You practically have to be a novice linux programmer in order to get crap installed
Uh.
sudo apt-get install
sudo pacman -Syy
make && make install
****, son, I'm programming!
Yea "dog".
Why should anyone have learn, let a lone WANT to learn all this 'sudo bash apt-get update' etc etc, when it could be as easy as "double click this .exe file and follow the prompts"
One shouldn't need to learn a whole new jargon *just* to get a friggin program installed.
most people have better things to do in life like for example, having a life.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Making the mistake of digging straight down; 3 hearts,
Falling into lava pool (lucky you have a bucket of water); 4 hearts,
Telling a hissing creeper "No!" - priceless.
I have Windows7 and Ubuntu 10.04 on my computer, and both have their advantages and drawbacks.
To start, Windows works with everything. You will be very hard pressed to find an application that does not work on Windows. That is the single biggest reason for its wide spread use. This wide spread use, about 400 million world wide, means lots of viruses. There is plenty of software to combat them, but they are still a threat now and again. If you use Windows long enough, you will probably get a virus in one shape or another.
The search feature on Windows7 and Vista is amazing. Just press the Windows Key and type the name of a folder, file, or program. I love it.
Installing new programs for Windows is idiot proof. You either unzip a file into "Program Files" or you run a *.exe or *.msi file.
Most people know what Windows 7 looks like, and how to use it. There are programs that can change things, like Mac-Dock emulators and Rain Meter.
Windows7's Paint program is also amazing. It is very simple, so dedicated artist will prefer Photoshop or GIMP, but if your needs are basic there is no better.
Windows7 needs about 20 GB of HDD space to install and run properly.
I can only speak for Ubuntu 10.04, but the core themes in Linux distros does not change much. Depending on your exact needs and abilities, you might prefer a different distro. Ubuntu uses a desktop environment called Gnome, which is very different than Windows. If you are use to Windows, which most people are, it will take a little adjustment to get use to it. Other distros use KDE(?), which in effect looks like Windows 7. Linux too has Dock emulators. My two favorite parts of Gnome are the Cube and the jelly-windows. The cube gives you 6 desktops to work with. They all show the same files - from the Desktop Folder - but they show different windows. It makes organizing a lot of windows very easy. The jelly-windows, not sure what they are actually called, make windows bounce back and forth when moved. This does not add to productivity, but it is fun. After using it for so long, Windows7 feels very stiff and cold.
Linux has issues running things. While C/C++ code can be compiled for Linux, it has to be done differently than Windows and it cannot include any of M$'s libraries: DirectX, .NET, etc. An executable from Windows will not work on Linux. Ever. It is part of the design of the operating system, and would be more trouble than it's work to fix. Most of the big retail games do not run on Linux. You cannot run Starcraft. Black Ops, or TF2 on Linux. Some games have Linux ports, but they are scarce. There is something called Wine which tries to emulate the Windows environment, but I have never used it.
Installing things in Linux is not idiot proof. If its in the "repositories", you can just type sudo apt-get install **** in Terminal - which is an amazing piece of technology, albeit confusing to people new to computers. Windows let command prompt die. :/ If the program is not in the repositories, installation can be confusing. Sometimes they have an installer file, sometimes they come in a compressed file. I find it very confusing, but I have much to learn.
Linux comes with everything. It comes with Firefox. It comes with GIMP. It comes with the equivalent of Microsoft Office. And all of this requires about 4-6 GB to run smoothly.
Linus's paint sucks. It is terrible. It makes me cry. GIMP is too complex for most of my needs. It is akin to rabbit hunting with a 50 caliber sniper.
As I have used Windows7 on my computer for about a year, it has slowed down. It takes a lot longer to run the same operations than it does on Linux. Linux might slow down, I do not know.
The last time I touched a mac was in 2003. I know Macs are different than Windows, so if you are use to one you will have to adapt. Mac computers are expensive as ****. Easily twice their Windows equivalent. Linux is a free Operating System which you should be able to install on any computer with enough space.
Personally, I like Linux. It is free and easy to get around. There are only a few things I miss from Windows 7: The search function, M$Paint, and compatibility. Wine might solve the latter, and I am sure there is some freeware somewhere to solve the other two problems.
