To just steer it back to the main topic though, the scary thing is that the majority of/. is all for Pystar losing, which is really scary. I read that and I thought to myself this is really, really bad. I don't think/. realizes what this means. That they may now have their precious Photoshop not being able to be used via Wine because of Apple. That MS will now pressure OEMs to disable the use of Linux, because after all, it's the OEMs hardware. Because of Apple.
Bad times are coming, and all the Mac zealouts do is cheer.
Re:Psystar winning would be terrible for Microsoft
on
Psystar Crushed In Court
·
· Score: 0, Troll
Wanting to use Mac OS X is just a preference. It is not a superior OS, as amply evidenced by:
1. Guest account bug that wipes ALL the user's data 2. All the bugs plaguing the system that should "just work" on a platform with a small known set of hardware. Very weak. 3. Vastly inferior library available of software compared to Windows 4. Lack of choice. Choice to run on any hardware you please. I have the choice to buy a machine that on average costs $1000 less than an Apple computer. I have the choice to go out and buy 2 ATI Radeon 5870's.
Most of the people on here rabidly decreeing that OS X is superior should stop the BS and just say it, that they like OS X because of personal preference. It is NOT superior software.
I can go all day with this, because I'm just plain right.
1) Think what you want. It's great looking, has tons of ports, very light, great battery life. What else do you want? Seriously. And I could make the argument that your Apple doesn't have the ability to be dropped or useable in rain like some PC manufacturers can, if I wanted to play devil's advocate.
2) So basically you want sex appeal, and your desire has nothing to do with quality even though that is what apparently what you think you are saying. And durability wise, a dropped MBP falls apart just like a Thinkpad. But PCs *do* have options for *very* durable laptops, which don't fall apart when dropped--Apple, not available.
3) Ah the car analogy. Yours fails. It would be like a Honda Fit 4-cylinder 117 hp engine put in a Mercedes E350 body (Apple), compared to an actual BMW 550i (the PC), which does 0-60 in 5.2, has Y rates performance tires, amazing handling, with a nice comfortable ride.
What part of "I *own* a Studio 15" don't you understand? I can tell you firsthand it's of nice quality, and honestly it's one of the best looking laptops I've ever seen in their "black chainlink" color.
Oh man and check this out--it was sooo difficult. Just priced out a Studio 15 with specs better than a MBP. For $1,324 on a Dell Studio 15, you get for $50 less:
8 GB RAM vs. 2 GB 500 GB *7200* RPM HD vs. a shitty 250 GB 5400RPM HD a 512 MB ATI discrete video card 15" screen vs a smaller 13.3" screen
So difficult. So let's see, not only do PCs give you *more*, but they cost *alot* less.
Cherry picking 2 systems, and checking every option, to bring it up to that ludicrous price doesn't make it true. Getting a powerful laptop at the 17" size, if it costs you more than $1,500 for a PC, you are doing it wrong.
1) Have you had an experience whatsoever with computers? The shear breadth of software in the enterprise available for Windows or even Linux *dwarfs* those for OSX. And you are just knocking your own argument. By going with Apple, you tie yourself to one vendor.
2) Yes OSX has *some* admin tools. But again, what is built-in with Windows and what is available *dwarfs* and are so much more featureful it's not even funny. There was an article a while back reviewing OSX server, I forget where (Anand, Toms, something to that regard). Let me sum it up for you: A hodgepodge of actually free UNIX tools with GUI interfaces, and while ok, not even close to being an integrated and coherent product as Windows Server.
3) Wrong, spec for spec Apple *is* more expensive, and the nice thing with PCs is you have the option of giving the assistant, who doesn't need a ridiculously fast CPU for typing documents, the option to save even *more* money. And as for a cheap PC that supposedly has cheap parts, Apple PCs have *identical* parts, which as most people know are also some of the cheapest around. So yes, you're right. Choose a PC option that gives you the *choice* to put in quality parts, so that you're *not* wasting time on Apple computers breaking down. See, I can look beyond sticker price too.
Ever use a ThinkPad? Nice and sturdy. There are PC options. So for that one, you fail.
Gestures are great. Trackpoints are better. But if for whatever reason you enjoy using it, PC manufactures do offer the software. Fail again.
Backlit keyboard. Dell Studio 15. Took me all of about 30 seconds to find it. Rough man. Fail.
