This guy seems to be just obsessed by the specs, we're all feeding the troll, I'm already tired of this thread...
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.
PLEASE NOTE: Current MBP is lightyears behind!
- Thread starter kamil.amersi
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
This guy seems to be just obsessed by the specs, we're all feeding the troll, I'm already tired of this thread...
Very good points, additionally the OP must factor in take Apple's industrial design costs. The design and styling of Mac computers costs $$$ and people pay more to have one, certainly not the only reason but that must be included in any value calculus.
^that too.
Cheers,
Don't forget customer service. Apple has higher marks than any of the other companies in that department. Oh and then theres the fact that they don't throw all that crappy bloat ware on to subsidize the price of their products. Ill stick with macs as long as the current companies stick with their business models.
I would rather apple take its time to get the latest and greatest components into their systems, because they are taking the time to make sure everything is OPTIMIZED to run as efficiently as possible. Something apple tries hard to do, and most other companies don't bother with.
I would rather apple take its time to get the latest and greatest components into their systems, because they are taking the time to make sure everything is OPTIMIZED to run as efficiently as possible. Something apple tries hard to do, and most other companies don't bother with.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8C148)
I Think you right mate
Looon said:
I Think you right mate
This topic comes up every. goddamn. time. Intel decides to put out a new CPU line, or refresh an existing one.
Who really gives a ****?
Unless you are into taxing your hardware to the absolute extremes of its limits, you're not going to notice marginal changes in CPU architecture between refreshes. You're NOT. CPUs in particular have reached a barrier of diminishing returns, and throwing your hands up and moaning about not being able to buy a MBP with bleeding-edge CPU releases is idiotic. You want that ****, buy a Dell or an HP, and see where that gets you.
You want a real-world, noticeable performance increase? Buy an SSD or double your RAM.
Here's the subconscious motivator behind threads such as this; the OP wants cutting-edge hardware, and realizes he'll have to pay an arm and a leg for it, and get an ultimately inferior overall system by going with a bleeding-edge Dell or Asus. And he doesn't want to pay that sort of cash, because he knows, deep down, that they aren't worth it. People just don't want to pay top-dollar for a garbage laptop. So he just wants to project all this bile, because he can't have his cake and eat it too. He wants something as overall nice as a MBP, yet wants to satisfy his spec-whoring ego.
Utterly juvenile, at best.
Who really gives a ****?
Unless you are into taxing your hardware to the absolute extremes of its limits, you're not going to notice marginal changes in CPU architecture between refreshes. You're NOT. CPUs in particular have reached a barrier of diminishing returns, and throwing your hands up and moaning about not being able to buy a MBP with bleeding-edge CPU releases is idiotic. You want that ****, buy a Dell or an HP, and see where that gets you.
You want a real-world, noticeable performance increase? Buy an SSD or double your RAM.
Here's the subconscious motivator behind threads such as this; the OP wants cutting-edge hardware, and realizes he'll have to pay an arm and a leg for it, and get an ultimately inferior overall system by going with a bleeding-edge Dell or Asus. And he doesn't want to pay that sort of cash, because he knows, deep down, that they aren't worth it. People just don't want to pay top-dollar for a garbage laptop. So he just wants to project all this bile, because he can't have his cake and eat it too. He wants something as overall nice as a MBP, yet wants to satisfy his spec-whoring ego.
Utterly juvenile, at best.
Last edited:
Thats because its a flawed message that everyone on mac rumors is sick of hearing. Its been beated to death. You are only looking at the hardware side of things when software is the reason people buy the computer. Thats like selling someone the best HD TV but not letting them watch any channels.
Is this a joke? You talk about business sense and try to go down to a granular level but leave out glaring omissions?
System Builders are paid for the stickers they put on their machines. Intel wants Apple to put "Int3lzz NSYDE!" on their boxes and will pay $$$. Apple refuses. Wintel Builders do, bringing down the cost.
Personally, I think badges are ok on my custom boxes, but that's a design choice that Apple's made and the costs savings aren't realized by Apple customers.
Next, many machines have crapware preinstalled on the machine (I don't think i've ever unboxed one that didn't), much to the chargrin of the user. Again, Apple chooses not to have random vendors (think ClamXav, M$, game devs) litter the default install with trialware garbage and then CHARGE THE END USER to remove it.
Obviously there's other factors that influence the price. Still, I'd rather pay for the maseratis in cupertino than get thrown under the bus by an OEM who will knowingly install garbage like norton which makes the machine c.r.a.w.l right out of the box.
I want to kill this entire thread with fire. This is seriously the most pointless 5 pages on this forum right now. Yeah we needed to be informed that Core 2 duo's are outdated after the 15 other threads I've waded through looking for something useful. Its good apple doesn't jump on brand new technology so they can see how it fairs in other computers and work on that.