But if you ever want to play SC, TF2, or Black Ops on Stream / Battle.net, Windows is your OS.
If you ever want to get into an artistic field - Graphic Design, Photography, etc - then Mac is your OS.
This is just kind of vomit on paper, so excuse the terrible structure.
Yea "dog".
Why should anyone have learn, let a lone WANT to learn all this 'sudo bash apt-get update' etc etc, when it could be as easy as "double click this .exe file and follow the prompts"
One shouldn't need to learn a whole new jargon *just* to get a friggin program installed.
most people have better things to do in life like for example, having a life.
Just... God, people like you make me want to kill myself. Or kill you.
Yea "dog".
Why should anyone have learn, let a lone WANT to learn all this 'sudo bash apt-get update' etc etc, when it could be as easy as "double click this .exe file and follow the prompts"
One shouldn't need to learn a whole new jargon *just* to get a friggin program installed.
most people have better things to do in life like for example, having a life.
Just... God, people like you make me want to kill myself. Or kill you.
Wow, so affected by something so insignificant. Talk about black & white thinking!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Making the mistake of digging straight down; 3 hearts,
Falling into lava pool (lucky you have a bucket of water); 4 hearts,
Telling a hissing creeper "No!" - priceless.
Yea "dog".
Why should anyone have learn, let a lone WANT to learn all this 'sudo bash apt-get update' etc etc, when it could be as easy as "double click this .exe file and follow the prompts"
One shouldn't need to learn a whole new jargon *just* to get a friggin program installed.
most people have better things to do in life like for example, having a life.
Just... God, people like you make me want to kill myself. Or kill you.
I'd run OSX on a PC if it were simple. Hackintosh's are still far away from being simplified, or easily universal across hardware. I won't pay an extra $1,000 or more for Apple's OS though. Not worth it.
Before Windows7, the appeal of an Mac style operation system was tempting. Win7 is amazing though, and it doesn't limit what I can do both hardware and software wise. Can't say the same for either Mac or Linux.
All you Linux fanboi's can get stuffed. There is no universal distro that will run 100% of anything you want to run on a linux computer. Not without a ton of headaches. Lets also not forget gaming sucks just slightly less than a Mac does.
Right of the bat, I consider Linux>Mac OS X>>>>>>>>>Windows 7>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>older windows
I also triple boot all three OSes on my personally built PC.
Apple makes great products, and OS X is actually a very nice OS to use. When you buy apple, you're paying for quality, that's why it costs more. However, the Mac Pro desktop is another story. That machine is truly a massive waste of money with poor configuration options and a horrible markup on all of its parts.
Though to that end, Apple is only guilty of what every other PC manufacturer is guilty of: Charging you for building the computer (which is why I build my own). The only difference between Apple and companies like Dell/etc. (and this is actually quite a significant difference) is that if you buy a Mac, you're more likely to spend less money in the end because it's going to last you a really long time (with VERY few exceptions). If you're like a friend of mine, and you use your laptop for everything from gaming to functioning as a temporary server, then get the extended warranty. For about $300 more, he got a whole new computer after about 2.5 years of use.
I'll still buy laptops from OEM's, but for desktops, I'll build my own. Though on that note, regarding laptops, Toshiba, ASUS, and Sony VAIO laptops all tend to have fewer problems than Macs (tbh, I'm not sure why). Though even then, Apple has, by far, the most superior tech support and warranty service of the four.
tl;dr Apple's more expensive because they make good computers (Mac Pro desktop sucks).
The fact that PC stands for personal computer is common knowledge. It's normal to know that. Macs are obviously computers used personally. Macs are therefore personal computers.
Not knowing this means you are less smart than the average person, thus of subnormal intelligence, thus an idiot.
On topic, Windows and OS X both suck. Linux is superior.
Yes, but even though PC stands for 'Personal Computer' its still accepted as a reference to a non-Mac computer, and is used alot. Thats why threads are always 'PC vs MAC', not 'Non-apple branded computer VS Mac'. Anyways i choose windows because after using Macs for a bit now, ive come to hate them, very, very much.
tl;dr Apple's more expensive because they make good computers (Mac Pro desktop sucks).
