Windows Vista

[Colonel Ingus]

I did read what you said

NO you didn't, or you wouldn't have responded as you did Either your reading skills are dismal or you have very low comprehension but either way if you truely understood what we posted then you wouldn't have just said what you said. I'm sure however that he appreciates you licking his boots like you are, but the fact remains that just because you are ignorant on a topic, doesn't mean that others are. Try again. This time, maybe read it slower and actually absorb the meaning of the words that were originally posted

[.aero]

First off, how about you step down from your pedestal of arrogance and not try to demean me. Talk in a civil manner, even when I oppose your view. Secondly, you said...

 

I might actually do all of the work and find some links for you, but I think we both know that no matter what facts are displayed here, you will just retaliate with some additional microsoft propaganda, so we might just have to agree to disagree, unless I find some extra time to do your googling for you.

Google is your friend. If I do all the research for you and dig it up do you promise to go away, or will you just whine about something else?

All I see is that you have not provided any sources to back up your opinions. You just mentioned a search engine! When has a search engine become a source? The information that it leads you to are the supporting opinions, not Google itself.

 

So, please, further elaborate your opinion that Macs last longer than PC's.

[bofors]

So, please, further elaborate your opinion that Macs last longer than PC's.

 

I will do that. Just check out resale values of Macs on eBay, they are about twice as high as comparable. The working lifespane of a Mac is about twice that of PC.

[Paranoid Marvin]

I will do that. Just check out resale values of Macs on eBay, they are about twice as high as comparable. The working lifespane of a Mac is about twice that of PC.

 

I bought my Mac two years ago, in the same time, my Dad has gone through 3 PCs

[Colonel Ingus]

how about you step down from your pedestal

Sorry to disappoint you but I'm not on a pedestal Any open minded person can read your responses and see that you are very biased and childish in your replies. All I can tell you is that in life when you act like a child, you'll be treated like one, so don't blame others when they call you on it. I understand that you are frustrated. I understand that you want everyone else to do your research for you, but that's not how it works If I really wanted to I could have easily have nailed you to the cross by proving that you didn't read what you 'claimed' to have read in my previous post (or at least you didn't comprehend it). I didn't do that however because I'm not here to argue with you or anyone else for that matter. I stated a fact. One that you can't seem to accept. So now you're pouting and you want others to do your research for you. Our original response stated that if I found some extra time to do your googling for you, I would. Nothing has changed in that respect. Obviously there are others here (see all the posts above) who also know from personal experience that what I've said is true, which leads us to another statement that I made in our original post, that being "we both know that no matter what facts are displayed here, you will just retaliate with some additional microsoft propaganda". The fact that others here have verified what I have said and that you are STILL here whining about this, proves that fact Again, no pedestal, just pointing out the obvious

 

All I see is that you have not provided any sources to back up your opinions.

First of all they are not opinions. A fact that seems to continuously fly right over your head Secondly, you can only "see what you want to see" because you are in denial. When a person is in this state they can only see what they want to see, and not the truth. For example; a person in a bad relationship, or a person in mourning can all be in a state of denial about things going on around them. It is because you are in denial that it is not worth anyones time to waste trying to explain the truth to you. It has already been explained to you once, and you obviously can't accept it.

 

When has a search engine become a source?

It isn't, nor did I ever say it was. Perhaps you want everyone to do your research for you because you don't understand how to use tools that help in getting the job done

[EFI]

Some info on why Macs infact DO last longer than PC's on average. Notice I said average...becuase this is not a set determined case...it can vary...but for the most part..they (Macs) do last longer.

 

Article 1

http://www.cio.com/article/127050/Eight_Fi...ld_Use_Mac_OS/1

 

Some quotes from the article:

 

In 1999, for instance, Gistics released a landmark report analyzing Macs and PCs in terms of return on investment (ROI). Gistics' study was limited strictly to the publishing, graphics and new media fields. Among many other findings, the authors concluded that Mac creative professionals were producing $26,000 more each in annual revenues for their employers than their Windows counterparts.

 

Mac remains an operationally viable choice for widespread use on servers and desktops alike. And despite all the energy Microsoft has poured into the new Vista, Mac is still king of the hill when it comes to desktop ease of use—translating, at the end of the day, into higher productivity and lower tech support and training expenditures.

 

But Mac OS continues to run only on Apple's own well-engineered PCs, attested to by many enterprises and other business as more crash-resistant, reliable and long-lasting than other PC hardware. Furthermore, Mac OS continues to require fewer patches than Windows, for easier and less pricey maintenance.

 

Article 2

 

http://hubpages.com/hub/LaptopDilemnaMacorPC

 

Some quotes from the article:

 

So what is long-term cost? The long-term cost of your laptop is the combination of several factors. Number one is how long will your laptop last? As a general rule, PC laptops physically wear out and/or break within five years. Not only that, the cost of software for a PC can really add up over time. This isn’t due so much to the cost of the software, but more due to the cost of not having any software included with purchase.

 

More articles:

 

http://www.macobserver.com/columns/userfri.../20060914.shtml

http://www.macintouch.com/macjust07.html (excellent debate, check it out)

 

If you put those pieces together...you'll have your reason why Macs last longer than PC's.

[pyrates]

That product already exists. It's called the iPod.

When another company can legally use the click wheel that Apple patented, Apple adds api's for iTunes enabling any mp3 player to connect to it as easily as an ipod, and when fairplay drm is licensed to third parties. All these no other mp3 player maker can use. That is why the ipod is still their. I've previously addressed this question because I knew someone would say the ipod. Now I've pointed out why.Sheer competition of companies introducing lower priced mp3 players that have all the same functions of the ipod, is the only way for them to have a level playing field against Apple. They frequently introduce features in their hardware that ties it to software that allows them to have an advantage. The ipod is just one of many examples of products.For anyone who says I'm wrong, why don't you insist that Apple open up these 3 features that they don't allow other mp3 players to have? They are the equivalent to a company producing a audio cd that only works with their brand of cd player. Sure you can rip the audio cd, but most people prefer that you just be able to play the audio cd in any cd player instead of just the one brand of cd player.And before anyone says it that the Zune is using this model too, I don't like this model at all. I like competition and lower prices that result from it.

