Operating Systems

Please compose all posts in Emacs.

Moderators: phlip, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
Hammer
Because all of you look like nails.
Posts: 5491
Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 7:32 pm UTC
Contact:

Operating Systems

Postby Hammer » Wed Nov 14, 2007 12:48 pm UTC

Linux! Windows! OS2! Solaris! Plan 9! Which are used by the good and righteous and which are the path to eternal sorrow?
"What's wrong with you mathematicians? Cake is never a problem."

User avatar
Bakemaster
pretty nice future dick
Posts: 8933
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 2:33 pm UTC
Location: One of those hot places

Re: Operating Systems

Postby Bakemaster » Wed Nov 14, 2007 7:24 pm UTC

Since this thread hasn't gone anywhere so far, I'll start it off with one of the more inflammatory statements it is possible to make on the internet.

Apple computers are not the devil.
Image
c0 = 2.13085531 × 1014 smoots per fortnight
"Apparently you can't summon an alternate timeline clone of your inner demon, guys! Remember that." —Noc

User avatar
LDJosh
Posts: 242
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 6:07 pm UTC
Location: South Central, PA
Contact:

Re: Operating Systems

Postby LDJosh » Wed Nov 14, 2007 7:32 pm UTC

BAN!
--------
~Lameduck Josh
ninjajosh.com

sebbeklang
Posts: 108
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2007 6:39 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: Operating Systems

Postby sebbeklang » Wed Nov 14, 2007 7:56 pm UTC

i definitely prefer mac osx. probably mostly because i'm used to it now.
windows annoys me with the warnings and stuff most of the time, also the fact that you have to use a bazillion different command functions in the os gui, as opposed to just a command button (alt+tab, ctrl+v, windowsbutan+e etc etc)
linux is just too much of a bother to set up and you also need to know more than i do to use it properly :D

as of right now, i only have one reason to use anything but osx. the fact that i have diablo installed on the windows partition and that my install discs are 1200 km from here for another month.

User avatar
rrwoods
Posts: 1509
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 5:57 pm UTC
Location: US

Re: Operating Systems

Postby rrwoods » Wed Nov 14, 2007 8:55 pm UTC

I use Windows.

I like Windows.

I don't think Windows Vista is worse than Windows XP. 4.5 of that five years was OOH PRETTY... but there is definitely 4.5 years of OOH PRETTY there.

I've used Linux.

I don't like Linux.
31/M/taken/US
age/gender/interest/country

Belial wrote:The sex card is tournament legal. And I am tapping it for, like, six mana.

User avatar
Dingbats
Posts: 921
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2007 12:46 pm UTC
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Re: Operating Systems

Postby Dingbats » Wed Nov 14, 2007 9:12 pm UTC

After getting used to having different workspaces in Ubuntu, I couldn't do any serious work in Windows or Mac OS X. And GNU/Linux variants are free as in freedom which makes them inherently superior to those two.

User avatar
zombie_monkey
Posts: 644
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2006 1:26 pm UTC
Location: Bulgaria

Re: Operating Systems

Postby zombie_monkey » Wed Nov 14, 2007 9:13 pm UTC

In the future we will all use Plan 9. You know, when we're all cyborgs.
2020: the year of the Plan 9 mobile terminal?

zenten
Posts: 3799
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 7:42 am UTC
Location: Ottawa, Canada

Re: Operating Systems

Postby zenten » Wed Nov 14, 2007 9:26 pm UTC

Windows has some good applications written for it by third party developers.

Yeah, that's about all I can say that's good about it. It's also the only real reason to set up a system using it (moving away from it when you're not upgrading can be costly of course).

After all, there's a reason there are so many video games that go well with the keyboard and mouse.

User avatar
Bakemaster
pretty nice future dick
Posts: 8933
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 2:33 pm UTC
Location: One of those hot places

Re: Operating Systems

Postby Bakemaster » Wed Nov 14, 2007 9:27 pm UTC

sebbeklang wrote:as of right now, i only have one reason to use anything but osx. the fact that i have diablo installed on the windows partition and that my install discs are 1200 km from here for another month.

