PowerMac RoadMap Past and Future

bobindashadows

macrumors 6502
Mar 16, 2002
419
0
Re: yep. they are.

Originally posted by edvniow



Correction:

They make the software that goes on the tablet PCs, which are made by Compaq, Viewsonic, Acer, etc, etc......
Whoa, I didn't know that. So are there gonna be a bunch of different brands of tablet PCs, like there are desktops and laptops? As in, you can either buy a (for example) Dell tablet or a compaq tablet? I always thought that microsoft was selling these things, my bad.
 

tychay

macrumors regular
Jul 1, 2002
219
29
San Francisco, CA
Tablet PC and other rantings

The confusion here may be that Microsoft made the first TabletPC which is a reference platform designed to show manufacturers how it can be done, and to provide a baseline requirement that needs to go into a TabletPC. And no, you cannot buy a TabletPC from Dell. Dell feels that this is a niche market so isn't going into TabletPCs. However, that would change if the TabletPC takes off.

This approach is similar to the multimedia PCs pushed by HP and Microsoft. Those are the computers at Best Buy that burn DVDs that can only be played back on that machine.

However, Microsoft makes hardware and has for years. The CP/M card in my Apple ][+ is made by them. And people are well familiar with their keyboards and mice, the latter being based on HP design and technology. They also make the XBox which is, in effect, a PC though the manufacturing is done elsewhere. However Dell doesn't do their own manufacturing either, so it is not much different. They recently introduced an Airport base station knock off (surprisingly for a price that puts it much higher than a competitor such as Linksys).

Why would Microsoft introduce a wireless gateway that is significantly overpriced? Obviously they feel that the Microsoft brand name and the associated software will ensure a quality, compatibility, and ease-of-use that more than justifies the $50 premium on a $100 product. Sound like anyone you know?

This leads me back to the other recent post about Apple's cost. Indeed the attitude that "Macs should be only for the wealthy" is wrong but consider that you can get a new Mac desktop <$800 or notebook for <$1000. That's a price that was "bargain basement" for a PC three years ago and uncommon even today for a notebook.

Unless you a pirating software, if a computer is <$1000 you can easily expect to pay twice as much during the lifetime of the computer for software. By this measure, Macs are not overpriced. The only difference I see is that Apple doesn't have the luxury of an "Office" tax and a "OS" tax. The closest comparisons I've seen on the press compare the single computer copy of Jaguar to the yearly fee of the home edition of Microsoft Windows XP. Let's ignore that 4-copy price of Jaguar being 1/3, that developers get it for free, that it is bundled with all new computers, that it delivers features that can only be found in Windows XP Advanced server, that I can recompile the kernel and install hundreds of free packages at the click of a button, etc.

No we'll ignore all that and focus on the extra $15 I have to spend once ever three years on a three button mouse.

People who say Macs are expensive are repeating a mantra that was true in the early 90s. Look at how much you spend on computer and computer related hardware such as cables, printer, modem, switches, peripherals, computers, monitors, etc. Just like a couple of years ago when people were clamoring for a Mac below $1000 and now there are three, they are now clamoring for a Mac below $600, and all they need to do is wait a couple years.

Of course, by then those same people will be demanding for a computer below $300. And comparing it to a barebones PC that they put together (ignoring the fact that they had to return their memory 3 times because it was defective and the week they were down because of a virus). The only thing that's the same is they'll still be paying five hundred dollars or more a year on the latest Windows, Office, and "essential" utilities like disk utilities, anti-virus, uninstallers, etc.

Not to mention the same $500 on games (statistically the average PC user spends as much on entertainment as the rest of software combined) and $400 on the latest graphics card to play that game.

Oh yeah, and the $300 on the latest XBox and the cost of the "must have" game that goes along with it.

Not to mention the yearly developer tax for Visual Studio.NET and MSDN which runs you about $1000/year.

Hmm, who's the frugal one? My computer isn't a game machine, most of my software is open-sourced or free, I get OS updates for free (as a developer), and don't use Microsoft Office, and all my Macs are still in use.

Consider the Total Cost of Ownership, the Return on Investment, and the length the computer will be deployed. A macintosh compares very favorably to a PC.

