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


Recommended Posts

The response from Apple doesn't surprise me. The company has always been acting like a spoiled little child, screaming insults and jokes calling it funny but when reality hits, they go on whining rampage trying to deny something that's obvious without a second thought.

Funny.

Christ. Everybody needs to get off their high horse and just calm down for a second.

Look, I love my Mac. I also love my PC. Both machines are fantastic at what they do. That said, based on my experience working as a computer technician at my university, far fewer customers come in with Mac problems versus customers with PC problems. Now, this could be for any number of reasons: maybe there are fewer Mac users on campus, maybe they're taking their Macs elsewhere to get fixed, or maybe, just maybe, the Mac users are having fewer problems than their PC-using counterparts. I don't know, and I don't profess to know.

Assuming that a Mac has fewer problems than a PC, how much is that advantage worth? I don't think anybody can argue that a Mac at a certain spec is going to be the same price as a PC at the same (or similar) spec, but are customers willing to pay a few extra hundred dollars to deal with fewer problems over the life of the machine? I don't know, but I can say I've had far more customers with broken PCs saying that they're going to switch to Mac than customers with broken Macs saying they're going to switch to PC.

If you know what you're doing and don't have a particular attachment to OS X, you can definitely save some money by going with a PC. That said, if you love the Apple design aesthetic and the OS, or if you just aren't that comfortable with dealing with the problems that tend to arise more often on a PC versus a Mac, you should probably go ahead and get that Mac and just eat out a couple times less per month.

Personally, I buy Mac for my laptops and build my own PC desktops. Apple's laptops seem to have better battery life, weigh less, and are thinner than similarly spec'ed PC laptops. However, for a desktop, I enjoy playing games and can get the experience I want by building my own machine.

Finally, for people laughing at Apple for responding to Microsoft's ad, get a freakin' life. Companies attack one another and the targets issue retaliatory statements right back. It's just a part of business. If Microsoft didn't retaliate when Apple started their "I'm a Mac" ads, that's their own damn fault.

I think that what Windows users need to realize is that Mac users have a different view on computing.

For instance, I like an OS built on Unix. I don't want an OS with 400,000 lines of code so that some old legacy software runs fine (thus impacting on the OS's stability and performance). I also don't want to be under a constant tirade of threats, malware etc.

Nearly forgot, I also actually don't want a generic operating system designed to run as many devices in the world, as possible. I want an OS that is tuned to a specific range of computers that are tightly supported.

I don't care if I can run 1,000,000,023 'apps' with Windows. I only really want and need about 40 that do the job damn well.

Plus the golden quote for any fanboy is this: 'Your hardware is only as good as your OS allows it to be.'

Windows never ran my hardware well. I always felt that Windows was doing it's own thing - at times, just when I rather it did what I wanted it to do.

So this silly quibbling over PC / Mac specifications, hardware etc.. See my quote in bold.

For those Windows fanboys who argue that PC is more secure and more advanced than any other OS on the market: Security Now 192: Listener Feedback 64 - have a listen to the opinions of a real security expert - not what flows from the bowels of Microsoft.

Thats another laughable argument to say the least, and as with Macalicious your assessment would require that everyone has the same experiences with Windows that you do, and that everyone else thinks that Unix is superior in the same way that you do, which they obviously don't because there are a lot of people perfectly happy with how Vista functions with their hardware. I have a Q6600, 4GB of memory, and a 512mb ATI 4850, and I don't see any of the issues you claim (my rig is even overclocked). My games run fluidly and smoothly, with hardly any framerate spikes, I rarely if ever get any BSOD's or crashes, and I don't find any problems with the legacy compatibility built into Windows either.

For the record also, Malware is only an issue if you don't secure your computer properly, or are careless when using the Internet.

I think that what Windows users need to realize is that Mac users have a different view on computing.

For instance, I like an OS built on Unix. I don't want an OS with 400,000 lines of code so that some old legacy software runs fine (thus impacting on the OS's stability and performance). I also don't want to be under a constant tirade of threats, malware etc.

Nearly forgot, I also actually don't want a generic operating system designed to run as many devices in the world, as possible. I want an OS that is tuned to a specific range of computers that are tightly supported.

I don't care if I can run 1,000,000,023 'apps' with Windows. I only really want and need about 40 that do the job damn well.

Plus the golden quote for any fanboy is this: 'Your hardware is only as good as your OS allows it to be.'

Windows never ran my hardware well. I always felt that Windows was doing it's own thing - at times, just when I rather it did what I wanted it to do.

So this silly quibbling over PC / Mac specifications, hardware etc.. See my quote in bold.

For those Windows fanboys who argue that PC is more secure and more advanced than any other OS on the market: Security Now 192: Listener Feedback 64 - have a listen to the opinions of a real security expert - not what flows from the bowels of Microsoft.

Steve Gibson? Pfft. Don't you remember his scare mongering when XP launched? He is good but exaggerates a lot!

"I also actually don't want a generic operating system designed to run as many devices in the world" ????