Does the original Diablo not run on Mac OS? I know D2 is dual platform, and the same disc installs on either OS...
Image
c0 = 2.13085531 × 1014 smoots per fortnight
"Apparently you can't summon an alternate timeline clone of your inner demon, guys! Remember that." —Noc

User avatar
b.i.o
Green is the loneliest number
Posts: 2519
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 4:38 pm UTC
Location: Hong Kong

Re: Operating Systems

Postby b.i.o » Wed Nov 14, 2007 9:49 pm UTC

Somehow the best mix of beauty, functionality, and speed has been vista using blackbox lean so far for me...windows annoys me sometimes but not all that much especially once the default shell is gone.

User avatar
OfficiallyHaphazard
Age=postcount/60
Posts: 209
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2007 2:56 pm UTC

Re: Operating Systems

Postby OfficiallyHaphazard » Wed Nov 14, 2007 10:15 pm UTC

Yay Mac OSX

>.>
<.<

I want to try linux though
"Who are you, how did you get in my house?" - Donald Knuth

EvanED
Posts: 4331
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 6:28 am UTC
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: Operating Systems

Postby EvanED » Wed Nov 14, 2007 10:27 pm UTC

They all suck.

Windows has implementation and policy issues out the wazoo and a sucky programmable userland, but many aspects of solid design that I wish other OSs would pick up. Unix-based OSs are still too tied to the roots set in 1970 which are now substantially restricting forward progress due to the need to maintain backwards compatibility, but also a lot of things that are nicely done.

User avatar
d3adf001
Posts: 1000
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 4:27 pm UTC
Location: State College, PA
Contact:

Re: Operating Systems

Postby d3adf001 » Wed Nov 14, 2007 10:33 pm UTC

i never got why people think OSX is so special. its a modified nextstep running on xfree using the mach kernel iirc. they just threw together what was hot at the time and made it look nice. also its expensive as hell. id still take it over windows tho

EvanED
Posts: 4331
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 6:28 am UTC
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: Operating Systems

Postby EvanED » Wed Nov 14, 2007 10:39 pm UTC

d3adf001 wrote:i never got why people think OSX is so special. its a modified nextstep running on xfree using the mach kernel iirc. they just threw together what was hot at the time and made it look nice. also its expensive as hell. id still take it over windows tho

Because Apple's probably been more successful at making their GUI work well than others. Since almost everyone spends most of their time actually interacting with the UI, this is what makes the largest impression if there's no huge flaws in the underlying, mostly hidden layers.

(BTW, OS X's kernel = XNU = modified Mach + BSD. Simply saying OS X runs the Mach kernel doesn't do Apple justice.)

User avatar
d3adf001
Posts: 1000
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 4:27 pm UTC
Location: State College, PA
Contact:

Re: Operating Systems

Postby d3adf001 » Wed Nov 14, 2007 10:50 pm UTC

EvanED wrote:
d3adf001 wrote:i never got why people think OSX is so special. its a modified nextstep running on xfree using the mach kernel iirc. they just threw together what was hot at the time and made it look nice. also its expensive as hell. id still take it over windows tho

Because Apple's probably been more successful at making their GUI work well than others. Since almost everyone spends most of their time actually interacting with the UI, this is what makes the largest impression if there's no huge flaws in the underlying, mostly hidden layers.

(BTW, OS X's kernel = XNU = modified Mach + BSD. Simply saying OS X runs the Mach kernel doesn't do Apple justice.)


ok ill accept that OSX does look really nice and i guess work and that makes sense.

User avatar
b.i.o
Green is the loneliest number
Posts: 2519
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 4:38 pm UTC
Location: Hong Kong

Re: Operating Systems

Postby b.i.o » Wed Nov 14, 2007 11:06 pm UTC

d3adf001 wrote:ok ill accept that OSX does look really nice and i guess work and that makes sense.


I actually hate OSX's UI--I can't put my finger on why (except the stupid dock that takes up so much screen space) but the general style just annoys me.

EvanED
Posts: 4331
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 6:28 am UTC
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: Operating Systems

Postby EvanED » Wed Nov 14, 2007 11:32 pm UTC

Silver2Falcon wrote:
d3adf001 wrote:ok ill accept that OSX does look really nice and i guess work and that makes sense.


I actually hate OSX's UI--I can't put my finger on why (except the stupid dock that takes up so much screen space) but the general style just annoys me.