That's a load of bull. They practically use all PC parts... intel, nvidia, etc, etc. There is nothing special out their hardware, and if your priced out a Mac desktop piece by piece via Newegg you would be ASTOUNDED at the price difference. FYI it's a lot more than $300 to build a comparible Mac vs. PC. A lot more.
And to say you'll spend less on a Mac than a PC is ridiculous. I had my last PC for 3+ years without an upgrade. But guess what, I was able to upgrade it when I wanted to. Updated processor and video card, BAM! Good to go for another 1+ years. Try upgrading your Mac.
Macs are over-priced, you aren't saving any money unless you are computer retarded and can't maintain a PC. And having worked on Macs all through school, I've seen many many many crashes. Macs don't need as much maintenance, but when they are used and pushed to their limits they are just as bad as Windows in my experience. All computers need maintaining.
tl;dr Apple's more expensive because they make good computers (Mac Pro desktop sucks).
That's a load of bull. They practically use all PC parts... intel, nvidia, etc, etc. There is nothing special out their hardware, and if your priced out a Mac desktop piece by piece via Newegg you would be ASTOUNDED at the price difference. FYI it's a lot more than $300 to build a comparible Mac vs. PC. A lot more.
And to say you'll spend less on a Mac than a PC is ridiculous. I had my last PC for 3+ years without an upgrade. But guess what, I was able to upgrade it when I wanted to. Updated processor and video card, BAM! Good to go for another 1+ years. Try upgrading your Mac.
Macs are over-priced, you aren't saving any money unless you are computer retarded and can't maintain a PC. And having worked on Macs all through school, I've seen many many many crashes. Macs don't need as much maintenance, but when they are used and pushed to their limits they are just as bad as Windows in my experience. All computers need maintaining.
No, it's not bull. Not all motherboards or graphics cards are created equal. Same goes for every other component in a computer other than the processor, as Intel and AMD are the only major manufacturers for CPU's and they both make good quality equipment.
Take PNY and EVGA for example. PNY makes sub-par graphics cards. They may perform just as well as an EVGA, but they won't last as long. EVGA has better quality control standards, and their product line shows this.
Also, take note that when I said "You'll end up spending less on a mac" I was referring to the Mac Pro desktop. I was mainly referring to their laptops, though this still holds true for their iMac desktops (to an extent. Though when it comes to a lab of computers, it's quite apparent that the TCO for an Apple-based lab is less than that of a PC-based lab).
To top it all off, the average Macbook Pro has enough power under the hood to last an average consumer a good 6 years. In contrast, while the average OEM laptop is much cheaper (take note that most people tend to buy underpowered laptops because they're cheapers), they're also significantly less powerful.
Say an average OEM laptop is $750, and we'll use the current mid-range 15" macbook pro ($2000). You'll probably have to replace that OEM laptop every two years, because it'll probably either break, or become too obsolete. So that's a total of 3x750= $2250.
That's $250 more, along with the pain of having to back up and transfer all of your files and settings. Not to mention a horrible warranty service (two years full coverage? Even if you payed for it, you'll have to pester the company to get it) and awful customer service. Keep in mind that doesn't apply to all OEM's, but most of them are just like that. Apple, however, actually uses english-speaking americans for their tech support in the US.
Also, keep in mind that I am referring to LAPTOPS here. I personally would never buy a desktop from an OEM unless I was putting together a computer lab for a school/company (which I'll have to do here in about 6 months for my local high school). I can do a fine job building my own computers, so I'll happily stick to doing just that. But for laptops, Apple offers a really good quality laptop for a comparatively reasonable price.
Take PNY and EVGA for example. PNY makes sub-par graphics cards. They may perform just as well as an EVGA, but they won't last as long. EVGA has better quality control standards, and their product line shows this.
So who manufactures mac's Intel and Nvidia products?
Quote from Toasty27 »
To top it all off, the average Macbook Pro has enough power under the hood to last an average consumer a good 6 years. In contrast, while the average OEM laptop is much cheaper (take note that most people tend to buy underpowered laptops because they're cheapers), they're also significantly less powerful.
