[APPLE] "Switch" One Year Later: No One Switched

[Eug]

In general, yes. Apple comptuers have fewer conflicts and are more stable than Windows/x86 machines. If you tossed OS X into the open hardware x86 world or put XP on a Mac-like closed hardware system then I think both OS's would come out about even. But there are millions of varitations of hardware, firmware, drivers, chipsets, etc., in the Win/x86 world that Windows has to attempt be compatible w/and it's just down right impossible for it to achieve a high level of stability and a low level of conflicts w/some many variables it has to deal with.

Yep. I noticed this myself with my own Windows hardware vs. my Mac hardware.

The Honda Civic Hybrids are much better than the Prius anyway (and they don't look so butt ugly). My girlfriend has one and avgs 50-55mpg.

See like a good car, but I'm not a big fan of Civics in general. Less comfortable than the Prius, too.

And Eug, why would you buy a hybrid car and "don't generally try too hard to drive to save gas"?

Why not? Because I like it, and because to drive to save gas in Toronto means p!ssing off all the other drivers anyway.

By the way, this car has much more pep and uses not much more than half the gas compared to my previous POS 1988 2 litre Ford Escort.

 

[OnetimeXP]

Originally posted by: Eug

I like the Apple=Sega theory. I'd rather see OS X on a PC than try to wade through the endless forms of Linux.

I disagree totally. The whole point of Apple's model is they make BOTH the hardware and the OS. Thus there are many less compatibility issues, etc. You buy a Mac and you KNOW everything on it is going to work if it's stock. They same cannot be said when you buy whitebox PCs and sometimes even name brand hardware.

[

You do know ECS manufactured Logic motherboards, as well as iBooks and iMacs. My ECS Desknote was made along side an iBook near China. Other Macs are manufactured at the same plant in Tiawan as Dell, HP, and other PC makers. Apple buys Samsung LCD's, like Dell or HP or whoever, an Airport has an AMD chipset. Apple "makes" nothing, they buy the same common parts that all computer manufacturers do and charge more for the OS and Apple brand name. You can read all about it in digitimes every day.

ECS actually sold the plant they made logic boards to Asus, but Asus is making the budget "AsRock" boards there and perhaps Logic boards as well.

I am open to any evidence that integration and quality are 'better', i.e why does OSX communicate better with Apples chipset than my AMD does with Via, or in what way is Apple ECS logic board of better quality than my MSI board. I don't think any believes ATI ot Nvidia put more R&D into Mac video cards/drivers.

Where exactly, as in specific examples, is this superior quality and intergration I often see mentioned? Does anyone honestly think an ECS Logic board is "better" than what every PC motherboard manufacturer makes? better than Asus, MSI, Abit, Intel??

Every time I ask "Mac people" this I get parroted rhetoric, like "Duh everybody knows it's better".. but no concrete examples.

I have a 1Ghz iMac on my desk next to my home built XP2500, I was Mac courious and took it as a trade in from a customer who wanted a PC. I've taken it apart and there's zero inside that screams quality, bad on-board audio/ average graphics, standard capisators, notebook RAM, regular PCB/resistors found on most any PC motherboard... but like I mentioned, evidence of superior anything is welcome because I don't see it.

 

[acemcmac]

Originally posted by: OnetimeXP
evidence of superior anything is welcome because I don't see it.

I spent almost a decade with them. Three weeks of curious investigation showed me a superior priceerformance ratio for an XP platform and I pessimistically devoted 200$ to building a rig. The success of that Celeron was so great in my benches and ease of use tests that now, after a decade on a mac, I can say that my life is 100% PC at last. There is no evidence to see, it all goes the other way... like the evidence exonerating OJ

 

[addragyn]

-Quality is as much a function of engineering as it is manufacturing. Apple's chipsets are designed by... Apple. OS X is designed by... Apple. PP970 was co-designed by... Apple.

-You don't think ECS builds to customer specification, regarding design & "quality"? The circular logic board in your iMac is evidence enough.

