Scratch

jji7skyline wrote:

fire219 wrote:

jji7skyline wrote:

@fire: Mac hardware is exactly what you would get on a Pc of the same price, and osx pwns windows in all aspects, and then there's bootcamp for gamers.

Also, Apple has the best customer service of.any.computer company.

Plus, I hate it when people say macs are for noobs. They sure are noob friendly, but have more professional and advanced features than windows. Consider for example the built in http server Apache and the built in vnc viewer and server.

Why do you think so many pros like web programmers and graphic designers use Mac?

Mac even comes with a screen video recorder. Windows doesn't have that does it?

As for software support you'll find that Mac has lots of slick apps for everything windows can do. Remember you can bootcamp of you are a real hard gamer. A bit of vdrift every now and again is enough for the likes of me. My life is happier without games.

Um no, you can get a PC with the same specs for alot cheaper. Lets take the current top 15inch MBP that is not a made-to-order (right side on this.  That is a 2.6Ghz Ivy Bridge i7 (3720QM), 8GB DDR3 RAM, 512GB SSD, and a GeForce 650M. That is $2799.

Now lets take a PC laptop with the same i7 CPU. That would be this. It has a 17 inch screen, 16GB of DDR3 RAM, a 750GB HDD/256GB SSD combo, and a Geforce 670M. Beats the MBP on all accounts, yet costs about $600 less. 

The rest of your arguments in this post: Why include software the user may not need? If they do need it, they can download it. If they don't, that is more free disk space for other stuff they do need or want.

I believe jvvg has handled the rest of your Apple propaganda.

Ah, yes. The asus laptop. Well known for breaking hinges. We had one and it broke in 1 year. We have 3macs. They have not yet had a single problem. One of them is 3 years old. And surprisingly, none of the open source projects mentioned by Microsoft are known to me, whereas you probably well know of webkit and xcode both apple projects.

Remember that apple.products have very good product quality. Worth 600 if you ask me. Plus theres great customer service and you don't have to buy yearly licences of antivirus programs.

The 27 imac is good value no matter how you look at it
You can even compare it to a normal desktop.

True, the Asus laptop I used as an example has the breaking hinges problem. But there aren't exactly that many Ivy Bridge laptops out right now. Wait a few months, and I will be able to provide much better examples. 

But I have found two more: this Samsung: better specs than the Mac and $2200,and this Lenovo IdeaPad (which are known to have high quality cases): slightly lower specs than the Mac, but significantly less than half the price.

I'd rather have my computer made of thick durable plastic than low-quality scrap aluminum  that will bend out of shape easily. A pound of 1/16 inch (1.6mm) aluminum is not worth $600. >.<

Ok....lets find a computer with better specs than the highest-end 27 inch iMac, and still cost less!   

The top (non-custom order) 27" iMac has a 3.1Ghz Sandy Bridge (ooooh.... they didn't update it for WWDC12) i5 (i5-2400), 4GB DDR3 RAM, Radeon HD 6970 GPU. $1999.

I found this. The CPU and RAM run circles around the iMac. The GPU is lower-end at first glance, but note that the iMac's GPU is a mobile version. This means it is tuned way down, which means that I think the PC wins, even if it is merely high-mid range. Oh, and it is $1099. And I doubt a monitor would be $900, even a very nice one. Another round goes to the PCs.

16Skittles wrote:

fire219 wrote:

even if it is merely high-mid range. Oh, and it is $1099. And I doubt a monitor would be $900, even a very nice one. Another round goes to the PCs.

Apple's thunderbolt monitor costs $999 

Overpriced, like the rest of Apple's product lineups. Even if it is retina display, which is just a gimmick. You can't see details small enough to make use of all the pixels. You are better off saving alot of the cash by getting a much nicer 1080p screen.

XenoK wrote:

I'd really like a mac.  but pcs are cheaper, and I can just put ubuntu on a pc.  I can also put MacOS snow leopard on a pc.

I think there are now tools to put Lion on one.

Anyway, Windows works great and people have actually found Windows 7 will run faster than Mac Lion on the same computer.

jji7skyline wrote:

Mac runs faster than windows 7on mine. Hackintoshes swill be slow though. Also, the 27 imac has a 2560 x 1440 screen. Monitors with that resolution cost at least as much as the thy nderbolt display, making the thunderbolt display pretty good value.

Ok, well, you're not the various articles I've read on the internet.

I've seen Windows computers at stores with screens of up to 3200x1800 or something like that and the computer plus the monitor was cheaper than the iMac mentioned.

DVI and HDMI Are also really good.

I saw it at a real store (yes, they still exist) and it was a few weeks ago.

DVI is old, but it still is pretty fast, and works very well for me (and I think that massive monitor used DVI).

Also, you forget that with some things (such as display speed or sunscreen SPF), once you get above a certain point, it doesn't really matter anymore.

16Skittles wrote:

Although, jj, can you do this in OSX? No really, I want to know if you can use Rainmeter in WINE on OSX.

*Ahem*

16Skittles wrote:

16Skittles wrote:

Although, jj, can you do this in OSX? No really, I want to know if you can use Rainmeter in WINE on OSX.

*Ahem*

Check out geektool for Mac 

@fire: it costs 10k or something 

Last edited by jji7skyline (2012-06-23 19:00:20)

wow only time this thead was on the second page so bump

conbot wrote:

Why does one need such a large display? Mine is at 1920x1080 and I'm perfectly fine with that.

Aye. Mine's even smaller (1440x900) but I don't really care.

Hmm... does Linux have compatibility for that res?

I am at a programming camp. Today, in 5 seconds, two of the Macs crashed. My screen went black and 4 seconds later someone else got kernel panic.
Then, 10 minutes later, half of the applications stopped working for no reason on someone else's computer.

For the entire almost two weeks I've been here, there has only been one crash on any of the Windows computers, and it was just one app.

veggieman001 wrote:

jvvg wrote:

I am at a programming camp. Today, in 5 seconds, two of the Macs crashed. My screen went black and 4 seconds later someone else got kernel panic.
Then, 10 minutes later, half of the applications stopped working for no reason on someone else's computer.

For the entire almost two weeks I've been here, there has only been one crash on any of the Windows computers, and it was just one app.

How old are the Macs?

They are from mid 2010.

veggieman001 wrote:

jvvg wrote:

veggieman001 wrote:

How old are the Macs?

They are from mid 2010.

Ah.
A bit strange that computers only that old would do that.

Not strange at all. This is a result of poor design!