I *HAVE* a 5 year old macbook pro. Netbooks run faster than this POS, and their screen size is damn near the same >.<
Quote from Toasty27 »
Say an average OEM laptop is $750, and we'll use the current mid-range 15" macbook pro ($2000). You'll probably have to replace that OEM laptop every two years, because it'll probably either break, or become too obsolete. So that's a total of 3x750= $2250.
Spend $1,500 or even $1,750 on a non-mac laptop and enjoy more horse power and a bigger screen that will last just as long while saving you $250-500.
And I can 100% assure you that if you spent $2,000 on a macbook pro today, in 3 years a $1,000 PC laptop will blow it out of the water. I currently own a Toshiba laptop, 19" screen, Intel i7 (yes i7) with a dedicated mobile nvidia card with 512MB graphics memory, 6GB ram and a 500GB HD. $970 after tax.
Macbook pro 17" start (START!) at $2,200. Bump it up to an i7, and it's already at $2,500. In 3 years when your mac is "still running strong" I'll just grab another $1,000 laptop that smears an i7 into the ground and still be $500 ahead of the game. Oh, and that's just a 17" screen. God knows what apple would charge for a 19"
A 15" macbook pro with an i7 starts at $2,200 btw. Oh, you wan't an HD screen? Another $150.
A 15" macbook pro with an i5 starts at $2,000.
A Toshiba laptop with identical specs, $670.
Windows. No contest.
Macs used to have the edge when it came to graphics, but they lost that. Honestly, I think of Macs of being nothing more than a over priced paper weight.
Linux, I've heard good things I've heard bad things. But I still like Windows better.
You sound like you've never even used OS X or Linux. : |
Used them both.
I've had to use Mac for a fair number of things over the years. Everytime I use it, I hate it.
I had to use it as far back as about ohhh....10 years ago or so. Hated it then. Had to use it through 3/4 of my school years. Hated it.I had to use one a couple months ago. Hated it.
Linux, has some good and some bad. Its not terrible, but I still like Windows abit better.
Even though i use a macbook and have windows 7 ultimate on boot camp if you learn how to use emulators well then linux will be far superior then mac and windows because of
So who manufactures mac's Intel and Nvidia products?
The only intel products in Macs are manufactured by Intel, because only Intel manufactures Intel products. I don't know who makes the rest of their hardware (I'm sure I could easily find out), but I know it's of better quality than stuff from either Dell, HP, or Acer (the three biggest PC OEM's at the moment), and that's all that matters.
Quote from ButtChew »
I *HAVE* a 5 year old macbook pro. Netbooks run faster than this POS, and their screen size is damn near the same >.<
Was referring to modern Apple laptops, obviously. What's the cpu on your old macbook?
Quote from ButtChew »
Spend $1,500 or even $1,750 on a non-mac laptop and enjoy more horse power and a bigger screen that will last just as long while saving you $250-500.
And I can 100% assure you that if you spent $2,000 on a macbook pro today, in 3 years a $1,000 PC laptop will blow it out of the water. I currently own a Toshiba laptop, 19" screen, Intel i7 (yes i7) with a dedicated mobile nvidia card with 512MB graphics memory, 6GB ram and a 500GB HD. $970 after tax.
Macbook pro 17" start (START!) at $2,200. Bump it up to an i7, and it's already at $2,500. In 3 years when your mac is "still running strong" I'll just grab another $1,000 laptop that smears an i7 into the ground and still be $500 ahead of the game. Oh, and that's just a 17" screen. God knows what apple would charge for a 19"
A 15" macbook pro with an i7 starts at $2,200 btw. Oh, you wan't an HD screen? Another $150.
A 15" macbook pro with an i5 starts at $2,000.
A Toshiba laptop with identical specs, $670.
Just by looking at and picking up a macbook, I can feel how good the build quality is. The shell is sturdy, the hinge is sturdy, and they have a very nice minimalistic look to them. That's what the average end-user is looking for. They also all have built in bluetooth, wifi b/g/n (more laptops are setting n as standard, though on many its still an upgrade), a [good] video camera, a mic, and a multi-touch trackpad (though I'll admit some manufacturers are including similar features for their trackpads).
