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.
Microsoft Executive on Apple: 'iPhone 4 Might Be Their Vista'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I've very familiar with the internal MS words for MS products - the fact that even product releases are bad, odd ones are good.. perhaps Apple's products are following the same
Seems to me people here are inept with computers. Vista was a fine operating system and the iphone is fine as well. Vista had its problems and they were fixed. Similarly, the iphone is having problems but they will also be corrected.
A majority of Windows users (XP) own computers which are under powered to run Vista without hiccups, even after the SP2 release.
Vista, compared with XP, is a resource hog, Aero and pre-fetching notwithstanding. Moving large files is still very slow, and its other annoyances remain.
re: MorphingDragon's comments
I agree that Apple made their share of dud products, but I'd say your list is FAR from accurate or sensible.
If you want to talk crap products from Apple, I'd suggest such items as the "puck" shaped mouse they released with the original iMacs, or the old PowerBook 5300's that caught on fire randomly! (But maybe those were from before your time?)
The fact is, the modern day Apple has been putting out extremely good products, across the board. Some only fill specific niches, like the Macbook Air notebooks, so many people won't see the point to them. But it's hard to pick one up, look carefully at its design and build quality, and really be able to claim it's junk. It's just not offering what you'd, personally, want for the money.
The issues like iMacs with yellow screens, I think were really a combination of a defective run of LCD display panels (Apple doesn't make those themselves, after all. Like everyone else, they source them from one of a few manufacturers, such as LG.), and people not understanding how to calibrate their display. The 20" aluminum iMacs *did* ship with a pretty lousy default calibration in OS X. I owned one and I remember it looking "washed out" and yellowish when I first booted it up. But all I did was run through the "Advanced calibration" one time and save that as my new default -- and it looked GREAT after that.
I own 2 Mac Pros and both have been flawless computers. Excellent performance and rock solid reliability, while running very quietly. I've upgraded the video cards in both (I think twice in the oldest one) now, using a reflashed PC card in one case. I never paid anywhere near $4000 for either of those. But even if we pretend I did buy one for $4000, it'd be on track to giving me 5 straight years of great service -- so less than a $1000 per year investment.
I agree that Apple made their share of dud products, but I'd say your list is FAR from accurate or sensible.
If you want to talk crap products from Apple, I'd suggest such items as the "puck" shaped mouse they released with the original iMacs, or the old PowerBook 5300's that caught on fire randomly! (But maybe those were from before your time?)
The fact is, the modern day Apple has been putting out extremely good products, across the board. Some only fill specific niches, like the Macbook Air notebooks, so many people won't see the point to them. But it's hard to pick one up, look carefully at its design and build quality, and really be able to claim it's junk. It's just not offering what you'd, personally, want for the money.
The issues like iMacs with yellow screens, I think were really a combination of a defective run of LCD display panels (Apple doesn't make those themselves, after all. Like everyone else, they source them from one of a few manufacturers, such as LG.), and people not understanding how to calibrate their display. The 20" aluminum iMacs *did* ship with a pretty lousy default calibration in OS X. I owned one and I remember it looking "washed out" and yellowish when I first booted it up. But all I did was run through the "Advanced calibration" one time and save that as my new default -- and it looked GREAT after that.
I own 2 Mac Pros and both have been flawless computers. Excellent performance and rock solid reliability, while running very quietly. I've upgraded the video cards in both (I think twice in the oldest one) now, using a reflashed PC card in one case. I never paid anywhere near $4000 for either of those. But even if we pretend I did buy one for $4000, it'd be on track to giving me 5 straight years of great service -- so less than a $1000 per year investment.
Apple makes 30% of PC profits on 3% of units sold. This is sheer destruction and the Softies are quivering! 
Yes... I must be brainwashed...
BZZT... insert fanboy comment here.
---
Dude, seriously. Stop now, you're making yourself look like a putz.
Of course I've used a mac. I've owned and used both since windows 3.11. Computers are devices that people use to get things done . How can a mac be a better computer when it runs a vastly smaller number of applications? How can it be a better computer when the hardware is inferior? I can build a far better computer than the mac pro at the same cost.
Sure macs look nicer and OSX is nice and pretty and maybe it might be better than win7, but thats hardly a reason to give up the huge application and hardware advantage that PCs have. On top of all that, macs are far more expensive, and the hardware is EXACTLY the same as what PCs have.
You also have how relevant the software is. Yes there are thousands of MS Windows software but how much of them are used by a significant amount of people?
How much of an advantage does staying with PC have to the individual? Is this perceived advantage actually a disadvantage in certain situations? Does this software use its hardware to the full extent? Is the pros worth the cons?
These are all questions that a competent computer user asks themselves.
Generally, everybody uses the bread and butter programs with the occasional gem or two. Same goes for windows and mac osx.
The bolded statement is false.
The vast quantity of high quality apps available for OS X makes this irrelevant.
Have you ever used a Mac Pro?
The interior design and layout trumps any PCs I've ever worked with.
Mac Pros also use server-grade parts - hence the price difference.
True, Mac's look nicer, with solid build quality, they run OS X, and have the advantage of not having to churn Virus Protection scans and updates 24/7, not having to hire an IT department for maintenance, resulting in downtime, not having to de-frag, re-format, re-install, deal with the grand old Registry, deal with poor memory management, deal with UAC, deal with a convoluted menu layout, or deal with the lethargy of moving large files.
The OS X user experience, for me, as well as for a great many colleagues, has proven to be vastly superior to the alternatives.
The peace of mind, in combination with the increased productivity due to less downtime, make it even more so.
Oh god, I WISH server companies would recognise that people might actually want to open their servers.
What are you buying?
The Proliant DL3xx/DL5xx series are wonderful to open up - toolless for the most part (a few things need a T10, but it comes with a T10 key in a clip on the inside). Front panel LED diagnostic panel so you know that DIMM 7 had an error before you even open it up.
http://www.apple.com/xserve/
Expect more ads to compensate the costs
Edit: I shouldn't read the thread before posting, that might by the key.
We have two ProLiants (cant remember the models names off by heart), some ancient DELL server I use primarily as a web host and 3 IBM System Zs. All running the RHEV hyper-visor. The Hypervisors send me an email if they flag something, so the LEDs are for if something goes physically wrong.
So do I, it'd make University miles more enjoyable.
I don't get the Xserve comments, are you saying I should use an XServe or that Xserves are hard to open? Besides, the partner who hired me would kill me if I bought Apple parts, then again he doesn't know jack. He thinks that Mac OSX is based off Linux.
LOL typical apple homer doubletalk. "Iphone is best because the app store has soooo many apps." "Who cares that windows has more apps? Macs only need the bread and butter apps."
I'm talking about major components, not some stupid display port. Or do u really think that the CPUs, chipsets, ram, HDD, etc are Mac specific? LOL.
You can use any computer as a server. You can even get a Mac Pro bundled with OS X Server but you're comparing a tower to rackmounted machines.
I had to open up a few Dell Xeon Nocona machines to dig around inside. It's wide open in there. I can say the same for the Optiplex and Precision workstations.
I've never said otherwise... ever! Stop putting words into people's mouths.
Out of that list you said explicitly, Macs do not use standard Intel/nVidia chipsets.
I realise that any computer can be a server, but ever since I started administering a high availability/high redundancy/high performance cluster, my definition of server and server grade components has drastically changed... also that anything other than Linux is unsuitable for such demands.
Also Im not comparing Rack to Tower. Both types had annoying shrouds that get in your way.
What ever the vast quality of apps available for OSX is, PCs have more. Furthermore cross platform apps usually run better on PC and there often many apps that dont even exist for OSX.
Actually, yes. Its a very nice machine, but overpriced.
LOL Ive seen lots of PCs with far cooler looking interiors. You do realize there is an entire cottage industry devoted to making the interior of PC cases look cool right?
So? It's still overpriced PC parts in a nice looking case.