I forgot that some may consider dotMac a "tax". I don't know about others, but since the switch from iTools to dotMac, I've simply stopped mentioning it to new users as its not longer a selling point. (Sure I get Virex and some games and prints with my dotMac, but it always smacked of rationalization.)

Take care,

terry
 
Re: Tablet PC and other rantings

Originally posted by tychay
They recently introduced an Airport base station knock off (surprisingly for a price that puts it much higher than a competitor such as Linksys).

Why would Microsoft introduce a wireless gateway that is significantly overpriced? Obviously they feel that the Microsoft brand name and the associated software will ensure a quality, compatibility, and ease-of-use that more than justifies the $50 premium on a $100 product. Sound like anyone you know?
Uh, Microsoft's base station is $160 and Apple's Airport base is $300?!
Unless you a pirating software, if a computer is <$1000 you can easily expect to pay twice as much during the lifetime of the computer for software. By this measure, Macs are not overpriced. The only difference I see is that Apple doesn't have the luxury of an "Office" tax and a "OS" tax. The closest comparisons I've seen on the press compare the single computer copy of Jaguar to the yearly fee of the home edition of Microsoft Windows XP. Let's ignore that 4-copy price of Jaguar being 1/3, that developers get it for free, that it is bundled with all new computers, that it delivers features that can only be found in Windows XP Advanced server, that I can recompile the kernel and install hundreds of free packages at the click of a button, etc.

No we'll ignore all that and focus on the extra $15 I have to spend once ever three years on a three button mouse.
You are making absolutely no sense here. There is no such thing as Windows XP Advanced Server. And what "yearly" fee of the Home Edition? I simply paid once for my copy of Windows XP Professional and never had to pay again.
People who say Macs are expensive are repeating a mantra that was true in the early 90s. Look at how much you spend on computer and computer related hardware such as cables, printer, modem, switches, peripherals, computers, monitors, etc. Just like a couple of years ago when people were clamoring for a Mac below $1000 and now there are three, they are now clamoring for a Mac below $600, and all they need to do is wait a couple years.
But back then, my family felt that the Macintosh was a better buy. Today, the Mac is seriously overpriced and we aren't going to justify purchasing a Power Mac G4 because it doesn't have the power we need.
Of course, by then those same people will be demanding for a computer below $300. And comparing it to a barebones PC that they put together (ignoring the fact that they had to return their memory 3 times because it was defective and the week they were down because of a virus). The only thing that's the same is they'll still be paying five hundred dollars or more a year on the latest Windows, Office, and "essential" utilities like disk utilities, anti-virus, uninstallers, etc.
WTF. $500 a year? I purchased a copy of them all and never had to pay again. In fact, the total cost was still lower than a high end Power Mac.
Not to mention the same $500 on games (statistically the average PC user spends as much on entertainment as the rest of software combined) and $400 on the latest graphics card to play that game.
My home-brewed Athlon was $1,100 including latest graphics card at that time (GeForce 3) and it is more than enough to play the current games. Unreal Tournament 2003 runs just dandy fine. Let's see, for that price, the iMac has a GeForce 2 MX.
Oh yeah, and the $300 on the latest XBox and the cost of the "must have" game that goes along with it.
I saw it for $199 including some games as a bonus. Sounds like a good deal, except my mom would never get game consoles so I'm stuck with my Athlon. No biggie.
Not to mention the yearly developer tax for Visual Studio.NET and MSDN which runs you about $1000/year.
And for many people, including me, it is very well worth it. One would get paid back many times more. Remember, MSDN also distributes latest apps, latest OSes, etc. so one can make sure their applications are compatible, etc. [not just the OS, but many, many more like: SQL Server, Windows 2000 Servers, Windows .NET Servers, and much more useful stuff] And since you are making sure, you have a larger customer base. Can't argue with 95% of potential users.
Hmm, who's the frugal one? My computer isn't a game machine, most of my software is open-sourced or free, I get OS updates for free (as a developer), and don't use Microsoft Office, and all my Macs are still in use.
Most of my computer is open-source and I've been producing free software, even for Windows. I use Microsoft Office, just because it is the defacto standard. Can't argue with that. I refuse to run StarOffice or others, they all suck compared to Microsoft Office. MS Office is well worth the $400.
Consider the Total Cost of Ownership, the Return on Investment, and the length the computer will be deployed. A macintosh compares very favorably to a PC.
Really? I consider upgradeability a part of the TCO. I recently upgraded my Athlon to Athlon XP 2100+ for a measly $89. For a 1 GHz G4 upgrade card, you'd need to pay a whopping $699. To me, for now, the Macintosh is not worth it. I've been waiting around for Mac that is worth it. Until then, I'll use my Athlon and the-oh-still-running Macintosh IIsi.
 

sweedledee

macrumors newbie
Nov 3, 2002
2
0
New York
Eh... beating up your boss?

