Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Comments on Microsoft's Laptop Hunter Ads
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Very well stated. Jonathan Ive is an industrial design genius. The iMac, iPod, etc have all been recognized as fantastic industrial designs, as evidenced by the many awards Apple has received. Further, simply stating that Apple uses "last years specs" and touts it as "new" is erroneous. The Mac Pro was just upgraded with brand new Intel server grade processors. The iMac and Mac Mini all received recent upgrades.
It seems to me that there are quite a few individuals who are more concerned with owning the best specs, the fastest machines on the consumer market. Apple isn't so much concerned with speed as a superior end user experience with products designed to work well with each other. Apple never claimed to be a "gaming" machine with 16 GB's RAM and killer graphics cards and lots of power. That isn't Apple's market. Apple takes every aspect into consideration; the ergonomics, aesthetics, interoperability between other devices, software (and in many cases Windows applications for their products), all of these are taken into account and streamlined until the product is even considered marketable.
OS X runs more stable on my system than Vista x64 ever did.
Apples and oranges unless you're doing hackintosh, right?
I'd be curious to see what hardware you were running and if you used the proper drivers. I've never had any issues and I've really manipulated the OS.
Ah, one of the pro's in running OS X on Apple controlled hardware, I don't need to fish around for device drivers while making certain that there are no driver conflicts with various hardware devices.
No explanation necessary? So you have no real argument? Sounds like you're saying the old phrase "you don't need to know." Not really respectful.
But isn't it just an icon as i said? It is a shell, what else is it? You're making the casing of the laptop into something its not. Comparing an Apple product to a name brand for clothing proves my point. Its one thing to buy the cheapest stuff, but when you buy decent clothing, you don't need to spend $100 dollars on jeans that fit and wear the same as the $25 dollar pair, especially when you can't even see the label. Same goes for a notebook. Would anyone really care if the apple logo wasn't visible on the notebook? I bet there's a few out there who would.
Your argument is also flawed b/c the internals of the macbook are the same as a PC now, no power-pc processors anymore, just intel c2d & i7.
The laptops are not made that will IMO as most people's macbooks I've come across break down after a few years while my IBM is still ticking along. Heck, I have thinkpads from the early 90s (circa 1992) that still work perfectly other than a dead battery that won't hold a charge.
Heck someone I know has a g4 macbook that can't stay on longer than 2 hours due to overheating. Many of the keys have come off the keyboard and its slowly dying. The fact that getting it fixed costs more than a used one also doesn't appear appealing to anyone other than those with money to burn.
I'm not impressed by the durability of their products pc wise. Ipods on the other hand are build like a rock.
I decided to try hackintosh about a week ago and did a little reading. Took me 3 hours to get the bios settings and drivers working. Video and audio took about 2 hours to figure out and it was more of a challenge than to screw apple. I just wanted to see if it really was as easy as people say.
I wouldn't say I'm a pro at running OSX on PC hardware, not apple.
Btw, I have absolutely no driver conflicts. Even virtualization of OS's inside of leopard works fine. I know a thing or two, but I'm no pro at this stuff, its just easy if you take maybe 1 or 2 hours of reading on the topic to make everything work.
Oh, I also have a choice of hardware which is nice. I can actually upgrade my video card.
This argument has been debated ad nauseam on MacRumors (and in general). As you just joined the forum, read some of the hundreds of threads that have discussed this topic.
I decided to try hackintosh about a week ago and did a little reading. Took me 3 hours to get the bios settings and drivers working. Video and audio took about 2 hours to figure out and it was more of a challenge than to screw apple. I just wanted to see if it really was as easy as people say.
I wouldn't say I'm a pro at running OSX on PC hardware, not apple.
Btw, I have absolutely no driver conflicts. Even virtualization of OS's inside of leopard works fine. I know a thing or two, but I'm no pro at this stuff, its just easy if you take maybe 1 or 2 hours of reading on the topic to make everything work.
I've built many systems. If you know what you're doing, it's not difficult. However, the general consumer doesn't know the difference between a Dual Core and a Quad Core processor, DDR2 and DDR3, EFI and BIOS, etc. Most simply want a computer that runs well, is simple to use and doesn't require a lot of maintenance. I have nothing against Windows, I run Vista 64 on my Mac Pro for AutoCAD and other necessities. I used to be an AVID Windows fan, seriously, to the point where friendships were compromised lol. However, when I had to switch to OS X in grad school and bought a PowerBook G4, I was sold.