I bought my Mac two years ago, in the same time, my Dad has gone through 3 PCs

What was the reason for your Dad going through 3 pc's? What was wrong with them when he switched to a new one? My parents went through I think 2 pc's so far and the first one they had for 4 years. Second one is about a year and a half old. Cost was $400 for the new one and it works fine.

I will do that. Just check out resale values of Macs on eBay, they are about twice as high as comparable. The working lifespane of a Mac is about twice that of PC.

First you do realize that the parts that are inside of a Mac are the same as in a PC. Other then having efi instead of bios, they're basically the same. Apple uses the same companies as many oem pc makers do to build their product.Now lets compare this to the diamond industry. When something is in limited supply, of course it will be more expensive and sell for more then something that is easily available. If suddenly the market was flooded with diamonds, would the price of them suddenly not drop even on used diamonds? Of course it would.Since Apple is the only maker of Mac's, this is a no brainer. Plus another thing is, it is whatever the market will bare. Another reason that used Mac's can sell for higher prices, is that people will buy them at that price. If they didn't buy them, the sellers would have to lower the price on them.

LOL Well at least you admit that you're ignorant about this topic, that's a start, but you're wrong about your premise. For example; let's say that someone told you that most diseases are started in the digestive system. Not knowing anything about medicine you respond by saying "well that's only your opinion. Show us where it says that on the internet". This reveals several things about your way of thinking. First, the internet is not the all knowing source of human knowledge as you believe. People did quit well without the internet before it came along, thank you very much. Secondly, just because you may be ignorant about a topic, doesn't mean that other people are, or that the facts aren't true. It just means that you don't know about these particular facts for one reason or another. That's not necessarily a bad thing, as we all need a starting point to learn from time to time. If I wasn't so busy with other projects, and if I thought that you'd actually be 'open minded' about this topic, I might actually do all of the work and find some links for you, but I think we both know that no matter what facts are displayed here, you will just retaliate with some additional microsoft propaganda, so we might just have to agree to disagree, unless I find some extra time to do your googling for you. Have a great day

Well in that case I would ask for what research paper corresponded to their opinion, but you could probably find it on the internet. But for your case, the internet is the common medium, so that is why I asked you for a reference. You telling me something does not make it fact. It makes it opinion. And in your opinion, you claim that Mac's last longer then PC's. And in my opinion, PC's last just as long as Mac's.

[EFI]

When another company can legally use the click wheel that Apple patented, Apple adds api's for iTunes enabling any mp3 player to connect to it as easily as an ipod, and when fairplay drm is licensed to third parties. All these no other mp3 player maker can use. That is why the ipod is still their. I've previously addressed this question because I knew someone would say the ipod. Now I've pointed out why.Sheer competition of companies introducing lower priced mp3 players that have all the same functions of the ipod, is the only way for them to have a level playing field against Apple. They frequently introduce features in their hardware that ties it to software that allows them to have an advantage. The ipod is just one of many examples of products.For anyone who says I'm wrong, why don't you insist that Apple open up these 3 features that they don't allow other mp3 players to have? They are the equivalent to a company producing a audio cd that only works with their brand of cd player. Sure you can rip the audio cd, but most people prefer that you just be able to play the audio cd in any cd player instead of just the one brand of cd player.And before anyone says it that the Zune is using this model too, I don't like this model at all. I like competition and lower prices that result from it.

 

I don't think you quite understand the picture. When a company brings a product that is everything that the average consumer wants, and it comes in a single tightly controlled ecosystem....they (consumer) could care less of the competition (infact they forget about it), when everything is offered and *supported* in an integrated system. This is why I believe, led to the huge success of the iPod. A company can have the exact SAME specs as the iPod, with the same features...but remember, unless they have their own service, and level of online (cloud) feaurettes (a la iTunes) in a SINGLE package....that product will likely fail. This is further justified with Sony's Walkman, Creative's Zen music player, Microsoft's Zune, etc, etc. People actually like being controlled, however this holds only true when the end product is likable on the eyes of the consumer. Otherwise...it's a low blow for the company.

 

So my point is, and one I cannot emphasize enough, is that as long as the end product is excellent, and offers integrated features and in turn make it a complete package, and one that distinguishes it from the competition, that's all it matters. I can tell you right now that thats what the vast majority of the consumers are looking for...and crave but sadly lack the knoledge for research. This is why Apple keeps besting the rest of the MP3 player companies, and this is why they will most likely never release the click-wheel patent, and numerous other ones involved with the behemoth iPod ecosystem.

 

This system is proven to work time and time again, with both Macs, as well as the iPod. Clearly it would only be sensible for other companies to adopt the same (albeit vastly expensive) approach, since obviously the direct competition has failed on pretty much every single angle time and time again.

[pyrates]

Well now that you've provided some articles for me to look at, took a while I noticed.

Some info on why Macs infact DO last longer than PC's on average. Notice I said average...becuase this is not a set determined case...it can vary...but for the most part..they (Macs) do last longer. Article 1http://www.cio.com/article/127050/Eight_Fi...ld_Use_Mac_OS/1Some quotes from the article:

In 1999, for instance, Gistics released a landmark report analyzing Macs and PCs in terms of return on investment (ROI). Gistics' study was limited strictly to the publishing, graphics and new media fields. Among many other findings, the authors concluded that Mac creative professionals were producing $26,000 more each in annual revenues for their employers than their Windows counterparts.

Well with statistics you can prove anything. Notice how they limited the use of PC's to one area instead of overall? And how old is this study? 8 years? Is is still relevant even? Plus see this one comment from when that article got posted on digg:I am a mac fanatic, but this guy is a freakin idiot. He is just making mac users look bad by being arrogant and not having solid facts.And another comment:This article is the biggest load of {censored} I've ever read regarding macs. Cheapest? I don't see how. Macs are the most expensive computers I know of, and the software for them is too. They are decently easy to get used to i guess, but saying that productivity increases because of them is utter nonsense. Did they bother explaining how it increases? (I didn't atualyl read the whole thing, mostly just the titles, because just reading the article title made me laugh.) Does it have fanatical support? Does it allow upgrading? Is it full proof? NO. NO. and NOOO.This is the reason I never bought a mac to begin with. It seems like anyone that uses a mac is an ignorant fool.Personally I'm a Linux guy. OK we rub it in people's faces when we can haha but at least we're not falsifying facts.

