So I see Macbooks are really super competitive in price...

[randomlinh]

Originally posted by: Chiropteran
To turn your example around, go spec a Macbook with specs equal to my $499 Vostro. I don't need more than a 1.9ghz dual core CPU. I don't need more than 1280X800 resolution. I don't need more than an 80GB hard drive, and I was fine with 1GB of RAM. Yet you can't match that laptop with a Mac no matter how hard you try.

There's a simple reason. Apple is not targeting you. And that's fine, it's a legitimate point. But it's been hashed out over and over that it's a market Apple has not decided to enter yet. So my guess is it's been left out here.

And why the hell did you buy a mac pro to learn the OS when you're issuing macbooks? Unless you plan on just virtualizing windows and making it your sole machine.. which would then put your price you felt the need to stick in pointless.

 

[rikadik]

The only way to settle this dispute is a fight to the death between Steve Jobs and Bill Gates.

They're allowed sticks.

Bill's stick will be a fairly uninteresting but nonetheless powerful stick that gets the job done, whereas Steve will be introducing the iStick, which is a stick, iPod and breakthrough internet device all in one. Unfortunately the iStick is in some ways style over substance, as Bill got a slightly bigger stick for the same amount of money. This would lead to Steve intially getting his ass handed to him by Bill. But then Bill will give half his stick to charity and the other half will be taken by antitrust lawyers leaving Bill with no stick. Steve will seize the moment and effortlessly bruise Bill whilst simultaneously listening to Coldplay and blogging about how much he likes the smell of his own farts. But then the iStick will run out of power and lo and behold he can't put a replacement battery inside.

In the end they both lie battered on the floor. They start to wonder what they were fighting about. Bill accepts that he would rather have a bigger stick for x amount of dollars with little regard for build quality and style, whilst Steve would rather have a smaller but sleaker and more solid iStick. They agree to disagree and go their seperate ways.

If Bill and Steve can see sense, so can you guys.

 

[randomlinh]

Originally posted by: rikadik
If Bill and Steve can see sense, so can you guys.

This is when Linus comes in with a modified walking stick he got from a group of campers that gave it to him. He proceeds to beat Bill and Steve while they are down and runs away laughing.

 

[Chiropteran]

Originally posted by: randomlinh
And why the hell did you buy a mac pro to learn the OS when you're issuing macbooks? Unless you plan on just virtualizing windows and making it your sole machine.. which would then put your price you felt the need to stick in pointless.

Because a Macbook, despite what the fanatics think, wouldn't be a valid replacement for my existing desktop. The Mac Pro can be. The advantage is having a single computer at my desk that can boot into Mac OS X, Vista, XP, or Linux. I could sorta do that on an Apple laptop but the drive space would be a limitation and the performance would be a downgrade, and I couldn't very easily add additional hard drives. In short, the Mac Pro is the *cheapest* Mac computer I could buy that would take 3+ hard drives... IMO that alone says a lot about how "affordable" and "price competative" Apple computers are, a $500 Dell could serve the same purpose except for the need to run Mac OS X.

Originally posted by: randomlinh
There's a simple reason. Apple is not targeting you. And that's fine, it's a legitimate point. But it's been hashed out over and over that it's a market Apple has not decided to enter yet. So my guess is it's been left out here.

Great, I'm glad we are in agreement.

My issue is with the OP's point of view, which is that apple computers are competitive in price. They aren't. They target a market of people that don't care so much about price.

 

[TheEarthWillShake]

Originally posted by: randomlinh

Originally posted by: rikadik
If Bill and Steve can see sense, so can you guys.

This is when Linus comes in with a modified walking stick he got from a group of campers that gave it to him. He proceeds to beat Bill and Steve while they are down and runs away laughing.

His modified stick would take hours to configure to use it and Bill and Steve walk away with ease.

 

[randomlinh]

Originally posted by: Chiropteran
Because a Macbook, despite what the fanatics think, wouldn't be a valid replacement for my existing desktop. The Mac Pro can be. The advantage is having a single computer at my desk that can boot into Mac OS X, Vista, XP, or Linux. I could sorta do that on an Apple laptop but the drive space would be a limitation and the performance would be a downgrade, and I couldn't very easily add additional hard drives. In short, the Mac Pro is the *cheapest* Mac computer I could buy that would take 3+ hard drives... IMO that alone says a lot about how "affordable" and "price competative" Apple computers are, a $500 Dell could serve the same purpose except for the need to run Mac OS X.

Ok, no one said a macbook is a replacement for a desktop. You have macbooks to support, it would seem you wouldn't need to get a full workstation to accomplish that, just another macbook. I got the impression you only had a few to support. Hell, even w/ mac pro's to support, I'm game with a macbook (wouldn't turn down the mac pro though..)

But this gets into another viewpoint, apple, IMO, is not suited for most enterprise/business type setups. There is no denying the Windows centric system that is in place, and playing nice w/ AD is not always fun. So I know that pain. Which gets into...

Great, I'm glad we are in agreement.

My issue is with the OP's point of view, which is that apple computers are competitive in price. They aren't. They target a market of people that don't care so much about price.

Not necessarily, but it's more of trying to sell the Apple experience. And when we compare, specs are always the baseline non-subjective thing to compare. part for part, apple's hardware is a small premium to pay. I'd argue their casing is hard to match, if at all as well. The OS added becomes highly subjective and it's the source of the problem.

Originally posted by: TheEarthWillShake

Originally posted by: randomlinh

Originally posted by: rikadik
If Bill and Steve can see sense, so can you guys.

This is when Linus comes in with a modified walking stick he got from a group of campers that gave it to him. He proceeds to beat Bill and Steve while they are down and runs away laughing.

His modified stick would take hours to configure to use it and Bill and Steve walk away with ease.

I said he runs away... I didn't say he beat them very much, hehe

 

[Kmax82]

Originally posted by: Chiropteran

Because a Macbook, despite what the fanatics think, wouldn't be a valid replacement for my existing desktop. The Mac Pro can be. The advantage is having a single computer at my desk that can boot into Mac OS X, Vista, XP, or Linux. I could sorta do that on an Apple laptop but the drive space would be a limitation and the performance would be a downgrade, and I couldn't very easily add additional hard drives. In short, the Mac Pro is the *cheapest* Mac computer I could buy that would take 3+ hard drives... IMO that alone says a lot about how "affordable" and "price competative" Apple computers are, a $500 Dell could serve the same purpose except for the need to run Mac OS X.

This is what drives me nuts. This blatant just disregard for real numbers. You cannot get a machine that will do what you want it to do for $500. If you could, then you could get a Mac Mini and accomplish what you're trying to do, since you're quoting $500 prices. Use external HDD's, and you have a $600 machine that will allow you to test OS X, run Windows, and Linux. No, it won't allow you to have internal HDD's, but it's a desktop for heaven's sake, you aren't moving it around a lot.

If you're needing the power of the Mac Pro (as you quote), then I don't believe that you can get anything with similar power for less than $1000. So at least quote real numbers.

This is just ridiculous how you spew this crap, back and forth.

Yes, Apple targets it's market. Yes, you're paying for the Apple experience, but c'mon, at least use a little bit of sense while you're arguing, please?

All in all, let's agree to disagree... this is just getting stupid.

 

[Chiropteran]

Originally posted by: Kmax82
This is what drives me nuts. This blatant just disregard for real numbers. You cannot get a machine that will do what you want it to do for $500. If you could, then you could get a Mac Mini and accomplish what you're trying to do, since you're quoting $500 prices. Use external HDD's, and you have a $600 machine that will allow you to test OS X, run Windows, and Linux. No, it won't allow you to have internal HDD's, but it's a desktop for heaven's sake, you aren't moving it around a lot.

If you're needing the power of the Mac Pro (as you quote), then I don't believe that you can get anything with similar power for less than $1000. So at least quote real numbers.

You are missing the point. I don't need a Mac Pro because it can run dual quad core Xeon CPUs, I need a Mac Pro because it's the *only* Mac I can buy that will take multiple internal hard drives. That is simply my personal requirement, I need 2TB+ disk capacity combined with the option to connect 3+ drives, and Apple requires a massive price premium to meet it.

I don't need the "power" of the Mac Pro, but Apple simply doesn't have an option that meets my real needs so I am forced to buy one. If running Mac OS X wasn't important, I could easily meet my needs with a $500 Dell.

 

[bearxor]

Originally posted by: Chiropteran
You are missing the point. I don't need a Mac Pro because it can run dual quad core Xeon CPUs, I need a Mac Pro because it's the *only* Mac I can buy that will take multiple internal hard drives. That is simply my personal requirement, I need 2TB+ disk capacity combined with the option to connect 3+ drives, and Apple requires a massive price premium to meet it.

I don't need the "power" of the Mac Pro, but Apple simply doesn't have an option that meets my real needs so I am forced to buy one. If running Mac OS X wasn't important, I could easily meet my needs with a $500 Dell.

Honestly I think you're just being an idiot now. When my co-worker and I needed Intel-based Mac's for support reasons, we bought Minis. We bought some RAM and some hard drives so each one could have 1.5B of RAM and 160GB hard drives. That came out to about $800 each.

Then you know what we did? We hooked them up to our existing Dell UltraSharp monitors (because Apple Cinema Displays ARE way overpriced) in the VGA port so that at the push of a button, viola!, instant Mac Mini + our existing desktops.

Now since that time, my co-worker has switched to an iMac full time with an external 1TB FW800 hard drive and I've switched to the Mac Mini full time but that's besides the point.

Honestly, it sounds like you really wanted a Mac and you really wanted a nice one. It's ok to admit to that.

I mean, when I did the offer thing for my MBP, I did it to replace my aging (and breaking) Inspiron 6000. Before this Mac, I had never owned one. I was a pretty die-hard PC user. I swore up and down to my co-worker that even though it was a Mac I was pretty much going to run Windows on it 90% of the time, only switching to OS X when I had things I needed to do for work. That's how it started out. Then, little by little, rebooting in to Windows became more of a hassle. Then I started to resent having to have a bootcamp partition taking up hard drive space. I bought a 320GB hard drive just so I could have more space in OS X. And now what? I don't even have a boot camp partition. I do everything through Parallels now, even games.

You're right that everyone's needs are different. You're right that Apple also starts out with higher-end configurations than most PC's. You're right that Apple is ignoring the mid-range desktop market. But you're wrong when you say, that spec for spec, Apple is not price competitive with anyone else on the market. That includes adding all the little things, like Vista Ultimate, Bluetooth, LED screens, backlit keyboards, 802.11n, etc, etc, etc...

And one more thing... This was my first Mac. I paid about $200 for it by doing a "Free MacBook Pro" offer. After using it for almost a year now, I can't see myself ever buying a PC again. The MBP is simply light years ahead of it's competitors and the design is already 5 years old. I may build a desktop again, probably to replace my aging HTPC, but since I've switched to a laptop full-time as my day in and day out computer, unless something drastic happens, I can't see myself owning any other type of machine. It's a big change from just over a year ago and the wife still says I've sold out, but oh well...

 

[TheStu]

Why is it absolutely necessary to use 3 internal hard drives? SATA drives over firewire would be quite fast, so like I said why is it absolutely necessary?

 

[sourceninja]

I have a macbook pro, I have a need for large storage. I have 3 really easy options.
1) External USB drive (cheap, fast enough for most everything but running applications or streaming video (although it does that ok as well)
2) Firewire 400/800 external drive (for that extra speed)
3) If I just need that performance, well I've got that covered too. I can get a sata card. In fact right now I"m looking at getting a sata card for my macbook pro so I can hook it to a small raid 5 storage device for my 'must keep' data and backups.

My desk is cleaner now, I don't have a giant case under there to dust. My office is MUCH quieter. The macbook pro makes my old amd x2 4400 sound like a wind tunnel. And I can get up and go when I need to. In fact, the ONLY thing my mac can't do as well as my last setup is gaming. But as I gave up windows awhile back, my gaming was limited to cedega/wine anyways, so the only difference is I can't play with the graphics as high as I could with my old desktop. However, some games which I used to have to emulate actually have mac versions (warcraft 3/WoW/NWN2/Civ4/etc) so I would say the gaming is better then my old custom built desktop.

I used to think I "HAD" to have raid 5 desktop with a TB of storage. I've come to find out that I was throwing my money away in the wrong places. Sure, my last PC build was 1000.00 less then my new mac, but the experience is not as nice. I can not ever go back to a desktop computer again, even if I decide to go back to linux. Simply put, having a brand new high end dell laptop at work, a midrange ibm laptop at home (my wifes) and my new mac, the macbook pro is the best example of craftsmanship I've seen in a long while. I've even found the keyboard easier to type on (I bought a bluetooth apple keyboard and mouse).

But I've realized that I have network storage, it is good enough for anything I need to keep over 100 gig. There is no reason my music needs to be on my hard drive, no reason my videos need to be on my hard drive, no reason all my old documents need to be on my hard drive. If it is being archived, then I archive it off my hard drive. I keep an old small machine downstairs with a nice huge raid setup to hold all that. For my more immediate storage, I have a 4 gig usb stick and a 500 gig usb drive and as stated above, i'm looking at a sata card to give me faster access for doing images and time machine (and possibly killing the need for network storage). Plus, by going this route, my data is now portable. I can ssh in from work and listen to my songs, I can easily start torrents from anywhere, etc. Simply put, my life is better.

Beyond that, I have discovered tools I have not found the match of in windows or linux. Things like textmate for example. It is the most amazing editor I've ever used. I can't think of anything anywhere that comes close to it. Xcode is also brilliant and much more my style then visual stuido or anything on linux. On the pure linux side, I can now use dreamweaver and photoshop if I desire (I wouldn't if gimp didn't require X on mac). I find iTunes much better then it is on windows (and much more stable). After syncing iCal with google calendar I've become addicted to that mixed with apple mail as well. I've become a complete junky of quicksilver and fallen in love with how integrated everything is with that and growl. Garageband has brought new life to my guitars that used to sit in the corner doing nothing. And expose, dashboard, and spaces are lightyears beyond what I've experienced in windows (but linux does spaces a lot better imho)

Beyond that, almost every single applications I can think of that I use on windows or linux either exists on mac, or has a nicer replacement. There is one exception however, I hate transmission. I miss uTorrent. But I plan to do something about this and start work on my own libtorrent based cocoa bittorent client. (If I can get myself to stop taking contract work).

Finally, I've started to get annoyed with windows and linux when i use them. I find myself hitting alt-c/v when trying to copy and paste because I've gotten so used to the command key. I've gotten frustrated in the lack of integration and consistency between applications. I also get really frustrated with the trackpad on my dell laptop. It is inferior to my macbook in so many ways. (Hell the whole laptop is, same specs only with intel video and it is fatter, heavier, hotter, the screen brightness is not constant, and it is nosier).

My wife has already told me that when we replace her aging computer that we will be getting her either a iMac or a macbook (she does not game at all and says she will be fine with low end graphics of a macbook). I am thinking she will be getting a macbook and probably within the next 6 months. I have also shown it to my mom who fell in love with it. She has constant problems with her computer (usually because she is not the most security conscious person). The mac will help mitigate some of her risk (her husband won't be installing tons of those random internet games on it) and she found the interface easier to use. She was able to do tasks on my mac that she normally calls me for help with on windows. My grandmother is also someone I have suggested the mac to. She was a windows 98 user who used linux (managed by me) for a while and recently got a new computer (I think about 2 years ago) and went back to windows. When she is ready for a new computer, I'm going to suggest a macbook. Not because she has trouble with windows, but because the macbook is better built then most of the dells out there and she has been talking about going to the laptop format.

One last thing. When I owned a windows machine, I spent a good deal of time maintaining and customizing that machine. I was always looking for faster antivirus, or better anti-spyware, or tricks to improve the speed. When I moved to linux, this became even greater. I would spend over 60% of my time just 'improving' things by customizing my desktop, writing scripts to automate tasks, recompiling software to make it 'run faster'. Switching distros to get a 'better experience'. It was a treadmill I was sucked into. I just didn't feel happy with my system. It seemed like the purpose of the computer was to maintain it and not use the software on it. Now with my mac, I sit and think, "what would I change?". The answer is a much shorter list. I love the mac as it is out of the box. The only tweak I've done so far is to set the dock to be a flat dock. The rest of the things I want to change are just applications that I think could be done better. Which means I'm doing actual useful work on my computer! I've gotten so much more done in the last few weeks then I have ever gotten done before. Maybe it is a placebo effect, I'm not sure. I can tell you that my boss has mentioned that I must be in love with my computer because I'm turning in work much faster then in the past. I think it is because in the past I have found laptops to be annoying and sitting in my office to be tiresome. But the macbook pro is great and I spend a lot of the time sitting outside on my porch doing work or sitting with my wife by the tv doing work. Combine that with textmate and I'm as happy as I've ever been.

 

[Chiropteran]

Originally posted by: TheStu
Why is it absolutely necessary to use 3 internal hard drives? SATA drives over firewire would be quite fast, so like I said why is it absolutely necessary?

Part of my job involves diagnosing messed up computers, occasionally if the computer won't even boot up I'll have to attach it's hard drive to my computer, also attach a blank hard drive, and copy the important data off of the original drive before I return it to the PC and reformat/reinstall.

External SATA drives use a different connector and are not the drives that come with the Dell computers which I'll be maintaining, so they aren't a solution.

Additionally, I'll be running Mac OS X, Vista, and testing various versions of Linux. This could be done with a single drive, but multiple hard drives makes it easier and less risky.

 

[Chiropteran]

Originally posted by: bearxor

Honestly I think you're just being an idiot now.

Great, then I'm not going to waste my time reading or responding to the rest of your posts.

 

[sourceninja]

Originally posted by: Chiropteran

Originally posted by: TheStu
Why is it absolutely necessary to use 3 internal hard drives? SATA drives over firewire would be quite fast, so like I said why is it absolutely necessary?

Part of my job involves diagnosing messed up computers, occasionally if the computer won't even boot up I'll have to attach it's hard drive to my computer, also attach a blank hard drive, and copy the important data off of the original drive before I return it to the PC and reformat/reinstall.

External SATA drives use a different connector and are not the drives that come with the Dell computers which I'll be maintaining, so they aren't a solution.

Additionally, I'll be running Mac OS X, Vista, and testing various versions of Linux. This could be done with a single drive, but multiple hard drives makes it easier and less risky.

If I had to support dells (and I do) I would have a dell (and we do). Obviously your job and a mac do not mix. Just like I have to keep windows around for somethings to do my job (where as at home I am mac/linux only). The good news is that you can run linux from a firewire/usb/external sata drive (btw, some of those cards use plain old sata connectors). There are tons of ways around the problem, but really it wouldn't be worth it. Support the platform you need to support with the same platform. We have about 100 macs on campus and 1000 windows machines. Guess what makes sense for our support staff to use. Rather then go mac for everyone with a lone windows machine for support to use on windows issues, the opposite was the best idea. Even if mac pro's were 500.00 it simply would not be a good idea.

On the other hand, as a developer, having the mac is useful to me, so I have one.

It's like trying to switch to linux as a hard core gamer, just a bad idea.

 

[Kmax82]

Originally posted by: Chiropteran

Originally posted by: TheStu
Why is it absolutely necessary to use 3 internal hard drives? SATA drives over firewire would be quite fast, so like I said why is it absolutely necessary?

Part of my job involves diagnosing messed up computers, occasionally if the computer won't even boot up I'll have to attach it's hard drive to my computer, also attach a blank hard drive, and copy the important data off of the original drive before I return it to the PC and reformat/reinstall.

External SATA drives use a different connector and are not the drives that come with the Dell computers which I'll be maintaining, so they aren't a solution.

Additionally, I'll be running Mac OS X, Vista, and testing various versions of Linux. This could be done with a single drive, but multiple hard drives makes it easier and less risky.

http://www.geekstuff4u.com/pro...rs_id=&products_id=847

There's an answer for SATA drives, and if you need the ability to boot EIDE, I'm sure there are other enclosures out there.

And I'll echo what everyone else is saying. If you have a lone Mac to support, you should have a Mac Mini to test and use. Everything else should be done through your Dell, or other branded Windows machine.

 

[Tyranicus]

Originally posted by: Chiropteran
Part of my job involves diagnosing messed up computers, occasionally if the computer won't even boot up I'll have to attach it's hard drive to my computer, also attach a blank hard drive, and copy the important data off of the original drive before I return it to the PC and reformat/reinstall.

External SATA drives use a different connector and are not the drives that come with the Dell computers which I'll be maintaining, so they aren't a solution.

Additionally, I'll be running Mac OS X, Vista, and testing various versions of Linux. This could be done with a single drive, but multiple hard drives makes it easier and less risky.

First off, you can run an operating system off an external drive. If it's FireWire 800 or eSATA, there won't be any speed issues. eSATA is the same thing as SATA by the way, just on the outside. You need to buy a power adapter to run an internal HDD on eSATA, but they are cheap and easy to find online. If you are trying to connect IDE drives, they sell IDE to USB adapters that you just plug into the drive. I have one that I use all the time. It also has a SATA plug, incidentally.

 

[sourceninja]

Originally posted by: Kmax82

Originally posted by: Chiropteran

Originally posted by: TheStu
Why is it absolutely necessary to use 3 internal hard drives? SATA drives over firewire would be quite fast, so like I said why is it absolutely necessary?

Part of my job involves diagnosing messed up computers, occasionally if the computer won't even boot up I'll have to attach it's hard drive to my computer, also attach a blank hard drive, and copy the important data off of the original drive before I return it to the PC and reformat/reinstall.

External SATA drives use a different connector and are not the drives that come with the Dell computers which I'll be maintaining, so they aren't a solution.

Additionally, I'll be running Mac OS X, Vista, and testing various versions of Linux. This could be done with a single drive, but multiple hard drives makes it easier and less risky.

http://www.geekstuff4u.com/pro...rs_id=&products_id=847

There's an answer for SATA drives, and if you need the ability to boot EIDE, I'm sure there are other enclosures out there.

And I'll echo what everyone else is saying. If you have a lone Mac to support, you should have a Mac Mini to test and use. Everything else should be done through your Dell, or other branded Windows machine.

That is the coolest thing ever! I want one!

 

[Chiropteran]

Originally posted by: sourceninja
If I had to support dells (and I do) I would have a dell (and we do). Obviously your job and a mac do not mix.

And while I support Dells, I have never used one as my desktop, instead running a custom built computer. I honestly don't see the need to run a Dell to support Dells. As long as my computer can accept and read Dell hard drives, and run some version of Windows, it'll work. My current custom built PC does this, and based on what I have read the Mac Pro will also do it. However, a Mac laptop wouldn't, an iMac wouldn't, and a Mac-mini wouldn't. so they aren't viable options.

Originally posted by: sourceninja
Just like I have to keep windows around for somethings to do my job (where as at home I am mac/linux only). The good news is that you can run linux from a firewire/usb/external sata drive (btw, some of those cards use plain old sata connectors). There are tons of ways around the problem, but really it wouldn't be worth it. Support the platform you need to support with the same platform. We have about 100 macs on campus and 1000 windows machines. Guess what makes sense for our support staff to use. Rather then go mac for everyone with a lone windows machine for support to use on windows issues, the opposite was the best idea. Even if mac pro's were 500.00 it simply would not be a good idea.

On the other hand, as a developer, having the mac is useful to me, so I have one.

It's like trying to switch to linux as a hard core gamer, just a bad idea.

Have you heard of bootcamp? I can run windows fine on the Mac. The opposite is not true, I can't run Mac OS X on a Dell or my custom built Core 2 Duo PC.

What makes more sense to you? Run Windows on a Windows-only PC, remain unable to support Mac OS X? Run Mac OS X, be unable to support Windows? Or... dual boot Mac OS X & Windows, support both fine?

Yeah, I suppose an alternative would be a Mac Mini + a Dell + external hard drive adapters + a KVM and a switch on my desktop, but the waste of office space and extra mess hardly justifies saving $500 from simply buying a Mac Pro and having a single box without any loose components to worry about.

 

[Chiropteran]

Originally posted by: Tyranicus
First off, you can run an operating system off an external drive. If it's FireWire 800 or eSATA, there won't be any speed issues. eSATA is the same thing as SATA by the way, just on the outside. You need to buy a power adapter to run an internal HDD on eSATA, but they are cheap and easy to find online. If you are trying to connect IDE drives, they sell IDE to USB adapters that you just plug into the drive. I have one that I use all the time. It also has a SATA plug, incidentally.

This is a business environment, not some computer workshop in my basement. I did consider the Mac-mini, it would have been a lot cheaper and external drives could have compensated for the lack of internal space. However, while I can't claim my desk is super clean or neat, adding external hard drives to it would just be taking away from my working area and doesn't make for a very professional looking workstation. Also, while I can't recall the exact sopecs of the Mac mini, it's probably a downgrade from my current windows PC, which would mean I'd just want to keep the Windows box as well, and there is more extra clutter. The advantage of the Mac Pro is consolidating multiple OSes into a single machine.

 

[Kmax82]

Originally posted by: Chiropteran

Have you heard of bootcamp? I can run windows fine on the Mac. The opposite is not true, I can't run Mac OS X on a Dell or my custom built Core 2 Duo PC.

What makes more sense to you? Run Windows on a Windows-only PC, remain unable to support Mac OS X? Run Mac OS X, be unable to support Windows? Or... dual boot Mac OS X & Windows, support both fine?

Yeah, I suppose an alternative would be a Mac Mini + a Dell + external hard drive adapters + a KVM and a switch on my desktop, but the waste of office space and extra mess hardly justifies saving $500 from simply buying a Mac Pro and having a single box without any loose components to worry about.

But why do you need the ability to switch out HDD's internally? You get an eSATA adapter, and then one of those external drive boxes, and you can use a MacMini to accomplish what you're trying to do for $2100 less than what you paid for the MacPro.

Also, it is a pain to plug in drives internally. I hated opening up my computer and plugging drives in then booting the system back up.

It feels like I'm talking to the wall. I just don't get where you're coming from, especially since you don't need the power of a MacPro's Xeon Procs.

 

[Kmax82]

Originally posted by: Chiropteran

Originally posted by: Tyranicus
First off, you can run an operating system off an external drive. If it's FireWire 800 or eSATA, there won't be any speed issues. eSATA is the same thing as SATA by the way, just on the outside. You need to buy a power adapter to run an internal HDD on eSATA, but they are cheap and easy to find online. If you are trying to connect IDE drives, they sell IDE to USB adapters that you just plug into the drive. I have one that I use all the time. It also has a SATA plug, incidentally.

This is a business environment, not some computer workshop in my basement. I did consider the Mac-mini, it would have been a lot cheaper and external drives could have compensated for the lack of internal space. However, while I can't claim my desk is super clean or neat, adding external hard drives to it would just be taking away from my working area and doesn't make for a very professional looking workstation. Also, while I can't recall the exact sopecs of the Mac mini, it's probably a downgrade from my current windows PC, which would mean I'd just want to keep the Windows box as well, and there is more extra clutter. The advantage of the Mac Pro is consolidating multiple OSes into a single machine.

So it's ok for you to have a MacPro's case open and have you constantly down underneath your desk changing out drives, but it's not ok to have a drive bay sitting on your desk that you can just pop it in?

Now you're just making NO sense whatsoever.

 

[Chiropteran]

Originally posted by: Kmax82
But why do you need the ability to switch out HDD's internally? You get an eSATA adapter, and then one of those external drive boxes, and you can use a MacMini to accomplish what you're trying to do for $2100 less than what you paid for the MacPro.

Also, it is a pain to plug in drives internally. I hated opening up my computer and plugging drives in then booting the system back up.

It feels like I'm talking to the wall. I just don't get where you're coming from, especially since you don't need the power of a MacPro's Xeon Procs.

Because the drives I need to look at are SATA, not eSATA?

Because desk space is valuable, and having a bunch of external drives covering half my desk isn't worth saving $1000?

Because the purpose of getting a new computer is 1- replace my existing computer, 2- support Mac OS X. A Mac mini doesn't even match my existing (2 years old) computer's specs.


Technically, a Mac-mini could work. Technically, all the programmers in the office could be running 450mhz Pentium 2 computers. Technically, you can run Vista on 512MB of RAM. In these cases the bare minimum has some annoying drawbacks that nullify the advantage of saving a little money.

 

[Chiropteran]

Originally posted by: Kmax82
So it's ok for you to have a MacPro's case open and have you constantly down underneath your desk changing out drives, but it's not ok to have a drive bay sitting on your desk that you can just pop it in?

Now you're just making NO sense whatsoever.

Maybe my assumptions about Mac's were wrong. With my custom PC, or any Dell in the office, I can easily open the side panel, screw in a drive, and close it... it's about 2 minutes of work, and have the panel back on. I figured a Mac would be similarly accessible, is it not true?

And my computer sits on my desk, not on the floor beside it. Nothing wrong with that.

 

[Kmax82]

Originally posted by: Chiropteran

Because the drives I need to look at are SATA, not eSATA?

Because desk space is valuable, and having a bunch of external drives covering half my desk isn't worth saving $1000?

Because the purpose of getting a new computer is 1- replace my existing computer, 2- support Mac OS X. A Mac mini doesn't even match my existing (2 years old) computer's specs.

Wow.. you run IT for your company? I linked to a box that interfaces with SATA drives and outputs them to USB, or eSATA. This means that you can plugin a *regular* SATA drive *externally* and then output that through an eSATA connection. Just like magic!

As for your other complaint, yes the MacMini is a bit underpowered, but if all you're doing is imaging drives and doing maintenance on the network, then you really don't need the Quad Dual Core Xeons. You could alternatively get an iMac, which would half your costs, and it would look super clean on your desktop.

 

[Chiropteran]

Originally posted by: Kmax82
Wow.. you run IT for your company? I linked to a box that interfaces with SATA drives and outputs them to USB, or eSATA. This means that you can plugin a *regular* SATA drive *externally* and then output that through an eSATA connection. Just like magic!

Yes, the extra "magic" box takes care of my first problem, but it makes the 2nd problem (clutter around my desk) worse. It's not a solution. I thought I made that clear, I guess you just read the first line of my post and ignored the rest.