>Everybody here claims they don't want to waste the resources etc, but everybody gets
>all giggly and bouncy when there's new OSX or KDE screenshots.
The difference (at least with OS X, not sure about KDE) is that the pretty graphics work on old hardware as well (as evidenced by my 400Mhz G4 sitting here running Tiger at perfectly acceptable speeds). I doubt a 400Mhz machine will run even the basic edition of Vista.
Firstly, I'd love to know why this was modded "+3, Interesting" rather than "-1, Flamebait", or "-infinity, Stupid".
Lets take a few points here...
They continuously sell overpriced hardware
On the contrary, my mac laptop cost me a little over £600, and for a laptop still easily capable of five hours battery life a year later, is the embodiment of value for money.
more robust modulare components with a wide selection of available hardware and features
Proof? More to the point, however, it's simply incorrect. How many people in the target audience for the iMac even know they *can* upgrade their computer, much less how to go about doing it? And this is without mentioning that it comes with pretty much everything you ever need anyway (internal bluetooth and wireless LAN are still not commonplace in machines from other manufacturers). The Power Mac, you must note, is a tower unit and can be upgraded with exceptional ease.
I am sure his FIRST mistake will be to overprice computers which can be directly compared to against' PCs.
Firstly let's define PCs. I always took it to mean "personal computer", which Apples are. Now lets see what *you* mean, which is computers running Windows. And for that precise reason, machines made by Apple are NOT comparable, since they run an operating system based around common sense security models such that they do not get viruses or spyware infections easily, and has not remained static for four years.
Apple should sell computers cheaper then Dell simply because they don't have to charge themselves OS licensing fees. OSX is FREE to Apple to install on their hardware
This shows you to *really* be an idiot. Who exactly do you think pays for the development of OS X?
Apple should sell computers cheaper then PC's if they ever want to gain marketshare.
No, this is the Dell approach. What Apple should continue to do is sell good quality products, not the cheapest.
but if the rest of them were smart, they would drop Steve Jobs like a lead balloon.
John Sculley anybody? Look where that ended up.
The only problem is, Apple execs have never shown one drop of intelligence in their entire history of the company.
Debatable, however what is certain is that you showed no sign of intelligence in your entire post.
Slashdot Mirror
>Everybody here claims they don't want to waste the resources etc, but everybody gets >all giggly and bouncy when there's new OSX or KDE screenshots. The difference (at least with OS X, not sure about KDE) is that the pretty graphics work on old hardware as well (as evidenced by my 400Mhz G4 sitting here running Tiger at perfectly acceptable speeds). I doubt a 400Mhz machine will run even the basic edition of Vista.
Check out OSXNews which is getting there as a newsreader, and is in a similar style to the Apple applications.
Firstly, I'd love to know why this was modded "+3, Interesting" rather than "-1, Flamebait", or "-infinity, Stupid".
Lets take a few points here...
They continuously sell overpriced hardware
On the contrary, my mac laptop cost me a little over £600, and for a laptop still easily capable of five hours battery life a year later, is the embodiment of value for money.
more robust modulare components with a wide selection of available hardware and features
Proof? More to the point, however, it's simply incorrect. How many people in the target audience for the iMac even know they *can* upgrade their computer, much less how to go about doing it? And this is without mentioning that it comes with pretty much everything you ever need anyway (internal bluetooth and wireless LAN are still not commonplace in machines from other manufacturers). The Power Mac, you must note, is a tower unit and can be upgraded with exceptional ease.
I am sure his FIRST mistake will be to overprice computers which can be directly compared to against' PCs.
Firstly let's define PCs. I always took it to mean "personal computer", which Apples are. Now lets see what *you* mean, which is computers running Windows. And for that precise reason, machines made by Apple are NOT comparable, since they run an operating system based around common sense security models such that they do not get viruses or spyware infections easily, and has not remained static for four years.
Apple should sell computers cheaper then Dell simply because they don't have to charge themselves OS licensing fees. OSX is FREE to Apple to install on their hardware
This shows you to *really* be an idiot. Who exactly do you think pays for the development of OS X?
Apple should sell computers cheaper then PC's if they ever want to gain marketshare.
No, this is the Dell approach. What Apple should continue to do is sell good quality products, not the cheapest.
but if the rest of them were smart, they would drop Steve Jobs like a lead balloon.
John Sculley anybody? Look where that ended up.
The only problem is, Apple execs have never shown one drop of intelligence in their entire history of the company.
Debatable, however what is certain is that you showed no sign of intelligence in your entire post.