Apple responds to Microsoft ads: "a PC is no bargain"


Recommended Posts

Southern Patriot
There are a few Motherboards in the market at the moment that run on EFI with BIOS support as-well its no different to what Apple are doing. EFI is very advanced.

Exactly. As I stated earlier, even the Acer Aspire One that I use actually is running EFI with the BIOS module (look up InsydeH20 if you don't believe this). Most if not all current Intel boards do too. How is it a hack for Apple to have make use of a FEATURE of EFI in order to allow Windows (including XP which didn't have EFI support) to be installed?

Link to post
Share on other sites
dwhall

Why on earth do Mac users care what Windows users think of Macs. Why do Windows users care what Mac users think of Windows? Not sure I understand the whole debate. This is just as pointless and neverending as the Chevy vs Ford debate. Who am I to tell my neighbor what he prefers and who is he to tell me what I prefer. It's all a matter of preference. If you love to use windows then good for you. If you like to use Macs then good for you. Who the hell cares as long as the one who is using the hardware/software likes his/her experience. The whole arguement is pointless. I can understand Apple and Microsoft fighting the issue but the users? come on now......

Link to post
Share on other sites
DavidM
Why on earth do Mac users care what Windows users think of Macs. Why do Windows users care what Mac users think of Windows? Not sure I understand the whole debate. This is just as pointless and neverending as the Chevy vs Ford debate. Who am I to tell my neighbor what he prefers and who is he to tell me what I prefer. It's all a matter of preference. If you love to use windows then good for you. If you like to use Macs then good for you. Who the hell cares as long as the one who is using the hardware/software likes his/her experience. The whole arguement is pointless. I can understand Apple and Microsoft fighting the issue but the users? come on now......

You stop being reasonable right now dammit this is the internet!!! Where my e-penis is bigger, faster, and vastly superior than yours in every way imaginable AND by just by using MY OS, it proves by association that MY OS is better than your OS.... dammit! :rolleyes:

P.S. What are you doing trying to use logic and common sense in a OS war thread? :rofl:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Growled

Not taking sides here because I think people should run whatever they want. However, the main difference between Apple and PC is not hardware any longer but software. You can get a Mac and add iWork for $79. When you get a PC and have to add $50 a year for Antivirus and then add several hundred more for Office then even a cheap PC is now getting expensive. Yes, I know you can get cheaper/free version but most people who buy their computers at retail don't.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Boz
Not taking sides here because I think people should run whatever they want. However, the main difference between Apple and PC is not hardware any longer but software. You can get a Mac and add iWork for $79. When you get a PC and have to add $50 a year for Antivirus and then add several hundred more for Office then even a cheap PC is now getting expensive. Yes, I know you can get cheaper/free version but most people who buy their computers at retail don't.

You don't have to do any of those things. And iWork costs $79. Most PC retailers include Office too.. the MS Works (smaller version of Office - $39.95) and you don't have to pay $50 for anti-virus as such nonsense is spread by completely ignorant people. Not only that you don't really even need anti-virus software on Vista x64 (due to presence of Windows Defender, DEP and UAC + IE and FF have block prevention from hazzardous sites) but even if you want to be completely protected there is a bunch of free solutions that are very capable and subjectively even better then paid versions. Not to mention the fact that you are not even safe anymore on OSX due to trojans appearing and making Macs into zombies.

Not one thing out of all that crap published by mainstream press, who's editors are mostly Mac fanboys anyways, is true to be perfectly honest. Everything you have on a Mac you get on PC (even iLife like apps too) and even more not to mention the variety of free stuff you can download that is not available for OSX.

And if you want to discuss even more cost-effective thing with PCs is that you get automatically 3 years of support from major manufacturers for your PC while on Macs you get 1 year and you have to pay $250+tax for Apple Care which is complete ripoff if you ask me.

Edited by Boz
Link to post
Share on other sites
chrisj1968

Eweek magazine's current edition listed in a commentary how Apple actually is a monopoly. the imac is so controlled by Apple that there is no competition. you must use it's hardware and even partner firms who develop for the imac's are also held under lock and key. there's no fair competition. why doesn't apple get run through the courts for anti competitive practises?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Boz
Eweek magazine's current edition listed in a commentary how Apple actually is a monopoly. the imac is so controlled by Apple that there is no competition. you must use it's hardware and even partner firms who develop for the imac's are also held under lock and key. there's no fair competition. why doesn't apple get run through the courts for anti competitive practises?

Right.. but they can't be really held responsible as monopoly because they have like 8% of marketshare. But you are completely right. Not only that they have shut down developers who made apps that collide with their own but their whole practice with AppStore and iPhone and dev stuff being exclusively approved by Apple so someone god forbid doesn't make a better application then something they do or that competes with their ridiculous Quicktime (something like Flash) tells you a lot.

I personally use their products and for the most part enjoy it, just like I enjoy aspects of Microsoft products, but I find that whole business practice and often ripoffs, plus childish and completely factually incorrect advertising, starting to really bother me.