MagSafe: won't argue its nice to have, but not a necessity. 2 cases out of 40 as you yourself said. And again, maybe those people shouldn't have carelessly ripped out the cord on a hundreds/thousand something piece of company property.
Battery life. I'm not even wasting any more time going to check out your article, because obviously you are hell-bent on having sex with Apple computers. Any/. should really check out that Anandtech article then. But I have seen many reviews that only show 3-4 hours, and no I'm not going to spend any more time to find them, they're easy enough to Google, because arguing with a fanboy just doesn't work.
There was no hostility present. Though it does bug me so much lately how foolish people can be, and how easily they are brainwashed by marketing.
And to refute some points:
Solid block of aluminum: useless to a computer Synaptics touchpad: use a thinkpad trackpoint, and get back to me. Illuminated keyboard: most if not all laptops have this option Power adapter: I have not once, in the entire 10 years of using laptops, have carelessly ripped out a power cord *Decent battery life*: except that it was actually tested recently, and Macs *don't* get more than 3-4 hours (the new ones, with a promised 7-8 hour charge); get yourself a nice battery (see with PC's you have an option) that could last you 8-10 hours. Swappable drive bay DIS-feature: are you one of those same fanboys that defended Apple's decision not to have cut and past on the IPhone (only for them to put it in because it actually WAS useful)? Lithium polymer batteries: again, worthless since macs don't get the 7 hour charge they promise. Though with PCs you can. Absence of a MS OS: that is someone's preference. But by your logic, then Apple should just remove boot camp because of the ULTIMATE SUPERIORITY OF THE OSX SYSTEM
And your analogy fails, because a Mac is not a better car. It provides less. A better analogy would be, take a Ford Focus, slap some fancy paint and leather seats in it, and charge $90,000... OR spend $68,000 on a BMW 550i. The choice is easy.
And netbooks aren't even in the same category. In that case, a Macbook Pro isn't in the same league as a brand new Core i7 desktop with 12GB RAM and a Intel SSD.
I wholeheartedly agree that time should be spent on doing the business. Except that you are wrong again, although I don't think you know it. Macs are a terrible choice here because PCs are the target platform, and applications and software are designed and tested for them. Hence less issues for PCs. And in addition, Windows is light years ahead for any sort of administration--in both speed, convenience and simplicity--for any size organization (and would be more efficient the larger the org) than Apple computers. And did I mention? The $500-1000 different PER computer cost isn't exactly in Apple's favor.
Oh yes, great advice. And those 15" only start at *seventeen hundred dollars.* Or about $1000 more than equivalent PC laptops cost, for the *exact same hardware.*
The question is, what *less* is there. For $1,200 he could get sooo much more for the money with a PC. Please, $1,200 for a old Core 2 Duo, skimpy (and slow) 5400RPM 160GB HD, and only 2GB of memory. Hey buddy, I have a bridge to sell you.
It was a nightmare because of PEBCAK. XP, if you had any sort of decent knowledge, ran very well. If you had to use a Mac because you couldn't figure out how to use XP, well thank god you're not in charge of administering those computers.
What part of, "must cost $1,200," don't you understand?
And Macs are *way* overpriced, are identical in hardware, give you less hardware for the money, and more importantly just don't fit into his parameters/requirements.
Because you know exactly how Apple works and you're privy to top-level business strategy that tells you they make their money on hardware, or that they're a hardware company. Please, enough/. armchair quarterbacks.
Oh my god you are such a loser. How many times must people rehash the same tired old Troll BS. If you actually stopped being an armchair quarterback and stopped talking out the side of your ass, and actually used the PSN or a PSP, you'd know that you can re-download any game you want up to 5 times, and *backup* your game to your computer and keep it and re-transfer as much as you want, FOREVER.
Slashdot Mirror
I keep seeing this posted all the time. Note to all who read the above post:
*** Your content will NOT(!) be unlocked if Valve/Steam goes under! ***
When a company goes under, pretty much the only people who get a red cent are the secured debtors.
Amen. You are spot on.
To just steer it back to the main topic though, the scary thing is that the majority of /. is all for Pystar losing, which is really scary. I read that and I thought to myself this is really, really bad. I don't think /. realizes what this means. That they may now have their precious Photoshop not being able to be used via Wine because of Apple. That MS will now pressure OEMs to disable the use of Linux, because after all, it's the OEMs hardware. Because of Apple.
Bad times are coming, and all the Mac zealouts do is cheer.