News flash: OS X by your definition is a generic OS and only thing stopping it running on a generic computer is Apple's DRM and lack of drivers. Stop using it!

For those Windows fanboys who argue that PC is more secure and more advanced than any other OS on the market: Security Now 192: Listener Feedback 64 - have a listen to the opinions of a real security expert - not what flows from the bowels of Microsoft.

I have another security expert that says different and he is a Mac user to boot.

Why Safari? Why didn?t you go after IE or Safari?

It?s really simple. Safari on the Mac is easier to exploit. The things that Windows do to make it harder (for an exploit to work), Macs don?t do. Hacking into Macs is so much easier. You don?t have to jump through hoops and deal with all the anti-exploit mitigations you?d find in Windows.

It?s more about the operating system than the (target) program. Firefox on Mac is pretty easy too. The underlying OS doesn?t have anti-exploit stuff built into it.

With my Safari exploit, I put the code into a process and I know exactly where it?s going to be. There?s no randomization. I know when I jump there, the code is there and I can execute it there. On Windows, the code might show up but I don?t know where it is. Even if I get to the code, it?s not executable. Those are two hurdles that Macs don?t have.

It?s clear that all three browsers (Safari, IE and Firefox) have bugs. Code execution holes everywhere. But that?s only half the equation. The other half is exploiting it. There?s almost no hurdle to jump through on Mac OS X.

That is Charlie Miller, you know the guy that took the Mac down 2 years in a row first and in seconds.

Charlie Miller Interview on ZDNet

The fact is in the real world, OSX is far less secure than Windows when you look at the ease it takes to crack it open because it doesn't implement ASLR and other features properly.

Get ready for a whole new level of distributed denial of service (DDoS) attacks when Microsoft releases Windows XP this fall. That's the prediction of security expert Steve Gibson in reaction to Microsoft's improved TCP/IP implementation in Windows XP

Sorry, did somebody call Steve Gibson an expert on something?

Steve Gibson is nothing more than a scaremonger that uses people's security paranoia to sell his own services to people gullible enough to believe what he spouts.

The fact that anyone would quote him as an authoritative source on anything is just laughable

Even if Macs had a higher failure rate than Windows you'd still see more Windows machines due to huge difference in market share. Working in a PC repair shop and hardly seeing a Mac is not an indicator that Macs are superior. You can prove this with simple math.

Thats another laughable argument to say the least...

Anyway. Just because there is more Windows PC's than Unix / Linux / Mac Computers doesn't mean that Windows is in any way better. It's just a 'no brainer' for most customers who couldn't care less what they run on their computer - as long as it works.

Edited by warwagon
And as the report describes, the bargain basement HP hardware isn't very compelling, with a wimpy battery rated for 2.5 hours compared to the MacBook Pro's eight, an extra 1.2 pounds of weight in a thicker case, and a far lower quality display with much lower resolution, 1440x900 compared to the MacBook Pro's 1920x1440

Of course a bargain basement PC is going to have crap specs, thats what you get choosing the 'Bargain Basement' option and people who chose this option are the people who know **** all about computers, and couldn't tell a Celeron from a Core 2 Duo!

Geez, go back to school Apple!!

Edited by bbfc_uk
Oh, and I suppose a Mac is a bargin..?!

A MAC is certainly not a bargain. I don't have ~?1000 to shell out for a basic mac, but I did have ?400 for a Dell laptop with pretty much the same specs.

A MAC is certainly not a bargain. I don't have ~?1000 to shell out for a basic mac, but I did have ?400 for a Dell laptop with pretty much the same specs.

I wasn't responding to your post, the one above mine...I made that reply in response to the OP's post on the first page.

Anyway. Just because there is more Windows PC's than Unix / Linux / Mac Computers doesn't mean that Windows is in any way better. It's just a 'no brainer' for most customers who couldn't care less what they run on their computer - as long as it works.

More stereotyping , Why am i not surprised i guess all mac users are smug and arrogant douchebags it works both ways . Our decisions to use PC's are every bit as valid as yours . Stop trying to claim that everyone who uses a pc is somehow inferior its nonsense.

Edited by warwagon
Anyway. Just because there is more Windows PC's than Unix / Linux / Mac Computers doesn't mean that Windows is in any way better. It's just a 'no brainer' for most customers who couldn't care less what they run on their computer - as long as it works.

I didn't make that claim, but like I said, everyone who I know that uses Vista is very happy with it, and have encountered no issues. What is "better" is a relative term anyway, which depends on what a user wants from a Computer.

I also own a Mac Pro but I run Windows 7 on it! Apple is really a perfect choice for people that aren't very good with computers and do not want to know how it works. A Power user cannot really like a Mac...