There are some things I don't like about it too, but I suspect many of them are just a matter of what you're used to. (I'm used to Windows.)

Most of the times where I can say "there is a clear right way to do this, at least between these two options", it's usually Mac that got it right. For instance, finally it's common in Windows and Windows programs for it to ask questions like "Do you want to save? Save/Don't Save/Cancel" as opposed to "Do you want to save? Yes/No/Cancel", whereas this was present on MacOS a long time ago. The only place I can think of where I would say that MacOS gets it wrong is the propensity of programs to remain running when there are no windows open (though dialog boxes that change size when you choose a different tab are borderline...).

User avatar
b.i.o
Green is the loneliest number
Posts: 2519
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 4:38 pm UTC
Location: Hong Kong

Re: Operating Systems

Postby b.i.o » Thu Nov 15, 2007 1:01 am UTC

EvanED wrote:Most of the times where I can say "there is a clear right way to do this, at least between these two options", it's usually Mac that got it right. For instance, finally it's common in Windows and Windows programs for it to ask questions like "Do you want to save? Save/Don't Save/Cancel" as opposed to "Do you want to save? Yes/No/Cancel", whereas this was present on MacOS a long time ago. The only place I can think of where I would say that MacOS gets it wrong is the propensity of programs to remain running when there are no windows open (though dialog boxes that change size when you choose a different tab are borderline...).


It isn't even stuff like that that I'm talking about...it's the whole feel of the window system--it just annoys me.

User avatar
Rodan
Any title.
Posts: 1846
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 11:52 pm UTC
Location: Eastern Standard Time

Re: Operating Systems

Postby Rodan » Thu Nov 15, 2007 1:08 am UTC

I Use windows and like it perfectly fine, thank you very much!

Not that I've tried any other systems, or I'm educated at all in the matter...

User avatar
Master Gunner
Posts: 546
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 1:40 am UTC
Location: Canada, eh?
Contact:

Re: Operating Systems

Postby Master Gunner » Thu Nov 15, 2007 2:00 am UTC

I predominantly use a Windows machine, simply because it (mostly) does what I tell it to do, and can run all of the programs I want to use (For those that say that Macs are better at photo/video editing and the like: At least for casual use, all Adobe programs run equally well under Windows, so I see no advantage to Macs there). I also use Ubuntu on my older systems, and have duel-booted my main desktop and laptop to run both Windows and Linux. It's free, and I can do neat stuff with it, even if I can barely install things on it and have no idea how to use the Terminal.

btilly
Posts: 1877
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 7:08 pm UTC

Re: Operating Systems

Postby btilly » Thu Nov 15, 2007 2:50 am UTC

Hammer wrote:Linux! Windows! OS2! Solaris! Plan 9! Which are used by the good and righteous and which are the path to eternal sorrow?


I prefer Debian-derived distros of Linux. Particularly Ubuntu. They tend to handle upgrades much better than the rpm based systems. (Not a fault of the packaging system, just a reflection of how well Debian's policy works.) But I'm pretty agnostic about the non-Windows operating systems. Microsoft, of course, I loathe.

In my house there is no Windows system, and the only Microsoft software is an old copy of Microsoft Office for the Mac that my wife uses occasionally.
Some of us exist to find out what can and can't be done.

Others exist to hold the beer.

User avatar
bbctol
Super Deluxe Forum Title of DESTINYâ„¢
Posts: 3137
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 10:27 pm UTC
Location: The Twilight Zone
Contact:

Re: Operating Systems

Postby bbctol » Thu Nov 15, 2007 3:12 am UTC

I use Windows. I have used Macs, and don't like them. I've never tried Linux. (okay, once, but I didn't inhale)

Windows is the universal standard, hence, a hell of a lot of stuff works on it.

failed assertion
Posts: 29
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 8:39 pm UTC

Re: Operating Systems

Postby failed assertion » Thu Nov 15, 2007 4:04 am UTC

EvanED wrote:They all suck.

My sentiments exactly. I just use whatever came with computer. If nothing came with the computer, I use ArchLinux because it's free and there's a mirror three miles from my house.

