How can you not buy a macbook?

[BoberFett]

Macs are for the marketing department. The rest of the company that actually accomplishes something worthwhile is on Windows. When the marketing department wants to communicate with the rest of the company, they do it in terminal session of... you guessed it... Windows. I'll leave it at that.

 

[darkswordsman17]

Originally posted by: mafia

What do you think of Sony Vaio labtops?

I haven't used them personally, so I can't really say. They do offer some interesting models, but they were fairly expensive for anything that I was interested in, and weren't rated for very good battery life so I passed. It doesn't seem that some of the better models they've made are no longer available or else were very expensive.

 

[coldmeat]

I was shopping for a laptop a little while back and almost bought a Vaio, but the poor battery life turned me off. It supposedly only got about 1.5hours.

 

[Train]

Originally posted by: BoberFett
Macs are for the marketing department. The rest of the company that actually accomplishes something worthwhile is on Windows. When the marketing department wants to communicate with the rest of the company, they do it in terminal session of... you guessed it... Windows. I'll leave it at that.

Ya one of our clients is always telling us how awesome they are since thier office went to MAC. But the funny thing is they spend most of thier day in Windows via parallels just so they can get things done. Sometimes I feel as though they want me to believe windows on a MAC is somehow better than windows on a regular PC.

 

[lifeobry]

I'm bored. Thusly I rant. At length. With no particular purpose in mind.

Macs are nice. This is not in dispute. They have good build quality, look good, and perform decently. However, what is in dispute is the price/performance ratio. What are you getting for your hard earned dollar?

You first have to think about: what are you going to use the computer for? If you're like "most" people, the extent of what you will be doing is:

The Laptop Functions

1. Internets (email, facebook, google, flash-laden sites, news, youtube, twatter, porn, etc.)
2. Listen to music (Winamp? iTunes?)
3. Watch some DVDs (WMP)
4. Watch media files (?)
5. Look at pictures/manage pictures (?)
6. Work (Microsoft Office?)

That will cover almost all laptop users. Desktop users may have additional possible criteria, possibly:

1. "Work" or Work (Photoshop? Video editing, FCP? Avid? Multitrack recording? Pro-tools? Logic? Nuendo?)
2. Games (CRYSIS OH YEA)
3. Programming? (I dunno, I don't know about that advanced compooter stuff)

So when you get a computer, you have to ask yourself: will it do what I want it to do?

The fact of the matter is that, the cheapest $300 PC shitbox will sufficiently do everything in the laptop category easily. A $300 laptop will do the same, albeit very... slowly. So you move up to a $500 box. Better. And a $500 laptop. Alright now we're moving along to "tolerable". This is all assuming the computers are "streamlined" (removing programs, disabling start-up items, etc.)

So the reality is that you can get a PC laptop for ~$500 that will do readily and easily everything in the laptop category.

So now we get to the MacBook.

It is $999. Spec-wise it is comparable to a $500 laptop. So what are we getting for the extra $500 spent? Can we do anything w/the macbook that the PC can't? No. Does it do anything particularly better than the PC? Not really. I mean when you're interneting, DVD-ing and stuff, there is not much room for improvement.

So why would you spend twice as much for something that does the same, exact thing? A couple possible reasons in my mind:

1. Coolness (debatable)
2. Virus/Spyware insusceptibility (valid point, most people can get infected easily with a PC)
3. Build quality (I'll give it that)
4. ???

If those factors are worth it to you, then by all means, Mac away. But for me and others, those just do not seem to justify spending literally TWICE as much for the same thing. And it is essentially the same thing if it can do the same functions with the same performance.

As for Mac Desktops...

The base iMac is $1500. This is for pretty respectable specs, 24" screen, 4GB ram, Core 2 Duo processor, decent HDD space, etc.

I tire of this pointless analysis, so it's sufficient to say that one could build a TOTALLY KICK-ASS PC with $1500. And it would be able to play games.

