, 2008)

*macs blow big chunks!*


----------



## tlarkin (Sep 27, 2008)

gamerman4 said:


> lol, i would call a debate pretty much an intellectual argument.
> 
> I said spec for performance as well as obvious feature (LED LCD is not an obvious feature that everyone would actually care about or even know it existed) and also, it wont be spec-for-spec, it will be what I get for the price (i set it at $2500 because that is a huge price and will guarantee high end). An LED LCD is just as good as a high-quality normal LCD when it comes to what matters most (refresh rate and color accuracy). Also, their LCDs aren't uber great, the iMacs in my college lab have slight bad colors from any angle except directly in front (blues turn more and more green as you look at it from an angle.)



How can you compare it then with out building it spec for spec?  It is obviously not a comparison at all.  LED back lit monitors are catching on and they are even using them in TVs now.  It may as well soon be a standard.  They use up less power, look brilliant, and of course there is no mercury in them.

You aren't comparing them you are just creating a shopping list of computer parts.  Comparing them would be trying to build or buy an iMac or all-in-one PC and then comparing the features and benefits versus the price.

All the new Macs also come with Firewire 800, blue tooth 2.0 EDR, built in ABGN wireless (yes the iMac has built in wireless), HDMI video out.  Plus it is like 1" thick and takes up very little space.  These are features consumers want.  Consumers don't want to build a computer they want to buy a computer.

Your comparison at best is just a way to spend money and no where near comparing how to get a PC just like an iMac for the same price.


----------



## Kill Bill (Sep 27, 2008)

but a mac pro with 1 processer is kick ass and be underpriced 450$ less


----------



## gamerman4 (Sep 28, 2008)

tlarkin said:


> How can you compare it then with out building it spec for spec?  It is obviously not a comparison at all.  LED back lit monitors are catching on and they are even using them in TVs now.  It may as well soon be a standard.  They use up less power, look brilliant, and of course there is no mercury in them.
> 
> You aren't comparing them you are just creating a shopping list of computer parts.  Comparing them would be trying to build or buy an iMac or all-in-one PC and then comparing the features and benefits versus the price.
> 
> ...



You missed the point of what I did, It is not the price you get for the machine, it is the machine you get for the price. Aesthetics aside, a Mac is pretty overpriced. Who cares about mercury, an LED backlight looks good but its not a showstopper EIZO only just released a monitor with an LED backlight and their main reason was more for power consumption than light conformity, Firewire isn't an absolute necessity (neither is it all that expensive, HDMI is extremely easy to get with any computer now, either with a DVI-HDMI adapter or a computer that supports HDMI natively, Bluetooth is an inexpensive feature, size is only a feature for those that want it to be, Gigabit ethernet is nice but many new NICs have it so its not Mac-specific, as far as i could tell the Remote is an additional part that doesnt necessarily come with it. It's the things you can't easily add or change that make a computer worth the initial price you pay for it. A CPU is not just something you go to walmart and buy for $10 and plug it in, a CPU is one of the most important things in a computer. If I were a video editor I'd rather have a computer that doesn't have built in firewire but a fast CPU than a slower CPU but built-in firewire.


----------



## tlarkin (Sep 28, 2008)

gamerman4 said:


> You missed the point of what I did, It is not the price you get for the machine, it is the machine you get for the price. Aesthetics aside, a Mac is pretty overpriced. Who cares about mercury, an LED backlight looks good but its not a showstopper EIZO only just released a monitor with an LED backlight and their main reason was more for power consumption than light conformity, Firewire isn't an absolute necessity (neither is it all that expensive, HDMI is extremely easy to get with any computer now, either with a DVI-HDMI adapter or a computer that supports HDMI natively, Bluetooth is an inexpensive feature, size is only a feature for those that want it to be, Gigabit ethernet is nice but many new NICs have it so its not Mac-specific, as far as i could tell the Remote is an additional part that doesnt necessarily come with it. It's the things you can't easily add or change that make a computer worth the initial price you pay for it. A CPU is not just something you go to walmart and buy for $10 and plug it in, a CPU is one of the most important things in a computer. If I were a video editor I'd rather have a computer that doesn't have built in firewire but a fast CPU than a slower CPU but built-in firewire.



No I understand your point and agree with you on some level.  You are ignoring what I am saying, which is you can't come close to building an iMac out of the same parts it has retail, therefore they are not over priced.  You on the other hand, ignored that completely, and went with the idea that you can build something better for cheaper.  I agree, you can, because when you build you can cut corners like not adding ABGN wireless, LED LCD screens, or BT.  I am saying when you add all of that up part for part retail the Mac is generally the same price or a bit cheaper.

They aren't over priced they just use high end parts.  So, it is you that is totally missing the original point, when I said show me how you can build an iMac and have it cheaper.  You didn't do that at all, you just built a desktop.  You also didn't cite any of your resources with links, but I of course took your word for it.  