-This elusive "quality" is not just the parts. It's the whole system. Apple's LCDs are the first and so far only flat panels to be SWOP certified. (As parts of Remote Director.)

-There is also the QC process. That can also make a big difference. For example the ADMs in Xserve RAID are are firmware modified and individually tested. Big difference than the batch tested drives you or I can buy off the shelf. PS: The Xserve RAID is very price competitive to other FC RAID boxes.

---

Now I'm not saying Apple does any of this better or worse than anybody else. But to suggest that because *you* can't see the quality and some parts are outsourced to the same factories doesn't invalidate other variables.

BTW Apple has factories in Sacramento, California, Cork, Ireland, and Singapore.

Furhtermore to harp on about motherboards is to miss the forest for a tree. Apple is in the systems business, not the parts business.

 

[LethalWolfe]

Originally posted by: OnetimeXP

Originally posted by: Eug

I like the Apple=Sega theory. I'd rather see OS X on a PC than try to wade through the endless forms of Linux.

I disagree totally. The whole point of Apple's model is they make BOTH the hardware and the OS. Thus there are many less compatibility issues, etc. You buy a Mac and you KNOW everything on it is going to work if it's stock. They same cannot be said when you buy whitebox PCs and sometimes even name brand hardware.

[

I am open to any evidence that integration and quality are 'better', i.e why does OSX communicate better with Apples chipset than my AMD does with Via, or in what way is Apple ECS logic board of better quality than my MSI board. I don't think any believes ATI ot Nvidia put more R&D into Mac video cards/drivers.

Why does it communicate better in this example? Because the guys who code OS X know what mobo and chipset their OS is going to use and can tailor OS X to that hardware for improved performance. If you were working for MS how many mobo and chipset combonations would you have to take into consideration? And ATI and Nvidia probably have to put less R&D into Mac drivers because there are only a handful of mobos and chipsets that they have to worry about. I don't know this as fact or not, but it makes sense, IMO.

If you look at video editing hardware at or above the prosumer level and you will see fairly small recommend/certified hardware lists on the manufacturers website. Why? Because these companies know that their clients will chose editing systems that work very well, but have limited hardware choices, rather than those that work okay, but have a variety of hardware choices. If you are going to buy a Media Composer from Avid it's either gonna run on a PowerMac G4 or an HP XW8000 workstation.


Lethal

 

[OnetimeXP]

Originally posted by: addragyn
-Quality is as much a function of engineering as it is manufacturing. Apple's chipsets are designed by... Apple. OS X is designed by... Apple. PP970 was co-designed by... Apple.

-You don't think ECS builds to customer specification, regarding design & "quality"? The circular logic board in your iMac is evidence enough.

-This elusive "quality" is not just the parts. It's the whole system. Apple's LCDs are the first and so far only flat panels to be SWOP certified. (As parts of Remote Director.)

-There is also the QC process. That can also make a big difference. For example the ADMs in Xserve RAID are are firmware modified and individually tested. Big difference than the batch tested drives you or I can buy off the shelf. PS: The Xserve RAID is very price competitive to other FC RAID boxes.

---

Now I'm not saying Apple does any of this better or worse than anybody else. But to suggest that because *you* can't see the quality and some parts are outsourced to the same factories doesn't invalidate other variables.

BTW Apple has factories in Sacramento, California, Cork, Ireland, and Singapore.

Furhtermore to harp on about motherboards is to miss the forest for a tree. Apple is in the systems business, not the parts business.

I can't see it so I'm asking for evidence, again I have seen none.

"co-designed by Apple" says nothing about the quality, since you claim to know; what exactly was Apples contribution in the chip design anyway? what about the 970 is from Apples input?

How are the Apple engineers ideas 'superior' to those of AMD/Intel/Via?

How does Apple designing a chipset, assuming they did.. I've seen nothing to indicate it's all Apples design, that ECS builds make it better? better quality than Via or nividia?, I seriously doubt that assumption is true.