Though more importantly than all of that, the warranty and customer service is far better than most other companies.
I'm aware you can get better deals elsewhere, and I consider Toshiba to be one of the best computer manufacturers I've come across. I was quite pleased with the build quality of the laptop I picked out for my sister for Christmas. However, every [modern] Mac I've come across has had a level of build quality and feel even greater than that.
You can call it personal preference if you want, but Apple makes good products. That's why they sell. The tolerances to which they have their components built and machined is definitely greater than that of their competition, and it shows.
I don't know who makes the rest of their hardware (I'm sure I could easily find out), but I know it's of better quality than stuff from either Dell, HP, or Acer (the three biggest PC OEM's at the moment), and that's all that matters.
You "just know"? You don't know. You are purely speculating.
Quote from Toasty27 »
Was referring to modern Apple laptops, obviously.
You claim that macbook pro's will last 5+ years running perfectly. If you bought a macbook pro today, it would not be modern in 5 years.
Quote from Toasty27 »
Just by looking at and picking up a macbook, I can feel how good the build quality is.The shell is sturdy, the hinge is sturdy, and they have a very nice minimalistic look to them. That's what the average end-user is looking for. They also all have built in bluetooth, wifi b/g/n (more laptops are setting n as standard, though on many its still an upgrade), a [good] video camera, a mic, and a multi-touch trackpad (though I'll admit some manufacturers are including similar features for their trackpads)
Are you kidding me? Those featuers are worth over $1,300? Lets break them down while we're at it:
My toshiba has a sturdy hinge, it has bluetooth, wireless N and a 3.2 megapixel camera (and omg yes it has a mic!). I can pinch and multi-touch my trackpad too! Modern technology is amazing! Besides the unibody metal frame of the macbook, you haven't mentioned anything that isn't available with other laptops of today.
Quote from Toasty27 »
Though more importantly than all of that, the warranty and customer service is far better than most other companies.
Oh, warranty and customer service? I'm sure it's nice, because it costs $350. If you don't pay the 350, you can only get phone support for 90 days. Wahooo! Oh, and this "more important justification warranty" doesn't even include accidental damages.The big OEM's come with at least a year of phone support if you buy no warranty at all, and their warranties (if bought) will replace your entire laptop even if you spill coffee on it or run it over with a car.
Quote from Toasty27 »
You can call it personal preference if you want, but Apple makes good products.
It is personal preference, and I never said they make bad products. They are OVER PRICED products.
15" Macbook Pro with an i5 processor: $2,000 ($2,350 with the applecare)
Identical stats or better Toshiba: $670 ($250 for 3 years including accidental damage).
I'm sorry, but 90 days of phone support, a metal body, blutooth/wireless-n and good camera aren't worth $1,300. I can't think of anything else you are getting out of them besides a "good looking" computer. When it comes to laptops, at least for me, performance > looks.
Yea "dog".
Why should anyone have learn, let a lone WANT to learn all this 'sudo bash apt-get update' etc etc, when it could be as easy as "double click this .exe file and follow the prompts"
One shouldn't need to learn a whole new jargon *just* to get a friggin program installed.
most people have better things to do in life like for example, having a life.
Falling into lava pool (lucky you have a bucket of water); 4 hearts,
Telling a hissing creeper "No!" - priceless.
To start, Windows works with everything. You will be very hard pressed to find an application that does not work on Windows. That is the single biggest reason for its wide spread use. This wide spread use, about 400 million world wide, means lots of viruses. There is plenty of software to combat them, but they are still a threat now and again. If you use Windows long enough, you will probably get a virus in one shape or another.
The search feature on Windows7 and Vista is amazing. Just press the Windows Key and type the name of a folder, file, or program. I love it.
Installing new programs for Windows is idiot proof. You either unzip a file into "Program Files" or you run a *.exe or *.msi file.
Most people know what Windows 7 looks like, and how to use it. There are programs that can change things, like Mac-Dock emulators and Rain Meter.
