-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
Why don't you own a mac?
Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Barnaby W. Füi
Elite Member
They are too expensive. They are attractive to me in many ways, but more and more lately, I have realized I've just fallen prey to good advertising and good cult building skills. Apple is to hardware as MS is to operating systems, that is, they are forced to develop them in order to have a platform for all of their great features, and to make sure those features work right, *instead* of making those features portable. For example, OSX does not run on non ppc hardware, and MS apps are not designed to work outside of windows (although wine does a good job of faking it, but that is not true portability).
Apples are very nice, don't get me wrong, and their OS is second to none as far as gui quality and multimedia capabilities and integration, but for someone like me, who just prefers the command line for 99% of things, an Apple is a bad investment, and I don't have tons of money to waste like some people.
Apples are very nice, don't get me wrong, and their OS is second to none as far as gui quality and multimedia capabilities and integration, but for someone like me, who just prefers the command line for 99% of things, an Apple is a bad investment, and I don't have tons of money to waste like some people.
Agree. They are niche computes, best suited for graphics work but even the pc can match up with them if properly configured, for less money. Macs are like pieces of art, they are aesthetically pleasing and their hardware designs are the result of a lot of R&D, but I don't care for that in my computers. I want broad-spectrum performance first, and fit and finish second. If Apple priced their computers even remotely close to pc's, they would get more sales. OSX is a great OS, but they are still too damn expensive.
newbiepcuser
Diamond Member
LMAO, it reminds me of the MAC customers that use to come in while I was techie at Micro Center. Always trying convince me how superior MACs are etc. I'm sure MACs are great machines. Just don't have the money to try one out.
I do not own an Apple because:
1. Prices for their new computers are higher than what I can pay for a PC (with or without a monitor)
2. I cannot build a Mac (easily) with purchasing parts from numerous vendors.
3. There is nothing, specifically, I *need* a Mac for.
Until one of either of those above three mentioned items change, I will own an x86 machine.
vash
1. Prices for their new computers are higher than what I can pay for a PC (with or without a monitor)
2. I cannot build a Mac (easily) with purchasing parts from numerous vendors.
3. There is nothing, specifically, I *need* a Mac for.
Until one of either of those above three mentioned items change, I will own an x86 machine.
vash
1. OS-X ROCKS!, Unix base you can't beat that. Also it is largely open source (not quite but open enough).
2. Sure the graphics cards on Macs are not quite top of the line, but almost all of the top 10% of the games are available for Mac.
3. X11, port Linux apps into a nice GUI interface great transition for people into linux (or linux to MacOS).
4. Mac portables have super long realistic battery life (4 hour +).
5. As far as program compatability nearly every heavily used office/design program is available for Mac.
6. Apple engineering is top of the line, if you look at the attention to detail I don't think any other company spends so much time on their products.
Some things to consider.
If Apple released OS-X for x86 would you go for it? Computer cost wouldn't really be a big issue, as you should be able to use nearly any x86 computer. There are quite a few rumors that Steve Jobs is playing with the idea and I would certainly do it.
FYI. If you know what your doing you can upgrade older macs fairly easily. I picked up a ibook the other day on ebay with a broken LCD (G3 700mhz/256mb/30gb/dvd/cdrw) for $450 and replacing the screen is going to run me $200-250. I personally find that a steal, sure I don't havea a warranty but it's not like many of use care.
2. Sure the graphics cards on Macs are not quite top of the line, but almost all of the top 10% of the games are available for Mac.
3. X11, port Linux apps into a nice GUI interface great transition for people into linux (or linux to MacOS).
4. Mac portables have super long realistic battery life (4 hour +).
5. As far as program compatability nearly every heavily used office/design program is available for Mac.
6. Apple engineering is top of the line, if you look at the attention to detail I don't think any other company spends so much time on their products.
Some things to consider.
If Apple released OS-X for x86 would you go for it? Computer cost wouldn't really be a big issue, as you should be able to use nearly any x86 computer. There are quite a few rumors that Steve Jobs is playing with the idea and I would certainly do it.