It's commonly known Apply buys other peoples parts, what part of a G4 or G5 is designed and manufactured by Apple and why is it of better quality than anything else?

It's a better quality myth, people tell themselves that to feel better about spending more.. and that's about it.

 

[OnetimeXP]

Originally posted by: LethalWolfe

Originally posted by: OnetimeXP

Originally posted by: Eug

I like the Apple=Sega theory. I'd rather see OS X on a PC than try to wade through the endless forms of Linux.

I disagree totally. The whole point of Apple's model is they make BOTH the hardware and the OS. Thus there are many less compatibility issues, etc. You buy a Mac and you KNOW everything on it is going to work if it's stock. They same cannot be said when you buy whitebox PCs and sometimes even name brand hardware.

[

I am open to any evidence that integration and quality are 'better', i.e why does OSX communicate better with Apples chipset than my AMD does with Via, or in what way is Apple ECS logic board of better quality than my MSI board. I don't think any believes ATI ot Nvidia put more R&D into Mac video cards/drivers.

Why does it communicate better in this example? Because the guys who code OS X know what mobo and chipset their OS is going to use and can tailor OS X to that hardware for improved performance.
Lethal

"Because the guys who code OS X know what mobo and chipset their OS is going to use"
So the "other guys" don't know?.. if thats what you're suggesting, it's laughable, sorry.

Show me performance examples or any example of why this is better or leads to better quality. Are you suggesting Apples design, assuming they designed it, is superior than the Sis MuTIOL? why, exactly, is a logic board running OSX better in any way than my MSI board running XP because of this?

Seems to me if Apples design was superior they wouldn't be borrowing AMD's hyperthreading, buts thats what Apples does.. they take a Samsung LCD, WD drive, ECS mobo, ATI video, and throw it in and Apple wrapping.

But go ahead and show me the performance gains and why it's better; articles, white papers.. things like that.

Saying it's better is one this, supporting that assumption is another.

 

[addragyn]

Please troll you own threads.

You made a anecdotal point and then argued it in the negative by claiming a lack of objective proof. Some of us *kindly* assumed you were just being curious and gave you some possible avenues to explore to learn more. Your reposnse it to repeat the same points again.

And then you repeatedly make points that because you don't know/haven't seen X then X doesn't exist. Do your own research instead of using ignorance as evidence. If you don't believe Apple didn't design their chipsets prove it, because you don't know does not disprove anything. It just proves you don't know.

Apple and IBM have both publicly stated they've been working on the 970 for YEARS. But again your point is that since you don't know anything about that it just can't be true.

You want broad general proof? Apple was the only company to get top ranking in Desktop, Server, and Notebook categories in the latest PC Magazine Satisfaction Survey. There, tops in all catergories from the people who matter and know - the customers.

You want specific access to Apple's bid specifications to ECS, or likely NDA'd information about PPC970 development. Good luck getting this kind of information from any company.

---

I'll say it again; Furhtermore to harp on about motherboards is to miss the forest for a tree. Apple is in the systems business, not the parts business.

---

"Because the guys who code OS X know what mobo and chipset their OS is going to use"
So the "other guys" don't know?.. if thats what you're suggesting, it's laughable, sorry.

What's laughable is how you completely missed the point. Even after an excellent example, allowed systems for an Avid DVW, clearly illustated it. Eliminate a variabe from a system(I mean this in the most general of ways) and that system is simpler. Add variables and complexity goes up and so does the margin for error. This definitely applies to software.

Seems to me if Apples design was superior they wouldn't be borrowing AMD's hyperthreading, buts thats what Apples does

Hyper-Threading is Intel technology.

You must be talking about HyperTransport?. Click. The. Link. Notice the logos on the right hand side. Notice the Apple 1 logo beneath AMD? Go to the about page. Find this quote.