Mac remains an operationally viable choice for widespread use on servers and desktops alike. And despite all the energy Microsoft has poured into the new Vista, Mac is still king of the hill when it comes to desktop ease of use—translating, at the end of the day, into higher productivity and lower tech support and training expenditures.

Again, another opinion. And if that is so, why do so many mac users insist that you should always buy Apple care? See this other comment from digg:3. The Mac desktop spawns fewer calls to the help desk- Oh please, I know plenty of Mac users that spend more time trying to figure out how to eject the dvd.

But Mac OS continues to run only on Apple's own well-engineered PCs, attested to by many enterprises and other business as more crash-resistant, reliable and long-lasting than other PC hardware. Furthermore, Mac OS continues to require fewer patches than Windows, for easier and less pricey maintenance.

I guess you're not aware that Mac's have the same guts inside as a PC except for using efi instead of a bios. But that's about it and then you are charged more for it. As for patches, I see just as many patches for OS X as for Windows Vista. Remember the security problems found with the Safari Web Browser when it was first released even though it was beta. People wouldn't have made as big a deal with it if Apple hadn't put their marketing material up on their website that insisted it was safer then other web browsers and that it was built from the ground up with security in mind. With those security holes found, it was shown to be all BS. Plus wouldn't you want an OS to quickly patch holes in it that are found? I'd rather have that.

Article 2http://hubpages.com/hub/LaptopDilemnaMacorPCSome quotes from the article:

So what is long-term cost? The long-term cost of your laptop is the combination of several factors. Number one is how long will your laptop last? As a general rule, PC laptops physically wear out and/or break within five years. Not only that, the cost of software for a PC can really add up over time. This isn’t due so much to the cost of the software, but more due to the cost of not having any software included with purchase.

PC Laptops break in 5 years? How is this limited to pc laptops? Remember now that mac's are mostly using pc parts in them. So how exactly do they only last 5 years? I'd like to see the sources that this article used. All laptops eventually die because of the amount of heat that is now in them.And as for software not being included, most pc oem makers do include extra software that isn't trial software such as cd/dvd burning software and an office suite generally. Windows Vista now includes a basic movie editing program and photo editing program as well. But the mac does tend to move toward the creative consumer more. I just like the PC because of how versatile it is.But I still can't take that article seriously after this paragraph in it. I still laugh after reading it:

Microsoft, makers of Windows, one of the most widely used operating systems in the world, have recently introduced a new operating system to replace Windows. This operating system is called Vista. The introduction of Vista has made many computer users angry. The reason for this is that it leaves a hackable door open in the programming.

lol what hackable door is being left open? And it is Windows Vista, not windows. The previous version of Windows is Windows XP. This author doesn't have a clue here.

The original purpose of this “door” is to allow Microsoft to do automatic upgrades on your computer (whether you want it or not), and to require automatic registration in hopes of preventing software theft. Of course, there is the theory that more reasonably priced software, or bundling more software with the OS like the Mac does, would go along way to preventing software theft all together. But that’s just a theory.

I think they mean automatic update service, which OS X has the exact same kind of feature. And right at the end you see she says it's just a theory, so that whole thing can be taken as opinion and not fact.

More articles:http://www.macobserver.com/columns/userfri.../20060914.shtml

From the above article:

Put it all together and what do you get? The PCs have equal or superior features to the Mac on every compared hardware feature except processor speed. The Mac has the superior software (although some Windows advocates might dispute even this!). But if you are already comfortable using Windows and don't expect to make much use of programs like iPhoto and iMovie, a software advantage may not matter much. The final kicker: The PCs are as much as $200 cheaper! Unless the more "intangible" advantages of the Mac carry the day, the weight of these statistics make it hard to convince someone like Ray that they should get a Mac. And so, at the end of the day, Ray got a Toshiba. I was not surprised.

Yep, you certainly do pay more when you buy a Mac. I don't know why you posted this article as it didn't help your position. And one more quote:

None of this changes my commitment to the Mac or my belief that, even at some extra cost, a Mac is still worth the difference for most users. But it is also clear that, at least at this lower end of the laptop market, Apple still has some work to do before it is truly price competitive.

At this point it's all opinion but I agree with it. If Apple wants to increase it's market share more, then it has to be priced competitively and we all know Apple never does well with competition.

http://www.macintouch.com/macjust07.html (excellent debate, check it out)If you put those pieces together...you'll have your reason why Macs last longer than PC's.

I noticed that most of it was about the G4 and G5 based Mac's, and is from 2 year ago. Now that Mac's have the same parts as a PC, this argument is thrown out the window. It no longer applies basically. Try showing something that uses the intel based mac's that say they last longer then pc's do.I've known businesses that were still using Windows NT up until last year when they finally managed to replace their aging PC's skipping windows xp and going straight to Windows Vista. Still wanna say that Mac's last longer then PC's?

I don't think you quite understand the picture. When a company brings a product that is everything that the average consumer wants, and it comes in a single tightly controlled ecosystem....they (consumer) could care less of the competition (infact they forget about it), when everything is offered and *supported* in an integrated system. This is why I believe, led to the huge success of the iPod. A company can have the exact SAME specs as the iPod, with the same features...but remember, unless they have their own service, and level of online (cloud) feaurettes (a la iTunes) in a SINGLE package....that product will likely fail. This is further justified with Sony's Walkman, Creative's Zen music player, Microsoft's Zune, etc, etc. People actually like being controlled, however this holds only true when the end product is likable on the eyes of the consumer. Otherwise...it's a low blow for the company.

Yes that is exactly what led to the success of the ipod. But you forget about this little thing called antitrust laws. You cannot tie 2 separate products together. And this is what Apple has done. Hence why they are in trouble over in Europe with their drm.I certainly don't like being controlled. The Mac faithful like being controlled by Apple obviously. But I disagree in that most consumers don't like being controlled.

So my point is, and one I cannot emphasize enough, is that as long as the end product is excellent, and offers integrated features and in turn make it a complete package, and one that distinguishes it from the competition, that's all it matters. I can tell you right now that thats what the vast majority of the consumers are looking for...and crave but sadly lack the knoledge for research. This is why Apple keeps besting the rest of the MP3 player companies, and this is why they will most likely never release the click-wheel patent, and numerous other ones involved with the behemoth iPod ecosystem.

