why is mac so expensive ?

[disconap]

1) I have I/0 registry dumps for dozens of non mac mobos and also for real macs. In most cases they are nearly identical. In a couple of cases I've used the DSDT generated from a real mac and used it on a PC mobo and it booted up with just 2 system kexts and everything worked 100%. I don't want to sound rude but if you don't know how to hack the DSDT file or map it out using the I/O reg as your guide, you have no idea what you are talking about. Before I got a deep understanding of this, I leaned toward your perspective.

No offense taken, but I do know how to hack DSDT files, kexts, and even kernels. Part of my main argument for the average user is, if you're not already somewhat knowledgeable in programming of any kind, the learning curve will likely take you more time than it's worth, unless you're a hobbyist...

The reality is that the "secret sauce" is the Mac EFI firmware. This is essentially the boot file and a handful of modifications to DSDT and/or system kexts rolled into one. As time goes by, the hackintosh community gets closer to getting this perfected and hence Hacks need less and less system kexts with proper emulation files and DSDT mods.

True, but we are talking about right now. If you buy IDENTICAL hardware to a Mac Pro, then your argument rings true. Most hackintoshers don't do this, they try to use other hardware, much of which is, of course, compatible. Right now. Nobody knows what 10.7 will bring, or even 10.6.3 (though my theory is that 10.6 is so cheap because Apple WANT people hackintoshing, so they get used to using the OS, and 10.7 will be much more closed; but again, this is just a theory)...

Your first sentence is completely misleading and baseless. If this was true, we wouldn't have so many issues with Macs overheating, crashing, bugs, no audio, lack of sleep, etc. Each issue of the EFI Firmware or OS revisions allows this to be true (Mac run perfectly on its hardware). So each time there is a revision it can fix a problem on Mac but possibly create a problem on a Hack that didn't share that problem. Within days or weeks, however the Hack community makes the fix that takes weeks, months, or never for some Mac models. For those who take the "ostrich with head in sand" perspective be aware that I'm just being objective since the Mac support forums are not overwhelmed with complaints and long standing issues without a reason.

See above. What I'm saying is that Mac does and will continue to cater to the hardware they sell. I had had zero problems with any Apple product I've ever bought, with exception to a G3 iBook that had the mobo issue. The mobo was replaced for free by Apple.

As for the existent problems, this is one of my major gripes about the direction of the software industry for over a decade. It USED to be that software would be released after it had been thoroughly tested. Nowadays there's a rush to constantly be new and updated, and developers just release half-finished crap that REQUIRES patches and upgrades. Apple have made this relatively seemless with software update, but it's still ridiculous. OS 9.2 had TWO revisions and, for the time, ran well above what anyone expected (yes, people gripe about it all the time, but I was using it at the time and it was a pretty damn solid OS for the era). This is true of every software company, though. And I find it annoying, but it's a reality of modern computing.

But I do hear what you're saying, though I have no personal experience with it as I haven't had hardware problems with any model I've ever owned (other than that iBook, which again was fixed for free). The irony is that 2/3 of the apples I've owned over the years are rated fairly high on lowendmac's roadapple list, yet I never encountered any of the problems or inefficiencies they sited. *shrugs*

I managed to even fix the bluetooth drop issue (big issue recently) on my hack system several weeks before Mac released a fix.

You are correct that it's not true for all hackintoshes and I never said that it was true. But on the other hand there are Macs that never ran perfectly and never will since they were abandoned by support after newer releases. So let's be fair and objective here.

Fair. As I hinted above, I owned one of the worst rated Macs in history, the performa 6200. I never had a problem with it. A friend had the 6300 and had problems, but again Apple fixed them for free. Everything is relative, which is what I was getting at.

But the majority of hackintosh experience I've had, and the people I've talked to say similar things, tend to revolve around impressive benchmarks but less than impressive performance. Generally speaking, you're going to build a hackintosh because you like building computers, tinkering, etc., or you have a PC that you'd like to try and run OSX on. I wouldn't build a hack for something that my livelihood depended on, because sure, it could run flawlessly forever, or it could stop functioning in a week. And my career is worth more to me than the $1K or so difference (mixed with, again, the time involved testing kexts and diagnosing issues).

But if I were wealthy and/or wanting a box that I can say is shiny and neat and does cool stuff it's not supposed to faster than it's supposed to? Of course I'd build one. But I wouldn't depend on it being supported and continually running well, even if it did. I know how to build my own car if I wanted to, but that doesn't mean I would...

2) G5 vs Intel. I happen to agree with you here so you won't get an argument from me since in relative terms, you are 100% correct.

3) Also agreed and you are just reinforcing my argument in that unless you have time to invest in it or pay someone to maintain it for you, you should use the "time is money" point of view. In my case I hate TV with the exception of Supernatural, True Blood, and Lost (two are sort or off season running shows), have a full home gym, have my meals delivered 2-3 times per day, and even work at home, I have more than enough free time to keep up with it. So you are totally right, hooray for me, but for those without my setup it makes it more difficult that I created by years of busting my butt to cruise through life now it won't be so simple and I readily admit the time involved. We all have more than one hobby right? That happens to be one of them. Ok I'm spoiled but I work on the web so what can I say...my job requires it hehe

It sounds like you are exactly the type of person who should be playing with hardware like that, so again kudos to you! I have a couple hackintoshes for different reasons--my Dell Mini because Apple doesn't make a netbook and I need something small to travel with; my Atom server because I wanted something that uses next to no power that can be left on 24/7, and again Apple doesn't provide a low-power option; and my MPC because I wanted to tinker with it and already had it. But I had some downtime so I had time to figure all this out (my Dell Mini was, of course, the easiest, as the 10v is 100% compatible with Netbook Installer). And of those, the Mini runs the most stably and fastest, which is hilarious since the server is the dual cover version of the mobo, yet it runs slower...

Point being we're both using hackintoshes for things that we can. I'm still on my dual G5 because I need a workhorse, dependable machine, which it is. Both my Sawtooth (which is our studio computer now) and this G5 have worked WELL past what they really should have, I have no complaints with either purchase (which were in 2001 and 2006 respectively, the latter used).

