Just don't give a rat's *ss

Discussion in 'General Mac Discussion' started by Bruce Lee, PhD, Jun 28, 2004.

  1. Bruce Lee, PhD macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2004
    #1
    OK.

    Obviously, I like Apple for the software. I mean, I spent over $2500 for a machine with a g4 processor in it. So either I'm a moron (possible), or I place a *lot* of value in OS X and Apple software.

    So why don't I get excited at all about what turned out to be basically a software-only keynote? I'll probably code to the new imaging API's, and Apple usually does a great job with their internals. It'll be fun.

    And I love my Powerbook. But I'm still watching and drooling for the new hardware. I'm swilling my lite beer and drawling, "Gimme somethin' wit' a hemi, dude!"

    How many of us would buy Apple hardware if we could run Apple software on generic Intel parts from Crap-o-tron? Be honest... A lot of us would, no doubt about it. I think for a lot of us, it's about the software with Apple. But still, who cares about a software-only show? Not me.

    Go figure.
     
  2. DeadEye686 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2003
    Location:
    Austin
    #2
    I don't mind the Keynote - it was a developer's conference, not a consumer one. The only hardware that could possibly have been released would have been professional - and they just had an update not three weeks before. I didn't really expect any hardware announcements, but I did pray a bit :) (Actually, I prayed for the Newton II, but I knew that wasn't going to happen.)
     
  3. Makosuke macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2001
    Location:
    The Cool Part of CA, USA
    #3
    Actually, I'm quite satisfied. This being a developer conference, I wasn't expecting a G5 iMac or anything consumer oriented (that'd be silly) and the G5s and PBs were just updated. Beefy monitors and a preview of the next OS version--the former hardware developers might enjoy, and the latter central to their business--is right on target.

    Personally, since an OS upgrade and a new monitor are the only two Apple products I'm in the market for anyway, I'm happy.

    As for the age-old "Apple software on generic PC hardware" argument, I'm not with you. Yes, I could build an Intel box from parts for less than an Apple machine, but the current G5s, even with the 90nm hurdles, are still faster than any non-workstation class x86 hardware available and at a competitive or superior price.

    And you can bet if OSX ran on any pile of PC parts under the sun there'd be even more compatibility problems than there already are, and Apple'd spend a whole lot more time and money trying to get everything to work. Why do you think (other than aging codebase full of holes) it's taking MS so long to produce Longhorn?
     
  4. Chip NoVaMac macrumors G3

    Chip NoVaMac

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    #4
    As it being a developers conference there should have been more definitive hardware than monitors. New iMac G5's to drive higher performance software. Video iPod to develop Mac software add-ons for the current G4's. A TIVO Mac device that crosses the boundaries. These are the things developers would want to write for. New monitors that few can afford? Not likely.
     
  5. Bruce Lee, PhD thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2004
    #5
    Yeah, no doubt that's the rational way to go. But at some gut level, aren't you disappointed? I am; that's what surprises me. I mean, I like Apple for the software. The main reason I switched was the fact that I got a BSD machine for doing coding *and* a great GUI for everything else. But I'm still bummed when they don't roll out hardware, even if it's stuff I wouldn't buy.

    Maybe it's these rumors sites getting me all excited about nothing. Curse you, MacRumors!
     
  6. Ryan1524 macrumors 65816

    Ryan1524

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2003
    Location:
    Canada GTA
    #6
    i think this keynote was better than the Panther one. it introduces a lot of cool stuff that can fundamentally change the way we compute. Panther's only real crazy thing is Expose. the rest is pretty ho-hum.

    this time, we got Search, Automator, Dashboard(yea it's Konfab, but the way it's integrated to Expose is nice - like having a virtual desktop with infos when you need a quick update), then there's H.264, new iChat, etc..

    overall, enjoyable keynote. i like it. :)
     
  7. iGav macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2002
    #7
    iMac G5's wouldn't need to be announced at a WWDC as these developers are already developing for the G5. ;) It's more vital that should an iMac G5 be announced that it should be in a consumer based Keynote or during a special dedicated event. ;) to give it maximum exposure. :)

    The expectations on Apple to release EVERYTHING during a Keynote are impossibly high... it's totally unfeasible to expect that Apple will ALWAYS announces new hardware whenever Jobs steps on the stage.
     
  8. iGav macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2002
    #8
    It's not necessarily Macrumors that is the problem... it's some of the users that frequent the site with inane ramblings that cause the discontent (no one in particular) when the subsequent rumourware isn't announced :eek: :p :p

    but really, the only hardware update options were likely to be either the iMac or iPod, neither of which I could see being updated at a Developers conference. The iPod will (unless there's fundamental changes) have a non-event update such as an increase in HD size.