Last time I tried to build a Mac with the exact parts that a Mac would have out of the box they came out more expensive.  When I built it off newegg or custom ordered it from Dell.


----------



## gamerman4 (Sep 28, 2008)

tlarkin said:


> No I understand your point and agree with you on some level.  You are ignoring what I am saying, which is you can't come close to building an iMac out of the same parts it has retail, therefore they are not over priced.  You on the other hand, ignored that completely, and went with the idea that you can build something better for cheaper.  I agree, you can, because when you build you can cut corners like not adding ABGN wireless, LED LCD screens, or BT.  I am saying when you add all of that up part for part retail the Mac is generally the same price or a bit cheaper.
> 
> They aren't over priced they just use high end parts.  So, it is you that is totally missing the original point, when I said show me how you can build an iMac and have it cheaper.  You didn't do that at all, you just built a desktop.  You also didn't cite any of your resources with links, but I of course took your word for it.
> 
> Last time I tried to build a Mac with the exact parts that a Mac would have out of the box they came out more expensive.  When I built it off newegg or custom ordered it from Dell.



I get what you mean by saying that part-for-part they may not be overpriced but they are overpriced in that you have less of what matters most for more of what matter least.
The reason for this is Apples fault. Microsoft just has the problem that they have to make an OS that fits any computer configuration. Apple has the problem of having an OS and a computer to fit any person that buys one. They add every feature they can and have to make up for that by sacrificing computer performance. I'm willing to bet that only a tiny fraction of a percentage of Mac owner actually use every single feature in their Mac. You can't "shop" for a mac with the stuff you need, Apple just has the stuff "they" think you need. Maybe someone doesn't want ABGN, they get a computer with ABG and a better CPU or if its a desktop, maybe they don't even need a wireless card (which is often the case). Maybe someone plans on photo editing but not now, they would want the computer with the most RAM, but Apple sacrificed some RAM for a firewire card, something video editors need but not really photo editors. A feature that someone does not use is a wasted price, something they could have saved money on or could have gotten more performance for. My hypthesis is that %90 of Mac users do not use at least one (probably two) hardware features on their Mac, thus spending money on nothing. That is how I think it is overpriced. They should do what every other computer maker does and that on the computer config screen have an option for "none" for some components.


----------



## tlarkin (Oct 7, 2008)

gamerman4 said:


> I get what you mean by saying that part-for-part they may not be overpriced but they are overpriced in that you have less of what matters most for more of what matter least.
> The reason for this is Apples fault. Microsoft just has the problem that they have to make an OS that fits any computer configuration. Apple has the problem of having an OS and a computer to fit any person that buys one. They add every feature they can and have to make up for that by sacrificing computer performance. I'm willing to bet that only a tiny fraction of a percentage of Mac owner actually use every single feature in their Mac. You can't "shop" for a mac with the stuff you need, Apple just has the stuff "they" think you need. Maybe someone doesn't want ABGN, they get a computer with ABG and a better CPU or if its a desktop, maybe they don't even need a wireless card (which is often the case). Maybe someone plans on photo editing but not now, they would want the computer with the most RAM, but Apple sacrificed some RAM for a firewire card, something video editors need but not really photo editors. A feature that someone does not use is a wasted price, something they could have saved money on or could have gotten more performance for. My hypthesis is that %90 of Mac users do not use at least one (probably two) hardware features on their Mac, thus spending money on nothing. That is how I think it is overpriced. They should do what every other computer maker does and that on the computer config screen have an option for "none" for some components.



This is purely opinion, what I stated was purely factual.  They aren't over priced because they only put high end parts in their machines.  You are getting what you pay for.

If you don't need it then don't buy it, that is simple.  If you don't like them don't buy them.  However, to sit there and say they are over priced because no one needs those features is irrelevant to what I originally stated.  Part for part they are cheaper to buy from Apple than to build on your own for the most part.  The Mac Pro compared to a major competitor like Dell or HP with a similar spec'd dual xeon desktop is almost always cheaper.


----------



## gamerman4 (Oct 7, 2008)

tlarkin said:


> This is purely opinion, what I stated was purely factual.  They aren't over priced because they only put high end parts in their machines.  You are getting what you pay for.
> 
> If you don't need it then don't buy it, that is simple.  If you don't like them don't buy them.  However, to sit there and say they are over priced because no one needs those features is irrelevant to what I originally stated.  Part for part they are cheaper to buy from Apple than to build on your own for the most part.  The Mac Pro compared to a major competitor like Dell or HP with a similar spec'd dual xeon desktop is almost always cheaper.



Maybe overpriced was the wrong word but you get what you pay for regardless of whether you will ever want it and whatever you don't use is wasted and you paid for something that is essentially useless to you.


----------



## tlarkin (Oct 7, 2008)

gamerman4 said:


> Maybe overpriced was the wrong word but you get what you pay for regardless of whether you will ever want it and whatever you don't use is wasted and you paid for something that is essentially useless to you.