Windows7's Paint program is also amazing. It is very simple, so dedicated artist will prefer Photoshop or GIMP, but if your needs are basic there is no better.
Windows7 needs about 20 GB of HDD space to install and run properly.
I can only speak for Ubuntu 10.04, but the core themes in Linux distros does not change much. Depending on your exact needs and abilities, you might prefer a different distro. Ubuntu uses a desktop environment called Gnome, which is very different than Windows. If you are use to Windows, which most people are, it will take a little adjustment to get use to it. Other distros use KDE(?), which in effect looks like Windows 7. Linux too has Dock emulators. My two favorite parts of Gnome are the Cube and the jelly-windows. The cube gives you 6 desktops to work with. They all show the same files - from the Desktop Folder - but they show different windows. It makes organizing a lot of windows very easy. The jelly-windows, not sure what they are actually called, make windows bounce back and forth when moved. This does not add to productivity, but it is fun. After using it for so long, Windows7 feels very stiff and cold.
Linux has issues running things. While C/C++ code can be compiled for Linux, it has to be done differently than Windows and it cannot include any of M$'s libraries: DirectX, .NET, etc. An executable from Windows will not work on Linux. Ever. It is part of the design of the operating system, and would be more trouble than it's work to fix. Most of the big retail games do not run on Linux. You cannot run Starcraft. Black Ops, or TF2 on Linux. Some games have Linux ports, but they are scarce. There is something called Wine which tries to emulate the Windows environment, but I have never used it.
Installing things in Linux is not idiot proof. If its in the "repositories", you can just type sudo apt-get install **** in Terminal - which is an amazing piece of technology, albeit confusing to people new to computers. Windows let command prompt die. :/ If the program is not in the repositories, installation can be confusing. Sometimes they have an installer file, sometimes they come in a compressed file. I find it very confusing, but I have much to learn.
Linux comes with everything. It comes with Firefox. It comes with GIMP. It comes with the equivalent of Microsoft Office. And all of this requires about 4-6 GB to run smoothly.
Linus's paint sucks. It is terrible. It makes me cry. GIMP is too complex for most of my needs. It is akin to rabbit hunting with a 50 caliber sniper.
As I have used Windows7 on my computer for about a year, it has slowed down. It takes a lot longer to run the same operations than it does on Linux. Linux might slow down, I do not know.
The last time I touched a mac was in 2003. I know Macs are different than Windows, so if you are use to one you will have to adapt. Mac computers are expensive as ****. Easily twice their Windows equivalent. Linux is a free Operating System which you should be able to install on any computer with enough space.
Personally, I like Linux. It is free and easy to get around. There are only a few things I miss from Windows 7: The search function, M$Paint, and compatibility. Wine might solve the latter, and I am sure there is some freeware somewhere to solve the other two problems.
But if you ever want to play SC, TF2, or Black Ops on Stream / Battle.net, Windows is your OS.
If you ever want to get into an artistic field - Graphic Design, Photography, etc - then Mac is your OS.
This is just kind of vomit on paper, so excuse the terrible structure.
Just... God, people like you make me want to kill myself. Or kill you.
Wow, so affected by something so insignificant. Talk about black & white thinking!
Falling into lava pool (lucky you have a bucket of water); 4 hearts,
Telling a hissing creeper "No!" - priceless.
LOLOLOLOLOLOLLOL
Before Windows7, the appeal of an Mac style operation system was tempting. Win7 is amazing though, and it doesn't limit what I can do both hardware and software wise. Can't say the same for either Mac or Linux.
All you Linux fanboi's can get stuffed. There is no universal distro that will run 100% of anything you want to run on a linux computer. Not without a ton of headaches. Lets also not forget gaming sucks just slightly less than a Mac does.
Right of the bat, I consider Linux>Mac OS X>>>>>>>>>Windows 7>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>older windows
I also triple boot all three OSes on my personally built PC.
Apple makes great products, and OS X is actually a very nice OS to use. When you buy apple, you're paying for quality, that's why it costs more. However, the Mac Pro desktop is another story. That machine is truly a massive waste of money with poor configuration options and a horrible markup on all of its parts.