User avatar
Bakemaster
pretty nice future dick
Posts: 8933
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 2:33 pm UTC
Location: One of those hot places

Re: Operating Systems

Postby Bakemaster » Thu Nov 15, 2007 4:50 am UTC

d3adf001 wrote:i never got why people think OSX is so special. its a modified nextstep running on xfree using the mach kernel iirc. they just threw together what was hot at the time and made it look nice. also its expensive as hell. id still take it over windows tho

WUT
LOL
ZOMG
Image
c0 = 2.13085531 × 1014 smoots per fortnight
"Apparently you can't summon an alternate timeline clone of your inner demon, guys! Remember that." —Noc

User avatar
OfficiallyHaphazard
Age=postcount/60
Posts: 209
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2007 2:56 pm UTC

Re: Operating Systems

Postby OfficiallyHaphazard » Thu Nov 15, 2007 4:54 am UTC

Bakemaster wrote:
d3adf001 wrote:i never got why people think OSX is so special. its a modified nextstep running on xfree using the mach kernel iirc. they just threw together what was hot at the time and made it look nice. also its expensive as hell. id still take it over windows tho

WUT
LOL
ZOMG

rofl....
well played sir :P
"Who are you, how did you get in my house?" - Donald Knuth

User avatar
d3adf001
Posts: 1000
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 4:27 pm UTC
Location: State College, PA
Contact:

Re: Operating Systems

Postby d3adf001 » Thu Nov 15, 2007 5:05 am UTC

Bakemaster wrote:
d3adf001 wrote:i never got why people think OSX is so special. its a modified nextstep running on xfree using the mach kernel iirc. they just threw together what was hot at the time and made it look nice. also its expensive as hell. id still take it over windows tho

WUT
LOL
ZOMG


sorry i forgot that MS give massive discounts to students. I could get it for free since im in IST or i could pay 50$ for it at the student bookstore. But i dont use either so im good.

photosinensis
Posts: 163
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 6:17 am UTC

Re: Operating Systems

Postby photosinensis » Thu Nov 15, 2007 6:01 am UTC

d3adf001 wrote:i never got why people think OSX is so special. its a modified nextstep running on xfree using the mach kernel iirc. they just threw together what was hot at the time and made it look nice. also its expensive as hell. id still take it over windows tho


Actually, I've got some gripes about what you say here:

1. Quartz does not run on the X Window System. It is its own window system, window manager, compositing manger, and desktop environment. There's not a shred of X in there. If it was X, then X stuff would be better integrated into the system look and feel.
2. As of Leopard, the X Window System environment shipped with OS X (it's an optional install that runs on top of Quartz) is X.org 7.2.
3. XNU, Darwin's kernel, does indeed descend both technologically and codewise from NextSTEP (Quartz, however, has nothing to do with Display PostScript, which was the technology in use for coding NextSTEP's GUI), and it does employ the Mach 4 kernel. However, on top of the Mach 4 kernel, they've welded a large chunk of the kernel from FreeBSD (it's nothing like today's FreeBSD kernel--it's long since been forked). Without those bits of BSD, nothing would work.
4. Last I checked, $400 (the price of Windows Vista, the only worthwhile version of WinVista) > $129 (the once and forever price of all OS X desktop releases since 10.0, though you can get 5 licenses/$200). If you're referring to Apple's hardware, that's actually competitively priced when it comes to hardware with similar specifications. Sure, you can get a Dell for cheaper, but it won't have anywhere near the same specs. Also, please realize that the price of Windows-based hardware is subsidized not only by Microsoft but by the installation of all that crapware. Why do you think you still get a 90 day trial of AOL when you buy a new Windows PC?

With that said, I'm an Ubuntu fan at heart. It's what I use on my desktop. That isn't to say that I don't have affairs with other operating systems: I've been doing most of my coding on OS X now for the last year and a half, simply because Xcode's debugger interface is nicer than a raw GDB session. That said, I don't include architecture-specific headers in my code (Qt 4 stuff, yes, but that's it), so I'm good to go.

Windows, however, is not worth the media it's published on. Sure, they've got games, but honestly, I'd rather do the console thing.
While I clicked my fav'rite bookmark, suddenly there came a warning,
And my heart was filled with mournng, mourning for my dear amour.
"'Tis not possible!" I uttered, "Give me back my free hardcore!"
Quoth the server: 404.