***Bottom Line***

My post was to point out certain pros and cons from an objective point of view. The "good for you"s are not necessary since I didn't post it to brag and I readily admit the torturous learning curve and time invested. But for some strange reason it was fun for me. My dad was a master of the quarter mile and loved muscle cars. He could put his hands on a running car and tell you everything about it. So maybe that's why I feel the same thing about Hacks. They are the "muscle cars" of the 21st century to most men who work with them.

The good-for-yous were genuine! I'm always stoked to hear about success stories with Hackintoshs, and there are plenty out there. Just saying that for most users, it's not the best option, and for professionals who need something they can turn on and work with, they're certainly not an option.

BTW, I loved hacking all three of mine as well, but I'm a total mechanic nerd. I had a 67 Mustang and, like your dad, I loved working on it.

But the reality is that if someone does a couple hours of research, they can figure out which boards are more or less 100% vanilla and will work with only 2-3 system kexts and a boot file. One is the MSI P55 G45. Another is the ASUS P6T series.

Due to the heat issues of my Mac Pro (a common problem on the forums), I've had to suspend pro work on it related to audio and Logic 9 and work from my Hack with a i7 920 that works 100%. I've done this for 3 months now without one single issue. The reason is that Mac won't acknowledge the issue since they don't know how to fix it. Others I know in the industry are struggling through it or went back to 10.5.8 and still have unresolved issues.

Just fyi, I read on the forums that there is a 10.6.2 software fix for the audio problem now in software update...

So again, it's give and take, and Mac is not 100% reliable in every application or scenario. To say otherwise is to be part of the fanboy cult, and to argue with people like that is an exercise in futility to say the least since they cannot learn.

No doubt; I was talking about the OS being tailored to the hardware, not necessarily third party apps...

 

[disconap]

I said that it was indeed an extreme example. It's just that Mac is unique in that "it is what it is" and you cannot choose between different manufacturers of Mac like you can with Dell, Toshiba, ASUS, etc. So you are "stuck" with one set of options and/or upgrades for each particular class of system. In the non-Mac case you can find a system with the options you want that come as standard and save a bundle vs. systems that you must upgrade to get the same options.

So I agree with you wholeheartedly, but in fairness if you compare upgrades such as RAM chip for chip and hard drive gig for gig, Mac charges much higher during the upgrade process hence the whole basis for the "Apple Tax" debate.

Oh, totally. I just meant that Dell does the same thing, albeit not as much of a hike. NewEgg and RamSeeker are all I've ever needed to upgrade a machine, personally.

 

[disconap]

I working on this now myself except making the case obsidian black and silver

I've SERIOUSLY debated it once I get a Mac Pro (or i7 iMac, depending on how the Mac Pro upgrade path goes; if it's 6 cores at no price hike from the current line, I'll definitely be going tower). All depends on whether or not I can get a decent amount for the G5 at that time or if I'll do better parting it out...

 

[AskMeIfICare]

Nobody knows what 10.7 will bring, or even 10.6.3 (though my theory is that 10.6 is so cheap because Apple WANT people hackintoshing, so they get used to using the OS, and 10.7 will be much more closed; but again, this is just a theory)...

I couldn't agree more. Before people needed distros to get 10.5 to work and it was horribly unstable in most cases unless someone could manage a vanilla install. Apps installed with a distro foundation were indeed more unstable with hacks vs Macs. Now it seems almost "too easy". My own feeling is that either Steve Jobs or someone he formulates strategy with came up with this idea at the same time they decided to go the Intel route. It's a brilliant marketing strategy since while I had both Mac and PC before, now I'm nearly entirely Mac due to the savings of being to convert old PC systems to Mac (even if half are hacks, I must admit I'm having amnesia when it comes to working with Windows as does my girlfriend who is a gamer who was stubborn when it came to moving to Mac...as backwards as that sounds). It allows people to immerse themselves in OSX when they'd otherwise never even think about it...so Apple cannot lose. Who knows...maybe they'll start using the A4 to create their own chipset based around the Intel CPU. Then the hack community would really have their work cut out for them like is the case when dealing with AMD chipsets or Nvidia based chipsets and the nightmares that they create for the hack community.

Thanks for the heads up on that fix. Whew that's a relief!

 

[AskMeIfICare]

The main reason they charge so much is because there are enough people willing to pay what they ask.

In my case I use Mac for Logic and Final Cut. I can use Vegas so if I had to transition to Windows 7 for that reason alone I'd be fine. But I cannot function without Logic 9 and all of the things it can do that no other software can do.

What's interesting is that most people in the States use Mac for what they justify as practical reasons or "it just works". Whether or not this is true is relative to the individual for the reasons already said but I tend to believe this, especially with home users in first world nations.

But there is an enormous segment of people, especially where I live (a 3rd world nation), who buy Mac just to be seen and they will not lie about that fact. According to someone I know at a Mac store, 98% of their sales are laptops since you cannot take a desktop to a restaurant or coffee shop as they will be the first ones to point out. In fact I don't think I'd be able to sell my Mac Pro for even 50% of its value here for that reason. Most of these people chat and check e-mail and will buy a MacBook Pro to do only that. They are not worried about viruses since I don't know a PC user here who isn't using software that isn't entirely pirated, including anti-virus. The only time someone here uses original software is if it came with the system in the form of OEM. So not only do are they willing to pay for the style (at a 150% premium due to importation taxes) but these same people earn 1/8th what someone in a developed nation earns. So you see people willing to pay 4-5 months salary "to look cool" as someone posted earlier and there is nearly zero depreciation (since have people who come here walk it through Customs for me and avoid duty) on something Mac that is 2-3 years old here due to a waiting list of potential buyers.

Sony Vaio really started to close the gap when it came to notebook style and those are very expensive here also with a very strong resale value. For example, I imported a Vaio back in 2006 for $900. A year or so later people were constantly "reminding" me that my laptop was "old already" and were hinting that I should sell it to them. So at around 20 month mark, I decided to see how much people were willing to pay since I needed a larger screen laptop. Sure enough, after 20 months of use, I sold it for $800 without even having to advertise and 3 people were willing to pay that price (but I sold it first come first serve). I could have probably sold it for $1000 or more but the people buying were my staff and obviously I need to keep my people happy so I wrote off the difference for the exchange of the hearts and minds. 2 years later I think the buyer of said Vaio can still get about $600 for it or more (I'd wager $700 for the asking price).