There is one thing I don't get:
Didn't M$ buy 30% of apple stocks some years ago?
Did they sell them or are they still holders of those 30%.

Another thing: If M$ would stop word for the MacOS then what is stopping
apple from using M$ old tactic of reverse engineering? Take the latest verson of the Office suite and rewrite your own code for all the functions and call it iWord or whatever.
 

sfoalex

macrumors 6502
Aug 11, 2001
374
28
Microsoft NEVER bought 30% of Apple

This word of mouth that goes on around the web gets very much out of hand. When Steve Jobs returned to Apple as the iCEO and announced the Microsoft commitment to Apple to continue to produce Office for the Mac for the next 5 years, Microsoft invested $150 million, at that time that was a 5% stake in Apple. The stock was non-voting shares. In other words, they gained nothing but stock and no ability to do anything that would shift Apple's focus at all. That 5% stake in Apple was sold long ago and Microsoft holds next to nothing in Apple at this time.

Facts:

Microsoft NEVER bailed out Apple.
Microsoft NEVER bought a 30% stake in Apple
Microsoft doesn't own Apple stock.
Microsoft's 5 year commitment has ended

Follow this link to see teh top stock holders in Apple
http://biz.yahoo.com/hd/a/aapl.html

None of which are Microsoft...
 

ddtlm

macrumors 65816
Aug 20, 2001
1,184
0
tychay:

You are apparently from a parallel universe where the sky is blue, the grass in green, and the very birds sing the praises of Apple. Meanwhile, in this universe, you will be misunderstood and made fun of. So sad, if only everyone else could see the beauty of the universe where you come from, then we would understand!
 

scem0

macrumors 604
Jul 16, 2002
7,028
1
back in NYC!
Yeah Tychay, your views are way off. Here are the stats on the
comp I bought off eBay 2 and a half months ago (something like
that):

p4 2.4 GHz
533 MHz system bus
CD-RW (40x-10x-40x - fast as hell, i love it)
CD-ROM (no clue on the specs here, it works quickly though)
40 Gig (not sure of the RPMs here, I think 5,200 or 5,400)
512 Megs of 333 MHz DDR RAM
Windows XP Home (It really ain't that bad, people underrate it on MR)
6 USB 2.0 ports (2 front of case, 4 back)
Dell Quietkey keyboard
Dell mouse
Dell case (Which I like a lot)
GeForce 4 MX (OMG WC3 plays sooooom much better then on my
400 MHz g4 which I bought about 4 months before the PC for more
money)

all for $700. Was around $750 after shipping and everything else.
It has been well worth the money. So don't even say that
Macs aren't overpriced. If I had gotten a mac, I would have been
stuck with obsolete technology, for a measly $700.

I haven't had to spend a penny past the $750 I spent on my
computer, and it works great, except for some flaws in the OS
(stupid M$ :rolleyes: ).

My computer proves your theories on macs not being over-priced
wrong.
 

DakotaGuy

macrumors 601
Jan 14, 2002
4,011
3,171
South Dakota, USA
Originally posted by scem0
Yeah Tychay, your views are way off. Here are the stats on the
comp I bought off eBay 2 and a half months ago (something like
that):

p4 2.4 GHz
533 MHz system bus
CD-RW (40x-10x-40x - fast as hell, i love it)
CD-ROM (no clue on the specs here, it works quickly though)
40 Gig (not sure of the RPMs here, I think 5,200 or 5,400)
512 Megs of 333 MHz DDR RAM
Windows XP Home (It really ain't that bad, people underrate it on MR)
6 USB 2.0 ports (2 front of case, 4 back)
Dell Quietkey keyboard
Dell mouse
Dell case (Which I like a lot)
GeForce 4 MX (OMG WC3 plays sooooom much better then on my
400 MHz g4 which I bought about 4 months before the PC for more
money)

all for $700. Was around $750 after shipping and everything else.
It has been well worth the money. So don't even say that
Macs aren't overpriced. If I had gotten a mac, I would have been
stuck with obsolete technology, for a measly $700.

