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.
Would you buy an Apple Clone?
- Thread starter 204467
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I could of bought an iphone clone when i was buying a new phone, but i didnt. that speaks for itself. i could of bought a dell/hp/etc but i bought a mac.
No screen, no Firewire 400, no Firewire 800, no wifi, no bluetooth, no optical digital in/out, no copy of iLife.Didn't bother to look for part's matching an iMac, more like an MacPro light or the mystical xMac
MoBo:Gigabyte GA-EP35-DS4 111
Proc: Q9450 2.66 GHz 250
RAM: MDT 4x2048MB PC6400 138
GFX: Sapphire 3870 512MMB GDDR4 95
PS: BE Quiet! Dark Power Pro P7 450Watt 75
HDD: Seagate 750GB (ST3750330NS) 99
Optical: LG GGC-H20L Reads BluRay/HDDVD writes CD&DVD 99
CPU HSF: OneUlike 65
Case: OneUlike 180
OS: OSX Leopard 105
IO: Apple Mice + Keyboard 118
=1335
I did take "consumer prices" if someone legitimate would sell this for say 1450-1500 why not?
Apple does not have a monopoly. How many threads does it take before people understand the definition of a monopoly?
**** Microsoft and its Xbox monopoly. [/Sarcasm]
That's exactly the point. What I want in a computer has changed in the last few years. I now want a reliable machine that just does what I need it to do without having to fiddle around with it.
A company making clones would just be another source making the decision of what to put into a computer for you. If they just used off-the-shelf parts instead of designing and building cases and motherboards and writing device drivers, then it would just be a hackintosh with a badge.
If the desire is just to run OS X on a less expensive machine, why pay the markup for someone to put one together when you could cut the price even more by snapping the same parts together yourself?
If a company came along offering actual clones, using the same Apple parts or designing their own, it may be a viable alternative. Maybe it's because I'm content with the hardware that Apple offers, I have no need that could be better filled by a clone or hackintosh.
It has 2 external and one internal FW400 ports (no FW800) and also Optical/Coaxial out (but no in), add some Bluetooth USB dongle for 10 a PCI Wifi card and a copy of iLive, maybe a FW800 card and a screen yourself to the bill if you wish. If you really want to compare this thing to an iMac please do not forget to upgrade your BTO iMac to 8GB RAM a Radeon 3870 and a Q9450.... good luck.
To save you time and effort of finding compatible parts and building it yourself. A "Clone" only would make sense (imo) if it is less trouble than a H4ckint0sh.
Oh yeah? do you call your computer - PC or a Mac?
Do you tell anybody that it's different?
With PC you have - natural monopoly of MSFT, but you still have a "choice" which OS & especially what hardware.
With Apple you have - violent monopoly - no OSX apart from Mac, and quite limited Mac configs.
If you spin, you may argue that Apple's not monopoly.
But I don't really care for definitions, most of the people not anal about wording, you know.
And it's only near & full monopolies, proprietary, closed systems, have this push of resistance - from hackers of all walks of life.
You don't need to be unix geek to understand - you not only being ripped by
Apple (I'm content with it for now - I'm still paying), but you being told what to use - by virtue of artificially restricting features - that's what really drives me mad.
Only monopolies incite such feelings in people, and that's what counts.
Definitions may not be important to you ... but being an economics major trying to do my masters -- those definitions are quite important.
everything you described is a monopolistic competition.
A monopoly would be if there was NO OTHER computer hardware, no other operating system then Apple.
Since there is choice -- Between hardware, and operating systems (windows and *nix -- I include OS X in *nix) -- it is monopolistic competition.
Exactly!
I'm really looking into one - no time to build it myself.
I'll be selling my MBP in favor of decent gaming rig.
iMac is weak = MBP with bigger screen.
MacPro = overkill both in features & cost, yet still underpowered in GPU dep.
The only thing I'll be begging Apple on my knees - MBA with Matte WSXGA (1440x900), extra USB/FW combo port & 3G.
(granted dumb ZIF/PATA is gone)
I call it a computer, a laptop, or a Macbook, depending on the situation.
That's not a monopoly you're describing. It's been said a million times, but if you don't want a Macbook with 2.1 or 2.4Ghz for example, Apple isn't forced to make a 2.2Ghz one for you. They're also not forced to make a "mid-tower" for anyone, either. Hell, they could sell only one computer, at one spec, with no BTO options if they wanted to. They're still not a monopoly because you have other choices of hardware, hardware manufacturers, and OSes. You are not priveleged to use Mac OS X, so even though it's only available on their hardware, they're still not a monopoly, because they're not the only ones with an OS.
You're not being told what to use. Why aren't we beating down all the computer companies' doors forcing them to continue to manufacture 400Ghz computers running Windows '95 and '98, just in case someone wants them? Apple offers computers that you are not forced to buy, and can be bought (along with other choices) by other manufacturers. No matter how much you want a specific product from Apple, or how fair or unfair it is, they are still not a Monopoly.
No, I'm afraid it isn't what counts. What counts is the definition of a monopoly and whether it is actually one.
I agree with revenuee here.
Definitions may not be important to you ... but being an economics major trying to do my masters -- those definitions are quite important.
everything you described is a monopolistic competition.
A monopoly would be if there was NO OTHER computer hardware, no other operating system then Apple.