I beg to differ (and I'm sure a lot of others here would too). Many "power users" absolutely love the Mac, with features like a true Unix shell, Applescript and Automator. The fact the a full development suite (Xcode) comes free with the Mac is a nice bonus as well.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • My father still uses a programme written in dbase3. Still manages to work with a little help from dosbox. 
    • Microsoft hides these secret Windows 11 performance boost settings available on every PC by Sayan Sen Windows enthusiasts often look for ways to extract as much performance out of their systems as possible, and it's often the case that they try and do so while trying to minimize the heat and power consumption. This is especially relevant in the case of mobile Windows PCs since laptops and notebooks tend to get hot and management of that heat and power is harder in such a form factor. As such users often turn to techniques like under-volting which can be used to squeeze out the maximum capabilities of a chip while also maintaining lowered power levels. There are official apps from AMD and Intel with the likes of Ryzen Master and XTU (Extreme Tuning Utility). While these are quite handy, most enthusiasts probably prefer to dig into the BIOS and play around with settings there like Curve Optimizer on Ryzen, which lets users set various frequency-voltage scaling values. These are essentially called P-States. If you are not familiar with them, Processor Power Management is done through Advanced Configuration and Power Interface (ACPI) P-states and C-states. While P-states or performance pwoer states handle CPU voltage-frequency scaling, C-states deal with CPU sleep states so that some of the CPU functions, which are not necessary at that moment, can be disabled. The P-states and C-states work together to make the processor run more efficiently. It helps the OS and apps determine which cores can be parked and which should be boosted. Of course not every user is an enthusiast or knows the technicalities and integrities of how things like overclocking or undervolting work. Thankfully for them Windows itself offers something pretty cool, though it is hidden by default on all systems. By default, Windows only has two P-States, "Minimum Processor State" and "Maximum Processor State." However, this can be changed with a Registry trick to expand the options under a secret "Processor performance boost mode" dropdown. This essentially enables the HWP or hardware P-States available on a device, and these are not controlled just by the OS itself as the underlying hardware gets involved too. In total there are five Processor Performance Boost Mode profiles that control how Windows requests and allows CPU turbo/boost behavior under the different power policies. They are: Disabled: In this mode, processor boosting is effectively turned off. The CPU will avoid entering turbo or boost frequencies and instead operate closer to its base frequency ceiling. This can significantly reduce power consumption and heat output, but at the cost of reduced burst performance and responsiveness in short workloads. Enabled: This is the standard behavior where boost functionality is allowed under normal conditions. The processor can opportunistically increase frequency when workload demands it, balancing performance gains with power and thermal constraints as managed by the system. Aggressive: Aggressive mode favors performance more heavily, allowing the CPU to enter higher boost states more readily and sustain them longer. This should in theory improve responsiveness under bursty or heavy workloads but increases power draw and thermal output compared to the default enabled behavior. Efficient Enabled: This mode still allows boosting, but with a stronger bias toward energy efficiency. The system attempts to use boost more selectively, avoiding unnecessary frequency spikes when the performance gain is marginal. Efficient Aggressive: This is a hybrid approach where boost is still performance-responsive, but the system continuously weighs efficiency more heavily than in Aggressive mode. It aims to deliver noticeable performance improvements while reducing wasted power in less demanding scenarios. Here's how to enable the Processor performance boost mode: Open Registry Editor: Press Win+R, type regedit, and click OK. Go to: HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Power\PowerSettings\54533251-82be-4824-96c1-47b60b740d00\be337238-0d82-4146-a960-4f3749d470c7 (where HKLM stands for HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE_) Modify the value of Attributes from 1 to 2 (you can find modify option by right-clicking) After that, exit Registry, you should now be able to see the new "Processor performance boost mode" dropdown menu: As you can see there are now five new P-States or CPPC states or power profile available that help define the boost mode processor setting on your PC. Wrapping it up here's a quick run-down of the settings as defined by Microsoft itself. Setting Description Disabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is disabled. Collaborative Processor Performance Control (CPPC) behaviour is disabled. Enabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is enabled. CPPC behaviour is Efficient Enabled. Aggressive The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is enabled. CPPC behaviour is Aggressive. Efficient Enabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is Efficient. CPPC behaviour is Efficient Enabled. Efficient Aggressive The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is Efficient. CPPC behaviour is Aggressive. Aggressive At Guaranteed Windows calculates the desired extra performance above the guaranteed performance level, and asks the processor to deliver that specific performance level. Efficient Aggressive At Guaranteed Windows always asks the processor to deliver the highest possible performance above the guaranteed performance level. In the next part we shall be comparing these settings to explore how much of a benefit or regression they can provide in terms of performance and power efficiency. If you decide to change the values on your system and are experiencing problems like crashes or an overheating PC, make sure to revert the steps back to the original state.
    • I think he means you haven't reviewed previous UFC games. Of course it doesn't matter... Every time you just report on something that involves the President even if just simply what happened you guys usually get accused of being anti-Trump. We live in fun times.
    • So how did you solve the problem? Disabling Secure Boot isn’t a solution.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Month Later
      Leroy Jethro Gibbs earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Conversation Starter
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • One Month Later
      AndreaB earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      agatameier earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      agatameier earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      518
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      198
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      147
    4. 4
      ATLien_0
      93
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      77
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!