Deleted member 329
Deleted member 329
Phnom_Penh said:
well you can ILLEGALLY
Mac users' elitism
- Thread starter Lysander
- Start date
well you can ILLEGALLY
Macs and PCs are two seperate components
PCs = Generalised Hardware and OS (such as Windows or Linux)
Macs = Generalised Hardware and OS (such as Mac OS X (based on Unix BSD) or Linux)
So... where is the difference? Mac hardware is pretty much the same as "PC" hardware now. If you prefer an operating system, so be it.
Personally, I think all macs are good for, is case design - and not even great case design, just the samey artificial plastic of most PC case designs, just more so, and flourescent.
So why can't they just say, I prefer Mac OS X ?
PCs = Generalised Hardware and OS (such as Windows or Linux)
Macs = Generalised Hardware and OS (such as Mac OS X (based on Unix BSD) or Linux)
So... where is the difference? Mac hardware is pretty much the same as "PC" hardware now. If you prefer an operating system, so be it.
Personally, I think all macs are good for, is case design - and not even great case design, just the samey artificial plastic of most PC case designs, just more so, and flourescent.
So why can't they just say, I prefer Mac OS X ?
Soldato
- Joined
- 15 Jan 2004
- Posts
- 14,199
- Location
- Hall
Only in Apple's eyes.Cogent said:
Have Apple tested the law in an EU court yet? It would be interesting to know the outcome. In my opinion, someone purchasing the retail boxed OS X should be able to install it on a generic PC if they wish. I suspect the courts would agreePhnom_Penh said:
Aren't Macs for people that can't set a video clock?
I hate Macs. Ever heard a Mac user talk about how Macs will overtake PCs. Recently, Apple dropped Computer from its name, to just Apple. To reflect the fact that is now an entertainment company.
I hate Macs. Ever heard a Mac user talk about how Macs will overtake PCs. Recently, Apple dropped Computer from its name, to just Apple. To reflect the fact that is now an entertainment company.
neocon said:
Ha, video clock nah for people who can't use Outlook Express
Of course Macs are never going to overtake PCs...good don't want to see that as a Apple user myself
Microsoft seems a bit of an entertainment company these days Zune, XBOX360, XBOX, MSN TV...
Of course you hate Macs, you are narrow minded...
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 31 Jan 2004
- Posts
- 16,338
- Location
- Plymouth
Ho hum!neocon said:
dirtydog said:I thought I had covered it by saying that the alternative PC had equal or better specs in those other areas
Case Study No. 1: Sony Vaio VGN-TX3XP/B
Intel® Core™ Solo Processor (Doesnt give a speed rating)
11.1" Display
512mb Ram
80gb HDD
DVD±RW
Intel 950 Graphics
802.11a/b/g
Price : £1498
What really is your point about the 13" macbooks being too small and over priced? I'll take my reasonably priced macbook anyway.
As for you issue over no-one ever wanting a screen that small, why does my place of work constantly shell out for small vaio's like this one, for employee's working out of the office? They really don't want to lug something huge around.
Your not really making a point you say....well yes I am. Smaller laptops are, I imagine, much more expensive to make. They have to squeeze all the components into a smaller house, so of course a 15/17" laptop of similar specs to a macbook is going to be cheaper, because they have to pay less skilled people to assemble them, aswell as less on cooling for the laptop etc.
...For me, the 13" macbook is a great compromise. Decent enough screen size, great performance and most importantly of all, it's not heavy or a rip off price like the vaio above.
neocon said:
...and here's me thinking we had found the most ignorant person possible, many pages back. I was wrong.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 15 Jan 2004
- Posts
- 14,199
- Location
- Hall
That's a subnotebook, a poor choice of comparison it weighs 1.25kg (a MB 13" is twice that) and has 6 hours battery life, it's also made of carbon fibre. Old tech too.JonB said:
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 15 Jan 2004
- Posts
- 14,199
- Location
- Hall
oops. lol delete this.
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Aug 2005
- Posts
- 6,901
- Location
- London
If you are a student, you can get a big discount. £640 for a basic macbook with the higher education discount.
triggerthat said:
I bought my Macbook for £930 with 2ghz cpu, 1gb ram, and 80gb hdd. Plus the 3 year Applecare - great deal if you ask me, was greatly suited to my needs.
Running Parallels when I need to do some windows work, and running os x most of the other time. Still prefer windows though.
To be quite brutally honest, most apple products are overpriced for similarly built PC systems. Especially now that they are just normal PC's with a mac front end. When they had IBM cores there was a difference, now they are just Pc's with "style".
Al Vallario you could buy a high class dual xeon mobo in the uk for £110 last year, so a good mobo would probably be about $150 in the US, not much more than his estimate.
And on the XP v OSX matter. Apple release a new OS ever 18-24 months whereas microsoft release one every 5 years (taking xp as an example), that makes cost per year almost identical for both OS's. Thats without taking into account the OEM version which the retail version of OSX practically is.
You change a mac every 3-4 years meaning your version of OSX will only be on one PC. Yo will probably have gone through 2 versions of mac OS's whilst owning the mac meaning you have spend £160 on software. Now apply that to XP. You buy an oem copy of XP and stick it on your pc at the beginning of the 4 years, microsoft supply free updates for it during those 4 years and overall you spend £80 on software for 4 years (£160 if you buy retail).