MacBook Pro 2.8 dual core converts
Dear Macrumors, I whole heartedly agree with Apple's position. In the last 6 months I have bought and specified 3 Macbook Pro setups for previous Windows XP/Vista users.
Since this time all have only used the PC to get retrieve old files. One is using up to 10 applications on the go at once, with multiple hot corners and spaces and only turns the computer off once a week. He runs multitrack recording sessions while at the same time, sending emails, and drafting documents. Not one crash for the entire time. He said and I quote,
" I have seen the light with a Mac - I can now do the things I want and for the first time I am playing catch-up with the computer not the other way round. With the PC, I was waiting, it was crashing and couldn't successfully run more than one real-time application"
For him nothing Windows offers could even remotely compete!
Dear Macrumors, I whole heartedly agree with Apple's position. In the last 6 months I have bought and specified 3 Macbook Pro setups for previous Windows XP/Vista users.
Since this time all have only used the PC to get retrieve old files. One is using up to 10 applications on the go at once, with multiple hot corners and spaces and only turns the computer off once a week. He runs multitrack recording sessions while at the same time, sending emails, and drafting documents. Not one crash for the entire time. He said and I quote,
" I have seen the light with a Mac - I can now do the things I want and for the first time I am playing catch-up with the computer not the other way round. With the PC, I was waiting, it was crashing and couldn't successfully run more than one real-time application"
For him nothing Windows offers could even remotely compete!
Apple doesnt give you a choice of a reasonably priced computer to run its OS on. MS will let you choose a reasonably priced computer to run its OS. Thats the whole point of these commercials. If you want OSX you have no choice but to do exactly what Steve wants you to. If you want windows all you have to do is buy windows, the rest of the choice is up to you. Most consumers would rather buy a $700 laptop and run windows than a $1300 (almost double!) to run osx on similar specs. MS is making a good point that they dont make you follow a strict set of rules in order to use windows, but if you want OS X you need to buy a certain computer, pay a certain amount for it, and deal with whatever features Apple tells you are needed.
Well... make up your mind. You're lamenting the fact that Windows has a de-facto monopoly on sub-$1500 notebooks (15" or above), but you're also defending Apple's decision to not compete in that market, so... what do you expect? Those are the two viable OS options for consumers. Linux is currently only for geeks. Apple is the only player that's in a position to challenge Microsoft's monopoly in that market segment but they choose not to. So... what's Microsoft supposed to do in this situation except continue to sell their product?
As a few have pointed out, choice is simply an illusion. Psychologically speaking, the more choice a consumer is given the more apt they are at making the wrong decisions as well as becoming emotionally overwhelmed. This is evident in many markets, and one of the reasons advertisers strive in simplifying marketing concepts. Too many choices does not equate to the best experience or a better end user experience. It simply means you have more choices. While the commentators on MacRumors are educated enough in electronics and computers, the average consumer is not. I can not tell you how afraid most of my clients are in doing the wrong thing or messing up their system. For the clients that switch from Windows to OS X, it takes a long time for most to realize deleting applications or moving something that may have caused issues with a Windows system generally doesn't occur in OS X. Time Machine, as much as we may bitch about it, is a GODSEND to Windows users who have switched. They are simply wowed that you can easily pull up any file or restore your system at any point. Exposé, spaces, integrated mail applications, how seamlessly the iPhone works with iCal, Mail, Address Book, the dock, all of these things we take for granted but for most individuals, they are a welcome change in their lives.
Um, yeah... and if you look a little closer you'll find that it ships with a mediocre NVidia 8800GTS card which Apple found so embarrassing since the 9000 series has been out for over a year, that they decided to rebrand it to "GT120" to throw everyone off. You never have to look far for Apple's trademark corner-cutting, it usually appears in the fine print under the CPU specs.
Correction: Apple was extremely concerned about having the fastest machines, this was the primary sales pitch for many years. Speed, power, speed, power, speed, speed, speed was all that Apple ever talked about. Until they switched to Intel and could no longer hide behind rigged benchmarks, the game was up, so they shifted focus to design, and replaced "speed" and "power" with "thin" and "gorgeous".
What's new? Windows has had System Restore since 1999, and in Vista you can right-click on any file or folder, bring up the "Previous Versions" tab and restore the file or folder to an earlier state. And there's scheduled backups too, if desired. Time Machine is more elegant from a visual POV, on the other hand it has plenty of shortcomings. It uses no file compression so you need an effing huge backup drive, and you always have to carry the drive around with you if you want access to deleted or changed files (Vista's Previous Versions doesn't need an external drive). Nice, yes... godsend... not so much.