As I said in one of my previous posts in other thread, Apple is a technology dictatorship model and definitely Big Brother-like.Which is ironic considering their '84 ads. They grown worse then those corporate things back in the day.

Link to post
Share on other sites
BajiRav
Not taking sides here because I think people should run whatever they want. However, the main difference between Apple and PC is not hardware any longer but software. You can get a Mac and add iWork for $79. When you get a PC and have to add $50 a year for Antivirus and then add several hundred more for Office then even a cheap PC is now getting expensive. Yes, I know you can get cheaper/free version but most people who buy their computers at retail don't.

The people buy a computer at retail - take it home without AV - Windows prompts for AV and links to Microsoft's website where are all AV options are listed. Including the free ones.

Is it that difficult?

Link to post
Share on other sites
giga
Eweek magazine's current edition listed in a commentary how Apple actually is a monopoly. the imac is so controlled by Apple that there is no competition. you must use it's hardware and even partner firms who develop for the imac's are also held under lock and key. there's no fair competition. why doesn't apple get run through the courts for anti competitive practises?

Apple has a monopoly...over their own product? A monopoly classification requires an establishment of a relevant market. An iMac does not qualify--a desktop consumer market does.

Not only that they have shut down developers who made apps that collide with their own but their whole practice with AppStore and iPhone and dev stuff being exclusively approved by Apple so someone god forbid doesn't make a better application then something they do or that competes with their ridiculous Quicktime (something like Flash) tells you a lot.

Just like the Android platform, right?

Link to post
Share on other sites
sc302

they seem to be confusing monopoly with proprietary.

Link to post
Share on other sites
twist
Not taking sides here because I think people should run whatever they want. However, the main difference between Apple and PC is not hardware any longer but software. You can get a Mac and add iWork for $79. When you get a PC and have to add $50 a year for Antivirus and then add several hundred more for Office then even a cheap PC is now getting expensive. Yes, I know you can get cheaper/free version but most people who buy their computers at retail don't.

did microsoft cave in to the recent news that photoshop is free on all macs and start giving away office to apple users too? or is there some sort of alternativeon macs, maybe one that doesn't cost money, nah, there isn't one on windows either...

Link to post
Share on other sites
chrisj1968
Apple has a monopoly...over their own product? A monopoly classification requires an establishment of a relevant market. An iMac does not qualify--a desktop consumer market does.

Just like the Android platform, right?

no it is a monopoly in that, all the hardware in imacs are made from someone else. the macs used to use G processors and then I chuckled when apple announced it would use intel processors.

now as a photographer, i have heard about how much imacs are used in photography. but they are just too expensive for me at this point.

Link to post
Share on other sites
giga
no it is a monopoly in that, all the hardware in imacs are made from someone else. the macs used to use G processors and then I chuckled when apple announced it would use intel processors.

How is that a monopoly?

Link to post
Share on other sites
sundayx
The whole arguement is pointless.

+1

This is a marketing campaign, the same type of marketing in every other industry.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ricardo Gil
no it is a monopoly in that, all the hardware in imacs are made from someone else. the macs used to use G processors and then I chuckled when apple announced it would use intel processors.

You make no sense. :huh:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Growled
You don't have to do any of those things. And iWork costs $79. Most PC retailers include Office too.. the MS Works (smaller version of Office - $39.95) and you don't have to pay $50 for anti-virus as such nonsense is spread by completely ignorant people. Not only that you don't really even need anti-virus software on Vista x64 (due to presence of Windows Defender, DEP and UAC + IE and FF have block prevention from hazzardous sites) but even if you want to be completely protected there is a bunch of free solutions that are very capable and subjectively even better then paid versions. Not to mention the fact that you are not even safe anymore on OSX due to trojans appearing and making Macs into zombies.

Apparently you guys didn't read my last sentence. That's OK, I'm use to it. :D

BTW, I've never used a Mac in my life.

Link to post
Share on other sites
techbeck
I think you forgot design, style, reliability and OS X. How does a company gather 'fanboys' if their product isn't worth being excited over in the first place?!

Please, who the hell cares about how something looks unless you are very vain and shallow. I got a Lenovo Thinkpad that is plane black, not shiny but solid as hell. Works great and NO ISSUES WHATSOEVER. Its stable and always boots. Had it for a year so far and no problems. Same goes with the hundreds of Dell laptops we have at work. Only had 2 issues with Dell laptops that had to be called in for warranty.

And you missed a point...security. Windows is way more secure than OSX. Hell, OSX was the first to be hacked 2 years in a row.

I will take functionality over looks any day.

Link to post
Share on other sites
bob21
you forgot design, style, reliability

Design and Style are all subjective , Reliability however is not. That argument might have been reasonable with PowerPC but not today . Same Components Same Reliability.

Apple doesn’t make Processors.

Apple doesn’t make Motherboards.

Apple doesn’t make Graphics Cards.

