Why do people buy "Apple" computers?

Page 8 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

n0cmonkey

Elite Member
Jun 10, 2001
42,936
1
0
Originally posted by: Flatline
However, I personally can't get around spending so many $$$ on proprietary hardware and software in order to have a brand-name 'nix machine at my desk; this is one of the things that kept me away from slowaris for so long.

Then dont. Buy a Mac. Darwin is Open Source software, and the only part of an Apple machine that is really closed is the equivilent of the x86 chipset.
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,561
982
126
Originally posted by: Flatline
BBWF, just one interjection...I wouldn't want to run a LARGE website on a Mac or a Windows machine; give me apache on linux any day.

Of course, if I were forced to choose between Mac & Windows for running a large website, I would pick the Mac (primarily because it IS a 'nix-based platform).

I would hesitate to call Windows machines a joke as far as being workstations is concerned...at my last company, all of our software developers used Win2K machines (although we in the IT department truly did try to get them to run 'nix); we were pleasantly surprised by their stability and performance. While I still think that a properly configured 'nix machine would have been better, the Windows workstations performed admirably (and were less expensive than their Mac counterparts...we did look at that).

Many of the things that you listed as great Mac features (apache, ssl, c compiler, etc.) will be included on pretty much any 'nix platform, and I agree that their inclusion in the OS is one of the things that make 'nix-based OSes so useful. However, I personally can't get around spending so many $$$ on proprietary hardware and software in order to have a brand-name 'nix machine at my desk; this is one of the things that kept me away from slowaris for so long.

Long story short, I rarely (if ever) use Windows anymore; I have become a 'nix fan. I like the fact that OSX is 'nix-based, but the price tag is too high for me (although I must say that the notebooks are intriguing) :D

Well, I guess I should point out that when you buy a Mac server, everything is pre-installed, it comes with dual gigabit ethernet ports (among other things) and the Xserve (1U) comes with a licence for unlimited clients, and 24/7 phone support. Now the phone support, etc. are something you may or may not need, but of course that's part of where the price differences come in.

It seems when I look around though that the Unix geeks seem to be buying nix desktops and Mac laptops though. You seem like somebody who would fit the bill. ;)
 

Flatline

Golden Member
Jun 28, 2001
1,248
0
0
You can get similar 'nix setups (and the support) from many companies. The Xserve is, from what I understand, a pretty decent product, so understand that I am not trying to say anything bad about it.

Just letting you know that Apple is, of course, not the only company offering such a thing.

Anyone here actually used an Xserve? I'd like to hear first-hand thoughts on it, but no one I know has done anyting with them. I'm always up for trying new things ;)
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,561
982
126
Originally posted by: Flatline
You can get similar 'nix setups (and the support) from many companies. The Xserve is, from what I understand, a pretty decent product, so understand that I am not trying to say anything bad about it.

Just letting you know that Apple is, of course, not the only company offering such a thing.

Anyone here actually used an Xserve? I'd like to hear first-hand thoughts on it, but no one I know has done anyting with them. I'm always up for trying new things ;)
I know very little about servers, so I can't comment on hands on experience. However, I will say I mentioned the support business simply because it seems that a few people in various threads always seem to compare a commercial server product (from any company) vs. a single desktop machine with good specs and complain that commercial servers cost too much. That's all I was talking about. Anyways, my local store runs their database and website off an Xserve. They said they just configured it and it simply runs. But I'm sure they could have done the same with any number of machines.

Here are some reviews:

PC Magazine
Macworld
OS News
Federal Computer Week
 

Lucky

Lifer
Nov 26, 2000
13,126
1
0
Originally posted by: BingBongWongFooey
5) Burning DVDs. You can burn them on the PC too, sure their expensive iMovie is nice, but there are also nice programs for the PC if you want to spend that amount of money.

another person with no idea what they're talking about.


Yeah, your right. Windows moviemaker 2 is FREE and just as good, if not better.
 

n0cmonkey

Elite Member
Jun 10, 2001
42,936
1
0
Originally posted by: Lucky
Originally posted by: BingBongWongFooey
5) Burning DVDs. You can burn them on the PC too, sure their expensive iMovie is nice, but there are also nice programs for the PC if you want to spend that amount of money.

another person with no idea what they're talking about.