Correct, it is just like buying a luxury car, you pay more for all the luxuries, even the ones who don't use.  I however, like these luxuries and use them with my Mac.  I sync all my cell phone contacts so if my phone is lost, stolen, or broken and I get a new one I can sync them all back.  

I love to see those posts on myspace and face book about people losing their cell phones and all the numbers and they post on there to get your number again.  So, to me BT is very useful.  I also use it to file transfer files back and forth from my blackberry to my laptop.  I also use my laptop to control my cell phone.

ABGN wireless is nice because I get to connect to any type of radio signal.

The LED back lit screen is nice because it looks just as sharp and consumes a bit less power and contains no mercury in it.

The SMS sensor is very nice and there are applications that utilize the technology.

The back lit keyboard and multi touch track pad are a must for me as well.  I find myself using the multi touch gestures on every PC laptop I touch now, and wish that every computer had that.

I would bet you $100 that after you had 6 months of actually using OS X on a macbook Pro you would find a use for all those features and enjoy them.

While, I am not saying that the Mac is right for you or for everyone but lets be honest here.  They aren't over priced and most people that don't like them have never used them past a bit or here and there, or they think all Apple fan boys are elitist, but then again so are the PC guys/gals too.

I personally could care less what you use, but over the years I prefer Unix and OS X is a great Unix-based OS in my opinion.


----------



## gamerman4 (Oct 7, 2008)

tlarkin said:


> Correct, it is just like buying a luxury car, you pay more for all the luxuries, even the ones who don't use.  I however, like these luxuries and use them with my Mac.  I sync all my cell phone contacts so if my phone is lost, stolen, or broken and I get a new one I can sync them all back.
> 
> I love to see those posts on myspace and face book about people losing their cell phones and all the numbers and they post on there to get your number again.  So, to me BT is very useful.  I also use it to file transfer files back and forth from my blackberry to my laptop.  I also use my laptop to control my cell phone.
> 
> ...



I have used a mac for more than 6 months and found nothing that would put it above any other machine. When it comes down to it, the capabilities of the machine are limited to the OS and for me OSX doesn't have an alternative that can touch the open source multimedia capabilities of ffshow, avisynth, and MPC which is what I mainly use my computer for, i guess different strokes for different folks, eh? Some people might find a use in OSX that can't be done with Windows or vice verse, it doesn't matter as long as you can do what you want with what you have. I just happen to like my machine tailored for me rather than for everyone else.


----------



## tlarkin (Oct 7, 2008)

gamerman4 said:


> I have used a mac for more than 6 months and found nothing that would put it above any other machine. When it comes down to it, the capabilities of the machine are limited to the OS and for me OSX doesn't have an alternative that can touch the open source multimedia capabilities of ffshow, avisynth, and MPC which is what I mainly use my computer for, i guess different strokes for different folks, eh? Some people might find a use in OSX that can't be done with Windows or vice verse, it doesn't matter as long as you can do what you want with what you have. I just happen to like my machine tailored for me rather than for everyone else.



I have yet to find an application or an alternative that a Mac can't run.  I am willing to bet you never used X11 and tried to compile Unix applications on OS X or even looked at a packaged manager called Fink.

There is so much open source software out there you can run on OS X, and a lot of times it is because the user just does not know how to do that kind or stuff, or they don't even know it exists.


----------



## gamerman4 (Oct 7, 2008)

tlarkin said:


> I have yet to find an application or an alternative that a Mac can't run.  I am willing to bet you never used X11 and tried to compile Unix applications on OS X or even looked at a packaged manager called Fink.
> 
> There is so much open source software out there you can run on OS X, and a lot of times it is because the user just does not know how to do that kind or stuff, or they don't even know it exists.



wtf?!?! I didn't say you can't run open source software. I said the specific programs ffshow, avisynth, and MPC, which are so great and have no real equal on OSX yet. I just stated open source because they are open source which means free.


----------



## Irishwhistle (Oct 7, 2008)

PHATSPEED7x said:


> Is MAC OSX really that great? Never use it first hand myself.



Yes, it's awesome! Best OS ever in my opinion.


----------



## tlarkin (Oct 7, 2008)

gamerman4 said:


> wtf?!?! I didn't say you can't run open source software. I said the specific programs ffshow, avisynth, and MPC, which are so great and have no real equal on OSX yet. I just stated open source because they are open source which means free.



Well, FWIW, there are some projects that have source which you can compile yourself for ffshow and avisynth that I found on google.  It says it will run on BSD and OS X but it is not tested, so it may run and it may run badly or not at all.

However, what I did find looking it up, is that there is a strong final cut studio community that want those apps ported over to OS X.  avisynth has its own project that is in development for OS X.

So, while they may not be available right now they most likely will in the near future.  

I personally have tons of Linux packages installed on my Mac via Fink Commander, and they all for the most part work just like they would in Linux.  

I also found several alternatives to what you had mentioned.  I know you said those are your preferred apps and they sound like deal breakers to you, but maybe not to everyone.


----------