I haven't had to spend a penny past the $750 I spent on my
computer, and it works great, except for some flaws in the OS
(stupid M$ :rolleyes: ).

My computer proves your theories on macs not being over-priced
wrong.
Why don't you brag about your PC on a Windows PC message board. You are a lot more likely to get a pat on the back on their boards then you are here. Looks like we lost you to the PC world, oh well... Sounds like you like XP better then OSX, why and how is it better? How is the case better then the new PowerMacs, are you saying the machine looks better then the Macs? Or it is more accessible? Just trying to figure out why you think your PC is better then a Mac other then it has a million GHz.
 

tychay

macrumors regular
Jul 1, 2002
219
29
San Francisco, CA
a reply

I post on a Mac board that I think Macs are not overpriced, that Apple hardware has always had a premium vs. PCs and people complained then just like they are complaining today. And then give examples where the total cost of ownership is comparible or better than a PC. Then get bashed by three PC users.

I'm a PC user too (Windows 2000/XP, Linux, FreeBSD on x86), but the difference is that there is no way I could be paid for posting this because Apple doesn't have anything comparible to MVP.

Uh, Microsoft's base station is $160 and Apple's Airport base is $300
So? When did I compare Microsoft's base station to Apple's? I was comparing the base station to the Linksys I own which I paid less for, purchased a year ago, and includes a 10/100 switch.

My only sin here is not putting "overpriced" in quotes. I was trying to show that even Microsoft charges a premium because they feel that "the Microsoft brand name and associated software will ensure quality, compatibility, and ease-of-use that more than justified the $50 premium" and as an example of Microsoft branded hardware (go reread the above).

Apple feels that the Apple brand name and associated base station software ensure a quality, compatibility, and ease-of-use that more than justifies a $200 premium on a $100 product. Perhaps some people like the way it looks. Perhaps some people like the reliability/warrantee (after all they've been around much longer than their competitors and people buy Cisco routers for similar reasons). I think their base station is overpriced, but obviously others don't because they're still selling it at that price and used ones seem to be holding their value after three years on the market.

The difference is that 6 years ago, I'd have no choice but to buy from Apple or a similarly priced "Made for Mac" product. Now I can buy a Linksys and make the decision for myself.

Most of you don't remember the days of proprietary or non-standard Mac connectors (monitor, serial, ADB, NuBus, SCSI, and yes, even ethernet), when Apple had a 60% markup on their hardware (compare their educational prices now to then), when you had to search to find an Authorized Apple Reseller and you couldn't even mail order parts from Apple, let alone build to order computers.

reference to Windows XP advanced server deleted
Yeah sorry, XP Advanced Server was delayed, I was referrring to 2000 Advanced Server. As for yearly fee, they delayed that too. Both were planned. As for "simply paid once" we'll see in a year and a half about that. Right now, your statement is like me saying I "simply paid once" for Jaguar... we'll see when 10.3 comes out. The rest of the world (the business world) already is paying a hefty sum for their up-to-date program.

But back then, my family felt that the Macintosh was a better buy. Today, the Mac is seriously overpriced and we aren't going to justify purchasing a Power Mac G4 because it doesn't have the power we need.
Good for you. And if more people are like you then Apple is in trouble. The numbers say such people are outnumbered by the PC users who are adding a Mac.

As for purchasing a copy of Windows, Office, Norton Utilities, Norton AntiVirus, and some uninstalling and "never having to pay again." Over what time period? All have had upgrades within the last year that necessitated at least an upgrade purchase (though you could probably throw the uninstaller out now).

My home-brewed Athlon was $1,100 including latest graphics card at that time (GeForce 3) and it is more than enough to play the current games. Unreal Tournament 2003 runs just dandy fine. Let's see, for that price, the iMac has a GeForce 2 MX.
My home brew Athlon was $800 of which ($300 was spent on RAM). So what? We both ran the risk of the the RAM, HD, Motherboard, or chip being defective (sometimes in a way that costs hundreds in diagnostic headache or lost productivity). We both had to purchase the OS (for me it was the time/cost of burning Linux ISOs vs $300 for XP Pro) and associated software (most people need Office, you probably need AntiVirus, etc.). This is why OEMs are so popular because they get Windows for $50/machine and similar discounts on associated software they bundle. That $1400 purchase not including the disk utilities, anti virus (don't need it for the Mac), iMovie knock off, MP3 encoder for Media Player starts too look pretty bad next to this $1100 iMac.

If you pirated your copy of Windows/Office (or purchased an "OEM copy" on eBay which may or may not be pirating depend on how the courts rule) then you are exempt from this analysis. Or perhaps you belong to a university that enterred into a site license with Microsoft and got your copy for the price of the media. The price for Windows/Office (and sometimes Visual Studio) just got embedded in your tuition price and "student fees".

I've never said that Windows PCs are overpriced. I just said that when you take into account the price of software (over the lifespan of the computer), it makes the difference in price for hardware (Mac vs. PC) appear small and often (not always) justified. This only gets better as hardware gets cheaper as Apple hardware has gotten cheaper too (though with a premium over the base price). Your Mac II si needing to be replaced after being on the market for over 12 years just shows that the lifespan of a Mac is sometimes outrageously long, thus lowering the TCO and putting a higher resale price on used Macs.

The software price is the same thing that makes it very hard for PC users to "switch" to Mac. It also explained the dissappointing sales of Office X for Mac.

As a game system though, your system still looks good (though the XBox may look better, it has the same graphics chip you mention for a fraction of the price). When someone is interested in the Mac, I tell them that you either have to give up games, or get a second computer (PC), or buy a console such as an XBox or a Playstation. You can use a Mac for them but it's not the best. Just like using a PC is not the best as a non-networked game machine. Video games are serious business--they occupy 50% of people's computer software budget. Unfortunately, it is very hard to get new computer purchasers to understand that which is why many still go with a Mac.

I made the statement that since video games do not occupy any place in my computer software budget, purchasing a Mac makes me look frugal (TCO-wise).

BTW, You do not necessarily get SQL Server, or 2000 Server/Advanced server with MSDN. You need a copy of MSDN to install Visual Studio, or you can just shell out $1200+$900/year (compared to free for Developer Tools and a free registration to keep up-to-date, $200/year to have it delivered to you (with the latest OS)).

If you are running Windows, most of your computer is not open-source as you say because most of your computer is the OS. The fact that you use Microsoft Office implies another 20 million lines of code in addition to the OS is also not open-sourced. Under a very restrictive shared source license, you can get access to a small snippet of this source code which may not even compile under their expensive Visual Studio platform. This is not open source. Unless you are dual booting into an installation that includes the "Everything" installation of SUSE, it is very hard to make a claim that "most of your computer is open-source". Most of my Mac isn't either, nor did I claim such. The kernel is, so is the web server bundled with it and some of the software I use here and here some of which can be installed with the click of a button. All this can be compiled from source with the Developer Tools which came free with Mac OS X (either as a separate CD or as a disk image in the Applications folder) uses a open-source compiler.

Really? I consider upgradeability a part of the TCO. I recently upgraded my Athlon to Athlon XP 2100+ for a measly $89.
From what? Another Athlon? More often Mac owners are upgrading their Macs--that's the advantage of using PC standard parts. They also trickle down their Macs from desktops to servers/children/parents or resell it for a very good price. Very few mac owners buy the $699 upgrade card you mention. Those that do have a specific need that somehow allows for a 3rd party to make a business out of a limited run of $699 priced upgrade cards (Apple was long sinced sued out of the upgrade market).

As for scem0 comparing an eBay priced computer to a new Macintosh, that's an argument for Macs not being overpriced. If Macs didn't hold their value so well, then you would see more PowerMac G4 1GHz DP for the $750 scem0 mentions. Doesn't happen why? Because people value even my three year old PowerMac G4/400 Yikes higher than that. That'd be really nice for me, but unfortunately I really need it as a server. And if I didn't my father wouldn't mind a replacement for his 8 year old macintosh.

terry
P.S. You are mostly right, in my universe the sky is blue and the grass is green. The birds, however, don't sing praises about Apple--neither do the people for that matter.
 