Yeah, your right. Windows moviemaker 2 is FREE and just as good, if not better.

Free? You must mean I dont have to pay for it. Ill look for a download link now, but if you could provide one Id be much obliged. :)
 

Sunner

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
11,641
0
76
I'd take a Compaq ProLiant DL360 G3 over an Xserve any day.

At least until the Xserve get some more time to prove itself, if Apple actually gets serious with their server effort, then the XServe would be much more viable.
 

Lucky

Lifer
Nov 26, 2000
13,126
1
0
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
Originally posted by: Lucky
Originally posted by: BingBongWongFooey
5) Burning DVDs. You can burn them on the PC too, sure their expensive iMovie is nice, but there are also nice programs for the PC if you want to spend that amount of money.

another person with no idea what they're talking about.


Yeah, your right. Windows moviemaker 2 is FREE and just as good, if not better.

Free? You must mean I dont have to pay for it. Ill look for a download link now, but if you could provide one Id be much obliged. :)


It is available for download. use google. :)
 

n0cmonkey

Elite Member
Jun 10, 2001
42,936
1
0
Originally posted by: Lucky
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
Originally posted by: Lucky
Originally posted by: BingBongWongFooey
5) Burning DVDs. You can burn them on the PC too, sure their expensive iMovie is nice, but there are also nice programs for the PC if you want to spend that amount of money.

another person with no idea what they're talking about.


Yeah, your right. Windows moviemaker 2 is FREE and just as good, if not better.

Free? You must mean I dont have to pay for it. Ill look for a download link now, but if you could provide one Id be much obliged. :)


It is available for download. use google. :)

I found it, thanks though. It appears I am required to purchase a version of Windows to use it... So all in all the price of iMovie compared to the price of this product is very similar, the purchase of an OS ($129 for Mac OS X, $199 or whatever for Windows XP).
 

OnetimeXP

Junior Member
Aug 26, 2002
8
0
0
Originally posted by: Bovinicus
Most people who are into content creation (Music, video, etc.) say that Macs are excellent for this purpose. As well, the user-friendy aspect is always a popular one. I like the OS. It's really stable and the system just feels smooth when using it. The aesthetics of the hardware doesn't hurt either.

James Taylor, R.E.M. and Frank Zappa recently had their music mastered on AMD powered PCs running Nuendo, plus a few other "names" in the music industry had DVD-A's done on PC's.

If PC's are good enough for REM, they're good enough for everyone.

http://www.crmav.com/recording/75/amd_teams_with_steinberg_to_deliver_digital_audio_workstatio.shtml

Matrox has ok'd AMD for realtime video / DVD authoring.
?Our scalable TurboDV software-based export engine takes full advantage of the AMD Athlon processor-based platforms to deliver faster DV rendering speed than ever before.?- Patrick Beaulieu, Matrox RT2500 senior product specialist.

http://www.crmav.com/video/38/amd_processor_based_platforms_certified_for_matrox_realtime.shtml

5 years ago Macs were the defacto standard in these areas, thanks in large part to hardware support.

I build PC's in the North Hollywood area, there are a ton of small audio / video shops around here that do everything from cheasy Porns and recording garage bands, to mastering shows for MTV / FOX Sports. No, not "bigtime", but more a sub pro-sumer industry full of people who make livings at it.

I tell long time Mac users doing audio / video to get with the times, Macs were the the best choice once upon a time but times have changed.

More than a few of these folks are the zealots, macCult freaks who identify themselves by the kernel they use, getting them to just touch a PC was often like pulling teeth. The last PC they used was some Win95 POS that had dll / driver issues and they don't forget that horror. I haven't created total "ditch Apple converts" per se, but I have sold quite a few PC's to people who would have bought a Mac... and now either use both or are transisitioning to PC. I have found quite a few of these shops using G3's just because that's what gets their work done, once I let them test drive a Win2K AMD XP / MP most of them are almost shocked at the performance gains and stability... and really shocked at the price.