But worldwide, Mac has a mystique and it is going to take a very long time to catch up with their brand recognition and reputation for being used only by "the coolest people" that another forum member said above.

Even then, until another OS maker comes out with a system that runs out-of-the-box and without any technical know how, I don't see the market changing that much unless Linux is able to convince all of the 3rd party vendors to make their drivers and software compatible or plug and play. But I don't any of that happening in the next 5 years (and probably 10 based on the speed of market changes these days).

 

[SnowLeopard2008]

Another PC vs. Mac war thread?

Here are the facts:

Macs have a higher starting price. PCs go as low as $200 (I saw a cheap Gateway or something desktop on a Fry's ad) while Macs start at around the $1000 mark.

Macs have better design and aesthetics. This one might be somewhat opinionated, but Macs are built with better/higher quality materials. I don't see the same level of design in most PC laptops, of any price point. Lenovo is the only PC brand closest in terms of quality and design.

Macs have a better OS. Another opinionated, but in many ways true fact. Mac OS X is based from Darwin UNIX. PCs run Windows, therefore have viruses, trojans, worms, spyware, etc. Macs don't have that.

Last but not least, Macs can do anything a PC can. Macs can run any OS (Linux, Windows, Mac). Windows can run any OS except Mac OS without any excessive hacking, modding, patching, etc.

 

[benjamin747]

Let's get to the facts shall we?

Everything from the hardware to the operating system is made by the same manufacturer. (Apple) What this creates is close perfection. You have an OS made for one brand of machine ONLY. The OS is so developed, you get iLife a suite worth an easy 500 dollars if it was available PC. You have the Quartz engine, Safari, iTunes, and so many other built in assistants. So many other features that make it perfect. Perfection you can only achieve at Apple. (Well close to it anyway)

And the price is not sooo high for the specs you are getting. The iMac, an all in once machine has the same design as this (ALL USD)

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/663914-REG/ASUS_ET2203T_B0317_Eee_Top_ET2203T_All_in_One.html

Faster HD and much faster processor! Look for yourself!
Without the mail in rebate it is 1,140.00!

Or the Mac Mini. The Optima PC: 40GB Hard Drive Capacity, 256MB; DDR Memory, Intel Celeron Processor, Additional Drives: DVD/CD-RW for 628.00 at target. Vs the Mac mini with

2.26GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
2GB memory
160GB hard drive1
8x double-layer SuperDrive
NVIDIA GeForce 9400M graphics
Mac OS X Snow Leopard

for 599.00!

Lastly the Macbook Pro

A Dell Latitude XT2: http://configure.us.dell.com/dellst...3=2G2D&m_8=256GEN&dgc=SS&cid=27721&lid=628326

1GB Ram, Core Duo 1.40 ghz. 256gb HD. 2,509.00

vs. Macbook Pro

Intel Core 2 Duo 2.26 ghz, 2GB Memory. 320 gb HD, 1,300.00.

As you can see the price is comparable. There is not much comparable to the Mac Pro. That thing is a beastly powerhouse!

It all boils down to, you get what you pay for!

I am a certified Apple Dev. myself. Believe me, there is tons of work that goes into the system. We are the real geeks.

I make hackintoshes all the time! Would I ever depend on them? Never. Would i ever use them as my only computer? Never. Do I have OSX on my Acer Aspire One, YES!

 

[arogge]

Apple's business model is almost subscription based: Upgrade cycles are much faster than they are in the Windows world AND Apple is very fast at artificially rendering "old" hardware - read: a two or three year old computer - useless by dropping or not even implementing support for certain features.

After Apple switched to Intel, I felt like the company simply dropped support for all of its other products. Now I wonder how long I should wait before buying another Apple product, because I don't want to get stuck with another obsolete platform when the next OS X version comes out. It's really frustrating to have bought into expensive computers, and then to be told that they're all junk now. This especially when I can run Microsoft Windows and Linux on much older hardware.

The upgrade paths were further eliminated by the software market that is dropping support for older versions of OS X, and a new version of OS X requires an Intel platform with specific Apple-branded hardware.

The only reason I continue considering Apple anymore is because of its software pricing and functionality. Other than the software, there's no reason to stay locked to this closed platform anymore, not when I can get better hardware from someone else.

I am confused by why Apple refuses to support the low-end and mid-range market, but Apple doesn't seem to get it when it comes to the high-end. Things like certified graphics support and an appropriate selection of workstation graphics cards at a price point that competes with the Linux/Windows market. I have tried several times to satisfy this requirement, only to be told that I had to buy a special Mac-only card that was older and much more expensive than what was available to normal people who didn't need Mac support.

It doesn't make any sense to be forced to pay for a GeForce GT card, when I really want a Quadro FX or FirePro card that won't work with the Mac. You go to ATI's Website and what does it say there? "Available in Precision Workstations from Dell." Yeah, Dell and a whole bunch of other OEMs that support Linux and Windows. Mac OS X support? Not really.

Apple finally figured out how to get ECC support on its RAM, but that was several years after the rest of the market was doing it. Hardware support overall is still frustrating, because Apple doesn't seem to want to play with anybody else. There's almost always the Intel and AMD support listed for all these different versions of Linux and Windows, but the Mac isn't even mentioned. The hardware won't even work, much less be certified.

I found this out once when I was having a problem with a hardware device that the power-management functions in a newly-installed update of OS X didn't like. I tried using AppleCare, but when I mentioned that I had altered the basic hardware configuration, they cut me off and told me that I was not eligible for support. It's not my fault that Apple changed something in the OS that now doesn't like my hardware! A worse problem happens if I try to install a new version of OS X. The installer refuses to see the hardware, so the software can't be installed because the computer won't work without it. Put that hardware over on Linux or Windows, and it works fine.