Wanting to use Mac OS X is just a preference. It is not a superior OS, as amply evidenced by:
1. Guest account bug that wipes ALL the user's data
2. All the bugs plaguing the system that should "just work" on a platform with a small known set of hardware. Very weak.
3. Vastly inferior library available of software compared to Windows
4. Lack of choice. Choice to run on any hardware you please. I have the choice to buy a machine that on average costs $1000 less than an Apple computer. I have the choice to go out and buy 2 ATI Radeon 5870's.
Most of the people on here rabidly decreeing that OS X is superior should stop the BS and just say it, that they like OS X because of personal preference. It is NOT superior software.
No, they really are just a marketing company. You're just wrong.
And I notice you don't address half of what I brought up, or make up things arbitrarily.
Don't grasp at straws, it's not becoming of anybody.
I can go all day with this, because I'm just plain right.
1) Think what you want. It's great looking, has tons of ports, very light, great battery life. What else do you want? Seriously. And I could make the argument that your Apple doesn't have the ability to be dropped or useable in rain like some PC manufacturers can, if I wanted to play devil's advocate.
2) So basically you want sex appeal, and your desire has nothing to do with quality even though that is what apparently what you think you are saying. And durability wise, a dropped MBP falls apart just like a Thinkpad. But PCs *do* have options for *very* durable laptops, which don't fall apart when dropped--Apple, not available.
3) Ah the car analogy. Yours fails. It would be like a Honda Fit 4-cylinder 117 hp engine put in a Mercedes E350 body (Apple), compared to an actual BMW 550i (the PC), which does 0-60 in 5.2, has Y rates performance tires, amazing handling, with a nice comfortable ride.
What part of "I *own* a Studio 15" don't you understand? I can tell you firsthand it's of nice quality, and honestly it's one of the best looking laptops I've ever seen in their "black chainlink" color.
Baseline is $649 buddy. Again, you cherry-picked the one that fits higher numbers with like $300 worth of support
Oh man and check this out--it was sooo difficult. Just priced out a Studio 15 with specs better than a MBP. For $1,324 on a Dell Studio 15, you get for $50 less:
8 GB RAM vs. 2 GB
500 GB *7200* RPM HD vs. a shitty 250 GB 5400RPM HD
a 512 MB ATI discrete video card
15" screen vs a smaller 13.3" screen
So difficult. So let's see, not only do PCs give you *more*, but they cost *alot* less.
Btw, just spec'd a Dell Studio 17. *Identical* specs to a 17" MBP.... for a grand total of *gasp* $1,229. That was hard.
Cherry picking 2 systems, and checking every option, to bring it up to that ludicrous price doesn't make it true. Getting a powerful laptop at the 17" size, if it costs you more than $1,500 for a PC, you are doing it wrong.
1) Have you had an experience whatsoever with computers? The shear breadth of software in the enterprise available for Windows or even Linux *dwarfs* those for OSX. And you are just knocking your own argument. By going with Apple, you tie yourself to one vendor.
2) Yes OSX has *some* admin tools. But again, what is built-in with Windows and what is available *dwarfs* and are so much more featureful it's not even funny. There was an article a while back reviewing OSX server, I forget where (Anand, Toms, something to that regard). Let me sum it up for you: A hodgepodge of actually free UNIX tools with GUI interfaces, and while ok, not even close to being an integrated and coherent product as Windows Server.
3) Wrong, spec for spec Apple *is* more expensive, and the nice thing with PCs is you have the option of giving the assistant, who doesn't need a ridiculously fast CPU for typing documents, the option to save even *more* money. And as for a cheap PC that supposedly has cheap parts, Apple PCs have *identical* parts, which as most people know are also some of the cheapest around. So yes, you're right. Choose a PC option that gives you the *choice* to put in quality parts, so that you're *not* wasting time on Apple computers breaking down. See, I can look beyond sticker price too.
Go price it yourself, right now. The Studio 15. And yes I actually do know the quality because I recently bought one.
Ever use a ThinkPad? Nice and sturdy. There are PC options. So for that one, you fail.
Gestures are great. Trackpoints are better. But if for whatever reason you enjoy using it, PC manufactures do offer the software. Fail again.
Backlit keyboard. Dell Studio 15. Took me all of about 30 seconds to find it. Rough man. Fail.