Since there is choice -- Between hardware, and operating systems (windows and *nix -- I include OS X in *nix) -- it is monopolistic competition.
Hey I don't eat monopolies, I don't breath them, I don't walk with them on the beach, I don't ride with them on the muni.
And I don't care how they brand themselves.
(And I don't eat economic books, and economics majors either)
Don't forget - It's all this terms & titles - for you, not vice-versa.
If I get **** in the face, I don't care if you get a fancy name for it or not.
So, the point is Apple is not opened to the other innovation than their own and that makes feel and look stupid, trying to defend stupid tech decisions.
I love Apple, I admire SJ, and it's not [only] about money - if they build my dream MBA I can easily justify 3K on it.
But when they stubbornly continue with deaf ear (look at the thread with WUXGA mod for MBP e.g.), that's what causes user's uproar. And that actually feeds illegitimate activities, like hackintosh.
You've used a cheap unbranded power supply that likely puts out a quarter of what it claims. Add a Decent Antec, Tagan, Seasonic etc. PSU of over 600w. Thats another 100 euros.
Cheapest 24" display I could find that matched the iMac display on brightness, contrast ratio, viewing angle was another 550 euros and the display still only has a 160 degree viewing angle as opposed to the iMacs 178. And I'm not sure whether this is TN or S-IPS, but the iMac is S-IPS just so you know.
And the graphics card you have selected looses to the 8800GS in the iMac on many benchmarks.
Add 30 Euros for the wireless card, as we need one that supports draft N. 30 for the FW 800 card. We don't want a bluetooth dongle as they are annoying and slow, not to mention the iMac is built in, so thats another 30 Euros for a PCI card.
In fact the most expensive sound card I'm looking at on this site (150 Euros) still does not support 10.1 sound like the iMac, although I believe it does support the rest.
So whats that altogether another 1000 Euros? It still looks ugly and cheap, I should really charge you more for a case that looks somewhat niceAnd if iLife is anything like Final Cut then it wont run on a Hackintosh, it just crashes. And of course this is illegal, the legal way would be to buy a copy of Windows, then buy Windows equivalents of the software that makes up iLife, which depending on how you compare could easily reach another grand.
And then theres the whole multi core utilization thing, which would make the 3.06ghz iMac faster than your 2.66ghz quad computer for many applications, including games.
In fact at the price that lot comes at, your better off buying a Quad Mac Pro with the 8800GT, a 24" Dell, and 8gb RAM, whats that? Under 3000 Euros.
Sorry if my prices are a bit off, I had to convert the lot into Euros etc.
Definitions may not be important to you ... but being an economics major trying to do my masters -- those definitions are quite important.
everything you described is a monopolistic competition.
A monopoly would be if there was NO OTHER computer hardware, no other operating system then Apple.
Since there is choice -- Between hardware, and operating systems (windows and *nix -- I include OS X in *nix) -- it is monopolistic competition.
What are you guys? An Apple lawyers?
You'll continue to defend them no matter what?
I'm not a lawyer, but I feel that if I provide a public service/product, I have some obligations to the general public, even not direct paying clients.
And when I run a coffeshop, I may go about with whatever I like for setup, customer service, and actual coffe, as long there's other shop round the corner.
But if I'm the only provider of a fresh air (think OSX) in the city - I might have some general obligations - to the whole public of this city?
Don't you think?
Or we still in wild capitalism age, when corporations only think about how to strip you of more money? And all service & features only comes as the function of this greed?
but effective communication is about precise language. Using the right words to describe the right concept.
otherwise we cause confusion.
Take even the use of MBA --- in this forum it is MacBook Air, if you were in a business forum, it would Masters of Business Administration. I've even seen MBA used for Mountain Bike Action.
I would also be hard pressed to call a company who holds less then 5% market share a monopoly.
YET, you don't here anyone running around yelling at Nikon and Canon, who even two years ago had 35%, and 40% market share respectively.
Oh good, did you factor in un-upgradeability of iMac?
How much you should discount it's worth for it?
How about 1999$ ?
(Just liked your ballpark calculations
)Wow! Can I use it now?
I cant? Then what are you talking about?
And how that "utilization thing" would work for 3.06 & and refuse service to 2.66 quads?
We both know the answers, so I don't mind if you don't bother answering.
I bought a Radius 81/110 clone back in early 1996. Still runs just dandy, albeit a bit slow for my taste, I do need to find the AAUI to 10-baseT adapter somewhere back in WI to get it networking again, but it does actually serve a purpose since we found an ancient CD that has Dr. Suess's Green Eggs and Ham on it that our oldest daughter loves. It frequently freezes up PCs and my laptop could do it in classic mode, but the old Radius does the best job.
Yeah, use your brains dude.
Your imperfect, constantly malfunctioning, always confused, extremely ambiguous & subjective mind.
That's the only thing that separates you from far superior computers.
They'd be pronounced worthless if they had just a fraction of failures your brain thrives on.
All this clarity of definitions is illusion - we understand each other because we posses immense variations of terms, their meanings, and meanings of meanings.
With this you bound to have confusion by definition.
And defining effective communication that way is "up vertical scale battle"
See, you got me in an instant!
Though we might choose to not understand, for some conscious, or rather unconscious reasons.
In that case - no amount of "precise language" will help it.
[/QUOTE]