Though to that end, Apple is only guilty of what every other PC manufacturer is guilty of: Charging you for building the computer (which is why I build my own). The only difference between Apple and companies like Dell/etc. (and this is actually quite a significant difference) is that if you buy a Mac, you're more likely to spend less money in the end because it's going to last you a really long time (with VERY few exceptions). If you're like a friend of mine, and you use your laptop for everything from gaming to functioning as a temporary server, then get the extended warranty. For about $300 more, he got a whole new computer after about 2.5 years of use.
I'll still buy laptops from OEM's, but for desktops, I'll build my own. Though on that note, regarding laptops, Toshiba, ASUS, and Sony VAIO laptops all tend to have fewer problems than Macs (tbh, I'm not sure why). Though even then, Apple has, by far, the most superior tech support and warranty service of the four.
tl;dr Apple's more expensive because they make good computers (Mac Pro desktop sucks).
Yes, but even though PC stands for 'Personal Computer' its still accepted as a reference to a non-Mac computer, and is used alot. Thats why threads are always 'PC vs MAC', not 'Non-apple branded computer VS Mac'. Anyways i choose windows because after using Macs for a bit now, ive come to hate them, very, very much.
That's a load of bull. They practically use all PC parts... intel, nvidia, etc, etc. There is nothing special out their hardware, and if your priced out a Mac desktop piece by piece via Newegg you would be ASTOUNDED at the price difference. FYI it's a lot more than $300 to build a comparible Mac vs. PC. A lot more.
And to say you'll spend less on a Mac than a PC is ridiculous. I had my last PC for 3+ years without an upgrade. But guess what, I was able to upgrade it when I wanted to. Updated processor and video card, BAM! Good to go for another 1+ years. Try upgrading your Mac.
Macs are over-priced, you aren't saving any money unless you are computer retarded and can't maintain a PC. And having worked on Macs all through school, I've seen many many many crashes. Macs don't need as much maintenance, but when they are used and pushed to their limits they are just as bad as Windows in my experience. All computers need maintaining.
Examples?
I upgraded my RAM on my mac.
No, it's not bull. Not all motherboards or graphics cards are created equal. Same goes for every other component in a computer other than the processor, as Intel and AMD are the only major manufacturers for CPU's and they both make good quality equipment.
Take PNY and EVGA for example. PNY makes sub-par graphics cards. They may perform just as well as an EVGA, but they won't last as long. EVGA has better quality control standards, and their product line shows this.
Also, take note that when I said "You'll end up spending less on a mac" I was referring to the Mac Pro desktop. I was mainly referring to their laptops, though this still holds true for their iMac desktops (to an extent. Though when it comes to a lab of computers, it's quite apparent that the TCO for an Apple-based lab is less than that of a PC-based lab).
To top it all off, the average Macbook Pro has enough power under the hood to last an average consumer a good 6 years. In contrast, while the average OEM laptop is much cheaper (take note that most people tend to buy underpowered laptops because they're cheapers), they're also significantly less powerful.
Say an average OEM laptop is $750, and we'll use the current mid-range 15" macbook pro ($2000). You'll probably have to replace that OEM laptop every two years, because it'll probably either break, or become too obsolete. So that's a total of 3x750= $2250.
That's $250 more, along with the pain of having to back up and transfer all of your files and settings. Not to mention a horrible warranty service (two years full coverage? Even if you payed for it, you'll have to pester the company to get it) and awful customer service. Keep in mind that doesn't apply to all OEM's, but most of them are just like that. Apple, however, actually uses english-speaking americans for their tech support in the US.
Also, keep in mind that I am referring to LAPTOPS here. I personally would never buy a desktop from an OEM unless I was putting together a computer lab for a school/company (which I'll have to do here in about 6 months for my local high school). I can do a fine job building my own computers, so I'll happily stick to doing just that. But for laptops, Apple offers a really good quality laptop for a comparatively reasonable price.
So who manufactures mac's Intel and Nvidia products?
I *HAVE* a 5 year old macbook pro. Netbooks run faster than this POS, and their screen size is damn near the same >.<
Spend $1,500 or even $1,750 on a non-mac laptop and enjoy more horse power and a bigger screen that will last just as long while saving you $250-500.