FYI. If you know what your doing you can upgrade older macs fairly easily. I picked up a ibook the other day on ebay with a broken LCD (G3 700mhz/256mb/30gb/dvd/cdrw) for $450 and replacing the screen is going to run me $200-250. I personally find that a steal, sure I don't havea a warranty but it's not like many of use care.
MercenaryForHire
Lifer
gEy. 😀
- M4H
Anubis
No Lifer
no i didnt want win2K cause i didnt order it but i took it cause it was a real version not a priated one.
i just want the OPTION of getting a 2 button mouse from apple instead of having to buy a 3000$+ comp and getting teh sh!tty 1 button one. and haveing to buy my own.
and seeing that for 3000$ i coulds build 3 or 4 PC's that are just as good. dosent help apples case with me either
Anubis
No Lifer
sence when is office V.X for mac more stable then Office XP????
office XP nad NEVER crashed on me in well over a year. te mac version on the other hand has lost me 3 papers. and caused me 1 broken finger and a 300$ fine cause i got so pissed teh 3rd time it happened i punched teh damn computer
Yes easily. OSX is a better *nix-based OS than any of the Linux flavors I have tried to date (and it's better than Solaris). It has better built-in multimedia capabilities and of course the stability of Unix. Apple wants to charge it's users a premium for their OS by tying it to proprietary hardware, but most people aren't goint to pay that premium. Port it to x86 at a reasonable cost and I would buy it in a heartbeat.
Barnaby W. Füi
Elite Member
What? A terminal window HOUSES a command prompt. Why are you trying to explain things to me when you don't even understand yourself?
And the point was, why pay all that money for an apple, when I can have a command line on any machine (including much cheaper ones)?
Barnaby W. Füi
Elite Member
That's great, but then they would go out of business, so it's not a good idea for them, only for you.
I had an Apple II at one point, but the software weren't upward compatible with Mac, therefor I went with a Amiga upgrade then PC after that.
I now own PCs, because everything that a Mac could do I could do it with a Lin/Win-Tel machine for much less money.
Yes, I'm a cheap skate that still using a 3 year old Cel 500mhz as the main computer. It is a Frankenstein that I buit from old parts + $350.00 worth of new parts and I'm not planing to give up Franky till 2004.
Barnaby W. Füi
Elite Member
And johnlog posts in the OS forum about how windows has always been 100% stable for him, so what. Anecdotal evidence is worthless.
I disagree completely. Apple tries to capture both the hardware and software markets simultaneously, and the resulting lack in competition drives the cost of their product up past the point at which most people will pay. People turn to substitues, like Linux or Windows on x86 machines. Let me ask you, who makes more money? Microsoft or Apple corp? Dell or Apple?
😀
😀
BatmanNate
Lifer
Too much $$ for what you get.
Barnaby W. Füi
Elite Member
They both make lots of money, because they both do the same thing, just apple with hardware, and MS with operating systems. News flash: Apple is making money! Just because they make less than MS by no means they are any kind of failure! They are doing just fine, and frankly do not need your business, their little cult of artsy people supplies them with plenty of revenue.
Whatever. Compare the balance sheets and MS and Dell destroy Apple. The situation, as the market overhwhelmingly sees it, is that Apple is too expensive for what it does. People like cool looking computers and OSX, but they can get suitable or better alternatives for less money. Paying for a mac has more to do with prestige and the cultive personality than it has to do with common sense.
Btw, you are arguing your personal taste vs. the computer market as a whole. Apple may make money, but most people don't buy them and for good reasons. While you can buy anything you want, that doesn't mean it makes fiscal sense for the majority to do so.
Btw, you are arguing your personal taste vs. the computer market as a whole. Apple may make money, but most people don't buy them and for good reasons. While you can buy anything you want, that doesn't mean it makes fiscal sense for the majority to do so.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