That is a shame because the moment Apple gets decent competitors, they tend to lose market share. They can't hold onto a patent forever. They will have to relinquish it sooner or later. And Apple definitely will have competitors who will use that click wheel the moment they can use it. Then if Apple truly wants it to be a level playing field, they will provide an api that allows mp3 player companies to make a driver for iTunes that enables their mp3 player to work just as well with iTunes as the iPod does.

This system is proven to work time and time again, with both Macs, as well as the iPod. Clearly it would only be sensible for other companies to adopt the same (albeit vastly expensive) approach, since obviously the direct competition has failed on pretty much every single angle time and time again.

Apple got it right with the click wheel and the iTunes integration. But only because they don't allow other companies access to it. The moment those companies can access it, say goodbye to Apple's monopoly on the mp3 player market.Remember they got it right with the gui as well, and they sued Microsoft who saw their idea and ran with it in their own OS product. But in the end Apple was told it couldn't patent a GUI idea. Hence why they use other features to lock out competition. iTunes and the iPod to me are 2 separate products. Any mp3 player maker should be able to connect to iTunes as easily as the iPod can. And when the click wheel patent expires, they will use that too in their mp3 players.A fine example of this is Tivo. They were the first succesful dvr maker, but once competition came long, they no longer owned the market. This is how the market works. The first succesful maker of a product rarely ever can hold onto a market for long. Mac's are another great example of this.

[EFI]

@ Pyrates

 

I'm not going to bother quoting all your quotes (remember where that went last time?), so, to keep it simple:

 

1. You never asked ME to provide proof, you asked MyMac8MyPC. I simply found them by doing a 20 sec search.

2. You are in brute denial. Yes, Macs use the same interior as PC's...but the key differentiating factor here, which was never mentioned, is the OS that both the machines run on. OS X is much, much easier to maintain than Windows is, and if you are going to be denying that fact by bringing in either a) the market obscurity talk, or vulnerability vs exploit talk....then I have nothing more to say, becuase I know you are just generalizing everything wrong about Macs and when someone comes up with an rebuttal...you simply refuse to believe it has validity

 

Since when was the last time anyone ever took Digg posters seriously? You take one Digg posters' opinon so seriously, when it was merely a sentence which in simple terms stated "lozlzlz, Mac users are dumb"....while on the other hand, me (a Mac user) is providing you with links which proves otherwise, and you are denying that...but believing the other Digg user, who chances are you barely know anything about. How lame is that?

 

You know what's even more funnier? , you are cherrypicking from all the user comments in the articles that I provided...for all the comments that state a negative viewpoint of Macs, and from users who have probably never even used a Mac, nor have even tried to price one with a similar configuration from a PC. It's funny how you take completely bogus comments (that too so random) and use that against me. lol.

 

The creme of the crop however, is when you state that Windows Movie Maker, and Microsoft Picture Viewer (which I assume was the basic photo editing program you were referring to), is more "versatile" than iMovie, and iPhoto, and you prefer Windows from that angle as a result of them being more versatile. That's the funniest thing ever. Have you used iLife? Ever? That sentence alone removes your your credibility at its entirety from having a neutral viewpoint between Macs and PC's (and in detail, OS X and Windows).

 

But I disagree in that most consumers don't like being controlled.

 

Then care to explain why iPod leads the market and has and killed Sony, Microsoft, Creative, and iRiver along the way with relative ease? If anything this proves that consumers LIKE being controlled, provided it's being done RIGHT...which is where the difference is between Apple and other companies.

 

The moment those companies can access it, say goodbye to Apple's monopoly on the mp3 player market.

 

That will never happen...to begin with..so your argument is invalid before it even started to make sense. Even if that were to happen...Apple will come up with another way to lock users onto iPod/iTunes.

 

Mac's are another great example of this

 

Again, stop confusing hardware with software. Macs are held by the software, contrary to what your belifes are about the hardware. Consumers switch becuase of the software, in which case is OS X...not becuase the fact that they run the same hardware as PC's. How many times do I have to say that?

 

You still have the mindset that Apple computers are more expensive than an equivalent Windows box. Please, come back to 2007.

 

[pyrates]

@ Pyrates

 

I'm not going to bother quoting all your quotes (remember where that went last time?), so, to keep it simple:

 

1. You never asked ME to provide proof, you asked MyMac8MyPC. I simply found them by doing a 20 sec search.

 

You're right. I'm glad you did too. Shows you're willing to try to backup your statements, unlike MyMac8MyPC here. My apologies to you.

 

2. You are in brute denial. Yes, Macs use the same interior as PC's...but the key differentiating factor here, which was never mentioned, is the OS that both the machines run on. OS X is much, much easier to maintain than Windows is, and if you are going to be denying that fact by bringing in either a) the market obscurity talk, or vulnerability vs exploit talk....then I have nothing more to say, becuase I know you are just generalizing everything wrong about Macs and when someone comes up with an rebuttal...you simply refuse to believe it has validity

 

Well now this is a different opinion from the one that MyMac8MyPC was saying. You're saying the OS is better now. To you it may be, but to me I don't like OS X. I prefer the GUI that windows provides.

 

Since when was the last time anyone ever took Digg posters seriously? You take one Digg posters' opinon so seriously, when it was merely a sentence which in simple terms stated "lozlzlz, Mac users are dumb"....while on the other hand, me (a Mac user) is providing you with links which proves otherwise, and you are denying that...but believing the other Digg user, who chances are you barely know anything about. How lame is that?

 

When their opinion was valid of the article. Those were just 2 comments I noticed about the article. Most of the points that the article was making was invalid using old statistics to prove a point as well as it being an opinion piece, not one based on fact.

 

You know what's even more funnier? , you are cherrypicking from all the user comments in the articles that I provided...for all the comments that state a negative viewpoint of Macs, and from users who have probably never even used a Mac, nor have even tried to price one with a similar configuration from a PC. It's funny how you take completely bogus comments (that too so random) and use that against me. lol.

 

There are more. Those are just a sample. Here's another one:

 

The article only showed sources regarding productivity with graphic design/visual media... What about business/IT/engineering/development user productivity?You cant draw on conclusions just because one industry shows improvement.

 

And another one:

 

Wow. What a completely ridiculous article.

 

I have an idea. Let's write an article that vomits up all sorts of assertions supported by anecdotal evidence (from 1 person, nonetheless), include a couple of statements that may have been valid 10 years ago, and throw in a study about productivity which confusing correlation with causation.

 

Sound good? Good.