User avatar
Korandder
Posts: 161
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2007 6:12 am UTC
Location: LoadingReadyRun Australian Astrophysical Observatory
Contact:

Re: Operating Systems

Postby Korandder » Thu Nov 15, 2007 6:05 am UTC

Use the right tool for the job ...
Windows - Games only. And only because Macs and Linux are no good for games. Games aside a terrible operating system.
Macs - Shiny and expensive. You pay a lot for the Apple logo. However if I was editing video I think I would want a Mac.
Linux - Where work is done. Plus it is free. Sure there is a steeper learning curve but once you figure out what you are doing things are much more efficient.

I have to admit have not used an Mac for significant any length of time since elementary school. I dual boot XP and Ubuntu at home and at work right now I am using Fedora.
Image

Karrion
Posts: 92
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 12:14 am UTC
Location: Melbourne, AU

Re: Operating Systems

Postby Karrion » Thu Nov 15, 2007 6:42 am UTC

Korandder wrote:Windows - Games only. And only because very few good games are released natively for Macs and Linux. Games aside a terrible operating system.


Fixed.

EvanED
Posts: 4331
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 6:28 am UTC
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: Operating Systems

Postby EvanED » Thu Nov 15, 2007 6:47 am UTC

photosinensis wrote:If you're referring to Apple's hardware, that's actually competitively priced when it comes to hardware with similar specifications.


You're deluding yourself. It's only when you get into Apple's high-end stuff ($2000+) that it competes. (Though to be fair, then it trounces. See below.) I've heard it argued that Apple is competitively priced if you take into consideration a lot of the software it comes with, but if you're looking at equivalent HW specs, Apple doesn't compete.

Apple's cheapest iMac is:
2.0 GHz Core 2 Duo
1 GB ram
250 GB hard drive
Radeon 2400 XT, 128 MB
20" screen
1 year warranty
$1200

From Dell, we can get:
2.2 GHz Core 2 Duo (20 GHz more)
320 GB hard drive (70 GB more)
16x DVD-/+R/RW/... (as opposed to 8x)
Radeon 2400 Pro, 128 MB (could get 2600 XT for +$40 if XT is better than Pro. Considering the more expensive iMacs come with the 2400 Pro though, seems the Pro is better than the XT.)
20" screen
$888

Congratulations, with Dell, you save over $300, or 25%, and get a slightly better system. If you have a monitor, you save even more because you can't get an iMac without a monitor. (The above computer w/o monitor and with integrated graphics is about $20 less than the less expensive Mac Mini while trouncing its specs, and is over $200 less than the more expensive Mac Mini, which the Dell still handily beats, so you can't say "if you have a monitor you can get the Mac Mini." We'll look at the Mac Pro in a bit.)

Let's look at the second to highest-end iMac:
2.4 GHz Core 2 Duo
1 gig RAM
320 GB hard drive
Radeon 2600 Pro, 256 MB
24" screen
$1,800

And an equivalent Dell:
2.66 GHz Core 2 Duo
2 GB RAM
320 GB hard drive
Radeon 2600 XT, 256 MB
24" screen
$1,500

Well, the gap closes... we're still at $300, but it's only a 17% savings to go with the Dell now, though because of the 2 GB vs. 1 GB of RAM, the spec lead the Dell has is wider than before. (Also consider that I recently assembled a computer far better than this iMac for about the same price.)

It's only if you look at the highest-end iMac that it seems to become competitive. (And in fairness, there it actually seems to have a considerable edge. I can't find a vendor that sells a Core 2 Extreme without being a few hundred more for equivalent specs.)

I also looked at the Mac Pro, and like the high-end iMac, Apple is in the clear lead here, by something like $500 for equivalent specs compared to a Dell.

Also, please realize that the price of Windows-based hardware is subsidized not only by Microsoft but by the installation of all that crapware. Why do you think you still get a 90 day trial of AOL when you buy a new Windows PC?

Why do I care why it's cheaper? It's easy enough to dispose of that stuff. I would consider that a good thing that some other company is helping me pay for stuff.