MagSafe: won't argue its nice to have, but not a necessity. 2 cases out of 40 as you yourself said. And again, maybe those people shouldn't have carelessly ripped out the cord on a hundreds/thousand something piece of company property.
Battery life. I'm not even wasting any more time going to check out your article, because obviously you are hell-bent on having sex with Apple computers. Any /. should really check out that Anandtech article then. But I have seen many reviews that only show 3-4 hours, and no I'm not going to spend any more time to find them, they're easy enough to Google, because arguing with a fanboy just doesn't work.
Why should I have to buy a used, refurbished computer when I can get one with superior specs *new*?
Straight from Apple's website:
15" MacBook Pro
# 2.53GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
# 4GB 1066MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2x2GB
# 250GB Serial ATA Drive @ 5400 rpm
# SuperDrive 8x (DVD±R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW)
# Backlit Keyboard (English) / User's Guide (English)
Grand total: $1,700
Straight from Dell with absolutely identical specs, including backlit keyboard:
Grand total: $859
For a total difference of Ding! Ding! ** $841 ** less for a PC.
Man that was hard. Took me all of about 2 minutes.
There was no hostility present. Though it does bug me so much lately how foolish people can be, and how easily they are brainwashed by marketing.
And to refute some points:
Solid block of aluminum: useless to a computer
Synaptics touchpad: use a thinkpad trackpoint, and get back to me.
Illuminated keyboard: most if not all laptops have this option
Power adapter: I have not once, in the entire 10 years of using laptops, have carelessly ripped out a power cord
*Decent battery life*: except that it was actually tested recently, and Macs *don't* get more than 3-4 hours (the new ones, with a promised 7-8 hour charge);
get yourself a nice battery (see with PC's you have an option) that could last you 8-10 hours.
Swappable drive bay DIS-feature: are you one of those same fanboys that defended Apple's decision not to have cut and past on the IPhone (only for them to put it in because it actually WAS useful)?
Lithium polymer batteries: again, worthless since macs don't get the 7 hour charge they promise. Though with PCs you can.
Absence of a MS OS: that is someone's preference. But by your logic, then Apple should just remove boot camp because of the ULTIMATE SUPERIORITY OF THE OSX SYSTEM
And your analogy fails, because a Mac is not a better car. It provides less. A better analogy would be, take a Ford Focus, slap some fancy paint and leather seats in it, and charge $90,000... OR spend $68,000 on a BMW 550i. The choice is easy.
And netbooks aren't even in the same category. In that case, a Macbook Pro isn't in the same league as a brand new Core i7 desktop with 12GB RAM and a Intel SSD.
Don't buy the FUD /.'ers.
I wholeheartedly agree that time should be spent on doing the business. Except that you are wrong again, although I don't think you know it. Macs are a terrible choice here because PCs are the target platform, and applications and software are designed and tested for them. Hence less issues for PCs. And in addition, Windows is light years ahead for any sort of administration--in both speed, convenience and simplicity--for any size organization (and would be more efficient the larger the org) than Apple computers. And did I mention? The $500-1000 different PER computer cost isn't exactly in Apple's favor.
Oh yes, great advice. And those 15" only start at *seventeen hundred dollars.* Or about $1000 more than equivalent PC laptops cost, for the *exact same hardware.*
The question is, what *less* is there. For $1,200 he could get sooo much more for the money with a PC. Please, $1,200 for a old Core 2 Duo, skimpy (and slow) 5400RPM 160GB HD, and only 2GB of memory. Hey buddy, I have a bridge to sell you.
It was a nightmare because of PEBCAK. XP, if you had any sort of decent knowledge, ran very well. If you had to use a Mac because you couldn't figure out how to use XP, well thank god you're not in charge of administering those computers.
What part of, "must cost $1,200," don't you understand?
What part of, "must cost $1,200," don't you understand?
And Macs are *way* overpriced, are identical in hardware, give you less hardware for the money, and more importantly just don't fit into his parameters/requirements.
Because you know exactly how Apple works and you're privy to top-level business strategy that tells you they make their money on hardware, or that they're a hardware company. Please, enough /. armchair quarterbacks.
Oh my god you are such a loser. How many times must people rehash the same tired old Troll BS. If you actually stopped being an armchair quarterback and stopped talking out the side of your ass, and actually used the PSN or a PSP, you'd know that you can re-download any game you want up to 5 times, and *backup* your game to your computer and keep it and re-transfer as much as you want, FOREVER.