So at worst you will pay the same amount for XP as OSX (if you buy retail) or at best you pay haf price for XP over the 4 years (OEM)
And thats only the case if you spend £80 on the OEM version (£60 from OcUK). If you think of OSX as an upgrade (which there is no denying whatsoever) then you can buy the XP upgrade CD for £100, almost the same as the OEM example. So OSX is more expensive than XP!
Don't get me wrong, I like macs, I want to get a macbook sometime in the near future to go with my PC.
EDIT: Looking a that scoring website I have a major issue with this score http://www.xvsxp.com/files/forbidden.php . PS CS2 has a hissy fit if I try and save a file for web use that has more than 32 (yes 32) characters because of incompatability with Macs. Absolutly stupid! Yes windows restricts wierd and wacky characters (which hardly anyone uses anyway) but at least its max character limit is a lot higher. Instead of that score I would say 2 to macs and 9 to xp.
They need to do one for vista now.
Al Vallario you could buy a high class dual xeon mobo in the uk for £110 last year, so a good mobo would probably be about $150 in the US, not much more than his estimate.
And on the XP v OSX matter. Apple release a new OS ever 18-24 months whereas microsoft release one every 5 years (taking xp as an example), that makes cost per year almost identical for both OS's. Thats without taking into account the OEM version which the retail version of OSX practically is.
You change a mac every 3-4 years meaning your version of OSX will only be on one PC. Yo will probably have gone through 2 versions of mac OS's whilst owning the mac meaning you have spend £160 on software. Now apply that to XP. You buy an oem copy of XP and stick it on your pc at the beginning of the 4 years, microsoft supply free updates for it during those 4 years and overall you spend £80 on software for 4 years (£160 if you buy retail).
So at worst you will pay the same amount for XP as OSX (if you buy retail) or at best you pay haf price for XP over the 4 years (OEM)
And thats only the case if you spend £80 on the OEM version (£60 from OcUK). If you think of OSX as an upgrade (which there is no denying whatsoever) then you can buy the XP upgrade CD for £100, almost the same as the OEM example. So OSX is more expensive than XP!
Don't get me wrong, I like macs, I want to get a macbook sometime in the near future to go with my PC.
EDIT: Looking a that scoring website I have a major issue with this score http://www.xvsxp.com/files/forbidden.php . PS CS2 has a hissy fit if I try and save a file for web use that has more than 32 (yes 32) characters because of incompatability with Macs. Absolutly stupid! Yes windows restricts wierd and wacky characters (which hardly anyone uses anyway) but at least its max character limit is a lot higher. Instead of that score I would say 2 to macs and 9 to xp.
They need to do one for vista now.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Aug 2005
- Posts
- 4,534
- Location
- UK
Going with the same OEM manufacturer that JonB mentioned, the VGNBX396VP.CEK model. Comparison with the second default MacBook configuration. The competitors are as follows:dirtydog said:I wouldn't say that. I'd say you're not really making a point
MacBook / VGNBX396VP.CEK
13.3" widescreen glossy LCD (1280x800) / 15.4" widescreen glossy LCD (1280x800)
2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo / 1.83GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
1GB DDR2 SDRAM / 1GB DDR2 SDRAM
80GB SATA 5400rpm / 80GB SATA 5400rpm
Intel GMA 950 graphics / Intel GMA 950 graphics
DVD+R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW drive / DVD±RW/±R DL/RAM drive
Bluetooth, WiFi, webcam built-in / Bluetooth, WiFi, webcam and fingerprint reader built-in
So the MacBook trumps the other laptop on processor clock speed and matches it on everything else bar the fingerprint reader (which, lets be honest, is not going to be utilised by 99% of users) and screen size (but not resolution, so you have a bigger laptop to lug around with no real productivity increase). The MacBook is also 23% lighter, most probably thinner and a damn-sight more attractive. The other laptop manufacturer do not state what ethernet jack their laptop has, but I doubt it is gigabit like the MacBook, and the other laptop does not come with an equivalent to the Frontrow remote control the MacBook is bundled with, which is actually very useful and easy to use.
Price? The MacBook configuration is £879.00 (£747.15 with HE discount), the other laptop is £938.38.
I wouldn't call that "eye-wateringly expensive"
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 15 Jan 2004
- Posts
- 14,199
- Location
- Hall
Interesting, because according to other places, it has a ATi Mobility Radeon x1600, and can be had for £869. Also looks like old tech tbh.Al Vallario said:
Last edited:
Phnom_Penh said:
the macbook pro has the X1600, which start at £1300 odd.
I'm not so sure on the build quality of some of the apples, the laptops that my colleagues use have broken down too many times and generally look... battered. They are carried around in sleeves and cases too.
Pho said:
In contrast, I hadn't used a Mac for aaages, and had to set one up to join a network, took me 5 minutes and it's been solid ever since.
On the other hand, virtually all the windows PCs have resulted in 6 months of...
"Riiiiich... why isn't my internet working?"
"Riiiiich, it isn't connecting, come and fix it"
etc.