    If it's a new form factor, or something like a colour screen etc then it'll deserve it's own consumer presentation such is its popularity. The same goes for the iMac, if it gains a G5 and/or a possible new form factor, then doesn't it warrant an event with more publicity and more focus than the WWDC?? I think so.

    Afterall, you can't please everyone. :rolleyes:
     
  9. slughead macrumors 68030

    slughead

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    #9
    I just ordered a dual 2.5 Ghz G5 which is like 10% faster than a dual AMD (top of the line), and twice as expensive for the same quality/features at street price.

    Being as how apple uses almost all the same quality components as are available on the street (sometimes they even use bad quality stuff), I'd have to say I'd be comfortable with ditching apple hardware any day of the week.

    I mean, maxtor and quantum hard drives? Apple, are you on crack?

    The RAM timings being non-standard are also incredibly petty (I feel they do this on purpose).

    Do I trust my PC with an Athlon XP 3200? Oh yes, possibly even more than my mac. Did it cost less? 1/4 as much.

    My Asus A7N8X-X has on-board HARDWARE SATA RAID and cost me $120.. That's the price of a keyboard and mouse from Apple. My case cost $70 retail, it has room for 12 drives (eight are 3.5 only), full shielding (no cost-shaving n00b-windows), 5 80mm fans with thermostats (for that G5 "low noise" cooling™©), and a high-quality 450 watt Antec PSU.

    The OS is the only reason I put up with paying *Obviously* too much for hardware. Windows ruins the usefulness of my hardware, however much better it is than my mac hardware.

    The only reason Apple laptops are a good deal is because you can't build one from scratch--it's all proprietary.
     
  10. slughead macrumors 68030

    slughead

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    #10
    It's too bad Powermacs aren't PCs, and are actually workstations.

    Unless this computer is considered a PC, which I'm willing to accept :)

    $1,656.09
    Thunder K8QS Quad Opteron Mobo (with more features than the G5 one, including SATA RAID and holds 20GB of DDR RAM in 10 slots, Dual Gigabit LAN)
    http://www.axiontech.com/product/images/3/62713/62713_M.jpg

    $677 (x4) = $2,708
    Four Opteron 842 Processors

    $126 (x9) = $1,134
    1GB RAM x 9 = 9GB (1GB more than the G5 holds, and with 1 slot to spare)

    $398
    BFG Tech's GeForce FX 6800 256MB (modified to go faster than standard)

    $159 (x2) = $318
    Dual WD 250GB hard drives (instead of maxtor which SUCKS)

    ~$150 for A equivalent SATA DVD burner
    ~$70 for an EXCELLENT case and PSU
    ~$45 for an equivalent sound card

    $6,320 For this beast

    $8,495 For the Apple, which is slower and has less features:
    • Dual 2.5GHz PowerPC G5
    • 8GB DDR400 SDRAM (PC3200) - 8x1GB
    • 2x250GB Serial ATA - 7200rpm
    • NVIDIA GeForce 6800 Ultra DDL
    • 8x SuperDrive (DVD-R/CD-RW)
    • Apple Keyboard & Apple Mouse - U.S. English
    • Mac OS X - U.S. English

    Oh woops, apple also charges sales tax in all states that have one, at 7%, that's $9089.65
     
  11. oingoboingo macrumors 6502a

    oingoboingo

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2003
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    #11
    I don't know what you're going to use that hardware for, but since you a) feel very strongly about being ripped off for Apple's hardware and b) don't want to run Windows, have you thought about running Linux? What do you use your computer for? Is Linux a viable alternative to Mac OS X for you? Too often x86 hardware is automatically lumped into the same basket as Windows in these forums...Linux solves 99% of the problems that many perceive to be issues with the x86 platform itself, which in reality are problems with Windows.

    Please don't tell me you bought a dual 2.5GHz G5 to run iPhoto :)
     
  12. slughead macrumors 68030

    slughead

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    #12
    LOL no, I'd run linux on a PC but I need access to commercial written drivers and software. In addition, I already own much mac software. I also think the Mac OS GUI is the best around.

    Between all that I'm uncomfortably boxed into Mac-[Lock]-In-tosh, but if that's the price I have to pay to get my work done, then so be it--it's still technically worth it.

    I'm just saying Apple hardware is a DOWNSIDE to working with Apple. The OS is the only thing they have that I want.
     