In conclusion:

Mac laptops = Kinda cool, kinda pricey
Mac desktops = Dumb

 

[Crono]

Originally posted by: lifeobry
I'm bored. Thusly I rant. At length. With no particular purpose in mind.

Macs are nice. This is not in dispute. They have good build quality, look good, and perform decently. However, what is in dispute is the price/performance ratio. What are you getting for your hard earned dollar?

You first have to think about: what are you going to use the computer for? If you're like "most" people, the extent of what you will be doing is:

The Laptop Functions

1. Internets (email, facebook, google, flash-laden sites, news, youtube, twatter, porn, etc.)
2. Listen to music (Winamp? iTunes?)
3. Watch some DVDs (WMP)
4. Watch media files (?)
5. Look at pictures/manage pictures (?)
6. Work (Microsoft Office?)

That will cover almost all laptop users. Desktop users may have additional possible criteria, possibly:

1. "Work" or Work (Photoshop? Video editing, FCP? Avid? Multitrack recording? Pro-tools? Logic? Nuendo?)
2. Games (CRYSIS OH YEA)
3. Programming? (I dunno, I don't know about that advanced compooter stuff)

So when you get a computer, you have to ask yourself: will it do what I want it to do?

The fact of the matter is that, the cheapest $300 PC shitbox will sufficiently do everything in the laptop category easily. A $300 laptop will do the same, albeit very... slowly. So you move up to a $500 box. Better. And a $500 laptop. Alright now we're moving along to "tolerable". This is all assuming the computers are "streamlined" (removing programs, disabling start-up items, etc.)

So the reality is that you can get a PC laptop for ~$500 that will do readily and easily everything in the laptop category.

So now we get to the MacBook.

It is $999. Spec-wise it is comparable to a $500 laptop. So what are we getting for the extra $500 spent? Can we do anything w/the macbook that the PC can't? No. Does it do anything particularly better than the PC? Not really. I mean when you're interneting, DVD-ing and stuff, there is not much room for improvement.

So why would you spend twice as much for something that does the same, exact thing? A couple possible reasons in my mind:

1. Coolness (debatable)
2. Virus/Spyware insusceptibility (valid point, most people can get infected easily with a PC)
3. Build quality (I'll give it that)
4. ???

If those factors are worth it to you, then by all means, Mac away. But for me and others, those just do not seem to justify spending literally TWICE as much for the same thing. And it is essentially the same thing if it can do the same functions with the same performance.

As for Mac Desktops...

The base iMac is $1500. This is for pretty respectable specs, 24" screen, 4GB ram, Core 2 Duo processor, decent HDD space, etc.

I tire of this pointless analysis, so it's sufficient to say that one could build a TOTALLY KICK-ASS PC with $1500. And it would be able to play games.

In conclusion:

Mac laptops = Kinda cool, kinda pricey
Mac desktops = Dumb

You win for fairest comparison.

 

[Martin]

Originally posted by: BoberFett
Macs are for the marketing department. The rest of the company that actually accomplishes something worthwhile is on Windows. When the marketing department wants to communicate with the rest of the company, they do it in terminal session of... you guessed it... Windows. I'll leave it at that.

Quite the opposite at work actually. Our work PCs are all ubuntu, but everyone (that is, developers) that brings their laptops has a macbook since its still a *nix, but without the bullshit hassles.

 

[jagec]

One. Button. Mouse.

On what is, ultimately, a one-button OS.

That would be like buying an automatic sports car. Some people like it, but those people should not be allowed to breed.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: loki8481
looking at the price tag makes walking away much easier.

this, and i don't envy having to buy a new mini-, micro-, nano-, pico- (by 2011--you can put it in the bank, son) display port ADAPTER every year...for $30 a pop, b/c there is no other option.

 

[n yusef]

Without debating software: Mac laptops are more expensive, but they are the more portable and have better battery life than other brands (the only exceptions are boutique Windows laptops which carry similar price premiums). To me, this is worth it. I wouldn't get one of their desktops, though.

