Why doesn't anyone come close to apple as far as design?

[Arkaign]

Then no doubt it will be cheaply made using cheap low end plastic parts. Apple is designed to take a beating and last over a decade. Also at $200 it will be using low end components, apple only uses the best components.

Haha, no and no.

(1)- Apple isn't exactly designed to take a beating as far as notebooks. They break just like anything else. Check out ebay for tons of parted-out macbook stuff from just the past 1-2 years. Their design is overall better, and *SOME* of the components, usually the casing, is superior to average PC notebooks.

(2)- Last over a decade? Are you high? Go find me a Macbook from May 30th, 2001 or older that you'd WANT to use for anything other than nostalgic purposes. Not to mention the battery will be toast or nearly toast at that advanced age. This is just the nature of technology. Being a Macbook doesn't make it immune to getting old, as a matter of fact most typical Apple acolytes (or fanboys if you prefer) CONSTANTLY buy the new model that makes the old one "obsolete".

(3)- Apple uses only the best components? By what standard? If screens, then yes, I think they do. If CPU? Usually not, but there is a lot of overlap with midrange PC notebooks. The Macbook air is cool, but it's still running on Core 2 Duo! That will be changed soon. Macbooks also have crap for GPU, which again is pointless to most of their users, but it's true. HDDs/SSDs, Apple's choices are usually middle-of-the-road. Memory? Ditto.

I know you're trolling, but really, you'll have to do better than that to make any sense at all.

It's funny, because I agree and am fond of saying that Apple has the best overall package for mobile products available today. But they're not made of magic dust, and they certainly are doorstops just like everything else after a few years. Ten years my ass.

 

[Bateluer]

The OP is an obvious troll, or a retard. Or both. Search his posts people.

 

[ElFenix]

Macbooks also have crap for GPU, which again is pointless to most of their users, but it's true.

eh, until the sandy macbooks the apples had better gpus than 90%+ of pc notebooks

edit: the 15 and 17 still have better gpus than 90% of pc notebooks

 

[Arkaign]

The OP is an obvious troll, or a retard. Or both. Search his posts people.

Hahaha, I think you're right.

 

[Arkaign]

eh, until the sandy macbooks the apples had better gpus than 90%+ of pc notebooks

I agree, though that was just because 90%+ of PC notebooks are $500 or cheaper beaters with integrated video. At the price points of the Apple notebooks, they gave you a mediocre discrete GPU along with a very nice casing and screen, while on a PC notebook you could get a screen 90% as good, with a vastly better GPU, for the same price.

It's still the same story, and has been for as long as I can remember.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacBook_Pro#Updates_2

Now you get either a mobile 6490 or 6750 All at bargain basement prices I'm sure

 

[preslove]

Apple owns the high end market and makes a ton more $ on each unit sold than anyone else. This allows them spend a small fraction of that on cool looking aluminum cases. The Mac Pros I set up a couple years ago are the best desktops I've ever seen. Of course, Apple sells most of their units at prices well over $3 grand. Compare that to prices that Dell charges for their desktops. There's your answer.

Why is this? The most effective marketing of a any technology company for over ~12 years. That includes over all marketing, including planning, product development, AND promotion.

I don't like what apple does in a lot of instances & am not a fanboy.

 

[0roo0roo]

Too bad the screen looks like you're looking through a screen door on a hot summers day. I have an x201 hate it.

yea its a damned shame, the thinkpads had good usability design but what awful screen panel choices... serious wtf.

 

[WelshBloke]

Best looking? They look like toddler toys.

 

[Arkaign]

Apple owns the high end market and makes a ton more $ on each unit sold than anyone else. This allows them spend a small fraction of that on cool looking aluminum cases. The Mac Pros I set up a couple years ago are the best desktops I've ever seen. Of course, Apple sells most of their units at prices well over $3 grand. Compare that to prices that Dell charges for their desktops. There's your answer.

Why is this? The most effective marketing of a any technology company for over 20 years. That includes over all marketing, including planning, product development, AND promotion.

I don't like what apple does in a lot of instances & am not a fanboy.