You're arguing for an anti-choice point of view. That's a good way to disenfranchise the consumer. Lack of choice is never a good thing. You can buy a pre-built computer or build one yourself. Apple doesn't give you that option. How is that a positive aspect? I don't see your point. Like I've said, at least I can choose a video card, even on a pre built system w/ built in video.
You can do system restore in vista & xp. Whats the big deal?
Read up on the psychology of choice before claiming the too much choice isn't a bad aspect. Let's be clear, I stated too much choice, not choice. Choice in consumerism is needed, however too little or too much choice is the issue I raised.
Show me a general user who has used Windows "restore" feature and I'll sell you a bridge in Brooklyn. Seriously, if you're claiming Windows' "Restore" feature is that great, just, wow... wow...
Times change, and Apple realized the general consumer couldn't give two craps about whether their machine is gaming ready or has the latest and greatest in speed. It is a very small segment of the market that is concerned with such factors, and mostly in relation to overcompensating for any "short" comings.
Again, Windows may have had it, but did they "do it" well? Not so much. Once again, Apple polished the concept and made it work well. Windows' "Restore" feature isn't a full featured restore system. If it were, Windows would have to map out another drive to mirror the system in order to restore any file at any point. Can you open a Windows Application such as iPhoto or Mail and restore photo's and email right in the application, instead of searching for unnamed picture files such as img_cccc.jpg? Apple's Media Browser allows for a much better system in searching out files in a compressed library. Utilizing this allows users to keep any file named and organized, easily indexed and just as easily retrieved should a file be deleted or misplaced. Same for mail. As well, Time Machine's GUI is extremely intuitive and easy to understand and utilize.
I've used it
So where's that bridge and how much? It actually worked well in XP when I used it. I can't speak for Vista. Please get off your high horse.
I'm not hiding behind psychology and arguing that PC's are worse by you have "too" much choice. I'm arguing that the more choice, the better you're able to make your PC work for you. I can't game on Mac simply b/c the video card selection sucks. For virtual machines I'd be limited with the amount of memory most of the macs can take and you don't need an overpriced mac pro to do virtualization, just a quadcore and 8 gigs of ram (if you're using ram hungry processes).
Most people don't know how much of a choice there even is in the PC world. These people are stuck with Dell & Acer (which I frankly can't stand) and have a little more choice than apple, but not so much more that its overwhelming. Check out dell dot com some time. The options for each PC are about the same as Apple offers.
I've used it
Please get off your high horse.
I'm not hiding behind psychology and arguing that PC's are worse by you have "too" much choice. I'm arguing that the more choice, the better you're able to make your PC work for you. I can't game on Mac simply b/c the video card selection sucks. For virtual machines I'd be limited with the amount of memory most of the macs can take and you don't need an overpriced mac pro to do virtualization, just a quadcore and 8 gigs of ram (if you're using ram hungry processes).
Most people don't know how much of a choice there even is in the PC world. These people are stuck with Dell & Acer (which I frankly can't stand) and have a little more choice than apple, but not so much more that its overwhelming. Check out dell dot com some time. The options for each PC are about the same as Apple offers.
I'll state it again, restore sucks, period. If that places me on a high horse, great, I'll enjoy the view.
As for gaming, who cares?! Seriously, does everyone need to be a gamer? Not everyone is a gamer, far from it. Most of us have adult things we need to do and left games for high school. If they are, good for them, but Apple has NEVER claimed to be competing in the gaming market. If you want to play games, great, own Windows, I don't care. I have nothing against Windows. However, we're on an Apple fan site, not Microsoft. So don't expect people to agree with your opinions.
Too much choice is what very nearly killed off Apple in the years without Steve. Apple doesn't want any part of that any more. If you want unlimited choices, there's Linux. There's probably more distros of Linux than anything else. But look where all those choices got Linux.
It's the difference between going to a junk, cheap restaurant and a really good, high end one. The cheap ones have a menu 10 pages long and you can order practically anything you want, all of it mediocre and substandard. The good restaurants don't give you much choice at all. They only serve a few items, but they make sure the items they do serve are top notch.