 

Here's one from someone who likes Mac's, but still the guy isn't agreeing with the points in the article:

 

When I finally switched to a Mac after 20 years on PCs, from DOS to XP - during which, for the last decade plus, I pooh-poohed Mac "fanatics" and insisted that "a computer is a computer and they all suck", I actually measured my productivity.

 

It has increased a whopping 30% since I switched to a Mac.

 

Just anecdotal, but, it surprised even me.

 

Also anecdotal: it was the ability to run the Windows programs I had a large investment in that finally convinced me to buy a MacBook. Guess what? After a few months of noodling around, first in BootCamp and later in Parallels, I haven't used a Windows app since.

 

So you see where the problem is? It's not that it looked like I cherry picked the comments, but that most of the points in the article weren't valid and instead were just opinions, not facts.

 

The creme of the crop however, is when you state that Windows Movie Maker, and Microsoft Picture Viewer (which I assume was the basic photo editing program you were referring to), is more "versatile" than iMovie, and iPhoto, and you prefer Windows from that angle as a result of them being more versatile. That's the funniest thing ever. Have you used iLife? Ever? That sentence alone removes your your credibility at its entirety from having a neutral viewpoint between Macs and PC's (and in detail, OS X and Windows).

 

Well if you don't like the picture viewer, you can use google's picasso. Works great and it's free. I don't do much movie editing though.

 

Then care to explain why iPod leads the market and has and killed Sony, Microsoft, Creative, and iRiver along the way with relative ease? If anything this proves that consumers LIKE being controlled, provided it's being done RIGHT...which is where the difference is between Apple and other companies.

 

I've already explained that it's because of the click wheel and the iTunes integration. If Apple allows another competitor access to those features, then say goodbye to their monopoly. Simple as that.

 

That will never happen...to begin with..so your argument is invalid before it even started to make sense. Even if that were to happen...Apple will come up with another way to lock users onto iPod/iTunes.

Again, stop confusing hardware with software. Macs are held by the software, contrary to what your belifes are about the hardware. Consumers switch becuase of the software, in which case is OS X...not becuase the fact that they run the same hardware as PC's. How many times do I have to say that?

 

Oh of course it will. Patents can't last forever after all. And it sounds to me like you like Apple locking you into iTunes. I sure don't. That is the only thing that Apple is ever good at. Locking out the competition because they know they never do good with it around.

 

You still have the mindset that Apple computers are more expensive than an equivalent Windows box. Please, come back to 2007.

 

 

Now the gap isn't as big, but it is still their. Plus I can build my own PC to my specifications exactly the way I want it. No way I can do that with a Mac.

 

And I just priced a mac and a pc out using apple's own store and a pc from dell. Granted the PC from dell was 2.13 GHz instead of 2.0 GHz and the monitor was a 22 inch lcd instead of a 20 inch lcd. But guess what? The PC was still cheaper. Still wanna say that doesn't apply to Mac's?

[EFI]

And it sounds to me like you like Apple locking you into iTunes. I sure don't. That is the only thing that Apple is ever good at. Locking out the competition because they know they never do good with it around.

 

See, that's your personal opinion. Do you have any proof or reference that they never do any good without the patents backing them up? Right now your doing exactly what you said shouldn't be doing....your using opinions as facts. Where is the proof?

 

Plus I can build my own PC to my specifications exactly the way I want it. No way I can do that with a Mac.

 

There is no way you can do that with your Dell, HP, or any other brand name PC make either. Don't forget that. You are comparing two different classes of machines. Home built vs Store bought. If you are going to compare a Mac to a PC...both of them have to be bought.

 

And I just priced a mac and a pc out using apple's own store and a pc from dell. Granted the PC from dell was 2.13 GHz instead of 2.0 GHz and the monitor was a 22 inch lcd instead of a 20 inch lcd. But guess what? The PC was still cheaper. Still wanna say that doesn't apply to Mac's?

 

And which Mac would that be? I know for a fact that when I prove you wrong...you are going to say that the Mac has features that you won't need or ones that you will never use...therfore those are pointless. You've done that before, so I'm just forewarning...I'll take everything into consideration...whether you use it or not..it has to be there on the PC as well. .

[pyrates]

See, that's your personal opinion. Do you have any proof or reference that they never do any good without the patents backing them up? Right now your doing exactly what you said shouldn't be doing....your using opinions as facts. Where is the proof?

 

Actually I do. Apple's original GUI with their first version of their System OS. They sued Microsoft saying they couldn't use the gui concept in their OS. They lost. And look what happened to their market share. It went down because they couldn't compete with the price of PC's. They never do well with competition as you can see.

 

There is no way you can do that with your Dell, HP, or any other brand name PC make either. Don't forget that. You are comparing two different classes of machines. Home built vs Store bought. If you are going to compare a Mac to a PC...both of them have to be bought.

And which Mac would that be? I know for a fact that when I prove you wrong...you are going to say that the Mac has features that you won't need or ones that you will never use...therfore those are pointless. You've done that before, so I'm just forewarning...I'll take everything into consideration...whether you use it or not..it has to be there on the PC as well. .

 

I can customize a dell pc selecting which cpu to have, how much ram, how big a hard drive, even add another, if I want only a cd burner or a dvd burner too, etc. But if I don't want a dell, or another oem branded pc, then I can just build my own. And I can customize it exactly how I want it to be. Don't like that? Too bad. You can't say a feature isn't fair that a pc has just because a Mac doesn't have it.

 

And the mac was a mac mini with a similarly priced dell and the dell was cheaper as I said. I even included office 2007 home and student edition and it was still cheaper then a mac mini. Course I myself would just use open office. So that lowers the price even more. I chose the mac mini because I already have a monitor and don't feel like throwing it away if I had selected an iMac. I also don't like it how Apple has no middle ground for a midrange desktop. Where I can select which graphics card to use from any out on the market, not the limited subset that Apple gives me a choice of in the Mac Pro. Mainly because they're the only company out their the makes Mac's. It isn't enough of a motivation because they might cut into other sales. Because their is so many companies that make PC's, I have such a large selection I can get a PC that can fill every niche out their.

 

Of course their are somethings that Mac's are better at. Specifically creative professionals and individuals who are creating netcasts. But if it has a feature that I don't use, I don't see the point of including it when making comparisons between the 2 for my benefit, it doesn't matter then. And if there was a way for me to exclude that feature that I don't particularly need so that I pay less for it, that would be wonderful.