Apple almost bought the farm not that long ago, so I'm not sure "over 20 years" applies. Macbooks used to be garbage as well (think original iMac era). It wasn't really until the iPod that Apple started a steady recovery. Then the Intel CPU switchover (competitive performance again along with greatly reduced costs), then iPhone, now iPad, it's been a very good few years. 20 years though, no. Apple was niche, then declined nearly into destruction, was actually "saved" by Bill Gates/Microsoft, and with a steady hand under Jobs has come back to be a beast.

Mac Pro desktop is terribly overpriced like all branded "workstations" are. Crap for upgrades, and completely uncompetitive with a well built custom system or hackintosh for the $.

 

[Arkaign]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxOp5mBY9IY

 

[Anubis]

because Function > Form

and function is cheap

also all white electronics are ugly. ALL OF THEM

 

[grrl]

Even the most ardent windows fan will have to admit that apple makes the best looking PCs and Laptops.

Assumption fail.

 

[ElFenix]

Now you get either a mobile 6490 or 6750 All at bargain basement prices I'm sure

how many laptops that don't need a sherpa to lug around and have good battery life have better graphics?

 

[Arkaign]

how many laptops that don't need a sherpa to lug around and have good battery life have better graphics?

That's a fair point, though my observation is that there are always tradeoffs. In this case, it's cost and GPU, while you do get the great macbook design, battery life, materials, screen, and OSX (this can be a pro depending on user and software needs, and of course you can still run Windows if need be).

As a counterpoint to Mac Pro 17" ($2,500 base), I would say something like the recent DV7 series, Sandy Bridge i7, 8GB DDR3, 17.3" LED HD, Backlit trackpad/keyboard, radeon 6770, blu-ray burner, usb3, wimax, wireless hdmi, etc, in a brushed aluminum case for $1k cheaper. Tradeoffs will be the lesser screen, no unibody, lower battery life, no mac name.

I'm a big fan of Apple's mobile products, but just keeping it real for folks like the OP who seem to think they're 100% perfect.

 

[Imp]

I like the look of business class Dells and HP computers more than Apple.

 

[CptObvious]

Because before Apple's iProducts, cell phones, MP3 players and computers were largely designed by engineers strictly concerned about features over user-friendliness. Remember your cell phones and music players from the 90's? They had odd, sometimes tiny buttons scattered all over the place, ugly menus that you had to dive through and read a manual for, and had horribly locked-down software. Even if you hate Apple, you have to give them credit for changing that.

I think there's still one more electronics market that needs revamping: DSLRs. Still too many tiny buttons and menu diving to change settings.

 

[Cogman]

http://www.hp.com/united-states/campaigns/touchsmart/#/Home
This, IMO, looks better than the iMac.

 

[shortylickens]

Its sorta like having a really pretty girlfriend whose a colossal bitch. Sure you get a good feeling having it and it looks cool when you walk around, but eventually it will drive you crazy and you will some day be glad to get rid of it, both for your mind and your wallet.

The low-cost alternative everyone else has may not be special, but overall you will be much happier, especially if you already had the expensive one and know the difference.

 

[Pardus]

Apple designed there products to be simple to use and maintain. According to Apple, there product lifespan is 3-4 years.

The iMac is a desktop with 3 pieces of hardware, 1 monitor/pc, 1 keyboard, 1 mouse. It hooks up with one cable, never gets hot and runs seamlessly. No loud fans either. Upgrades is limited to ram and hard drive. Costs $1100 to $2000.

A comparable Dell or custom build with give you better hardware and costs a lot less, but you can't easily run Mac OSX on it. With the iMac, you can run Windows 7 in vmware and drag and drop files between.

So you get a mac and windows in one unit.. With the Dell or custom build, you cant run Windows 7 and MAC OSX on it as easy.

I would love to get a MacBook Pro or even a iMac, but i don't have an extra grand around to do so. Funny also how Apple never discounts there products or allows use of coupons like Dell does.

If Apple lowered there prices by 50%, they have a lot more market share.

People who buy Apple products do so with the expectancy that nothing will go wrong with it in 3-4 years, and for that piece of mind, they are willing to pay whatever Apple asks.

 

[shortylickens]

Apple designed there products to be simple to use and maintain. According to Apple, there product lifespan is 3-4 years.