You sir know wtf your talking about unlike most. Idk if every employee drives a maserati, my MacBook is still cool and I hate crapware more than anything else, especially when it runs in the background sucking up RAM.
So you want to look at specs? Check out my sig. Both those computers work fine to this day. Can't play any games at max settings anymore like i could when i got them, but they still work, and i have never had to bring them in for repair, although i had to buy a new battery for my laptop, but those die. If you want a computer that has a high likelihood of lasting you for years, without needing maintenance, then a mac is what you want. Apple doesn't just put any part in the computer, they choose the BEST parts, the most reliable parts. That's why the computers last as long as they do. It isn't magic, and specs are not all that matter. Many of those "numbers" don't mean squat if the parts fail after a year or two.
Also, how stupid can you be to even suggest that the current MBP is "Lightyears" behind? The current MBP (excluding the 13'') uses i5s and i7s, and last i checked, those are still pretty new. Sandy Bridge is EXTREMELY new, and apple hasn't reached their normal refresh time yet. Impatient, I'd say.
Also, how stupid can you be to even suggest that the current MBP is "Lightyears" behind? The current MBP (excluding the 13'') uses i5s and i7s, and last i checked, those are still pretty new. Sandy Bridge is EXTREMELY new, and apple hasn't reached their normal refresh time yet. Impatient, I'd say.
+1
Also for all the people on the thread complaining about the price of macs, they are woefully unaware that MS and Apple have different business models. Apple makes money from hardware, which is why their software is dirt cheap. ($129 OS anyone?) Microsoft has no hardware and makes money from licensing software, which is why their software is more expensive ($400 for the full version of Win 7, $500 for the full version of office, Visual studio starting at $1200 for professional and going up to $12,000 where as XCode is free)
There is nothing wrong with that, its simply different business models. People always fail to take that into account and do nothing more then blindly bash Apple.
Not true. People already have laptops with i7 Sandy Bridge at home. Asus is shipping them now. Probably others are also shipping now. But fact is, they are available and others are shipping them.
Apple will come ofcourse with an answer sooner or later.
Last edited:
Home Premium, which is meant for consumers is only 179$, or 99$ for OEM version (10 times more popular in NewEgg than retail version). Professional and Ultimate version offer features that most people don't need. I don't know does OS X have similar features natively though.
iWork is a joke compared to full Office suite.
But Apple offers the full OS for $129, not a dumbed down version. The point is is Microsofts software costs much more because that is where they make their money. Also OEM disks are meant for OEMs because they work on one computer. If you try and change computers with it or add it to a second computer you'll get the "You may be a victim of software counterfeiting" message all the time.
Also iWork is actually quite good. I much prefer it over office.
It's decent, but it has a clumsy interface. That floating window to modify text and such just annoys me. My wife, a non-technical person in all senses of the word, asked for OpenOffice back after I asked her to try iWork.
I'm sorry I bought it now that I have Office 2011 on my machine. It makes it easier to go between work and home, even between operating systems.
Apple always takes 1 to 2 months to update their MB/MBP lines after an update. Why? Because they have to wait for volume availability. They likely have a higher percentage of day one buyers than any other brand, so they need large volume on day one.
Their dv series, yes, but not their envy line (which is intended to compete with apple's offerings).
Their dv series, yes, but not their envy line (which is intended to compete with apple's offerings).
I don't think it matters is it "full" OS or not. It's up to the features. I don't know what exactly Professional and Ultimate versions offer but IMO the key question is does OS X offer similar features that Ultimate does. If OS X really offers similar features for 129$ while MS asks 400$ for them, then it is a bargain. However, if OS X doesn't offer those features, then it's only comparable to Home Premium which is much more similar in price as well.
Also, 129$ OS X is a single license as well, you cannot legally install it to more than one computer AFAIK. I know OS X doesn't ask for serial so you can install it to as many computers as you like but on the other hand, installing OEM Windows and cracking it takes less than 5 minutes (both are illegal anyway).
But again, it's up to the features. Home & Student version of Office 2010 is the closest to iWork '09. It's only ~120$ so not that much more (plus it has OneNote). iWork doesn't offer anything similar to Outlook for example so you can't really compare iWork to the ultimate version of Office.
Mostly networking related, like remote login, advanced network settings. Stuff a business would need.
He's saying only the Quads are shipping now. The cheap 13, i5 and dual core i7 based on SB won't ship until later.
Not one current Apple laptop even has the quad i7 so in some regards the OP is right. It's just pointless to keep bringing it up.
Cheers,
Last edited:
Yeah, but does OS X (non-server) offer them natively? That is what I'm interested in (well, I don't care but it's part of the debate
).Dual core Sandy Bridges will be released on February 20th.
Yeah, but does OS X (non-server) offer them natively? That is what I'm interested in (well, I don't care but it's part of the debate
Not to my knowledge, but that would be a hell of an iOS feature eh?
Besides, real men SSH with a VNC.