And I can 100% assure you that if you spent $2,000 on a macbook pro today, in 3 years a $1,000 PC laptop will blow it out of the water. I currently own a Toshiba laptop, 19" screen, Intel i7 (yes i7) with a dedicated mobile nvidia card with 512MB graphics memory, 6GB ram and a 500GB HD. $970 after tax.
Macbook pro 17" start (START!) at $2,200. Bump it up to an i7, and it's already at $2,500. In 3 years when your mac is "still running strong" I'll just grab another $1,000 laptop that smears an i7 into the ground and still be $500 ahead of the game. Oh, and that's just a 17" screen. God knows what apple would charge for a 19"
A 15" macbook pro with an i7 starts at $2,200 btw. Oh, you wan't an HD screen? Another $150.
A 15" macbook pro with an i5 starts at $2,000.
A Toshiba laptop with identical specs, $670.
Used them both.
I've had to use Mac for a fair number of things over the years. Everytime I use it, I hate it.
I had to use it as far back as about ohhh....10 years ago or so. Hated it then. Had to use it through 3/4 of my school years. Hated it.I had to use one a couple months ago. Hated it.
Linux, has some good and some bad. Its not terrible, but I still like Windows abit better.
speed
safety
reliability
and if you learn how to use emulators
the ability to run the most programs.
The only intel products in Macs are manufactured by Intel, because only Intel manufactures Intel products. I don't know who makes the rest of their hardware (I'm sure I could easily find out), but I know it's of better quality than stuff from either Dell, HP, or Acer (the three biggest PC OEM's at the moment), and that's all that matters.
Was referring to modern Apple laptops, obviously. What's the cpu on your old macbook?
Just by looking at and picking up a macbook, I can feel how good the build quality is. The shell is sturdy, the hinge is sturdy, and they have a very nice minimalistic look to them. That's what the average end-user is looking for. They also all have built in bluetooth, wifi b/g/n (more laptops are setting n as standard, though on many its still an upgrade), a [good] video camera, a mic, and a multi-touch trackpad (though I'll admit some manufacturers are including similar features for their trackpads).
Though more importantly than all of that, the warranty and customer service is far better than most other companies.
I'm aware you can get better deals elsewhere, and I consider Toshiba to be one of the best computer manufacturers I've come across. I was quite pleased with the build quality of the laptop I picked out for my sister for Christmas. However, every [modern] Mac I've come across has had a level of build quality and feel even greater than that.
You can call it personal preference if you want, but Apple makes good products. That's why they sell. The tolerances to which they have their components built and machined is definitely greater than that of their competition, and it shows.
You "just know"? You don't know. You are purely speculating.
You claim that macbook pro's will last 5+ years running perfectly. If you bought a macbook pro today, it would not be modern in 5 years.
Are you kidding me? Those featuers are worth over $1,300? Lets break them down while we're at it:
My toshiba has a sturdy hinge, it has bluetooth, wireless N and a 3.2 megapixel camera (and omg yes it has a mic!). I can pinch and multi-touch my trackpad too! Modern technology is amazing! Besides the unibody metal frame of the macbook, you haven't mentioned anything that isn't available with other laptops of today.
Oh, warranty and customer service? I'm sure it's nice, because it costs $350. If you don't pay the 350, you can only get phone support for 90 days. Wahooo! Oh, and this "more important justification warranty" doesn't even include accidental damages.The big OEM's come with at least a year of phone support if you buy no warranty at all, and their warranties (if bought) will replace your entire laptop even if you spill coffee on it or run it over with a car.
It is personal preference, and I never said they make bad products. They are OVER PRICED products.
15" Macbook Pro with an i5 processor: $2,000 ($2,350 with the applecare)
Identical stats or better Toshiba: $670 ($250 for 3 years including accidental damage).
I'm sorry, but 90 days of phone support, a metal body, blutooth/wireless-n and good camera aren't worth $1,300. I can't think of anything else you are getting out of them besides a "good looking" computer. When it comes to laptops, at least for me, performance > looks.