Then there's the mobile market. Yeah, the iPad looks nice, but what about a mobile product that actually works well outside of an air-conditioned office? I can buy a Dell laptop that keeps working in a pouring rain, after being dropped, and after being left inside a hot car. I take one of these new Macs out there and it wouldn't last an hour. I got tired of panicking whenever a few drops of water got near my Apple laptop, or when the temperature went over 110 degrees Fahrenheit. It's time for something better from Apple, and that's one area where my interest in Apple software simply expires. If the computer will fail under the conditions presented, it's worthless.

Another problem with Apple's new laptops is the non-replaceable battery. That's really useless when there's no electrical socket available. Not everybody works in an office during normal business hours, which is who seems to benefit from a "seven hour" battery. On the eighth hour, however, you have a nice paperweight.

I actually almost bought a new Apple laptop last year, but then I figured out that its battery would fail during the event that I was going to use it at, and I was assuming that it was only going to be mildly-warm and not raining. It actually did rain, and it rained hard. The event went on, and my hardware kept working. How would that new Apple laptop have worked for me? It probably would've failed within five minutes. Apple doesn't seem to want to cater to these customers who work outdoors, and when Apple uses the same basic hardware as everybody else, there's really no hardware-related advantage to buying the Apple anymore.

I want to invest more in the Apple platform, because the company does make some very nice software, but Apple doesn't make that easy. If Apple has the resources to develop the MacBook Air and the iPad, it can make a laptop that won't break when it's exposed to the outdoors, and it can also support the wide variety of certified workstation hardware that's on the market.

 

[AskMeIfICare]

Let's get to the facts shall we?

Everything from the hardware to the operating system is made by the same manufacturer. (Apple)

From what I understand, Apple sources out their motherboards to the a 3rd party fabricator and then hires the same contractors who write the code of ASUS and MSI motherboard DSDT files (since they are all 99% identical with respect to code relevant to OSX. The rest is junk code for non-OSX. If you are a Certified Apple Developer, then you should know everything I'm saying already.

You write the actual OSX code or 3rd party apps? Actually what I really want to be clarified is what I wrote about the motherboards and why everything is nearly identical. The 1% that is not identical is ACPI code that I do not understand what it does.

In my case I had to depend on my Hack for nearly 4 months awaiting the fix for the Mac Pro since I couldn't run Logic until said fix. I got two systems since I thought I'd need a node to share CPU time. I was totally wrong. One system became essentially a test machine and the other handled everything Logic threw at it with every effect imaginable. The greatest I saw the CPU loaded was 60%. No runs, no drips, no errors, and definitely no crashes. 100% vanilla ASUS P6T-SE and Rampage II Extreme with 4 system kexts in each. With all due respect, if you were building your hacks 100% correctly you wouldn't have any problems...but I don't blame you for not trusting them. Where I live I don't have a choice (read: South Pacific).

Please don't take this as a hostile challenge because I am interested to know what are the facts (motherboard fabrication) since the evidence points to 3rd party bulk mobo fabrication.

 

[AskMeIfICare]

Another PC vs. Mac war thread?

Here are the facts:

Macs have a higher starting price. PCs go as low as $200 (I saw a cheap Gateway or something desktop on a Fry's ad) while Macs start at around the $1000 mark.

Macs have better design and aesthetics. This one might be somewhat opinionated, but Macs are built with better/higher quality materials. I don't see the same level of design in most PC laptops, of any price point. Lenovo is the only PC brand closest in terms of quality and design.

Macs have a better OS. Another opinionated, but in many ways true fact. Mac OS X is based from Darwin UNIX. PCs run Windows, therefore have viruses, trojans, worms, spyware, etc. Macs don't have that.

Last but not least, Macs can do anything a PC can. Macs can run any OS (Linux, Windows, Mac). Windows can run any OS except Mac OS without any excessive hacking, modding, patching, etc.

Did you read the last dozen or so posts? Only a fanboy would take objective discussion as a "war". If you are a fanboy then go get mad elsewhere since this was a civilized discussion between individuals who use PC, Mac, and their hybrid systems. In my case I use all 3 but I use my Macs the most and hopefully can use my Mac Pro for work again now that they just released a long awaited fix. Stop already with the virus/trojan myth. I run Clamshell for a reason and it has caught a couple of things already since December. There was a reason it was developed and it updates it MAC antivirus definitions on a regular basis. This discussion is waaayyyyy out of your league on so many levels. If you wish to continue in the debate, be prepared to be ignored since forums like this are full of clones.

 

[AskMeIfICare]

After Apple switched to Intel, I felt like the company simply dropped support for all of its other products. Now I wonder how long I should wait before buying another Apple product, because I don't want to get stuck with another obsolete platform when the next OS X version comes out. It's really frustrating to have bought into expensive computers, and then to be told that they're all junk now. This especially when I can run Microsoft Windows and Linux on much older hardware.

The upgrade paths were further eliminated by the software market that is dropping support for older versions of OS X, and a new version of OS X requires an Intel platform with specific Apple-branded hardware.

The only reason I continue considering Apple anymore is because of its software pricing and functionality. Other than the software, there's no reason to stay locked to this closed platform anymore, not when I can get better hardware from someone else.

I am confused by why Apple refuses to support the low-end and mid-range market, but Apple doesn't seem to get it when it comes to the high-end. Things like certified graphics support and an appropriate selection of workstation graphics cards at a price point that competes with the Linux/Windows market. I have tried several times to satisfy this requirement, only to be told that I had to buy a special Mac-only card that was older and much more expensive than what was available to normal people who didn't need Mac support.

It doesn't make any sense to be forced to pay for a GeForce GT card, when I really want a Quadro FX or FirePro card that won't work with the Mac. You go to ATI's Website and what does it say there? "Available in Precision Workstations from Dell." Yeah, Dell and a whole bunch of other OEMs that support Linux and Windows. Mac OS X support? Not really.

Apple finally figured out how to get ECC support on its RAM, but that was several years after the rest of the market was doing it. Hardware support overall is still frustrating, because Apple doesn't seem to want to play with anybody else. There's almost always the Intel and AMD support listed for all these different versions of Linux and Windows, but the Mac isn't even mentioned. The hardware won't even work, much less be certified.