 

[nutxo]

I run OSX on my pc so all my hardware can run 75% as fast as it does in windows.

 

[n yusef]

Originally posted by: jagec
One. Button. Mouse.

On what is, ultimately, a one-button OS.

That would be like buying an automatic sports car. Some people like it, but those people should not be allowed to breed.

The current-gen Macbook Pros have a two-finger right click, and you can assign right click to the bottom right or left of the trackpad or use any external two-button mouse. This was once a legitimate complaint, but it's not anymore.

 

[Crono]

Is Apple working on a netbook? If they priced it right, they could do to the netbook market what they did to the mp3 player market.

Nvm. They probably wouldn't go for the low profit on netbooks. "Air" seems to be as close as they want to get.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: mafia

Originally posted by: halik

WTF is crysis?

Exactly.. you have no argument at all. Mac boy

Oh google says it's a game of some sort.


I think the point you're missing is that most people don't play games on their computers (laptops in particular) and some miniscule hardware differences are hardly the selling point. I would argue that you can't even tell the difference between 2.3 and 2.5ghz processor in a double blind test, much less to have it as *the* selling point for a laptop.

Hell I've got a geforce 8600 in this thing and I'd much rather have the video card from my old G5. I can't tell any difference between the two and this thing is loud as hell.

....


say what you will about gaming, but it is a $4 Billion Industry. This fact alone makes the rest of your opinion laughable, whatever it is, as I suddenly have no reason to continue reading your post ofter the first statement.

(and I'm not much of a "gamer," myself.)

Most Mac users, meaning 3% of the industry, may not play games, ...but you're ignoring the actual computer market when you make that comment.

....just so you know.

 

[lxskllr]

Originally posted by: Crono
Is Apple working on a netbook? If they priced it right, they could do to the netbook market what they did to the mp3 player market.

Sell the equivalent feature set at twice the price?

 

[Kev]

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: mafia

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: mafia

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: mafia

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: KeypoX

Originally posted by: uclaLabrat
Yeah, I think it's fairly well explained. Macs are nice, sure, if you don't mind paying 60-100% more than you need to for the same amount of computing power. Then again, if you buy your PC's based on the fact that they're "thin and shiny/sleek" then you have other problems....but if it works for you, then by all means, go ahead.

lol... "I ll buy anything shinny and made by apple "

Eh honda civic will get you from A to B too, but people still buy Porsches...

Just like with everything in life, good industrial design, UI and materials go for premium money.

Please don't compare Macs to Porsches! And PCs to Civics. Come on? I think its the other way around. Buying a Mac is like buying a Honda Civic for the price of a Carrera GT. On the other hand, buying a PC is like buying a Honda Civic, but getting a Porsche in return. Way more powerful, play lots more games, and at the forefront of CPU and Graphic Card tech.

Uhhh that argument doesn't work - macs are obviously considered premium goods compared to say dell laptops given the cost alone. Same thing goes for the construction (aluminum frame, skin vs plastic).

People pay more for premium stuff, it's as simple as that. Ford sells the same car as both lincoln and ford, lexus does the same thing with the ES.

But Porsches are fast. How often do you see a Mac playing Crysis?

WTF is crysis?

Exactly.. you have no argument at all. Mac boy

Oh google says it's a game of some sort.


I think the point you're missing is that most people don't play games on their computers (laptops in particular) and some miniscule hardware differences are hardly the selling point. I would argue that you can't even tell the difference between 2.3 and 2.5ghz processor in a double blind test, much less to have it as *the* selling point for a laptop.

Hell I've got a geforce 8600 in this thing and I'd much rather have the video card from my old G5. I can't tell any difference between the two and this thing is loud as hell.

you've been on this forum for 9 years??????

 

[jagec]

Originally posted by: n yusef

Originally posted by: jagec
One. Button. Mouse.

