PC user reviews Mac

[madoka]

Anandtech put this up:

http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2232

Seems like a fair assessment though I didn't read everything.

My biggest peeve about Macs are the ridiculously small HD sizes. iPhoto, iMovie, iTunes, etc. all take up large amounts of disk space yet a $2,000 computer comes with a 80 gig HD. I've seen $400 PCs come with dual layer DVD burners and 160 gig drives. And yet Apple still uses cheesy 80 gig'ers. People can buy 250 gigs for about $100 these days. I could only imagine how cheap Apple could get them for, yet we get one of the smallest drives still made.

BTW, I also got a couple of Dells for $125 ech AR! Man, it's like they are just giving them away these days. P4 2.8, 128meg RAM, 40 gig HD. Add a Radeon 9800 Pro for $150, $50 for 512 RAM and you've got a great gaming setup.

 

[munkle]

Same article also mentioned in MacBytes, linky.

 

[johnnyjibbs]

Um, if I was going to try out a Mac as a devoted PC user, I wouldn't just decide to buy the absolute most expensive model they do . I mean, come on - the cheapest eMac would have showcased the OS just as well..

 

[virividox]

good read fair assesment i pretty much share that opinion with a few minor quibbles but overall very good article

 

[Jigglelicious]

Um, if I was going to try out a Mac as a devoted PC user, I wouldn't just decide to buy the absolute most expensive model they do . I mean, come on - the cheapest eMac would have showcased the OS just as well..

One of Anand's major complains was the lack of speed that he felt in the Dual 2GHz G5. I don't think he would have been overly happy with an eMac

 

[jeremy.king]

I've seen $400 PCs come with dual layer DVD burners and 160 gig drives. And yet Apple still uses cheesy 80 gig'ers.

People can buy 250 gigs for about $100 these days.

BTW, I also got a couple of Dells for $125 ech AR! Man, it's like they are just giving them away these days.

Where? Where? and Where?

I smell a Troll....

 

[johnnyjibbs]

One of Anand's major complains was the lack of speed that he felt in the Dual 2GHz G5. I don't think he would have been overly happy with an eMac

Yeah, ok, but it is true that OS X is simply not as responsive as Windows (in certain areas, mind). For example, while it should be more snappy on a dual G5 than my 1GHz PB 12" or any eMac, it's not that much more snappy. For example, window scrolling is acceptable on both but not as good as Windows. You can't tell me that Mac OS X's inability to scroll pages smoothly is because the 1.25GHz G4 (eMac) or whatever can't process that quickly - it's more to do with poor coding of the scrolling mechanism I would have thought.

 

[iMeowbot]

You can't tell me that Mac OS X's inability to scroll pages smoothly is because the 1.25GHz G4 (eMac) or whatever can't process that quickly - it's more to do with poor coding of the scrolling mechanism I would have thought.

I think that you mean to write "good coding"

Windows NT used to have the very same graphics performance characteristics. MS addressed this in NT 4.0 by moving graphics APIs from user space into the kernel. While this did make response faster, there have been some lingering problems here and there.

I'd rather not see OS X repeat this blunder.

 

[johnnyjibbs]

I think that you mean to write "good coding"

Windows NT used to have the very same graphics performance characteristics. MS addressed this in NT 4.0 by moving graphics APIs from user space into the kernel. While this did make response faster, there have been some lingering problems here and there.

I'd rather not see OS X repeat this blunder.

Oh well, I'd rather have slower window scrolling than security holes and at least a Finder window always opens immediately, not like Windows XP when you double click the My Computer icon and then have to wait half an hour for a window to appear, only to find half a dozen open up because Windows gives you no feedback of having clicked it or not

 

[bdomz]

BTW, I also got a couple of Dells for $125 ech AR! Man, it's like they are just giving them away these days. P4 2.8, 128meg RAM, 40 gig HD. Add a Radeon 9800 Pro for $150, $50 for 512 RAM and you've got a great gaming setup.

Dell's low end desktops are cheap but I've never seen them that cheap (or even close to that). And their lowest end systems don't have an AGP slot so upgrading graphics isn't always possible. Still they do have some good deals.

 

[slooksterPSV]

Dells have never been or will be that cheap, that must have been a behind deal. A celeron may cost that much, but a P4? No way, even on the cheapest site you can't get a computer for $125. Its not possible. Besides AMD is so much better than Pentium 4

 

[aethier]

Anandtech put this up:

http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2232

I've seen $400 PCs come with dual layer DVD burners and 160 gig drives. And yet Apple still uses cheesy 80 gig'ers. .

don't kid yourself there buddy,

on another note, i found that article to be very well writin, and the die hard windows user seems to like mac os x quite a lot

aethier

 

[JLS]

I have already seen several examples (e.g. Icon size customization) that he says you can't do in XP.. this is false.

or how about this..

Under OS X, the term drag-and-drop is really taken to a new level - you can drag and drop just about anything. Let's say, you really like one of the pictures in this review. Under OS X, you could simply click and drag the image to your desktop or any folder and a copy of it would be saved....You can drag it into an IM window to send someone a URL of the image, or you can drag it into an email to send someone a copy of it

That happens in windows too.

I understand that his article is good, but when he doesn't even know what the windows machine he has been using his whole life can do, its not that useful.

 

[kwajaln]

I just read that entire article, and it was by far the most informative and unbiased review of anything Apple I have come across in the month or so that I have been looking into their products. I applaud Anand Lal Shimpi, the author, for his objectivity. That is something I have found to be elusive since becoming interested in Apple recently. The Apple camp seems to already have their minds made up about anything Windows based, and the same can be said for the Windows/PC people about Apple. I have been doing a lot of reading and research on Apple over the past 4-6 weeks, and the AnandTech article was refreshing for not following that pattern.

From the article: "I'd say that Safari is probably the weakest link in Apple's OS X package, and it's one that they absolutely need to fix. After all, you can argue that not everyone games, but when a $300 eMachines computer browses the web faster than a $3000 Powermac, it's time for an updated web browser."

That is an excellent point. Do you all expect that weakness of Safari's to be revised with Tiger's release?

 

[slooksterPSV]

I have already seen several examples (e.g. Icon size customization) that he says you can't do in XP.. this is false.

or how about this..

Under OS X, the term drag-and-drop is really taken to a new level - you can drag and drop just about anything. Let's say, you really like one of the pictures in this review. Under OS X, you could simply click and drag the image to your desktop or any folder and a copy of it would be saved....You can drag it into an IM window to send someone a URL of the image, or you can drag it into an email to send someone a copy of it

That happens in windows too.

I understand that his article is good, but when he doesn't even know what the windows machine he has been using his whole life can do, its not that useful.

OMG You can drag-and-drop. OMG WHEN DID THIS HAPPEN! LMAO come on seriously I could hold down CTRL and click and drag something and boom in windows its a copy. If you haven't tried it, do so. These Cnet people are really pizzing me off. (I don't know if you guys accept the one word as a swear word, but I don't so yeah)