 

But if you're going to insist that I count those extra features I don't use, where is a Mac for gamers? This is going back to the midrange Mac with a quad core cpu with 4 GB of ram and works with any graphics card on the market so that you can have a powerful Mac without having to buy a Mac Pro. It should be in a tower and no monitor should be included. Their is absolutely no reason why a monitor can't last 5-10 years. Sure they would have to boot windows to game, but then Apple might have some more hardware sales. What's wrong with wanting this?

[Colonel Ingus]

I know you are just generalizing everything wrong about Macs and when someone comes up with an rebuttal...you simply refuse to believe it has validity

I'm not psychic but I do believe that last week I predicted that pyrates would react in that fashion I'm sure I'm not the only one who saw that train coming down the tracks. Personally I wouldn't even waste your time responding to him, he's not in any way even remotely open minded, and he certainly isn't here to learn anything new. He's a classic case of someone in denial, and you could try to explain the facts to him till the cows come home, and he would never be willing to admit the truth because for him, it's just far to painful. His arguments above have sooo many holes in them that you could use them as a screen door. Just let him go off into his own little world and believe whatever he wants to believe. I promise you it's not going to effect the facts one single bit EFI I have far too much respect for you to watch you waste your valuable time trying to talk reasonably with someone like pyrates, who is only here to spread his own microsoft psychobabbled propaganda. Of course the final decision is yours, but it is just sad to watch your valuable time wasted

[pyrates]

I'm not psychic but I do believe that last week I predicted that pyrates would react in that fashion I'm sure I'm not the only one who saw that train coming down the tracks. Personally I wouldn't even waste your time responding to him, he's not in any way even remotely open minded, and he certainly isn't here to learn anything new. He's a classic case of someone in denial, and you could try to explain the facts to him till the cows come home, and he would never be willing to admit the truth because for him, it's just far to painful. His arguments above have sooo many holes in them that you could use them as a screen door. Just let him go off into his own little world and believe whatever he wants to believe. I promise you it's not going to effect the facts one single bit EFI I have far too much respect for you to watch you waste your valuable time trying to talk reasonably with someone like pyrates, who is only here to spread his own microsoft psychobabbled propaganda. Of course the final decision is yours, but it is just sad to watch your valuable time wasted

 

Yeah you did predict that. Because you refused to put your sources to back up your arguments was your reasoning. It is far more easier to plug your ears and pretend you can't hear then it is having an actual debate now isn't it?

 

At least EFI here put up something to back up your argument instead of you doing that. Guess it must have made you look bad to spout something out and refuse to give where you got your evidence for it. EFI had to come along with some evidence to try to back your claim. I respect EFI because anything he says, he tries to back it up with some evidence. If you had said it was your opinion, then I'd say fine and disagree. And that's all I could do. But you kept on insisting their was proof it was true. And I asked and you refused to say what lead you to the conclusion.

 

I gotta say I'd rather have a debate with EFI then you. Rule number 1 of debating. If you claim something is true, you better have the evidence to back it up. It is not my responsibility to prove that your theory is true, it is yours. That's all I gotta say.

[Colonel Ingus]

Yeah you did predict that.

You're right, I did. You're nothing if not transparent

 

Let's analyze the rest of your ballyhooed response shall we;

 

you refused to...

See now even your first 3 words are dead wrong. I never refused ANYTHING! If you think I did then you simply don't know the definition of the word 'refuse'. I told you AT LEAST TWO TIMES ALREADY that I would respond when I found time to properly do so, and I will. You're not the first windows fanboy that I've debated. I know full well how you will be twisting the truth around, and warping everything that is said here. That means that "debating" something/anything with someone like you is going to take a LOT of time, and I simply don't have it right now. Just look at the BS manuscript above that you wrote to EFI. I don't blame him one bit for not covering all the mistruths that you wrote in that post. We're not here to make a career out of posting to you, or to keep you company. If you're lonely get a dog

 

If you had said it was your opinion, then I'd say fine and disagree.

Why would I have said that? You've been told several times that it WASN'T an opinion, it is fact. You're obviously incapable of absorbing even the minutest bit of comprehension.

 

That's all I gotta say.

Well I think that everyone here by now knows that's a lie

[EFI]

Actually I do. Apple's original GUI with their first version of their System OS. They sued Microsoft saying they couldn't use the gui concept in their OS. They lost. And look what happened to their market share. It went down because they couldn't compete with the price of PC's. They never do well with competition as you can see.

 

No, you're incorrect there. Apple's market share lost because Microsoft beat them to the market...not because of the lowered prices, which could have been an inhibiting factor later down the road (but no one knows, since it was too late), however the reason why Microsoft took the lead was becuase they were able to finalize Windows and get it out there before Apple was able to get the Macintosh out. The suing had and to be honest would have had no effect on Microsoft's momentum at that time. This is why the market share looks vastly different now. It's like pulling out of a pit stop at a Infineon Raceway, just joining the main track and watch a car go 150MPH faster than you just over take your car which is just starting to gain speed at 45MPH. There is nothing you can do about it, becuase you know it's too late.

 

Moreover, if Apple had patented the idea of the OS UI prior to Microsoft's invitation, I would guess that today it would have been a completely different story.

 

I can customize a dell pc selecting which cpu to have, how much ram, how big a hard drive, even add another, if I want only a cd burner or a dvd burner too, etc. But if I don't want a dell, or another oem branded pc, then I can just build my own. And I can customize it exactly how I want it to be. Don't like that? Too bad. You can't say a feature isn't fair that a pc has just because a Mac doesn't have it.

 

You can customize a Mac to have which CPU to have, how much ram, how big the HD, and even add another if you wanted, and you can even customize more if you wanted. What you can't do however with a Mac AND a PC however...is put a Zalman custom cooler, or liquid cool your dual 8800GTX's, adjust/increase the clock timings of the RAM, clear the cables inside, fit a modular PSU, etc, etc. You can have bluetooth 2.0 on the Mac, ambient light/motion sensors on the Mac, have a thin profile design that's visually appealing. You can't say a feature isn't fair that a Mac has just becuase a PC doesn't have it.