User avatar
Korandder
Posts: 161
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2007 6:12 am UTC
Location: LoadingReadyRun Australian Astrophysical Observatory
Contact:

Re: Operating Systems

Postby Korandder » Thu Nov 15, 2007 7:07 am UTC

If you compare building the hardware yourself to the Mac Pro the Macs are still expensive. Mind you the Mac Pro's are more workstations than desktops.
Image

EvanED
Posts: 4331
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 6:28 am UTC
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: Operating Systems

Postby EvanED » Thu Nov 15, 2007 7:10 am UTC

Korandder wrote:If you compare building the hardware yourself to the Mac Pro the Macs are still expensive. Mind you the Mac Pro's are more workstations than desktops.

Yes, but even as a home user, I don't want an iMac. I don't want my monitor built into my system. I want an upgrade path. I want to be able to reuse components when I get a new computer.

An iMac doesn't suit my needs, or many other people's needs, in the slightest. If anything, the iMac would have to be $300 cheaper than an equivalent PC for me to consider it.

(And I would indeed be surprised if a home-built Mac Pro-like system wouldn't also be cheaper, but I'm too lazy to price all the components. Only one I know is that the processors that were used in the default setup are $750 apiece. Add in $75 for the RAM, $200 for a nice case and PS, $75 for an equivalent HDD, $100 for the video card, and you're at $1950 already. Already our margin of difference is smaller. The Mac Pro is a pretty darn good price for what you get.)
Last edited by EvanED on Thu Nov 15, 2007 7:13 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
OfficiallyHaphazard
Age=postcount/60
Posts: 209
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2007 2:56 pm UTC

Re: Operating Systems

Postby OfficiallyHaphazard » Thu Nov 15, 2007 7:13 am UTC

I love my mac as a laptop though :D
"Who are you, how did you get in my house?" - Donald Knuth

trickster721
Posts: 282
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 4:26 am UTC

Re: Operating Systems

Postby trickster721 » Thu Nov 15, 2007 7:25 am UTC

XP is great, once you delete half the services and change a few hundred registry entries to turn off the "security" and strip down the UI. If I had to use it in the state it's being delivered these days, I'd have switched to Linux years ago. As it is, Linux has a weird user/permissions model designed for university mainframes thirty years ago, and doesn't run any of my programs.

Mac is for people who don't enjoy computing for it's own sake. And no, there isn't really a magical multimedia-editing leprechaun inside.

User avatar
OfficiallyHaphazard
Age=postcount/60
Posts: 209
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2007 2:56 pm UTC

Re: Operating Systems

Postby OfficiallyHaphazard » Thu Nov 15, 2007 7:34 am UTC

trickster721 wrote: And no, there isn't really a magical multimedia-editing leprechaun inside.



Lies!!!
I swear I saw the leprechaun once, and then he gave me a rainbow mouse cursor :D
Spoiler:
for those who don't know macs, you get the rainbow spiral when your application hangs... its annoying as hell
"Who are you, how did you get in my house?" - Donald Knuth

btilly
Posts: 1877
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 7:08 pm UTC

Re: Operating Systems

Postby btilly » Thu Nov 15, 2007 7:42 am UTC

EvanED wrote:
photosinensis wrote:If you're referring to Apple's hardware, that's actually competitively priced when it comes to hardware with similar specifications.


You're deluding yourself. It's only when you get into Apple's high-end stuff ($2000+) that it competes. (Though to be fair, then it trounces. See below.) I've heard it argued that Apple is competitively priced if you take into consideration a lot of the software it comes with, but if you're looking at equivalent HW specs, Apple doesn't compete.


(Detailed analysis deleted.)

If you add in the fact that the resale value of the Mac is better than the PC, that removes the price difference for someone who buys a new computer on a regular basis.

Alternately the higher resale value can be taken as a sign that the equipment is likely to last better, which again justifies the price difference for someone who likes to keep their computers as long as possible.
Some of us exist to find out what can and can't be done.

Others exist to hold the beer.

User avatar
Korandder
Posts: 161
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2007 6:12 am UTC
Location: LoadingReadyRun Australian Astrophysical Observatory
Contact:

Re: Operating Systems

Postby Korandder » Thu Nov 15, 2007 7:52 am UTC

Why not to buy a Mac Pro - the video card it ships with.