I found this out once when I was having a problem with a hardware device that the power-management functions in a newly-installed update of OS X didn't like. I tried using AppleCare, but when I mentioned that I had altered the basic hardware configuration, they cut me off and told me that I was not eligible for support. It's not my fault that Apple changed something in the OS that now doesn't like my hardware! A worse problem happens if I try to install a new version of OS X. The installer refuses to see the hardware, so the software can't be installed because the computer won't work without it. Put that hardware over on Linux or Windows, and it works fine.

Then there's the mobile market. Yeah, the iPad looks nice, but what about a mobile product that actually works well outside of an air-conditioned office? I can buy a Dell laptop that keeps working in a pouring rain, after being dropped, and after being left inside a hot car. I take one of these new Macs out there and it wouldn't last an hour. I got tired of panicking whenever a few drops of water got near my Apple laptop, or when the temperature went over 110 degrees Fahrenheit. It's time for something better from Apple, and that's one area where my interest in Apple software simply expires. If the computer will fail under the conditions presented, it's worthless.

Another problem with Apple's new laptops is the non-replaceable battery. That's really useless when there's no electrical socket available. Not everybody works in an office during normal business hours, which is who seems to benefit from a "seven hour" battery. On the eighth hour, however, you have a nice paperweight.

I actually almost bought a new Apple laptop last year, but then I figured out that its battery would fail during the event that I was going to use it at, and I was assuming that it was only going to be mildly-warm and not raining. It actually did rain, and it rained hard. The event went on, and my hardware kept working. How would that new Apple laptop have worked for me? It probably would've failed within five minutes. Apple doesn't seem to want to cater to these customers who work outdoors, and when Apple uses the same basic hardware as everybody else, there's really no hardware-related advantage to buying the Apple anymore.

I want to invest more in the Apple platform, because the company does make some very nice software, but Apple doesn't make that easy. If Apple has the resources to develop the MacBook Air and the iPad, it can make a laptop that won't break when it's exposed to the outdoors, and it can also support the wide variety of certified workstation hardware that's on the market.

With 10.7 on the horizon in the next 12-18 months I wonder the same thing. Disconap and I posted about it earlier. I have read that Mac was considering integrating Nvidia into their Intel chipsets. And if they use the A4 chipset on top of this it will change their platform considerably. I would probably buy a new system either way should this happen but it would be annoying if it locks out my Intel Macs like with what happened to the PPC users who were told the same promise.

I guess history has taught that if they do such a thing, dump everything on e-bay as fast as humanly possible so history doesn't repeat itself.

 

[AskMeIfICare]

Let's get to the facts shall we?

Everything from the hardware to the operating system is made by the same manufacturer. (Apple) What this creates is close perfection. You have an OS made for one brand of machine ONLY. The OS is so developed, you get iLife a suite worth an easy 500 dollars if it was available PC. You have the Quartz engine, Safari, iTunes, and so many other built in assistants. So many other features that make it perfect. Perfection you can only achieve at Apple. (Well close to it anyway)

Please don't ignore my first post since it's a burning question. But I reread what you wrote so I didn't miss anything. I'm glad I did since it made for a good giggle. I hope you can find it in yourself to find the humor in what you wrote since you seem kinda disturbed at the time that you wrote this and you weren't thinking straight

My top 3 of the day:

1) What is this "perfection" of which you speak? 10.6.3 is coming out any day now because of nearly 100 imperfections. My own mission critical flaw was only fixed and released yesterday.

2) If iLife isn't sold for $500 for Mac why would it be sold for $500 for PC? Most vendors price software nearly identical when sold for both platforms.

3) iTunes and Safari run on Windows and they have for years....yet look at what you wrote. Is this a joke? It has to be a joke.

You keep touting perfection but see #1...but then you said "Well close..". As the saying goes, close only counts in horse shoes and hand grenades. In software, I always thought it was called "Beta"

 

[Dozerrox]

Let's get to the facts shall we?

Everything from the hardware to the operating system is made by the same manufacturer. (Apple) What this creates is close perfection. You have an OS made for one brand of machine ONLY. The OS is so developed, you get iLife a suite worth an easy 500 dollars if it was available PC. You have the Quartz engine, Safari, iTunes, and so many other built in assistants. So many other features that make it perfect. Perfection you can only achieve at Apple. (Well close to it anyway)

And the price is not sooo high for the specs you are getting. The iMac, an all in once machine has the same design as this (ALL USD)

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/663914-REG/ASUS_ET2203T_B0317_Eee_Top_ET2203T_All_in_One.html

Faster HD and much faster processor! Look for yourself!
Without the mail in rebate it is 1,140.00!

Or the Mac Mini. The Optima PC: 40GB Hard Drive Capacity, 256MB; DDR Memory, Intel Celeron Processor, Additional Drives: DVD/CD-RW for 628.00 at target. Vs the Mac mini with

2.26GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
2GB memory
160GB hard drive1
8x double-layer SuperDrive
NVIDIA GeForce 9400M graphics
Mac OS X Snow Leopard

for 599.00!

Lastly the Macbook Pro

A Dell Latitude XT2: http://configure.us.dell.com/dellst...3=2G2D&m_8=256GEN&dgc=SS&cid=27721&lid=628326

1GB Ram, Core Duo 1.40 ghz. 256gb HD. 2,509.00

vs. Macbook Pro

Intel Core 2 Duo 2.26 ghz, 2GB Memory. 320 gb HD, 1,300.00.

As you can see the price is comparable. There is not much comparable to the Mac Pro. That thing is a beastly powerhouse!

It all boils down to, you get what you pay for!

I am a certified Apple Dev. myself. Believe me, there is tons of work that goes into the system. We are the real geeks.

I make hackintoshes all the time! Would I ever depend on them? Never. Would i ever use them as my only computer? Never. Do I have OSX on my Acer Aspire One, YES!