Advanced Micro Devices, Alliance Semiconductors, Apple Computers, Broadcom Corporation, Cisco Systems, NVIDIA, PMC-Sierra, Sun Microsystems, and Transmeta are charter members and comprise the Executive Committee of the HyperTransport Technology Consortium.

I think you need better information.

---

Again making a bunch of anti-points does not an argument make.

 

[addragyn]

OnetimeXP: Hey if your not doing anything with that iMac would you be interested in selling it. I have an acquaintance who wants one. Email is in my profile. Thanks!

 

[LethalWolfe]

Originally posted by: addragyn
Please troll you own threads.

You made a anecdotal point and then argued it in the negative by claiming a lack of objective proof. Some of us *kindly* assumed you were just being curious and gave you some possible avenues to explore to learn more. Your reposnse it to repeat the same points again.

And then you repeatedly make points that because you don't know/haven't seen X then X doesn't exist. Do your own research instead of using ignorance as evidence. If you don't believe Apple didn't design their chipsets prove it, because you don't know does not disprove anything. It just proves you don't know.

Apple and IBM have both publicly stated they've been working on the 970 for YEARS. But again your point is that since you don't know anything about that it just can't be true.

You want broad general proof? Apple was the only company to get top ranking in Desktop, Server, and Notebook categories in the latest PC Magazine Satisfaction Survey. There, tops in all catergories from the people who matter and know - the customers.

You want specific access to Apple's bid specifications to ECS, or likely NDA'd information about PPC970 development. Good luck getting this kind of information from any company.

---

I'll say it again; Furhtermore to harp on about motherboards is to miss the forest for a tree. Apple is in the systems business, not the parts business.

---

"Because the guys who code OS X know what mobo and chipset their OS is going to use"
So the "other guys" don't know?.. if thats what you're suggesting, it's laughable, sorry.

What's laughable is how you completely missed the point. Even after an excellent example, allowed systems for an Avid DVW, clearly illustated it. Eliminate a variabe from a system(I mean this in the most general of ways) and that system is simpler. Add variables and complexity goes up and so does the margin for error. This definitely applies to software.

Seems to me if Apples design was superior they wouldn't be borrowing AMD's hyperthreading, buts thats what Apples does

Hyper-Threading is Intel technology.

You must be talking about HyperTransport?. Click. The. Link. Notice the logos on the right hand side. Notice the Apple 1 logo beneath AMD? Go to the about page. Find this quote.

Advanced Micro Devices, Alliance Semiconductors, Apple Computers, Broadcom Corporation, Cisco Systems, NVIDIA, PMC-Sierra, Sun Microsystems, and Transmeta are charter members and comprise the Executive Committee of the HyperTransport Technology Consortium.

I think you need better information.

---

Again making a bunch of anti-points does not an argument make.

Couldn't have said it better myself.


Lethal


EDIT: Felt like tossing in my 2 cents again.

"Because the guys who code OS X know what mobo and chipset their OS is going to use"
So the "other guys" don't know?.. if thats what you're suggesting, it's laughable, sorry.

No, they don't know. The guys coding software/firmware for the x86/Windows world have *no idea* what kind of hardware the end user will be running. None. Here is a list of companies selling motherboards for AMD procs currently at Newegg.
ABIT USA, ALBATRON USA, AOPEN, ASROCK, ASUS, BIOSTAR, CHAINTECH-EXCEL, INC., DFI, ECS, EPOX, FIC, GIGA BYTE, IWILL, LEADTEK, MATSONIC, MSI, PC CHIPS, SAPPHIRE TECHNOLOGY LIMITED, SHUTTLE, SOLTEK, SOYO, TYAN.

How are the guys writing the code supposed to know what hardware, and other software/firmware, their code will have to interact with? They can't. So the make the code generic enough to run okay on, hopefully, all the hardware. On the Mac side of things there are far, far, far, far, far fewer possible hardware combonations to take into consideration so time can be spent making sure the code runs very well on a narrow range of hardware as opposed to just okay on a wide range of hardware.


Lethal