Re: a reply

Originally posted by tychay
So? When did I compare Microsoft's base station to Apple's? I was comparing the base station to the Linksys I own which I paid less for, purchased a year ago, and includes a 10/100 switch.

My only sin here is not putting "overpriced" in quotes. I was trying to show that even Microsoft charges a premium because they feel that "the Microsoft brand name and associated software will ensure quality, compatibility, and ease-of-use that more than justified the $50 premium" and as an example of Microsoft branded hardware (go reread the above).
My point was to show two similar hardware and the absymal difference in price... neither is really "better" than each other. So the best deal to the people who research, like me, would be a cheaper alternative to Apple's over-priced hardware. True, not all PC guys "research," but neither do all Mac guys. I don't care if people are willing to pay $299 for Apple's base station, it's their problem. I'm not willing to. I don't know how many people are willing, but I bet if they knew the competitors' quality and price were better than Apple's, they'd not purchase Apple's base station.
Apple feels that the Apple brand name and associated base station software ensure a quality, compatibility, and ease-of-use that more than justifies a $200 premium on a $100 product. Perhaps some people like the way it looks. Perhaps some people like the reliability/warrantee (after all they've been around much longer than their competitors and people buy Cisco routers for similar reasons). I think their base station is overpriced, but obviously others don't because they're still selling it at that price and used ones seem to be holding their value after three years on the market.
Customers dictate the price. If people don't buy, Apple will lower the price. You see, we begged/stopped buying for the most part the laptops and we got the price drop and better hardware. If people were constantly buying them and there were enough supplies, there'd be no reason to update the laptop line.

Resale value is mostly because Apple isn't updating their hardware often enough like the PC counterpart.
The difference is that 6 years ago, I'd have no choice but to buy from Apple or a similarly priced "Made for Mac" product. Now I can buy a Linksys and make the decision for myself.
Good point. That has certainly improved nowadays. There are, however, still some problems acheiving hardware compatibility. Some graphics card have to be flashed to work on Mac, some PCI cards simply won't work, etc.
Most of you don't remember the days of proprietary or non-standard Mac connectors (monitor, serial, ADB, NuBus, SCSI, and yes, even ethernet), when Apple had a 60% markup on their hardware (compare their educational prices now to then), when you had to search to find an Authorized Apple Reseller and you couldn't even mail order parts from Apple, let alone build to order computers.
:eek: My god, these days. I had no problems with that back then because most of the stuff weren't as modular and standard. I knew Macs were better that time, but now, it isn't.
Yeah sorry, XP Advanced Server was delayed, I was referrring to 2000 Advanced Server. As for yearly fee, they delayed that too. Both were planned. As for "simply paid once" we'll see in a year and a half about that. Right now, your statement is like me saying I "simply paid once" for Jaguar... we'll see when 10.3 comes out. The rest of the world (the business world) already is paying a hefty sum for their up-to-date program.
Still no such Windows XP Advanced Server. I think you were thinking of Windows.NET Server family.

Yes, my brother simply paid once for Jaguar. Once 10.3 comes out, he'll pay again for a copy? So? That's not paying a yearly fee for Jaguar.
Good for you. And if more people are like you then Apple is in trouble. The numbers say such people are outnumbered by the PC users who are adding a Mac.
Yep. They'll be in trouble.
As for purchasing a copy of Windows, Office, Norton Utilities, Norton AntiVirus, and some uninstalling and "never having to pay again." Over what time period? All have had upgrades within the last year that necessitated at least an upgrade purchase (though you could probably throw the uninstaller out now).
The copy of Windows XP on my computer has been installed for over a year and will be for another year or so. Paid once for it. Had Office XP for over 1 1/2 years, still using it with original price paid once. NAV 2002 works great as they have virus definition updates all the time. Still paid once.
My home brew Athlon was $800 of which ($300 was spent on RAM). So what? ... That $1400 purchase not including the disk utilities, anti virus (don't need it for the Mac), iMovie knock off, MP3 encoder for Media Player starts too look pretty bad next to this $1100 iMac.
You wouldn't run in the risk if you purchased from a knowledgable brands known for best quality components. My PC is built from best possible quality for PC and it was still cheaper than a frickin' low end iMac, and don't get me started with those Power Macs.