Apart from you've intentionally chosen expensive equipment that's less powerful. In fact, isn't that dell a tablet?? And that Asus is an all in one! You're comparing completely different systems with different benefits that jack up the price on your comparisons! Maybe if the mac mini came in an imac type enclosure, and the macbook pro had a swivelling touch tablet like screen then it'd be fair. Choose some real comparisons if you have to.

 

[freepeacesweet]

Inside every Mac is a gold nugget - when the time comes, just crack it open and mail it off to gotgoldgetcash.co.uk and you'll get back the extra cost of the Mac vs. the PC.

Works 60% of the time. Every time.

Love it!

 

[dmr727]

It's good to see someone finally ask this very important question.

 

[Disc Golfer]

Macs are expensive so poor people can have their sour grapes.

 

[kernkraft]

Without exclusivity to OS X, their hardware could not survive at this price level. Paying the price of a Mac Pro or even a MacBook - for what they are - is just immoral.

 

[flopticalcube]

A lot of it is form factor and included items. To get a PC as small as the mini with a Core 2 Duo CPU would probably come within 20% of a mini. To get a PC as thin as an iMac with the 27" IPS panel would probably come within 20% of the iMac. If you don't need something as small as a mini or as thin as an iMac, you have no choice. I think this is why Macs end up being expensive. People have to pay for design decisions they would not have made given a choice.

 

[AskMeIfICare]

Macs are expensive so poor people can have their sour grapes.

Somehow I believe that you are the opposite of rich. Unless you were born into money...now that I could believe seeing as how most people who cannot afford Mac find a way to get one while those who can afford 10 tend to be more prudent and patient.

So be careful who you insult since often the ones you pick on have a big brother with big fists and even bigger lawyers. But this is typical and why the forums are so entertaining

 

[Ramius]

Apple does everything a PC dont.
Simply put. You pay for different things than a laptop.

Apple priorotizes to make their machines silent, and do alot of smart engineering to make this happen.

They want them to look and feel good, so they build their machines in aluminum.

They constantly try to simplify, and you will see that on their Macbooks, you have a fullsized alphabetical keyboard which is really comfertable to write on compared to many laptops, who have hundreds of cramped up buttons.

Apple tries setting standards and simplify the business, which is why they have SD card readers now, and helps driving the whole business of external memory into using one card.

Then you have the programs, which Apple only makes for themselves. And basically, when you start up your Apple computer for the first time, its not only MUCH easier to use for your daily needs. But it has everything you want. You dont need to download any program at all to it.

It has a great movie editor, but people like me, was shocked to see it also has an image mounter, partition program, great dvd burning tool and much else.

When you start up your windows pc for the first time, you always have ********s of downloading to do. Compare Paint to iPhoto LOLOLOL.

I am a journalist student, and I see now that often - I dont need photoshop for my pictures. Iphoto does the job. You can crop nicely, adjust levels and colors and all those small functions you need.

Generally speaking, an Apple computer is better equipped than a Windows PC is. "It just works". This is their important philosphy that I really appreciate. While Windows... well, tries to open windows to an entire world... but sometimes you dont want to travel to mexico to get tacos.

 

[SnowLeopard2008]

Did you read the last dozen or so posts? Only a fanboy would take objective discussion as a "war". If you are a fanboy then go get mad elsewhere since this was a civilized discussion between individuals who use PC, Mac, and their hybrid systems. In my case I use all 3 but I use my Macs the most and hopefully can use my Mac Pro for work again now that they just released a long awaited fix. Stop already with the virus/trojan myth. I run Clamshell for a reason and it has caught a couple of things already since December. There was a reason it was developed and it updates it MAC antivirus definitions on a regular basis. This discussion is waaayyyyy out of your league on so many levels. If you wish to continue in the debate, be prepared to be ignored since forums like this are full of clones.

I'm not mad by this discussion nor am I a fanboy. If you wish to continue debating on your [low] level, then be prepared to back up your statements. Do not belittle me. I at least know what I'm talking about. You seem to believe "MAC" is the same thing as "Mac". Not so. "MAC" refers to a MAC address. You run Clamshell because you are paranoid, not out of necessity. I run Norton out of necessity and because my Lenovo Thinkpad has gotten viruses many times and caused connection problems to my network. My Mac has never done this. I don't have time to read through 4 pages of very long posts so I just read the 4th page, forgive me if I missed the previous 3.

The virus/trojan "myth" is not a myth. At least, not the proportions you believe it to be (which is both wrong and stupid). Windows is more prone to viruses and other malicious software because it holds a majority of the OS market share and it is the most weak. UNIX and Linux have better security and also have a smaller part of the market share.

You prove my statements with your own actions. Norton on my Thinkpad has caught 80 viruses or so since the beginning of this year. According to you, Clamshell has couple of things since December. The updating of viruses definitions is almost useless since there aren't any/many viruses for Macs.

Just because you use all 3 OSes does not make an expert in anything. Except trying to make yourself seem smarter than you are, which you fail miserably at. I've programmed in all 3 OSes and am more familiar with the structure than you in any. Again, I use formal english to the best of my ability while you are still stuck between learning the difference between "MAC" and "Mac" and "waaayyyy" and "way". This discussion will always be above your league, not mine.

Back to the OP. Macs usually aren't more expensive than Windows counterparts. With the exception of right now (the Core iX transition) Macs are a little behind. Apple usually updates products in a cycle, so you can somewhat predict when they will next refresh. But I find once both PCs and Macs are updated/refreshed, Macs aren't that much more expensive.

 

[AskMeIfICare]

Apple does everything a PC dont.
Simply put. You pay for different things than a laptop.

Apple priorotizes to make their machines silent, and do alot of smart engineering to make this happen.

They want them to look and feel good, so they build their machines in aluminum.

They constantly try to simplify, and you will see that on their Macbooks, you have a fullsized alphabetical keyboard which is really comfertable to write on compared to many laptops, who have hundreds of cramped up buttons.

Apple tries setting standards and simplify the business, which is why they have SD card readers now, and helps driving the whole business of external memory into using one card.

Then you have the programs, which Apple only makes for themselves. And basically, when you start up your Apple computer for the first time, its not only MUCH easier to use for your daily needs. But it has everything you want. You dont need to download any program at all to it.

It has a great movie editor, but people like me, was shocked to see it also has an image mounter, partition program, great dvd burning tool and much else.

When you start up your windows pc for the first time, you always have ********s of downloading to do. Compare Paint to iPhoto LOLOLOL.

I am a journalist student, and I see now that often - I dont need photoshop for my pictures. Iphoto does the job. You can crop nicely, adjust levels and colors and all those small functions you need.

Generally speaking, an Apple computer is better equipped than a Windows PC is. "It just works". This is their important philosphy that I really appreciate. While Windows... well, tries to open windows to an entire world... but sometimes you dont want to travel to mexico to get tacos.

First thing's last, as a journalism student, it may not be prudent to say things like "you don't want to travel to Mexico to get tacos". First, tacos are more "Tex Mex" than they are Mexican. Second, I'll leave it to someone of Mexican decent to explain the rest of why that can be offensive.

But to play Devil's Avocate here (since I partially agree with you on several points) I'll comment on a few of these points for the sake of discussion.

Apple does everything a PC doesn't?

Well it runs Final Cut and Logic, two apps that I adore. I'm a Mac user mainly for Logic, secondarily for Final Cut with everything else a distant "also ran". Other than those there are few "game changing" apps that are not available for both Mac and PC.

All of the apps that you cite are far too simple for pro use, but I'm sure that you can do fine as a student on them. But once you graduate, you would have to be exceptional to not need Photoshop or some other pro grade app that can run on either platform.

The basic movie editors for Mac and Windows have their pros and cons but they'll both serve a resourceful beginner equally well based on the law of averages.

"You pay for different things than a laptop"? I don't quite understand what you are comparing here.

Modern Macs are anymore silent than modern PCs? I think it has been over 3 years since I remember hearing a peep out of either my Mac or Windows machines. With the 1156 chipset in both Mac and PC coupled with a solid state drive, both platforms are as quiet as a mouse.

I don't mind some eye candy myself and the aluminum makes for handsome equipment, but in fairness there are some very slick PCs out there as well. Sony Vaio has an equal and sometimes greater wow factor. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Personally I think the slickest machine on the market is the 27" i7 iMac, but other people sprout wood over a black mesh case that glows red. While not my style, I understand the appeal.

Keyboards on laptops? Let's see...I'm writing this on an Aluminum MacBook Pro but I have a 17" inch HP 9000 series with an identically sized keyboard. Some days I prefer the longer throw of the HP. Today I felt like the shorter throw speed of the Macbook Pro keys. Again one is not clearly better than the other and it's a personal taste. In my case it changes from day to day.

Apple tries to set standards to simplify the business? I'm sure anybody who got the shaft during the transition from PPC to Intel will beg to differ with you on that one. If anything that just created a mess that is still far from settled.

SD card readers? Other platforms have these as well and there is better technology than SD card readers. What you are saying is a good thing is often a major gripe with Mac owners. Mac decides what is obsolete rather than what the industry wants, more often than not. If anything, Apple usually is the last to adopt an industry standard rather than introduce it. They also have a history of rendering certain technologies obsolete with little or no notice. Again see PPC. I'm not saying it's right or wrong. Annoying and inconvenient? Certainly. Smart business? No doubt about it. Patience has been one of the reasons Mac has become such a heavy hitter. But since the point of this thread is to ask a question, we should all angles of "why" and whether or not it is justified so people who can avoid impulse buys based on biased misinformation.

Indeed Apple makes programs usable only on their platform with their OS. While it is their right to do business as they see fit, it also costs them customers who do not want to be locked into one platform and one OS. Time will tell if their business model is the best and viable on a long term scale. Remember that Mac has been a roller coaster and has been near bankruptcy at least once that I clearly remember and another time that is before I was really paying attention. So again, time will be our teacher.

Downloading every time you boot up? Not if you set updates for times that you know you are going to take a break, or you set it to manual updates...or last, update downloads never really interfered with anything I'd do since they run in the background. In the case of Mac, I find that I'm constantly downloading near a gigabyte once per month on average due to 10.6.2, then Logic updates 3 times, Final Cut updates 2 times, and several dozen apps that I own. If anything I've downloaded 1.5 gigabytes in 3 years of owning Vista and about 5 gigabytes since Snow Leopard came out 5 months or so ago.

Mac has everything someone wants? Based on the way I'm perceiving your statement, you are saying in a stock configuration. If that was the case the app store wouldn't exist. The reality is that Mac and PC are more or less equally functional out of the box, again, with pros and cons for both.


I could go on with this but I don't want it to sound like I'm taking sides. But in this case, and as a journalism student, you should practice being more objective and weighing both sides of an issue...and here you are demonstrated a clear bias based on emotion and a misinformed point of view...and I'm sure you are aware that this is exactly what is wrong with journalism today...personal bias.

Even though I said it already, I agree with you that creative types like myself would like Mac more as it is in a stock configuration. But someone who just needs to e-mail, chat, and typical office work may prefer Windows for all reasons that people prefer Windows over Mac. So it's give and take and a matter of personal taste.

 

[AskMeIfICare]

I'm not mad by this discussion nor am I a fanboy. If you wish to continue debating on your [low] level, then be prepared to back up your statements. Do not belittle me. I at least know what I'm talking about. You seem to believe "MAC" is the same thing as "Mac". Not so. "MAC" refers to a MAC address. You run Clamshell because you are paranoid, not out of necessity. I run Norton out of necessity and because my Lenovo Thinkpad has gotten viruses many times and caused connection problems to my network. My Mac has never done this.

The virus/trojan "myth" is not a myth. At least, not the proportions you believe it to be (which is both wrong and stupid). Windows is more prone to viruses and other malicious software because it holds a majority of the OS market share and it is the most weak. UNIX and Linux have better security and also have a smaller part of the market share.

You prove my statements with your own actions. Norton on my Thinkpad has caught 80 viruses or so since the beginning of this year. According to you, Clamshell has couple of things since December. The updating of viruses definitions is almost useless since there aren't any/many viruses for Macs.