But once I boil it down to them in business terms; more computers runnng faster means more work = more money... the choice to stay Mac becomes less of a no brainer. One typical ponytail scruffy hat bakwards Apple head audio "dude" said he'd sooner quit than use a PC, after 4 months he finally admitted it wasn't so bad afterall.

I'm not trying to suggest that PC's are taking over or that Macs "suck", just my observations as a small builder in the heart of audio / video digital land. The idea Macs are better at audio / video is no longer the fact it once was, today it's a matter of opinion.

I'd never buy one personally, I'd never buy a Dell or Gateway either... I build my own. Now that those PPC motherboard / CPU's are being sold and you can run OSX through yellow Dog, or something like that, I just might build one and check out OSX.

If all Joe User wants is e-mail, word processing, CD burning and web surfing, a $300 Walmart Lindows thing with an Athlon XP will suit them just fine. My neighbor has one and I was suprised how peppy it ran and how well it worked.
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,561
982
126
Originally posted by: OnetimeXP
Originally posted by: Bovinicus
James Taylor, R.E.M. and Frank Zappa recently had their music mastered on AMD powered PCs running Nuendo, plus a few other "names" in the music industry had DVD-A's done on PC's.

If PC's are good enough for REM, they're good enough for everyone.
Steven Soderbergh and Trent Reznor use Macs. If Macs are good enough for Steven Soderbergh and Trent Reznor, they're good enough for everyone. NOT!

People use what they prefer to use. Indeed, Steven Soderbergh uses BOTH PCs and Macs, sometimes at the same time. Nothing wrong with that.
 

Lucky

Lifer
Nov 26, 2000
13,126
1
0
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
Originally posted by: Lucky
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
Originally posted by: Lucky
Originally posted by: BingBongWongFooey
5) Burning DVDs. You can burn them on the PC too, sure their expensive iMovie is nice, but there are also nice programs for the PC if you want to spend that amount of money.

another person with no idea what they're talking about.


Yeah, your right. Windows moviemaker 2 is FREE and just as good, if not better.

Free? You must mean I dont have to pay for it. Ill look for a download link now, but if you could provide one Id be much obliged. :)


It is available for download. use google. :)

I found it, thanks though. It appears I am required to purchase a version of Windows to use it... So all in all the price of iMovie compared to the price of this product is very similar, the purchase of an OS ($129 for Mac OS X, $199 or whatever for Windows XP).

It's in beta right now, it hasn't gone gold. But of course you would be required to have windows...you expect MS to release it on linux? Cmon.
 

n0cmonkey

Elite Member
Jun 10, 2001
42,936
1
0
Originally posted by: Lucky
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
Originally posted by: Lucky
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
Originally posted by: Lucky
Originally posted by: BingBongWongFooey
5) Burning DVDs. You can burn them on the PC too, sure their expensive iMovie is nice, but there are also nice programs for the PC if you want to spend that amount of money.

another person with no idea what they're talking about.


Yeah, your right. Windows moviemaker 2 is FREE and just as good, if not better.

Free? You must mean I dont have to pay for it. Ill look for a download link now, but if you could provide one Id be much obliged. :)


It is available for download. use google. :)

I found it, thanks though. It appears I am required to purchase a version of Windows to use it... So all in all the price of iMovie compared to the price of this product is very similar, the purchase of an OS ($129 for Mac OS X, $199 or whatever for Windows XP).

It's in beta right now, it hasn't gone gold. But of course you would be required to have windows...you expect MS to release it on linux? Cmon.

Apple has open sourced their quicktime streaming server or whatever... ;)

I just wanted to point out that iMovie is as free as Microsoft's solution. Thats all.
 

starwarsdad

Golden Member
May 19, 2001
1,433
0
0
I work on both. I work with a PC a good bit more though.

For Adobe apps (Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign), I prefer to work on the Mac. I have a strong feeling that my preference is based on the fact that I learned those apps on a Mac and just feel more comfortable.

As for stability, I can crash OS 9.xx in seconds if I try and hours if I am working. OS X is a great OS for performance and stability and I HIGHLY recommend it. I have yet to crash it. I have an uptime of 60+ days and counting on OS X since I upgraded.

I can crash a PC pretty easily if I want, but have far fewer crashes when just working. Windows 2000 has helped out remarkably in that department. It is my favorite "everyday" OS and is what I do the majority of my work and play on.

The incarnations of the Mac OS prior to OS X are not very "network friendly". They can be networked, but it is (IMHO) an kludgy and painful experience unless everything in your network is a Mac and runs on Apple Talk. Proprietary communication protocols are not the best idea in my view.

Mac hardware is prohibitively expensive and in my experience is not any faster than a PC. I will say that GHz (or MHz) for GHz Macs are faster in some apps, especially video, sound, or image manipulation apps.

The nearly 2GHZ difference that has been acheived between the platforms nullifies any advantage the Macs had even in the apps that it previously excelled in.

I believe that based on performance alone PCs are the better choice for most people at every price point.
 

EeyoreX

Platinum Member
Oct 27, 2002
2,864
0
0
Just my quick 2 cents and opinion as an avid non-Mac user.

I think OS X is great, looks good, works well. Too bad it doesn't play on PC hardware.

I also think, personally, that iMacs (all versions) are ugly. But then, i am a bit of a traditionalist. I like my computer to look like a box. Granted my boxes are black and silver, and both are lightly modded (one window kit, one bio-hazard laser-cut window kit, CCFL in both) but still boxes. I admit they are innovative, but still, as I said, I am a bit of a traditionalist. For me its the same way with cars. I like older models that are more "boxy" vs newer "bubbly" cars (ie Chevy Blazer, etc). Maybe I am old fashioned in my young age ;)

I also enjoy upgrading and mild tinkering with my hardware, which you really can't do much of with Macs. Especially the iMac.

As I said, just my opinions.

\Dan
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,561
982
126
I think OS X is great, looks good, works well. Too bad it doesn't play on PC hardware.

I also think, personally, that iMacs (all versions) are ugly. But then, i am a bit of a traditionalist. I like my computer to look like a box. Granted my boxes are black and silver, and both are lightly modded (one window kit, one bio-hazard laser-cut window kit, CCFL in both) but still boxes. I admit they are innovative, but still, as I said, I am a bit of a traditionalist. For me its the same way with cars. I like older models that are more "boxy" vs newer "bubbly" cars (ie Chevy Blazer, etc). Maybe I am old fashioned in my young age

I also enjoy upgrading and mild tinkering with my hardware, which you really can't do much of with Macs. Especially the iMac.
Yeah, you can't tinker with an iMac much. But then again, it's aimed at the home user non-tinkerer crowd. You can tinker with a PowerMac though, if you wish.

I don't like big boxy American cars and I don't tinker with my cars. In fact, even if I wanted to I couldn't tinker with my car because of the numerous 288 V lines that run through my Prius. But I like how the car is packaged, and the fit and finish of the car, and the spaciousness. But my car can't haul a boat, and would get its @ss kicked in a drag race. Fortunately, I don't own a boat, and I definitely don't street race. I drive my car around the city usually, and this gas-electric hybrid car has amongst the best gas mileage in any car in its class for city driving. :) (And no, you never plug this car in, in case you're wondering.)
 

Barnaby W. Füi

Elite Member
Aug 14, 2001
12,343
0
0
Originally posted by: Eug
I think OS X is great, looks good, works well. Too bad it doesn't play on PC hardware.

I also think, personally, that iMacs (all versions) are ugly. But then, i am a bit of a traditionalist. I like my computer to look like a box. Granted my boxes are black and silver, and both are lightly modded (one window kit, one bio-hazard laser-cut window kit, CCFL in both) but still boxes. I admit they are innovative, but still, as I said, I am a bit of a traditionalist. For me its the same way with cars. I like older models that are more "boxy" vs newer "bubbly" cars (ie Chevy Blazer, etc). Maybe I am old fashioned in my young age

I also enjoy upgrading and mild tinkering with my hardware, which you really can't do much of with Macs. Especially the iMac.
Yeah, you can't tinker with an iMac much. But then again, it's aimed at the home user non-tinkerer crowd. You can tinker with a PowerMac though, if you wish.

I don't like big boxy American cars and I don't tinker with my cars. In fact, even if I wanted to I couldn't tinker with my car because of the numerous 288 V lines that run through my Prius. But I like how the car is packaged, and the fit and finish of the car, and the spaciousness. But my car can't haul a boat, and would get its @ss kicked in a drag race. Fortunately, I don't own a boat, and I definitely don't street race. I drive my car around the city usually, and this gas-electric hybrid car has amongst the best gas mileage in any car in its class for city driving. :) (And no, you never plug this car in, in case you're wondering.)

i see those hybrid cars the same way i see macs: i'd buy one if i had the cash :)

cool cars.
 

DT4K

Diamond Member
Jan 21, 2002
6,944
3
81
Originally posted by: straubs
Originally posted by: Shanti
Originally posted by: IHateRequiredNicknames
And OS X is pretty cool. Imagine if your PC came with Apache server software pre-installed, and used a Unix-based system.
.
Umm, mine does. It's called Red Hat 7.2. And what about IIS on Win 2K.
You must not know much about web servers if you are comparing Apache to IIS. That's like comparing a Mercedes to a Ford, in terms of quality.
I wasn't comparing them at all. Apache is better. That's why the majority of large websites are hosted on Apache running linux or Unix. Not too many running OS X yet. But maybe there will be.

I was making two points.

1. If you install RH or any other flavor of linux on an x86, it also comes with Apache. And it's free.
2. Windows platforms also come with a web server. And although IIS is not as popular as Apache, it certainly does the job and is extremely easy to use and configure. There are many large corporations running websites on IIS / Win 2K.

And you must not know much about english if you couldn't understand my statements.

 

DT4K

Diamond Member
Jan 21, 2002
6,944
3
81
I think you are all arguing about different things.
The original question was why people buy Apple computers.
A valid response would be "because OS X is great and it comes on Mac's"
NOT "because Windows sucks"
x86 does not mean Windows.
I have not used OS X. I hear very good things about it. But I thought this was more of a hardware debate and I think the x86 platform wins there. But to each his own.
By the way,

AMD rules
Intel sucks

NVidia rules
ATI sucks

Just kidding, don't you dare start on that one. Maybe I'll start a AMD vs Intel thread. I'm sure Anand has extra diskspace to burn. Muhahaha.

Originally posted by: thorin
Originally posted by: mjolnir2k
Not a flame war plz.
Right like that was gonna work. May as well have just put up a big sign "Insert match here".

Thorin
If only we had listened.
 

LethalWolfe

Diamond Member
Apr 14, 2001
3,679
0
0
Originally posted by: Shanti
I think you are all arguing about different things.
The original question was why people buy Apple computers.
A valid response would be "because OS X is great and it comes on Mac's"
NOT "because Windows sucks"
x86 does not mean Windows.
I have not used OS X. I hear very good things about it. But I thought this was more of a hardware debate and I think the x86 platform wins there. But to each his own.
By the way,

AMD rules
Intel sucks

NVidia rules
ATI sucks

Just kidding, don't you dare start on that one. Maybe I'll start a AMD vs Intel thread. I'm sure Anand has extra diskspace to burn. Muhahaha.

Originally posted by: thorin
Originally posted by: mjolnir2k
Not a flame war plz.
Right like that was gonna work. May as well have just put up a big sign "Insert match here".

Thorin
If only we had listened.

Well, it wasn't an all out flame war. There were moments of civility. :)


Lethal
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,561
982
126
Installing software (if done correctly) is simply dragging the directory off the install disc to the hard drive. Indeed, strangely enough, that's how you install Microsoft's Office v.X.

When I close the lid on my laptop, the machine shuts off and goes to sleep. When I open the lid, it starts back again within about 5 seconds, precisely where I left off.

Every app can save files as .pdf files, because it's a native format of the OS.

Auto fall-back of network interfaces is cool. My primary network is wireless, but 10/100/1000 is my secondary. When I'm not near a wireless access point I just plug in Ethernet... and it just works. No need to adjust the config settings.

I can mount the hard drives from other Macs via Firewire. eg. If I plug a Firewire cable into both my TiBook and my iBook, I can reboot one of the computers while holding down the "T" key. That computer goes into Firewire mode and its drive simply gets seen as any other Firewire drive mounted on the other computer. Faster than 100 Mbps Ethernet (and much faster than current Windows and Mac implementations of Firewire networking), without need for removing a drive.

This is a software issue, but contextual menus (ie. right clicking or ctrl-clicking) seem to be better on Macs. I find often in Windows far too many things are crammed into the right click menu. I suppose because the Mac OS tends to be built around one button, it's easier to access the main features via that one button, with more select stuff in the right button contextual menus. I have no problems using my single button on my track pad for my laptops, whereas using a single button on a Windows XP would be much more difficult.

Disk images. OS X prefers works with disk images instead of stuff like zip files. To backup a CD or create a new archive you just use the built-in disc image function. You can then mount them and they get seen as any other hard drive and can be partitioned and formatted, etc. This is similar to Drive Image in Nero, but simpler, and built into the OS. However, if you want, you can use .zip files or .sit files.

External displays are much better supported. It's built into the OS and simply works. Sometimes I find myself fighting with ATI or nVidia drivers to get dual displays working as they should. Although usually not necessary, sometimes in XP or 2000 a reboot after plugging the second display in helps. This is not needed in OS X, ever. Plus I think my laptop is in the only laptop line in existence with DVI output. DVI is sweet.

I hate AOL, but Apple's AIM client is actually quite nice.

iDVD I'm told is the best consumer level home DVD authoring program in existence. I've made picture books with iPhoto (great for gifts), and iPhoto has ultra easy image web site creation. And I don't even like iPhoto (free) that much, but it's certainly better than most inexpensive image software I've seen on the Windows side.

I don't deal with it much, but others love the underlying Unix backbone, with full Unix compatibility, without the difficult ergonomics of Linux. What I do use is SMB to mount Windows drives over the network, and I may start using CUPS.
Actually one feature I forgot to mention is the fact that I can boot off an external Firewire drive. ie. I can make an external CD or DVD or DVD-RAM or hard drive as the boot disk as I wish. My guess is that even a Firewire CompactFlash reader would work. I simply hold down the OPTION key when booting, and the Mac will automatically search for all Firewire connected drives. Not being able to do this on my Windows PC is a severe pain in the @ss, esp. since DOS boot discs won't support reading of NTFS volumes. I think the OPTION boot command also searches for USB drives, but so far I haven't tried that since I don't have any USB drives that would hold enough info.
 

Go3iverson

Senior member
Apr 16, 2000
273
0
0
I generally prefer the Mac OS. In fact, I just added my newest Apple......I bought a new TiBook G4. 1GHz G4, 1GB Ram, 60GB HD, Airport card, SuperDrive, whole 9 yards....can't wait to get my hands on it...

Typing this right now on a 867MHz G4 with 640MB Ram.....
Have a 533MHz G4 tower next to me running OS X.1.4 Server....
Have an iBook that just lost its job to a Ti ;)

I have a XP1800+ system that hasn't been started in months now....

Just a matter of what your doing and what you like...The Apple does all my work. I'm a Communications/CS/Art student and the Apple handles them all in the way I like.

Just a matter of finding the best way to do what you need to do....for me, its an Apple...for other people its a PC...they both have merits, good points, and bad points...you take the good you take the bad and that's just the way it is... :)

Mike D
 

Barnaby W. Füi

Elite Member
Aug 14, 2001
12,343
0
0
Originally posted by: Shanti
x86 does not mean Windows.

of course it doesnt, but the vast majority of people here are windows people. the few x86 non-windows people are the ones defending macs in this thread, and realize that they are not being referred to as windows users.