  13. 7on macrumors 601

    7on

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2003
    Location:
    Dress Rosa
    #13
    Apple sticks with their hardware so they don't have to bundle upteen millions of drivers. Which I like. And I'd buy Apple hardware even if they released x86 OSX. Because I wouldn't have driver problems.
     
  14. slughead macrumors 68030

    slughead

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    #14
    Like most windows devices, drivers are written and included with the hardware. It is the manufacturer's job to create and package the drivers, not Apple. Most will follow a generic spec (like most CD-ROMs and HIDs do), but generally the full functionality requires a driver download from the company or included CD.

    3rd party devices are already available for OS X, and drivers are required for most of those. It's not a problem.

    Apple could just package its own drivers to persuade people to buy their hardware. Instead they buy out and stamp out the competition.

    Why does apple want you to buy their hardware? Because that's where they make their money.

    I wouldn't be surprised if they lost money on every OS release since 10.1.
     
  15. win_convert macrumors member

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2004
    Location:
    Aus.
    #15
    Apple can be likened to the new kid at school who has to keep coming out with new stuff or risk being forgotten and having to hang out with nerds(where analogy becomes fact!) All of the .x increases are juggling, balancing on your hands and having a large amount of scabs.
    The bullies, ie microsoft can feel comfortable in the fact that once the novelty wears off of the new stuff, people will come crawling back to them for cheap stuff (having their lunch money stolen, if you will).

    Or whatever.
     
  16. gekko513 macrumors 603

    gekko513

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2003
    #16
    $9,685* For the Dell, which is slower and has even less features (but DDR2 and PCI Express):
    - Dual 3,6GHz Xeon
    - 8GB DDR2 400 (Actually only able to customize with 4GB, but there is room for 8GB and 4GB additional RAM from Dell is $2000)
    - 2x250GB SATA
    - 256MB Quadro FX 3400
    - 8xDVD+RW

    You always have to pay more for a complete system that is tested and supported by a large company (Apple, Dell, HP, whatever). So it's useless to throw in the cost of individual parts.
     
  17. gekko513 macrumors 603

    gekko513

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2003
    #17
    Where do you get 1GB DDR400 RAM for $126 ???
     
  18. thecombatwombat macrumors member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2004
    #18
    OK, no one's really going to dispute (i think at least) that pcs are often cheaper than apple, especially if you build them yourself.

    But let me poke a few holes in your setup anyways.

    If you can get ram for that cheap, and building it yourself is not the issue, then just put that 8 gigs in yourself. Apple ram is crazy expensive. Yikes, you just cut roughly $3500 from the apple system (sub $4650 dropping your config to 512, then buying 8 gigs at your low price for roughly $1000) and it still has 8 gigs.


    That alone makes it cheaper than your pc.

    Plus, $70 for an equivalent case/ps? Not really wanting to debate it, but I'd think at least a ~$150 lian-li and a high quality psu, easily $200.

    Also, please show me a $40 sound card with optical outputs.

    Your box also comes with no keyboard and mouse . . . or support and warranty for that matter.

    Oh, and your hard drives, like the ram, if building labor/warranty isn't a factor, get the cheapy config from apple, put your maxtors in yourself. This way the system is a solid few grand less than your Opteron.

    I'm not in total disagreement with you, but still, your scenario is a little slanted.

    EDIT: One more thing since I just noticed you said you wouldn't be running Linux. Have your priced a four processor, commercial x86 operating system recently?
     
  19. slughead macrumors 68030

    slughead

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    #19
    If you can get ram for that cheap, and building it yourself is not the issue, then just put that 8 gigs in yourself. Apple ram is crazy expensive. Yikes, you just cut roughly $3500 from the apple system (sub $4650 dropping your config to 512, then buying 8 gigs at your low price for roughly $1000) and it still has 8 gigs.

    Apple screws with its timings to prevent you from using anything but specialized RAM, which is only mildly cheaper via 3rd party than the apple store. Truth be told, half the price of the mac is the RAM, and a 'mild' price reduction is probably going to make a big difference. However, it'd have to be 1/3 the cost in order to have the cost usurp my PC's

    Plus, $70 for an equivalent case/ps? Not really wanting to debate it, but I'd think at least a ~$150 lian-li and a high quality psu, easily $200.

    First off, I said EXCELLENT, not equivalent, I even said it in all caps.. Second, where are you getting your numbers from? I get mine from http://www.pricewatch.com ... a $200 PSU?? is it gold plated?

    Your box also comes with no keyboard and mouse . . . or support and warranty for that matter.

    All of those parts have a warranty of some sort. Maybe not as good as apple's included 1 year, and definitely not as good as applecare.

    No keyboard and mouse? You want me to include a keyboard and mouse better than the G5's? You think that'd be hard?
    http://www.pricewatch.com/1/311/10732-1.htm
    $35 Mouse, way more DPI, a scroll wheel, and two buttons
    http://www.pricewatch.com/2/310/809-1.htm
    $11 keyboard, better make/model than the mac one.

    Oh, and your hard drives, like the ram, if building labor/warranty isn't a factor, get the cheapy config from apple, put your maxtors in yourself. This way the system is a solid few grand less than your Opteron.

    First of all, like I said, Maxtors suck. Second, the biggest cost of my scenario is the motherboard and processors. You really, REALLY don't want to compare cheapo systems with PCs. Third, buying 3rd party HDs wouldn't make enough of a difference.

    If I didn't want to show a system faster than the G52.5, I could build something slightly slower for $2,500 less.

    Also, depending on your measure of speed, I could use the latter system to power DUAL FX6800's, and it'd still be cheaper than the G5.

    I just noticed you said you wouldn't be running Linux. Have your priced a four processor, commercial x86 operating system recently?

    I never said that, we're talking about hardware, I already said the OS is the only reason I buy mac. Someone said Mac hardware was cheaper/comparable and better, I begged to differ.

    Also, please show me a $40 sound card with optical outputs.

    First off, I said $45. Second, here you go :):
    http://www.compuplus.com/insidepage.php3?refer=pricewatch.com&id=1002397

    http://www.pricewatch.com/1/33/5025-1.htm

    So, because mac users have to pay MSRP (or greater) for their computers, x86 users have to pay the same? Nice try, but no, I like my custom system. All the components in my system have been meticulously tested by corporations before they leave the plant.

    For the lazy and uninformed, I'll grant you that Macs are comparably priced. But for those of us who can build their own computer, PCs are no contest except in very specific situations.

    edit AGAIN! I'm only talking in terms of hardware here, I automatically get to call anyone a jackass who thinks I didn't say the Mac OS makes the PC NOT worth it! YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED!

    Mid-range? PCs
    Ultra-high range? PCs
    Between Mid and High? Possibly Macs, Certainly PCs once a new quad Opteron mobo comes out (A dual opteron might have the same power as a dual G5).
     
  20. gekko513 macrumors 603

    gekko513

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2003
    #20
    Thanks :D Add in people who like to be productive on their computers rather than tinker with it.
     
  21. thecombatwombat macrumors member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2004
    #21
    Uhm, maybe, not to be a total dick but you can back that up anywhere? My bet would just be that apple requires very low timings . . . you know . . . non crap bottom of the barrel pricewatch ram . . .


    First off, I said EXCELLENT, not equivalent, I even said it in all caps.. Second, where are you getting your numbers from? I get mine from http://www.pricewatch.com ... a $200 PSU?? is it gold plated?

    I said $200 for a $150 case and a decent PSU.

    But actually, yes. Multi-processor boards don't use standard ATX PSUs (maybe that one does, so new to me) but a 4 cpu power supply will probably be well over $70.

    Your box also comes with no keyboard and mouse . . . or support and warranty for that matter.

    All of those parts have a warranty of some sort. Maybe not as good as apple's included 1 year, and definitely not as good as applecare.




    First of all, like I said, Maxtors suck.

    OK, that was just a typo -- I meant replace their maxtor's with your WDs -- either way you get my point.

    I have a PC next to my powerbook. It runs Debian. I still totally agree that it was a much better deal price/performance wise, but I still say those numbers are crazy.

    I'm serious about the bit with the ram -- if that's true and you can show me something beyond "does something weird with their timings" I want to know about it before I add some (quality) ram to my powerbook.
     
  22. LethalWolfe macrumors G3

    LethalWolfe

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2002
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #22
    If you did you'd be sorry. One of the things that gives Apple a leg up is their closed hardware. If Apple released a perfect port of OS X for x86 it wouldn't fair any better than XP, IMO. What's more difficult, dealing w/the few dozen G3, G4 and G5 hardware varients, or dealing w/the thousands of x86 hardware variants out there?


    Lethal
     
  23. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #23
    Whoa. Since when is hardware of any use without an OS? If you've already admitted that the MacOS is what makes Mac hardware worth buying, then what kind of sense does it make to leave out the cost of the OS when pricing out a competing PC?

    As for building your own PC, as I've recently discovered myself, this is a non-trivial exercise. For those who enjoy rolling their own, it might be worthwhile and enjoyable, and even marginally rewarding from a financial point of view. But it's certainly not for everyone. So the only fair cost comparison is between Apple hardware and hardware from an OEM. With an OS installed.

    Home builders always want to brag about how much money they save, but almost invariably they leave something out when they add up the costs. This is why you're being seemingly nitpicked on issues like the RAM, keyboard, mouse and OS. These things add up.
     
  24. thecombatwombat macrumors member

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2004
    #24
    Indeed. As another example, this kid's board requires registered ECC RAM. I'd bet that's 9 sticks of incompatibility just purchased right there.

    Not only that, said board has no AGP slot.

    They make that graphics card for PCI-X? Hmmm, the less featured mac board has 8x agp . . . and firewire . . . and . . .

    I haven't really read up on any tech specs on that board . . . but I believe it has per cpu ram . . . (it has 4x4 banks per cpu . . . not 20 gigs in 10 slots like you said . . .) but there will likely be less ram available to applications on that board.

    I could go further. I was being kind of nice before, but your configuration wouldn't even work. That's a fantastic deal.

    EDIT: I found that board with the ram configuration you said, just in case the diagram was all wrong and it has AGP and such too. (it doesn't)

    http://tyan.com/products/html/thunderk8qs.html
     
  25. slughead macrumors 68030

    slughead

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    #25
    There are many problems with my hypothetical PC, but there are even more problems with your responses to my last post.

    I'm not going to deal with correcting the accuracy of 3 people's posts. So I concede that my hypothetical PC is not as good a deal as its mac counterpart.

    I could put together another one, slightly slower in processor, but faster in just about everything else, but I have a feeling that one little error will cause a flame war.

    I'd just like to make some closing points:

    1. Building your own PC allows you to avoid buying certain things (like a brand new license for the OS that you already own).

    2. Upgrading a PC is much easier, cheaper, and more cost effective than having to buy a new Package deal (like a mac) every time you want to upgrade your mobo or processor.

    Therefore you aren't taking into account the whole picture by saying this setup is more expensive. In the short run, yes. But if I want to upgrade, I can replace the processors and buy a video card (that's reasonably priced and up-to-date). Not to mention the expansion bays in the case, so I can actually have more than two hard drives without Apple releasing a new computer.

    3. If I had compared a feature-reduced DP2.5 to a PC, I could easily reduce the cost by half just buy switching to a dual opteron setup. $1600 for this mobo is way overpriced--but when I first chose it I figured it'd still be cheaper. Excuse my error. How fast is the DP2.5 in comparison to a dual opteron? I'm looking forward to a barefeats test. I'm confident that the difference between the two, even if not in the PC's favor, will not be worth the extra cost of the mac's hardware.

    4. Someone was saying that since my setup doesn't include the cost of the OS (presumably he meant windows), it somehow points to the mac being a better deal. Well, as I said before, I ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THE WHOLE MAC PACKAGE WAS A BETTER DEAL, THE ARGUMENT WAS OVER THE HARDWARE. You want an OS that can power multiple x86 CPU's? Linux, and it's free. What the hell do you want from me? Pushing the fact that Apple forces you to buy the OS can only be a part of this discussion if you point out that you pay for the os with every CPU purchase whether you want to or not--making the x86 route a lot more freedom.

    5. What do I want apple to do? Release an x86 version. Just do it. Include generic drivers, allow companies to write their own. Charge $600 for it, and give away the PPC version for free. They can get their money for R&D, an then some. I assure you, after a while there will be a long list of companies whose drivers are the same or better than Apple's. This whole argument that "oh well apple locks you in to make their OS more stable" is a bunch of crap and Open Source OS's are proof--more stability than OS X, and way more supported hardware.

    6. Read my lips: Apple locks you into their hardware to make money, they lose money on their OS.

    7. Apple's hardware is no better than some of the stuff available for PC, in fact, Apple is using crappy hard drives again (maxtor), which makes it WORSE than a lot of PC hardware. Bad hard drives are the absolute most terrible thing they could've done (data loss is the worst thing that can happen to your computer, because it can't be fixed with money alone), I'd pay extra for a seagate, even though seagates cost less than maxtors at those sizes at street prices.

    Well I hope I've helped some of you detach your lips from apple's bunghole, and I thank thecombatwombat for keeping an open mind from the get-go. I would again remind you that I've been using macs for 18 years and I'm proud to do so. I've just taken an economics class is all, and I realize that it's OK for companies to want money, and we should all expect them to do so.
     

Share This Page