The iMac is a desktop with 3 pieces of hardware, 1 monitor/pc, 1 keyboard, 1 mouse. It hooks up with one cable, never gets hot and runs seamlessly. No loud fans either. Upgrades is limited to ram and hard drive. Costs $1100 to $2000.

A comparable Dell or custom build with give you better hardware and costs a lot less, but you can't easily run Mac OSX on it. With the iMac, you can run Windows 7 in vmware and drag and drop files between.

So you get a mac and windows in one unit.. With the Dell or custom build, you cant run Windows 7 and MAC OSX on it as easy.

I would love to get a MacBook Pro or even a iMac, but i don't have an extra grand around to do so. Funny also how Apple never discounts there products or allows use of coupons like Dell does.

If Apple lowered there prices by 50%, they have a lot more market share.

People who buy Apple products do so with the expectancy that nothing will go wrong with it in 3-4 years, and for that piece of mind, they are willing to pay whatever Apple asks.

Their.

Don't feel bad, Chrome is superior to Safari but it wont correct grammar. Just spelling.

 

[kyrax12]

Well OP is not entirely wrong.

Despite better alternatives for Apple computers, people are still stuffing money into Apple's big pocket.

One of the reasons I deducted was from the overall design of both the exterior and interior of the MBP. I agree the design of the Macbook Pro triumphs over any laptop brand ever made and I also agree OSX has very nice aesthetics.

The design is one of the rea.... hell it's mostly the reason why the MBP is doing so well in the computer market.

 

[Cogman]

Apple designed there products to be simple to use and maintain. According to Apple, there product lifespan is 3-4 years.

The iMac is a desktop with 3 pieces of hardware, 1 monitor/pc, 1 keyboard, 1 mouse. It hooks up with one cable, never gets hot and runs seamlessly. No loud fans either. Upgrades is limited to ram and hard drive. Costs $1100 to $2000.

A comparable Dell or custom build with give you better hardware and costs a lot less, but you can't easily run Mac OSX on it. With the iMac, you can run Windows 7 in vmware and drag and drop files between.

So you get a mac and windows in one unit.. With the Dell or custom build, you cant run Windows 7 and MAC OSX on it as easy.

I would love to get a MacBook Pro or even a iMac, but i don't have an extra grand around to do so. Funny also how Apple never discounts there products or allows use of coupons like Dell does.

If Apple lowered there prices by 50%, they have a lot more market share.

People who buy Apple products do so with the expectancy that nothing will go wrong with it in 3-4 years, and for that piece of mind, they are willing to pay whatever Apple asks.

WTF? Mac does not make vmware. The fact that it is easy to transfer files from vmware to the OS is completely unrelated to apple. Hell, the fact that Windows can run on apple hardware is a testament to microsoft.

Mac OSX can't run anywhere else because apple has specifically designed it not to be able to run on anything but approved apple hardware. Saying "Dell sucks because it can't run OSX" is silly because it isn't dell's fault.

 

[0roo0roo]

because Function > Form

and function is cheap

also all white electronics are ugly. ALL OF THEM

i wish that were true, more likely is most are designed for cost cutting/safe inoffensiveness.
companies put out interesting concept designs but deliver some bland junk.

sony walkmans with sonic stage weren't cheap thats for sure lots of half baked stuff released out there.

http://www.engadget.com/2010/11/30/dell-inspiron-duo-review/
poor execution... not function

 

[Gibson486]

It's because Apple's designers are highly revered within in the company and are greatly admired.

In most other companies the design is an after thought.

I have to agree with this. Just look at the apple power supply. There is no ferrite bead on it....Pretty much tells me that the EEs got it right the first time instead of having EMC be an after thought.

 

[Pulsar]

Then no doubt it will be cheaply made using cheap low end plastic parts. Apple is designed to take a beating and last over a decade. Also at $200 it will be using low end components, apple only uses the best components.

Talk about a desperate cry for attention.

Please get back to us and let us know how their common-off the shelf components like their DVD drive, hard drive, processor, ram, video chipset, sound chipset, and screen, which all happen to be outsourced and are no different that 100 different models on the net, are the "best" components.

Oh wait. Sorry. They're in an apple. Of course they're the best. ROTFLOL.