A GeForce 7300 GT !?!
Image

EvanED
Posts: 4331
Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 6:28 am UTC
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Re: Operating Systems

Postby EvanED » Thu Nov 15, 2007 8:16 am UTC

btilly wrote:
EvanED wrote:
photosinensis wrote:If you're referring to Apple's hardware, that's actually competitively priced when it comes to hardware with similar specifications.


You're deluding yourself. It's only when you get into Apple's high-end stuff ($2000+) that it competes. (Though to be fair, then it trounces. See below.) I've heard it argued that Apple is competitively priced if you take into consideration a lot of the software it comes with, but if you're looking at equivalent HW specs, Apple doesn't compete.


(Detailed analysis deleted.)

If you add in the fact that the resale value of the Mac is better than the PC, that removes the price difference for someone who buys a new computer on a regular basis.

Only if you sell your old computer.

Alternately the higher resale value can be taken as a sign that the equipment is likely to last better, which again justifies the price difference for someone who likes to keep their computers as long as possible.

At the same time, there are also factors that work for the PC that are not considered just by looking at Apple vs. Dell.

If I get a PC, I can choose all the components myself. This means that the result is almost always cheaper than what a manufacturer would choose, which widens the gap vs. Apple even more. It means that I have much more flexibility in the components I choose. If I want to put a little extra money to ensure that I get durable components, I can do this, and my computer will last longer at the expense of closing the gap a bit. (But it won't close it all that much.) It means that I can pull components out of my old computer and move it to the new, reducing my cost even more. Do that with a monitor and you could save a substantial amount. The monitor in the iMac has got to contribute at least $150 to $200 to the price, and probably at least $400 for the 24" version. (This is looking at prices of standalone monitors, then subtracting off a margin.)

Your typical PC is also more more upgradeable than an iMac. How many PCI slots does an iMac have? (Hint: zero.) How many empty bays does it have if I want to add a new hard drive? (Hint: I suspect none. Apparently, even upgrading the drive that is in there requires a substantial effort and voids your warranty.) Want to upgrade the GPU or even CPU? You're probably out of luck. Related to this, it means that if a single component dies on you after warranty, practically speaking there is a fair chance you'll have to throw out the whole machine if you have an iMac, as opposed to just replacing that part.

(Yes, a lot of these are directed at someone who is good at computers and not necessarily the typical user. Then again, what's the audience that's reading these posts?)

sebbeklang
Posts: 108
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2007 6:39 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: Operating Systems

Postby sebbeklang » Thu Nov 15, 2007 10:15 am UTC

Bakemaster wrote:
sebbeklang wrote:as of right now, i only have one reason to use anything but osx. the fact that i have diablo installed on the windows partition and that my install discs are 1200 km from here for another month.

Does the original Diablo not run on Mac OS? I know D2 is dual platform, and the same disc installs on either OS...

yah i know, it's just that i didn't know how to install it on osx (hint: you need to download an installer or it will run in classic mode) so i installed it on the windows partition. now i only have access to my play disc until i get home again in a month.

and as for the apple/winpc price debate, i don't mind buying a slightly more expensive computer. in my experience, windows wont run smoothly for long unless you install firewalls and antivirus programs and such. osx will.
i don't want to build my own computer, i want to open the box, start the computer and use it instantly.
i also think it's reasonable to pay for the design. most winpc laptops are terrible. they have twenty extra buttons on the keyboard and everywhere, stickers everywhere (which you can peel off, to be fair.anyway), they seem bulky and yeah, just plain ugly. my macbook has one button you wont find on a regular keyboard, the power button. it has magnets instead of giant plastic hooks to keep it shut. i could probably go on forever.
i am glad to be able to pay extra to get a computer where someone has actually put some thought into making it look and feel good

User avatar
davean
Site Ninja
Posts: 2498
Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2006 7:50 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Operating Systems

Postby davean » Thu Nov 15, 2007 11:24 am UTC

Are they ever making a MacBook that isn't a lead brick? Thats a reason to never go Apple, those laptops are thick and weight a ton.

I've got a Q2010 and it about sets my upper limits on weight and size. Frankly, its a year+ old and I can stack several in the area and weight a MacBook takes up. Hell, MacBooks are heavy and bulky compared to some of the better Dells I've seen and Dells make some of the least portable laptops around.


Return to “Religious Wars”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest