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.
Why a Mac costs more than a PC...
- Thread starter Giuly
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Wow..you found it!
Wow...HP sure did name the "Envy" appropriately considering it's trying to be like a Mac.
I've never played with a Thinkpad so I can't speak to it's quality...however I can say that it seems that the visual design of the laptop hasn't changed much in the last 5-10 years (does any other manufacturer still use the eraser mouse?).
Anyways, your example illustrates that if you want to get a laptop that isn't a plastic throwaway P.O.S you'll need to spend some bucks and then you're close to the price of a Mac.
Cheers.
Right, Apple sells the software you need to get stuff on the iPods. You rather want to think about it at least a couple of seconds before you start typing.
Thinkpads are at least partially build of metal. And I guess that's the worst statement you can do on Macrumors.
HP Envy stated before is intended to be a MacBookPro Clone, according to Gizmodo.
Just a bit cheaper (they 13" is much more expensive then a 13" MBP), just a bit inferior - they start $1700 (13" w/ Core2Duo(!)) and $1800 (15" i5). That's a quality PC laptop - but it has a little less battery runtime, a bit superior graphics and cost about the same (15") resp. much more (13").
Wow...HP sure did name the "Envy" appropriately considering it's trying to be like a Mac.
I've never played with a Thinkpad so I can't speak to it's quality...however I can say that it seems that the visual design of the laptop hasn't changed much in the last 5-10 years (does any other manufacturer still use the eraser mouse?).Anyways, your example illustrates that if you want to get a laptop that isn't a plastic throwaway P.O.S you'll need to spend some bucks and then you're close to the price of a Mac.
Cheers.
So... because Apple decided to put merging into a different application (FileMerge) that means OS X sucks?
Opinions are opinions, but I repeat, they're not facts.
No question, the typical Thinkpad exterior look hasn't changed much in the past 5-10 years. However: in that time frame, they did start reinforcing the casings with magnesium skeletons, fit in inbuilt cellular data cards, implemented a liquid drainage system to channel spills away from sensitive internal parts, offered swappable BluRay drives, etc..You see where I'm going with this? Keeping the exterior look the same is quite deliberate--they're not going for style, but rather conservative looks that don't come at the cost of functionality. Remember when everyone was comparing the then-new Macbook Air against a Thinkpad X301? Which one went for horrible floppy hinges and no internal optical drive to save a minimal amount of volume? Which one had inadequate cooling? Which one had a whopping one USB port?
As for your observation about the trackpoint (eraser-head mouse thing), it's there by popular demand...they're very popular in the business world--thus why Dell offers them on their Latitude series, too. Whether or not you like them/think they look nice is up to you...but there's nothing wrong with being given a choice
To sum up: Most of the time, you'll pay less and get more features/functionality out of a Thinkpad as opposed to a Mac.* Case in point: without student pricing, my loaded original 15" Macbook Pro would have cost $2700. The Thinkpad T60 I'm using now has the same processor, a better screen, a higher RAM ceiling, a comparable optical drive which can be swapped out, an option for a ultrahigh capacity battery, more ports, more slots...and the retail on it was about $1800. Even with student pricing on the Mac, it still had about a $400 premium. I didn't pay for the top-end graphics option on the Thinkpad (which would have been slightly superior to the X1600 in the Mac) so the graphics in the Thinkpad are far lower than in the Mac. But I could have evened the playing field for $200. The Thinkpad would have still cost less. Guess which one was built better and doesn't have a WARPED case from poor heat dissipation? Guess which one I still have, and like better
*There are exceptions to the rule--a X301 cost more than the Macbook Air, but was built to a far better standard, and had a much better feature set. On the other hand, it wasn't stylish. But as a general rule, most Thinkpads will cost less (or worst case the same as) the "competing" Mac.
GPU FAIL on Macs
The problem with your views are that they are subjective for the most part. Apple lags 1-2 years BEHIND on GPU technology (using mid range cards from 2009 in the 2010 iMac i7 for example).
For someone like me (a gamer) it is hard to justify paying 2k for a computer that I could build (spec wise) for about 900 bucks. I still do it (or "pay the Apple tax as I call it") because of other intangible reasons but lets not kid ourselves and pretend Macs are a fair value compared to PCs. You buy them for other reasons.
The problem with your views are that they are subjective for the most part. Apple lags 1-2 years BEHIND on GPU technology (using mid range cards from 2009 in the 2010 iMac i7 for example).
For someone like me (a gamer) it is hard to justify paying 2k for a computer that I could build (spec wise) for about 900 bucks. I still do it (or "pay the Apple tax as I call it") because of other intangible reasons but lets not kid ourselves and pretend Macs are a fair value compared to PCs. You buy them for other reasons.
I agree on the overall point, but the 5000 series GPUs in the new iMacs are from January of this year, and there won't be successors until later in the year (which appear to be bumps of current GPUs).
The 4670 in the low-end iMac is from early last year though.
NVIDIA's current GPU lineup isn't any better in the "GPU technology" area either (unless you count the 480M but that's another story).
The root of these gripes is that Apple offers fewer choices.
LIke you have to buy the 27" IPS led-backlit lcd monitor to get an i5 or i7 cpu in your desktop.
Those monitors aren't cheap even on the pc side of things where they are made out of creaky black plastic without the usb ports, decent speakers, mic and webcam and laptop charging plug.
That's the root of the gripes.
NOt really that they are over-priced. But you have fewer choices.
LIke you have to buy the 27" IPS led-backlit lcd monitor to get an i5 or i7 cpu in your desktop.
Those monitors aren't cheap even on the pc side of things where they are made out of creaky black plastic without the usb ports, decent speakers, mic and webcam and laptop charging plug.
That's the root of the gripes.
NOt really that they are over-priced. But you have fewer choices.
Well that's called business. No company would allow you to just configure your computer at 100%. That would result in a MAJOR loss of profit. Remember, Apple and other companies make great products, but they're still having profit as a goal. There's no such thing as just a very generous sympathetic company, except for non-profit organizations.
Just embrace the fact that you've got at least SOME choice of configuration. You don't see that everywhere.
If I copy folder A to folder B and folder B already contains a folder named "A", this latter folder is wiped. The behaviour is both surprising and dangerous. Because of this, Finder sucks.
For what it's for, it's great. You have a point, you're right, but is it that hard to copy everything from folder A to "A"? .
Get PathFinder if you want that feature, I believe it does the job.
I'm using Win7 after about 4 years mostly away from Windows.
Now what I love so far about Windows 7 are
....are the bigger buttons. I really hate the skinny OSX scroll bars and tiny buttons and hate even more the tiny little windows that sometimes open in an OSX program like Finder. You can relax more aiming for a bigger target in Windows.
Also they have this new thing call accelerators. An accelerator icon appears anytime you highlight text. Click it and you're given options to search for that term or look it up on a map site and you can customize the options. IT's pretty slick. But not alot different than the 2nd mouse button.
The 2 windows side by side option is useful. Drag a window to either side and it takes up half the screen.
Also like how the task bar acts as a dock and shows you open programs. And how you just mouse over the icon and it shows you bigger thumbnails of that program's open windows and then you can click those to go to the full-size version.
Love the layout of Windows Live mail. Ipad-like. folders in 1st column. Email headers of highlighted folder in 2nd column. 3rd column shows the highlighted email.
It's fast. I swear it's faster than OSX. It is a new system though.
Surfing in IE8 seems quicker than Safari. OSX made great strides in web-site compatibility. Basically close to 100%. But surfing with IE8 tells me everything is designed for Windows first still as it all seems faster and less rendering problems.
Windows Explorer. Seems a little easier to access file management options. And again it is helped by the buttons all being larger.
There's more I love.
But there's alot I miss and hate too.
Now what I love so far about Windows 7 are
....are the bigger buttons. I really hate the skinny OSX scroll bars and tiny buttons and hate even more the tiny little windows that sometimes open in an OSX program like Finder. You can relax more aiming for a bigger target in Windows.
Also they have this new thing call accelerators. An accelerator icon appears anytime you highlight text. Click it and you're given options to search for that term or look it up on a map site and you can customize the options. IT's pretty slick. But not alot different than the 2nd mouse button.
The 2 windows side by side option is useful. Drag a window to either side and it takes up half the screen.
Also like how the task bar acts as a dock and shows you open programs. And how you just mouse over the icon and it shows you bigger thumbnails of that program's open windows and then you can click those to go to the full-size version.
Love the layout of Windows Live mail. Ipad-like. folders in 1st column. Email headers of highlighted folder in 2nd column. 3rd column shows the highlighted email.
It's fast. I swear it's faster than OSX. It is a new system though.
Surfing in IE8 seems quicker than Safari. OSX made great strides in web-site compatibility. Basically close to 100%. But surfing with IE8 tells me everything is designed for Windows first still as it all seems faster and less rendering problems.
Windows Explorer. Seems a little easier to access file management options. And again it is helped by the buttons all being larger.
There's more I love.
But there's alot I miss and hate too.
Ok, let's see:
1.- Tiny scrollbars - What?! Why would you ever click a scrollbar if you can just scroll with 2 fingers on almost every Mac there is now?
2.-Tiny buttons - I have no idea what you mean. Seriously.
3.- Tiny Finder windows. When the hell do you get that?
4.- Accelerators - you get that same feature in OS X by rightclicking the highlighted text.
5.- 2 Window side by side - You may have a point here, but I recall a feature in OS X very similar to that. I'm not sure though, you may be right.
6.- Task bar thumbnails - You get the same effect with Exposé in a cleaner UI.
7.- Windows live mail - Those are just preferences, you're entitled to one, I won't discuss this.
8.- IE8 - Preferences again, won't discuss.
9.- Windows Explorer - You are definitely right here. That's a fact.
PC means Personal Computer. Laptops can be a personal computer. Anti-virus can be free too.
Yes. I think that's true for all US Government contracts. IBM/Lenovo low balls to get in. It's the usual low ball, make up in quantity thing...
My friend makes fun of me for wasting my money on a Mac and he wonders why I think it's funny that he drives an Escalade
OSX has tiny buttons/scrollbars/windows etc. Open up viewing options in the Finder for an exaggerated example.
I like accelerators. Accelerators are setup for 3rd parties development for say looking up something on Amazon.com. Ironically perfect for 1-button mice.
It's that I love IE8 or anything, but it seems ....snappier than Safari in my general web surfing. My only guess is I have a slightly faster pc now than my IMac, IE still has the lions marketshare (you design you website first and foremost to the market leader,) and it's a new computer - no baggage yet. Doesn't help my experience that 5.0 seems to have made Safari worse performance-wise than before. Quite a few crashes as of late even with Flash blocked.
Windows LIve mail layout is superior. It's the iPad mail layout. I'm sure Mail in OSX will go that direction as well. Not saying I like Windows LIve mail better overall. IT's retarded in other ways. Layout is nice though.
Anyway I have alot of things to hate too. But that's another post.
I normally run my Linux boxes command line only, with the exception of my Ubuntu netbook which I have not touched since receiving my iPad. As for the OP mixing up OS with graphical shell, I don't have a problem with that. Sure you can customize the heck out of one desktop environment to make it look like another but the real question is which would you choose? I spent some time making Ubuntu look like OS X and making Windows look like OS X. That's because I like the simplicity of the Dock and single command bar. I have been a Linux user for many years and it is my familiarity with Linux that makes me feel most at home with OS X. Do I like the way it looks? I guess. Sort of. Meh. But the thing I like most about OS X is the well thought out clutter free design, whatever skin it happens to be wearing. I was most excited about getting 20 gig of disk space due to compression tricks in Snow Leopard more than I was excited about any appearance tweaks.
The OP confusion of the OS with the window manager is even more understandable given the fact MS was calling Windows an "operating system" for quite a long time before it evolved into one. It was a window manager on top of DOS until the "NT" era. There are things I like about Windows as a window manager and OS X as a window manager. I would love to have windows explorer on my Mac (versus the Finder) and let OS X handle everything else. If only Apple and MS would sell me a window manager I could use instead of Gnome/KDE on Linux. They aren't about to do that because they don't want to compete with free software like KDE and Gnome which are arguably "almost as good". These big companies are all about lock in. They want us to become entrenched in their particular solution. I don't mind so much that I have become entrenched in Apple's solution. I still dabble in Linux but not so much because I can open a terminal in OS X any time I feel the need to vi some config file somewhere. There was a time I was pulling for Linux to take over the desktop. Not so much any more. I feel OS X meets my *nix needs and I'm content to let Linux continue drifting along on the fringes as either a netbook or a tinkerer's OS.
As for Lenovo, I love Lenovo machines. They are awesome. We had a trade show here a few years back and the Lenovo rep was showing viral videos of their laptops being thrown from the third level of a parking structure and landing on the ground and still running! Another video had a Lenovo laptop in the lap of a crash test dummy going into a 35 mph impact. The bezel came off but the machine was still running. They were touting their accelerometer that parks the hard drive if the notebook is dropped. Lenovo is the only company I would want Apple to allow to clone Macs. Not Psystar, Dell, HP or Sony. Lenovo.
There is a lot of "heat" in this thread about the use of the word "advanced". There are so many possible meanings for that term. It could mean anything from aesthetically refined and easy to use to supports the latest network protocols to most secure to most stable. I would argue that if you sat down and ranked OS attributes OS X would score high in a broad spectrum of areas and would still deserve the term "advanced." Apple has crossed a bridge MS refuses to even look at. Apple orphaned all the old OS 9 apps and starting with Snow Leopard, Rosetta isn't even enabled by default. I know because I had to switch it on to take a look at some records in Palm Desktop after my Blackberry got in a sync fight and multiplied some of my contacts. MS continues to haul along baggage from the 16 bit DOS days and it shows in terms of bloat and end to end user experience.
The term fanboyism has been thrown around a lot here as well. The person calling attention to positive attributes of Apple stuff may be drunk on Apple Kool Aid but that doesn't change the fact Apple products are some very good products produced by an organization whose engineering priorities are conducive to making high quality products that work reliably and very well.
I agree with you in principle...but some of your facts/figures are flawed. Sorry dude. It's clear to me that you have never used Windows 7.
I would agree if it wasn't essentially Unix with a GUI. This argument leads one to believe that something like Linspire is an "advanced" OS. It isn't. It's Linux with a GUI.
iTunes is horrible. Simply horrible. Compared to Windows Media Center, Zune Marketplace or even the old Sony Connect product, iTunes is counter intuitive. Just the simple art of burning a CD takes way too many steps (create playlist, add songs to playlist, burn playlist to CD instead of just dragging the files to the CD in the order you want and clicking Burn). It's also extremely bloated, choking on all but full-on DSL or greater internet connection speeds. The only time iTunes wins is for movies/trailers.
Some of the apps in iLife are downright clunky. iMovie, for example, has a horrific interface. iPhoto is decent, but it's silly that you can't actually TAKE photos from there without jumping through hoops. Photo Booth is a nice concept, but it's an app that belongs on an iPod or some other mobile device. iDVD I understand has been removed from the newer version and likely for good reason.
A better list:
iPhoto = Windows Live Photo Viewer, Windows Media Center. Both freely available. Picasa is bloated.
iMovie = Windows Live Movie Maker, VirtualDub. Both free. And Live Movie Maker blows iMovie out of the water in terms of simplicity, even integrating direct APIs to upload videos to popular sites.
iDVD = Windows Media Center, Windows Live Movie Maker. Both free.
iWeb = Windows Live Writer, Visual Web Developer. Both free.
GarageBand = Audacity for Windows. Free. In some ways superior to GarageBand in terms of flexibility of editing, plugins, and export formats.
Negative. Windows has had built in backup support since Windows 2000. Windows 7's Backup and Restore even takes it to the next level; its only limitation is the need to buy Professional or Ultimate to backup to a network location, otherwise it's just as functional as Time Machine and will complete the backup significantly faster.
You must not know much about Visual Studio. Express 2010 will do 90% of what developers need. Xcode also does not come with a robust database software like SQL Express, whereas Visual Studio Express does.
And I don't know where you got your pricing summary, but trust me. There isn't one app on the Mac that I can't find a free, solid (in some cases, superior) alternative on Windows. Not one.
Don't delude yourselves. I've said it for years. It's all about the quality of the hardware, not the software running in it. Windows Vista SP2 runs so well in Boot Camp on a MacBook Pro that it's almost criminal.
I would agree if it wasn't essentially Unix with a GUI. This argument leads one to believe that something like Linspire is an "advanced" OS. It isn't. It's Linux with a GUI.
iTunes is horrible. Simply horrible. Compared to Windows Media Center, Zune Marketplace or even the old Sony Connect product, iTunes is counter intuitive. Just the simple art of burning a CD takes way too many steps (create playlist, add songs to playlist, burn playlist to CD instead of just dragging the files to the CD in the order you want and clicking Burn). It's also extremely bloated, choking on all but full-on DSL or greater internet connection speeds. The only time iTunes wins is for movies/trailers.
Some of the apps in iLife are downright clunky. iMovie, for example, has a horrific interface. iPhoto is decent, but it's silly that you can't actually TAKE photos from there without jumping through hoops. Photo Booth is a nice concept, but it's an app that belongs on an iPod or some other mobile device. iDVD I understand has been removed from the newer version and likely for good reason.
A better list:
iPhoto = Windows Live Photo Viewer, Windows Media Center. Both freely available. Picasa is bloated.
iMovie = Windows Live Movie Maker, VirtualDub. Both free. And Live Movie Maker blows iMovie out of the water in terms of simplicity, even integrating direct APIs to upload videos to popular sites.
iDVD = Windows Media Center, Windows Live Movie Maker. Both free.
iWeb = Windows Live Writer, Visual Web Developer. Both free.
GarageBand = Audacity for Windows. Free. In some ways superior to GarageBand in terms of flexibility of editing, plugins, and export formats.
Negative. Windows has had built in backup support since Windows 2000. Windows 7's Backup and Restore even takes it to the next level; its only limitation is the need to buy Professional or Ultimate to backup to a network location, otherwise it's just as functional as Time Machine and will complete the backup significantly faster.
You must not know much about Visual Studio. Express 2010 will do 90% of what developers need. Xcode also does not come with a robust database software like SQL Express, whereas Visual Studio Express does.
And I don't know where you got your pricing summary, but trust me. There isn't one app on the Mac that I can't find a free, solid (in some cases, superior) alternative on Windows. Not one.
Don't delude yourselves. I've said it for years. It's all about the quality of the hardware, not the software running in it. Windows Vista SP2 runs so well in Boot Camp on a MacBook Pro that it's almost criminal.
I've found that the backup feature in Windows 7 is an absolute fail. It works great until the backup drive is full, then it just stops working and screams "oh noesss!11 ur drive is teh fullz!", and it is up to you to delete backups.
Ah, well, you really put your foot in your mouth here. They most certainly DO in certain applications. The US Army uses Mac OS 10 servers for example. How do I know? Take a guess.
I don't understand how you find it hard to "take" (?) photos from iPhoto. You find the photo, and drag it to where you want it, be that a Pages document, Finder window or a new Mail message.
Rocket science.
No. You design your website according to web standards, then you go back put in fixes and hacks for IE. I take it you have never designed a website, huh?
While your statement may make sense logically, in reality it is far from the truth. Although, IE 9 is supposed to fix some of this, but today the reality is that IE (especially 6) is the bane of any web designer.