If you want a small number of products, each one fairly carefully thought out, Apple is the company with that mindset. If you want mass market appeal on nearly any hardware configuration you can think of, Microsoft has that mindset. If the sky's the limit, and you want any hardware AND software configuration you can dream of, Linux is there for you. Different strokes for different folks.
Sure, and they could be on the right track for all we know -- it was just that they changed focus at the exact same time they switched to Intel, which was hardly a coincidence. They knew they would never be able to compete on speed again since all PC manufacturers would be offering the exact same components, so they had to look for a competitive edge elsewhere. Whether the chicken or the egg came first, we'll never know.
Well, depends on who the user is. It's too technical for the general user, that's true. You have to dig in places the general user would probably never look. This is Microsoft's main problem, there's a missing link between the underpinnings engineers and the GUI guys. There's a whole bunch of really smart and sophisticated technology buried deep within in Vista, in certain areas MS is way ahead of Apple just like they were with pre-emptive multitasking and memory management back in the pre-OSX days, but somewhere between the kernel via the API to the GUI the point gets lost and you end up with something that looks like XP deluxe rather than a whole new system. Fortunately Win7 is a step in the right direction, but they still have some way to go.
I'll state it again, restore sucks, period. If that places me on a high horse, great, I'll enjoy the view.
As for gaming, who cares?! Seriously, does everyone need to be a gamer? Not everyone is a gamer, far from it. If they are, good for them, but Apple has NEVER claimed to be competing in the gaming market. If you want to play games, great, own Windows, I don't care. I have nothing against Windows. However, we're on an Apple fan site, not Microsoft. So don't expect people to agree with your opinions.
Maybe restore sucks b/c you either can't back up your files properly or you don't know how to set restore points? I've recovered 100% of my stuff when I used to use it. Now I just back everything up to a 2nd hdd and leave it at that. A lot of people claim "X" sucks b/c of "Y", yet usually don't use the stuff enough to figure out how to properly make it work.
A lot of people do care about gaming and even companies such as id software and blizzard support OSX. Maybe bootcamp exists to attract PC gamers?
I agree. I also wanted to say thank you, while we may not agree on some things, and while we both may get heated sometimes lol, it's nice to read comments that are intelligently written and keep the topic from getting personal.
According to stats from the Entertainment Software Association...
...video games are played in 75% of American households
...63% of all Americans play video games
...42% of all game players play games online once a week or more
...the average game player is 30 years old and has been playing for 9.5 years
...the average game buyer is 37 years old
...43% of the gamers are women
...Women above the age of 18 represent a greater portion of the game playing population (28%) than boys aged 6-17 (19%)
...19% of Americans aged 50 and above play video games
So while you're correct in saying that not everyone is a gamer, it's not quite the obscure hobby for immature zit-faced 15-year old geeks you make it out to be. Games outsell music for crying out loud. Did you notice what the sales pitch for iPod Touch is these days? It's spelled G-A-M-E-Z.
Fair enough. I won't give you a free pass until you stop getting my iMac story messed up, though.I agree. I also wanted to say thank you, while we may not agree on some things, and while we both may get heated sometimes lol, it's nice to read comments that are intelligently written and keep the topic from getting personal.
No. It just doesn't work well. It's a good idea not executed to the fullest extent.
The gaming market is a very, very small market. For you it may seem big, but for the general consumer, most never have heard of ID or WoW. The mass consumer interested in gaming looks towards gaming consoles, not their home computer. Wii, PS3, XBOX, those are for mass gamers. General consumers do not care how many megabytes their video card supports, and if they do it's mostly for use with multiple displays for graphic design, etc. Gaming, not so much, it is a very, very small market when all things are considered.
Sure, however those "gamers" use consoles. There are very few people who are "serious" gamers (as is the discussion) and in search of top of the line graphics card for their system. Again, Scrabble isn't what we're discussing, any video card can play Scrabble (and any mobile device as well). The point mentioned is games that require heavy graphics, which is the gripe raised by the select few regarding OS X.
Do you have a source for all of your data? Video games cover a very large spectrum, however I would bet that less than 5% of the 63% of American video game players play anything more taxing (or nerdy) than World of Warcraft. The games they do play are tetris, on occasion, and solitaire.
Define serious.
It doesn't have the same connotation it used to back in the 90s. You're entirely wrong about video games being a small segment of the market in general. Its larger than music and even movie rentals on xbox360 earn a lot of cash.
At least anuba provided some numbers disproving your argument. Where is your proof?