 

And the mac was a mac mini with a similarly priced dell and the dell was cheaper as I said. I even included office 2007 home and student edition and it was still cheaper then a mac mini. Course I myself would just use open office. So that lowers the price even more. I chose the mac mini because I already have a monitor and don't feel like throwing it away if I had selected an iMac. I also don't like it how Apple has no middle ground for a midrange desktop. Where I can select which graphics card to use from any out on the market, not the limited subset that Apple gives me a choice of in the Mac Pro. Mainly because they're the only company out their the makes Mac's. It isn't enough of a motivation because they might cut into other sales. Because their is so many companies that make PC's, I have such a large selection I can get a PC that can fill every niche out their.

 

Does the Dell come in a really small thin profile enclosure? Does it have Bluetooth 2.0? Does it have an equivalent iLife app under Windows? I could go on much more. Moreover, where is your proof? Where is your breakdown of prices between the two...right now your just saying from an opinon...becuase you don't have, nor have provided hard evidence to back up your claim.

 

Furthermore, you are sidetracking from the main argument about how Apple does not have a midrange desktop. We have gone through this over, and over, and over again in the previous grueling long posts from a while ago. I am NOT going to talk about that again, since it will carry on another long post.

 

Aside gaming....what else negative reason is there towards Macs? The only reason why individuals want a midrange Mac is becuase they want to be able to game on it...nothing more, nothing less. Why? becuase of the so called "options for adding video cards, etc.". It's not going to happen. If you want to be serious about gaming, then you would be smart enough to custom build your PC, and save your money from Apple, Dell, Hp, etc, etc. So, that being said, aside gaming....why do you need a midrange desktop Mac?....when the iMac will be able to handle everything else that falls under "midrange".

 

 

What's wrong with wanting this?

 

Nothing wrong in you "wanting" this...but if you are going to be gaming in Bootcamp...you might as well do it on any Mac out now. Here, this is my YouTube profile page. I have posted numerous videos of me perfectly gaming on my Macbook Pro. You can game happily on a Mac too...contrary to your beliefs. Yes, you might not be able to play at 1920 x 1200 (actually I can with some games by hooking up to my 23" Cinema Display HD) on average, but on most games, I can max out the settings and resolution on my MBP and play happily.

 

http://www.youtube.com/profile_videos?user=KamikazeX1

 

EFI I have far too much respect for you to watch you waste your valuable time trying to talk reasonably with someone like pyrates, who is only here to spread his own microsoft psychobabbled propaganda. Of course the final decision is yours, but it is just sad to watch your valuable time wasted

 

Yeah, I know I'm wasting my time here...but he/she just way too wrong to ignore. It's like he/she believes what he/she wants to believe...and subdue the rest of reality.

[ginsu417]

I like computers.

[Colonel Ingus]

What you can't do however with a Mac AND a PC however...is put a Zalman custom cooler

Could you clarify this please? Before we sold our PC and bought a Mac we had a Zalman cooler on it. Maybe it was a different model.

 

Yeah, I know I'm wasting my time here...but he/she just way too wrong to ignore. It's like he/she believes what he/she wants to believe...and subdue the rest of reality.

That's the very definition of someone who is in denial. The brain literally can't accept the new information being fed to it, so it 'blocks' it out. It's actually a safety mechanism of the human brain, but we're getting too medical here It can take time to get someone in denial to realize (and admit) the truth. With pyrates, you'll wear out your keyboard by then

 

I like computers.

And we like you. Welcome to the forum

[EFI]

Could you clarify this please? Before we sold our PC and bought a Mac we had a Zalman cooler on it. Maybe it was a different model.

 

No no, I meant it was buying it from Dell, HP, etc. Not custom built.

[Colonel Ingus]

Oh OK, thanks for the clarification

[pyrates]

You're right, I did. You're nothing if not transparent

Here is the original quote:

Yeah you did predict that. Because you refused to put your sources to back up your arguments was your reasoning. It is far more easier to plug your ears and pretend you can't hear then it is having an actual debate now isn't it?

Nice cut and paste job you did their.

See now even your first 3 words are dead wrong. I never refused ANYTHING! If you think I did then you simply don't know the definition of the word 'refuse'. I told you AT LEAST TWO TIMES ALREADY that I would respond when I found time to properly do so, and I will. You're not the first windows fanboy that I've debated. I know full well how you will be twisting the truth around, and warping everything that is said here. That means that "debating" something/anything with someone like you is going to take a LOT of time, and I simply don't have it right now. Just look at the BS manuscript above that you wrote to EFI. I don't blame him one bit for not covering all the mistruths that you wrote in that post. We're not here to make a career out of posting to you, or to keep you company. If you're lonely get a dog

Here is my original question:

I'd like to know your sources from where you got this interesting fact.

And here is your response:

Google is your friend. If I do all the research for you and dig it up do you promise to go away, or will you just whine about something else? Come on now, be honest

Seems like you're refusing here. Even EFI when he responded, said it only took him 20 seconds to find some proof. You said you didn't have the time to look it up. You don't have 20 seconds to spare yet you have enough time to respond to my posts.

Why would I have said that? You've been told several times that it WASN'T an opinion, it is fact. You're obviously incapable of absorbing even the minutest bit of comprehension.

Until there was some proof provided, it was an opinion.

No, you're incorrect there. Apple's market share lost because Microsoft beat them to the market...not because of the lowered prices, which could have been an inhibiting factor later down the road (but no one knows, since it was too late), however the reason why Microsoft took the lead was becuase they were able to finalize Windows and get it out there before Apple was able to get the Macintosh out. The suing had and to be honest would have had no effect on Microsoft's momentum at that time. This is why the market share looks vastly different now. It's like pulling out of a pit stop at a Infineon Raceway, just joining the main track and watch a car go 150MPH faster than you just over take your car which is just starting to gain speed at 45MPH. There is nothing you can do about it, becuase you know it's too late.

Apple beat Microsoft with the gui for an OS, but Apple's high prices on their hardware allowed Microsoft to catch up. Businesses didn't see the need for a computer with a gui if it cost 2-3 times the price. Arrogance cost Apple market share here.

You can customize a Mac to have which CPU to have, how much ram, how big the HD, and even add another if you wanted, and you can even customize more if you wanted. What you can't do however with a Mac AND a PC however...is put a Zalman custom cooler, or liquid cool your dual 8800GTX's, adjust/increase the clock timings of the RAM, clear the cables inside, fit a modular PSU, etc, etc. You can have bluetooth 2.0 on the Mac, ambient light/motion sensors on the Mac, have a thin profile design that's visually appealing. You can't say a feature isn't fair that a Mac has just becuase a PC doesn't have it.