Apple doesn’t make RAM.

Apple doesn’t make Hard Disks.

Apple doesn’t make PSU’s.

Once you accept this any claims of increased reliability are laughably stupid .

Link to post
Share on other sites
Subject Delta
Just like the Android platform, right?

No. Applications rarely get removed from the Android market, and unlike Apple they don't block out competing applications either. The only things that have ever been removed have been tethering applications, and that is because they violate most network providers FUP's.

Link to post
Share on other sites
giga
No. Applications rarely get removed from the Android market, and unlike Apple they don't block out competing applications either. The only things that have ever been removed have been tethering applications, and that is because they violate most network providers FUP's.

My comment was directed at the Flash statement.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Vice
Design and Style are all subjective , Reliability however is not. That argument might have been reasonable with PowerPC but not today . Same Components Same Reliability.
Apple doesn’t make Processors.

Apple doesn’t make Motherboards.

Apple doesn’t make Graphics Cards.

Apple doesn’t make RAM.

Apple doesn’t make Hard Disks.

Apple doesn’t make PSU’s.

Once you accept this any claims of increased reliability are laughably stupid .

They do actually make Motherboards. Specifically they design the Motherboard themselves and have them produced by Foxconn. They also design and manufacturer the enclosure of the computers and if you look at the Notebooks specifically they have designed a number of components in it such as the Magsafe power connector and the Multi-touch trackpad which is made of Glass. These are all things which can be pointed to as being more or less reliable then a generic Notebook. When you look at the Mac Pro it also has Apple engineered components however these are less obvious, the Case is still custom made and the motherboard is again designed by Apple with a special daughter board that comes out with the CPU's and RAM, again not standard affair and another point of contention when compared to generic PC's

The MacBook Air is a special exception as Apple claims they actually requested Intel to repackage their Core 2 Duo Die so that they could fit it in to such a small enclosure. Intel claims that Apple worked very closely with them on the final design of the Processor how true that is only Paul Otellini knows but one thing for sure was that Apple had exclusivity over that specific Processor for a few months and other OEM's such as ASUS were vocal about their disdain for this Apple-Intel relationship which they felt was anti-competitive.

I get what you are saying that the core components that actually process information are the same but that is true of any computer. When people talk of Apples higher reliability they are talking about the overall package including the casing which secures the life of the internal components by not subjecting them to stress. For example a Plastic trackpad is much more likely to wear out then a Glass one. A magnetically held in Power connector is less likely to wear then a plug that is designed to stay in based on how deep the plug recess is and the force on all sides of it. The same can also be said of the Glass screen which is more robust and stain resistant compared to a screen without a Glass exterior, it can also be argued that a Unibody enclosure is much more rigid and thus less prone to failure then Aluminium notebooks that are designed with many more separate pieces that connect together.

Just pointing out that although the CPU, GPU, Chipset, Display, WiFi, Bluetooth and Hard Disk are the same the way in which they are arranged and pieced together in an overall system is was derives its reliability when compared to other manufacturers of computers. Not that I'm saying Apple is more or less reliable then any other supplier, just that they aren't using the same formula as most other computer suppliers based on the examples I gave above.

Link to post
Share on other sites
iamwhoiam
Define "out of the box"...

Out of the box = Natively. OSX cannot run the vast majority of programs and/or games and that "PC" users can, and until it can, installing Windows on a Mac does not equal out of the box. Installing Windows on a Mac defeats the purpose of having a Mac in the first place, does it not?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Vice
Out of the box = Natively. OSX cannot run the vast majority of programs and/or games and that "PC" users can, and until it can, installing Windows on a Mac does not equal out of the box. Installing Windows on a Mac defeats the purpose of having a Mac in the first place, does it not?

Exactly. I agree. But it should also be recognised that iLife comes with a Mac in the same statement which includes many Applications that Windows users would have to purchase if they wanted to do serious Video editing or Photo manipulation, DVD Authoring or learning an Instrument. In the same vain Mac users would have to spend money if they wanted to play Games and by that I mean obviously a license to XP or Vista.

In my opinion if your looking for a Gaming computer get a PC. You can paint a horse to look like a zebra but it's still a Horse at the end of the day and Mac's are just not very good for Gaming as they ship with only Optical out when it comes to more then 2.1 Sound (so you can't use 5.1 or 7.1 gaming headsets) the Graphics cards are very slow and in all but one of the computers (Mac Pro) cannot be changed from the default that the Machine ships with. And of course no SLI/Crossfire support.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Solid Knight

Microsoft could always ship Office with Windows... oh wait, everyone would cry foul. Some people criticized Windows for lacking some application suite out of the box but if they include said application suite those very same people would run around saying Microsoft is abusing its near-monopoly and being anti-competitive. Which is it? Do you want them to have the applications or not? Pick one and only one.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Vice

I'd personally like them to include applications, or lower the price of Windows one or the other. I don't think Vista was worth its retail price for what it included.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.