Apple hardware defective rate are just as high. You just hear more from PC land because there are *gasp* more PCs. *cough* The horrible quality of the TiBook. *cough*

Viruses are more widespread on Windows than on Mac OS because *gasp* there are more Windows users than Mac OS users. In fact, before I bought NAV, I never had an AV and had gigabytes of stuff installed, hundreds of emails. Yet I don't get infected. Common sense plays a huge role.
If you pirated your copy of Windows/Office ...
Nope, all copies are good. I just know where to buy software from for good prices. One can get VS.NET Academic for $99, but I opted to get the Professional.
I've never said that Windows PCs are overpriced. I just said that when you take into account the price of software (over the lifespan of the computer), it makes the difference in price for hardware (Mac vs. PC) appear small and often (not always) justified. This only gets better as hardware gets cheaper as Apple hardware has gotten cheaper too (though with a premium over the base price). Your Mac II si needing to be replaced after being on the market for over 12 years just shows that the lifespan of a Mac is sometimes outrageously long, thus lowering the TCO and putting a higher resale price on used Macs.
And the IIsi is useful how? I only use it to play some old 68k games for the sake of memories. In fact, I've had two IIsis die a couple of years ago, this is the only one I have that is surviving. I use my Athlon for real work.
BTW, You do not necessarily get SQL Server, or 2000 Server/Advanced server with MSDN. You need a copy of MSDN to install Visual Studio, or you can just shell out $1200+$900/year (compared to free for Developer Tools and a free registration to keep up-to-date, $200/year to have it delivered to you (with the latest OS)).
I apologize for not specifying which MSDN, but you get my point. That is still a LOT cheaper than purchasing them individually.
If you are running Windows, most of your computer is not open-source as you say because most of your computer is the OS. The fact that you use Microsoft Office implies another 20 million lines of code in addition to the OS is also not open-sourced. Under a very restrictive shared source license, you can get access to a small snippet of this source code which may not even compile under their expensive Visual Studio platform. This is not open source. ... with the click of a button[/url]. All this can be compiled from source with the Developer Tools which came free with Mac OS X (either as a separate CD or as a disk image in the Applications folder) uses a open-source compiler.
Man, assumptions. I run Windows XP, Gentoo Linux 1.4, and FreeBSD with a good variety of free software, thank you. My claim is valid.
From what? Another Athlon? More often Mac owners are upgrading their Macs--that's the advantage of using PC standard parts...
You can't really use PC hardware in Macs without the drivers for them, or especially if the cards themselves are designed for PC hardware specifically. So that rules out a lot of cards/peripherals.

No, not exactly Athlon to Athlon. Athlon T-bird to Athlon XP 2100+. Okay, that's like 800 MHz to 1 GHz jump. To make this even better, if my system was a Duron system running at 650 MHz, that'd be more than 1 GHz upgrade and many, many times faster rate of upgrade than the Mac, even from the G2s and G3s.
As for scem0 comparing an eBay priced computer to a new Macintosh, that's an argument for Macs not being overpriced. ... That'd be really nice for me, but unfortunately I really need it as a server. And if I didn't my father wouldn't mind a replacement for his 8 year old macintosh.
That's mostly thanks to Apple not updating the hardware fast enough. If Apple released new hardware round the clock like the PCs, the devaluation would be the same. Just the fact that you can get an Athlon system that is MANY times faster than the Power Macs for a lot cheaper is sad, sad.
 

Mudbug

Administrator emeritus
Jun 28, 2002
3,846
1
North Central Colorado
It must be nice to have so much time on your hands that you can write a 20 minute response to an idiotic post, then read the 20 minute reply, then write another 20 minute response to that.

Get in, get out, get on with your life.
And get onto another topic, since you can't stay on this one.
 

ddtlm

macrumors 65816
Aug 20, 2001
1,184
0
Mudbug:

Get in, get out, get on with your life.
My favorite are the people that show up just long enough to be seen hoisting their noses into the air before leaving.
 

Mudbug

Administrator emeritus
Jun 28, 2002
3,846
1
North Central Colorado
You've missed the point (not suprisingly).