Just because you use all 3 OSes does not make an expert in anything. Except trying to make yourself seem smarter than you are, which you fail miserably at. I've coded programs in all 3 and am more familiar than you in any. Again, I use formal english to the best of my ability while you are still stuck between learning the difference between "MAC" and "Mac" and "waaayyyy" and "way". This discussion will always be above your league, not mine.

Don't make me laugh. Screw it...this is funny! I used all capital letters to emphasize something. I know what is a MAC address. If this is the way you debate, then I need not say anything else since you've already proven my point for me, thank you very much.

 

[TheAshMan]

Macs aren't more expensive

Compare the iMac and laptops to equivalent hardware from HP, Dell, and others and the prices are about the same. Don't compare the iMac to a bargain tower PC, check the prices on their All In Ones and Apple stacks up well. Apple simply doesn't have products that target the bargain categories where they don't feel they would do well. Apple puts a premium on philosophy, design, quality and style. If price is your only major concern, go with a cheap PC.

 

[Ramius]

First thing's last, as a journalism student, it may not be prudent to say things like "you don't want to travel to Mexico to get tacos". First, tacos are more "Tex Mex" than they are Mexican. Second, I'll leave it to someone of Mexican decent to explain the rest of why that can be offensive.

But to play Devil's Avocate here (since I partially agree with you on several points) I'll comment on a few of these points for the sake of discussion.

Apple does everything a PC doesn't?

Well it runs Final Cut and Logic, two apps that I adore. I'm a Mac user mainly for Logic, secondarily for Final Cut with everything else a distant "also ran". Other than those there are few "game changing" apps that are not available for both Mac and PC.

All of the apps that you cite are far too simple for pro use, but I'm sure that you can do fine as a student on them. But once you graduate, you would have to be exceptional to not need Photoshop or some other pro grade app that can run on either platform.

The basic movie editors for Mac and Windows have their pros and cons but they'll both serve a resourceful beginner equally well based on the law of averages.

"You pay for different things than a laptop"? I don't quite understand what you are comparing here.

Modern Macs are anymore silent than modern PCs? I think it has been over 3 years since I remember hearing a peep out of either my Mac or Windows machines. With the 1156 chipset in both Mac and PC coupled with a solid state drive, both platforms are as quiet as a mouse.

I don't mind some eye candy myself and the aluminum makes for handsome equipment, but in fairness there are some very slick PCs out there as well. Sony Vaio has an equal and sometimes greater wow factor. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Personally I think the slickest machine on the market is the 27" i7 iMac, but other people sprout wood over a black mesh case that glows red. While not my style, I understand the appeal.

Keyboards on laptops? Let's see...I'm writing this on an Aluminum MacBook Pro but I have a 17" inch HP 9000 series with an identically sized keyboard. Some days I prefer the longer throw of the HP. Today I felt like the shorter throw speed of the Macbook Pro keys. Again one is not clearly better than the other and it's a personal taste. In my case it changes from day to day.

Apple tries to set standards to simplify the business? I'm sure anybody who got the shaft during the transition from PPC to Intel will beg to differ with you on that one. If anything that just created a mess that is still far from settled.

SD card readers? Other platforms have these as well and there is better technology than SD card readers. What you are saying is a good thing is often a major gripe with Mac owners. Mac decides what is obsolete rather than what the industry wants, more often than not. If anything, Apple usually is the last to adopt an industry standard rather than introduce it. They also have a history of rendering certain technologies obsolete with little or no notice. Again see PPC. I'm not saying it's right or wrong. Annoying and inconvenient? Certainly. Smart business? No doubt about it. Patience has been one of the reasons Mac has become such a heavy hitter. But since the point of this thread is to ask a question, we should all angles of "why" and whether or not it is justified so people who can avoid impulse buys based on biased misinformation.

Indeed Apple makes programs usable only on their platform with their OS. While it is their right to do business as they see fit, it also costs them customers who do not want to be locked into one platform and one OS. Time will tell if their business model is the best and viable on a long term scale. Remember that Mac has been a roller coaster and has been near bankruptcy at least once that I clearly remember and another time that is before I was really paying attention. So again, time will be our teacher.

Downloading every time you boot up? Not if you set updates for times that you know you are going to take a break, or you set it to manual updates...or last, update downloads never really interfered with anything I'd do since they run in the background. In the case of Mac, I find that I'm constantly downloading near a gigabyte once per month on average due to 10.6.2, then Logic updates 3 times, Final Cut updates 2 times, and several dozen apps that I own. If anything I've downloaded 1.5 gigabytes in 3 years of owning Vista and about 5 gigabytes since Snow Leopard came out 5 months or so ago.

Mac has everything someone wants? Based on the way I'm perceiving your statement, you are saying in a stock configuration. If that was the case the app store wouldn't exist. The reality is that Mac and PC are more or less equally functional out of the box, again, with pros and cons for both.


I could go on with this but I don't want it to sound like I'm taking sides. But in this case, and as a journalism student, you should practice being more objective and weighing both sides of an issue...and here you are demonstrated a clear bias based on emotion and a misinformed point of view...and I'm sure you are aware that this is exactly what is wrong with journalism today...personal bias.

Even though I said it already, I agree with you that creative types like myself would like Mac more as it is in a stock configuration. But someone who just needs to e-mail, chat, and typical office work may prefer Windows for all reasons that people prefer Windows over Mac. So it's give and take and a matter of personal taste.

Wow, that was just way too much for me to care about replying properly to.
To reply to one point that got my eye. No, I dont need photoshop at work. You obviously dont know how a journalism education works or what the occupation is about. I have used Photoshop for ten years, I have grown up with it, but im seriously starting to loose the need of it.

You say you did not understand what I meant by a Mac doing what PCs dont. What Im saying is that Apple makes priority of things as design, user friendlyness, innovation, creativity. While PCs tends to be all about power power power power - packed in plastic.

Macs are design products, and gives you better quality on aspects PC manufacturers consider unimportant. This is why Apple have made such a unique market position for themselves.

And to your criticism. A journalist can especially practice his right to free speech. Since its us who keep it allive you know. Take your morals to someone like Hunter Thompson lol, and see how far you get.