On what is, ultimately, a one-button OS.

That would be like buying an automatic sports car. Some people like it, but those people should not be allowed to breed.

The current-gen Macbook Pros have a two-finger right click, and you can assign right click to the bottom right or left of the trackpad or use any external two-button mouse. This was once a legitimate complaint, but it's not anymore.

And automatic cars have manual mode, but that doesn't mean that the ultimate architecture isn't set up for a certain system and feels cobbled together and worthless to anyone who has actually done it the right way.

 

[Fear No Evil]

Originally posted by: n yusef

Originally posted by: jagec
One. Button. Mouse.

On what is, ultimately, a one-button OS.

That would be like buying an automatic sports car. Some people like it, but those people should not be allowed to breed.

The current-gen Macbook Pros have a two-finger right click, and you can assign right click to the bottom right or left of the trackpad or use any external two-button mouse. This was once a legitimate complaint, but it's not anymore.

I need to use TWO fingers to do a right click?

 

[OCGuy]

lol @ mac fanbois.

 

[KeithTalent]

The only people I know with Macs are women and/or teachers. I'm neither of those things, so won't be buying one unless something major changes in my life.

KT

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: mafia

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: mafia
I have nothing to say. You worship Steve Jobs to much and the outside world has been censored. Just like the folks in iNorth iKorea

Hah you're ~15 years old.

I use the best tool for the job and my productivity is the highest on OSX. It's got nothing to do with Steve Jobs or shiny things, the OSX just gets outta my way and I still get bash all open source ports. It's all of the upside of Linux, but w/o having to fuck around with everything before it works.

How so? Do you know how to count? My B-Day is in 91 so that makes me 17. I guess your too old to even count or know what true power is. Sure OSX is more 'user friendly', but like the analogies we pointed out earlier, who buys a Porsche because its more practical? PCs are for people who have passion for computing and don't need any of that iCrap mumble jumbo stuff. lol

The statement about your age was prompted by what you said, rather than your user profie... and I was pretty spot on.

you run out of arguments so you pick on someone for their age?




....you do realize that all you did was point out that a kid knows more about computers than you do, right?

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: n yusef

Originally posted by: jagec
One. Button. Mouse.

On what is, ultimately, a one-button OS.

That would be like buying an automatic sports car. Some people like it, but those people should not be allowed to breed.

The current-gen Macbook Pros have a two-finger right click, and you can assign right click to the bottom right or left of the trackpad or use any external two-button mouse. This was once a legitimate complaint, but it's not anymore.

it remains a legit complaint, as that faux-right click is hardly a real click. fails on me 43% of the time at work.

just b/c they implement it, doesn't make it right. They actually have to make it work, see?

 

[ric1287]

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: loki8481
looking at the price tag makes walking away much easier.

this, and i don't envy having to buy a new mini-, micro-, nano-, pico- (by 2011--you can put it in the bank, son) display port ADAPTER every year...for $30 a pop, b/c there is no other option.

maybe if you never heard of the internet, where paying $30 for cables isn't possible...or if you buy a new laptop every year

 

[n yusef]

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil
I need to use TWO fingers to do a right click?

Originally posted by: jagec
And automatic cars have manual mode, but that doesn't mean that the ultimate architecture isn't set up for a certain system and feels cobbled together and worthless to anyone who has actually done it the right way.

I'm using a MacBook Pro right now, and IMO, the two-finger-tap right-click, along with the other trackpad features are great. I've had Windows laptops (Thinkpad T60 was my most recent), and I have a desktop running Windows 7 and Ubuntu 9.04 right next to this laptop. As long as I'm not doing a non-OSX specific task, I prefer using the MBP, mostly because of the trackpad behaviors. You're free to disagree, but realize that your disagreement is that of opinion, not fact.

 

[silverpig]

I love my macbook pro. Yes, I do get 7.5 hrs of battery life. The other people in class are busy looking for plug in spots while I'm not even worried about it.