The last few posts in this talk have been so far off topic that they should be in a completely different website, let alone messageboard. I come here when there's information about Macs, other Apple products and wishes of people much like myself. NOT to hear about what a great deal someone got on their used POS Dell they bought on ebay. I don't care. And I'm pretty sure not a whole lot of other regulars around here do.

As for the sticking around long enough to make a point and leave, I use the internet for all sorts of things, not just trolling around this site. I let my email tell me when there might be pertinent information on topics I'm interested in (see previous paragraph) so I'm free to go and do other things, like cook dinner, wash clothes, put the kids to bed, "visit" with my wife, etc. My schedule of real life is a little busier than those in the college world.

But thanks for playing anyway. I'm sure the people who wanted to read this forum to see the arguments flare have had a good time. As to the others (those who give a d***), my apologies for straying from the topic.
 

ddtlm

macrumors 65816
Aug 20, 2001
1,184
0
Mudbug:

You've missed the point (not suprisingly).
Not surprising at all, in light of your rather pointless post I referred to. You went ahead and made fun of them for spending X amount of time, yet didn't say anything about them being off topic.... oh wait yes you did, as a parting shot! Way to drive the point home.

I let my email tell me when there might be pertinent information on topics I'm interested in
Don't we all?
 

pgwalsh

macrumors 68000
Jun 21, 2002
1,639
218
New Zealand
This thread appears officially dead.

However, there was a little article on Architosh which brings back the rumor of the G5. Maybe we will see something special at MacWorld San Francisco. The timing's right. :cool:
 

Siemova

macrumors member
Dec 2, 2002
43
0
Texas
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Upgradability

Originally posted by MacCoaster
I'd never have gotten three and one half years out of my Pentium II 233 MHz if it weren't for that kind of upgradability power.
Funny - I've gotten 3-1/2 years out of my iMac 333, and the only thing I've upgraded is the RAM. :D

But yes, upgradability is certainly a nice thing, which is why my next computer purchase will almost certainly be a tower.
 

ddtlm

macrumors 65816
Aug 20, 2001
1,184
0
Siemova:

I sure hope whatever processor comes after the G4 is upgradable...
 

benixau

macrumors 65816
Oct 9, 2002
1,307
0
Sydney, Australia
Originally posted by ddtlm
Siemova:

I sure hope whatever processor comes after the G4 is upgradable...
i own a tower and the only thing that isnt upgradeable is the um...... yeah

if i wanted i could put in a pc mobo and it would fit. BUT to stay apple, i can upgrade everything but that, and the PSU which is an apple wierdo one.

thats life. towers are always upgradeable. every other mac isnt offically.
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Upgradability

Originally posted by Siemova
Funny - I've gotten 3-1/2 years out of my iMac 333, and the only thing I've upgraded is the RAM. :D

But yes, upgradability is certainly a nice thing, which is why my next computer purchase will almost certainly be a tower.
It all depends on what the people do. iMac 333 MHz is certainly fine for many people, but for me, it would have lasted two months before I go crazy because of the un-upgradeability. :p
 

ddtlm

macrumors 65816
Aug 20, 2001
1,184
0
benixau:

i own a tower and the only thing that isnt upgradeable is the um...... yeah
Power supply is not easily upgradable, nor is the motherboard (and hence RAM type). None of that was the point though; I specifically referred to the processor.

towers are always upgradeable
To date they have been, but there is no reason to believe that this will continue. In particular, we have no way to know of the PPC-970 will be upgradable. A FSB that scales with core clock speed could be very tricky for upgraders.
 

Les Kern

macrumors 68040
Apr 26, 2002
3,063
76
Alabama
Eight is not enough

I heard that Apple will introduce a G4 with 24 processors. Even though the downside is the dozen 60-watt ducted fans to keep it cool and therefore the necessity of wearing OSHA-approved hearing protection, early benchmarks show that the prototype can do a 100MB Gaussian blur in Photoshop 7 in -2.6 seconds. I figure that every day I work in PS, I'll actually GAIN several hours a week to use as comp-time. Thanks Steve!
My 867 is fine, I work fast enough, Apple will have an answer for all you speed-demons pretty soon I'm sure. Just be patient.