Can you customize a mac with a core 2 quad and have it come with one or 2 nvidia graphics card in sli mode? Nope.I don't say a feature isn't fair, in fact I list several that a PC has that a Mac doesn't. But if their is a feature that a Mac has that a PC doesn't have, go right ahead and use it. I'm not stopping you. iLife 08 is a good one for example. Except maybe the crippled iMovie in it. 6 got much better reviews.

Does the Dell come in a really small thin profile enclosure? Does it have Bluetooth 2.0? Does it have an equivalent iLife app under Windows? I could go on much more. Moreover, where is your proof? Where is your breakdown of prices between the two...right now your just saying from an opinon...becuase you don't have, nor have provided hard evidence to back up your claim.

Small thin profiles doesn't matter to someone like me because it is cosmetic. It doesn't change how you use the computer does it? Hence why I'm not into paying a premium for something that looks better. I don't exactly care what it looks like, just how well it performs for the money I'm paying for it.

Furthermore, you are sidetracking from the main argument about how Apple does not have a midrange desktop. We have gone through this over, and over, and over again in the previous grueling long posts from a while ago. I am NOT going to talk about that again, since it will carry on another long post.

See here for exactly what I'm talking about.

Aside gaming....what else negative reason is there towards Macs? The only reason why individuals want a midrange Mac is becuase they want to be able to game on it...nothing more, nothing less. Why? becuase of the so called "options for adding video cards, etc.". It's not going to happen. If you want to be serious about gaming, then you would be smart enough to custom build your PC, and save your money from Apple, Dell, Hp, etc, etc. So, that being said, aside gaming....why do you need a midrange desktop Mac?....when the iMac will be able to handle everything else that falls under "midrange".

Because some individuals want to run OS X and don't feel like purchasing 2 computers with one for OS X and the other for gaming. The ability to run Windows with bootcamp is the first step in this. The second is for Apple to release a midrange Mac Desktop. Then businesses would start looking at purchasing it because they don't want to replace their lcd displays which are already working and don't need replacing. This means more sales for Apple.

Nothing wrong in you "wanting" this...but if you are going to be gaming in Bootcamp...you might as well do it on any Mac out now. Here, this is my YouTube profile page. I have posted numerous videos of me perfectly gaming on my Macbook Pro. You can game happily on a Mac too...contrary to your beliefs. Yes, you might not be able to play at 1920 x 1200 (actually I can with some games by hooking up to my 23" Cinema Display HD) on average, but on most games, I can max out the settings and resolution on my MBP and play happily. http://www.youtube.com/profile_videos?user=KamikazeX1

For me, building my own custom PC is much more fun. I have a core 2 quad with 4 gigs of ram and a 7600 GT video card. Besides I don't like laptops much. The keyboard feels smaller to me. And my 24" lcd monitor I see no need to throw it away when it works just fine. Plus with the iMac I'd be forced to purchase a monitor built into it when I already got one.

Yeah, I know I'm wasting my time here...but he/she just way too wrong to ignore. It's like he/she believes what he/she wants to believe...and subdue the rest of reality.

Doesn't mean I was wrong though. I'm glad you enjoy a debate as much as I do. Enjoy your day

 

Sorry for the long post, but the forums here don't allow 2 separate replies to be 2 separate posts, they put them together as one.

[Colonel Ingus]

Nice cut and paste job you did their.

 

They were YOUR words, not mine or anyone elses. If you're ashamed of them then don't use them. The points we made still stand.

 

Seems like you're refusing here.

TWICE you've used the word 'refused' in your responses to me, and TWICE you've proven to everyone here that you don't even know the definition of the word. Doesn't that virus-box peecee of yours have a dictionary on it?

 

EFI when he responded, said it only took him 20 seconds to find some proof.

...and of course you took that literally Your mentality clearly explains why you're still using a peecee. But that's good for us because we need the entertainment

 

Are you suggesting that EFI is a mind reader and he somehow knows exactly what articles other people are looking for? Doing a 'general' search, and doing one as I would be doing are two different things Einstein. Again pyrates you prove to everyone here that you don't even know how to correctly use google. What you (conveniently) left out of your quotes was the fact that I also said that I've dealt with windows fanboys like you before, and I know just how much time is needed to FULLY debate with you. When I have that much time I will be more than happy to expose your ignorance here. Shouldn't be that hard really, you seem to like to hang yourself with your own words

 

You don't have 20 seconds to spare

20 seconds yes. 20 minutes no

 

Until there was some proof provided, it was an opinion.

Oh really? So that must mean that you don't believe in atoms, since you've never seen one with your own eyes

 

Go ahead and try and weasel out of that one. We can already hear you trying to say "that's different" as you're excuse. Again, you're nothing if not transparent

[EFI]

@ Pyrates

 

Your mixing up personal preference and stating them as a generalized fact...that's what you've been doing all along, and continue to do. Stop that. If you feel that it's not worth it for you, then say "I feel", and not "Macs are not blah blah"...as if that one conceptualization of Macs fits for every Windows user out there. Even CNET...which dare I say is arguably one of the anti-Mac review sites out there, has given the new iMac top reviews and has stated it as "Without a doubt, the best home-use computer". Your argument, seems totally biased, and not openminded in any way.

 

Furthermore you state that you don't like laptops in general. In which case, your only arguments should be for the Mac Pro...not any other mac out there to begin with. So why are you going on about the rest of the Mac family? And no, you are wrong, arrogance did not cost Apple the market share....lazyness and being taken by surprise did. Regardless of that debacle, the fact remains that Windows is not Microsoft's original creation, just like pretty much every single market sector they are known for. (MSN, Halo, Windows, Live One Care, FrontPage, Windows Defender, etc, etc)

 

SLI is not as good as what it is hyped up to be. In some new games, SLI actually decreases the performance rather than boosting it..and in games that it does help, it does so only by 10 or 15fps.

 

You are still comparing a custom built PC to a store bought Mac. Stop doing that, for the 100,000,000th time.

[onizuka]

Lively debate in here (as we can expect in a thread with Vista in it's name on a Mac forum).

 

Vista is definitely far behind Tiger, and further behind Leopard. But as Bill Gates said : "I don't care".