Steve Jobs is an @SS, don't buy into the OSX86 crap!

[agnitrate]

I would be willing to be money that OSX will not run on a regular PC. Sure, it will have the x86 architecture, but there will be specialized hardware that only Apple will produce that will be required to run. You will STILL have to pay extra because of this to own an Apple, you'll just get processors whose prices you KNOW you're getting raped on because you can see how cheap they are to produce in non-Apple systems.

 

[FreshPrince]

all you have to do is remove the pc bios and replace it with mac's version of bios and boom, you have hardware that can't install anything but the MAC OSX86....so ya, the hardware will be virtually the same, but they'll pay the same price.

 

[iamwiz82]

Originally posted by: ultimatebob

Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt

Originally posted by: her209
Soon, the Mac users will realize how Apple has been raping them on prices for all these years.

Why would they realize now? They've been getting screwed for years and constantly bend over and say "Thank you sir, may I have another?". That's not going to change any time soon.

Yeah, but they've been getting away with it all these years by duping their customers into thinking that the Mac is a faster computer. Sure, a top of the line P4 EE or Athlon 64 will destroy a dual G5 setup in most applications, but there is always one or two Photoshop plugins or video editing apps that run better on the PowerPC platform. When it came time to create some new advertising hype, you knew damn that Apple was going to use those benchmarks to hype their products.

Now that the next generation Macs will be using generally the same processors and motherboards that Dell/HP/Lenovo(IBM)/Gateway/etc are using, it will likely become much harder to find those performance advantages with certain applications over a standard PC. In general, Steve Jobs will be asking people to pay around a 20% price premium for a fancier looking box and a different operating system. Sure, the Mac die-hards will probably pay it in a second, but it's a tougher sell to those looking for the best performance on the applications they NEED to do their job.

I think you fail to see that most people don't give a sh!t about benchmarks. I know I don't. I do not care if your PC can get 125FPS in Quake 3. WTF is that going to do for me?

 

Originally posted by: FreshPrince
I'll stick with longhorn

Good luck with that. By time Longhorn finally comes out and after all its features have been stripped, you would have waited six years for what is really just Windows XP SP3.

 

[chcarnage]

Originally posted by: FreshPrince
If you think about it, he's been forcing the MAC world to buy the more expensive PPC counterparts, when he could've been honest from the get go and let people choose their own hardware. :|

I like OSX, but even that tactic is hitting below the belt....

I'll stick with longhorn

What, there are other platforms beside PPC? How should I have noticed that during the last ten years? I was forced to buy PPC, oh noes!

Oh and I bet OS X/x86 is going to hit the shelves before Longhorn... Who bets against?

 

[FreshPrince]

I'm sure it will...osx has had 5 different versions in the past years, and there's only been XP. So, ya, it'll come out before longhorn, but that's ok. I can wait.

purpose of this thread is to show that Jobs screwed all the mac users into buying more expensive hardware, not to compare different OS's.

Bottom line is, when the new Macs come out, there won't be a difference hardware wise between them and Pcs, how does Apple account for charging more then?

 

[iamwiz82]

Originally posted by: FreshPrince
I'm sure it will...osx has had 5 different versions in the past years, and there's only been XP. So, ya, it'll come out before longhorn, but that's ok. I can wait.

purpose of this thread is to show that Jobs screwed all the mac users into buying more expensive hardware, not to compare different OS's.

Bottom line is, when the new Macs come out, there won't be a difference hardware wise between them and Pcs, how does Apple account for charging more then?

How do you know they will be charging more?

 

[StageLeft]

Apple has sucked for YEARS.

 

[Cal166]

My friend just wasted $2,000 on a Ibook last friday. What a waste! All that just to do run Graphics programs to do work?

 

[JeffreyLebowski]

Just because Intel is making the processor doesn't mean it's going to be an x86 processor. Intel has the money and the capabilities of making something else. Maybe, Apple is tired of IBM/Motorola's lower output capacity, and is hoping Intel's manufacturing capabilities will help drive down the cost.

Wait, why am I defending Mac? Mac OS sucks, the hardware sucks. and the the astetics suck.

 

[Zebo]

Little Stevie's been fooling rich hippies to give him thier money for years now I don't see it changing.

 

[loic2003]

Originally posted by: JeffreyLebowski
Just because Intel is making the processor doesn't mean it's going to be an x86 processor. Intel has the money and the capabilities of making something else. Maybe, Apple is tired of IBM/Motorola's lower output capacity, and is hoping Intel's manufacturing capabilities will help drive down the cost.

Wait, why am I defending Mac? Mac OS sucks, the hardware sucks. and the the astetics suck.

It is going to be x86. Apple are unhappy with the high power consumption of the G5 chip which is preventing them from putting it in their powerbooks which is why they're still stagnating with G4's in there which have sub 200MHz bus speeds: not good.

Intel have the best mobile chips currently, so it's expected that the first macs with intel chips will be the notebooks and probably the mini. The G5 is a great chip and I don't think we'll be seeing intel hardware in the high end macs until maybe 2007.

Intel -being the biggest- have the best resources and so will be able to provide the most reliable roadmap of chips.

Oh, and MacOS doesn't suck. Why do you think it does, out of interest?

 

[loic2003]

This space left intentionally blank.