Why Apple

As a long term Vista hater, I would love to find a reason to switch to Apple. I look them over than then always come to the same conclusion - I can't see any rational reason to pay almost double for a laptop computer that has tiny screen, little better than a netbook (unless I'm willing to spend $2K) and also having to buy new software to boot. I know Apple comes with software, but I already have MS office, antivirus and dozens of other programs that I am used to, so I gain nothing switching to Apple and run the risk that some of my stuff won'r run.

I know that Apple is is a better machine. But really, what is the rational for paying so much more money so that Apple can keep their 30% profit margin. I must be missing something? What is it? I'd love to find a reason to switch.

 

Good question. I was all PC/Windows for 10 years then decided to make the switch after messing around with a macbook pro on display at apple store. I liked the solid feel of the laptop, I liked what I saw of OSX, iLife and decided to give it a chance. Had it about a year and I'm not sure I'd buy another laptop. The support is darn solid as well and thats priceless.

 

Lol so dont switch to Apple.

 

Sigh...it's the same old argument. You can get from point A to point B in a Yugo too, but people still buy Lexus....so, personal preference, perhaps?

If I could find a Windows based laptop that looks as good as my 15" MBP, has the same battery life, and could legally run OS X...I might consider it. But since there are zero offerings that meet that criteria, guess not.

Finally, I can easily build a Windows based laptop at multiple businesses that easily cost $5k plus, so please stop pretending that Mac is the only seller that charges a premium...and since the market is flooded with Windows based laptops, that is really more of an overpricing than Macs since the more product saturation there is, the cheaper prices should be...

 

We've been here before- like a million times.

Use the search function.

 

Agreed.

@TheShirt, he can talk about the prices all he wants. There are many alternatives to expensive windows companies, but there are no alternatives for a less expensive apple. There is a major difference there.

 

OP, I'm with you. I have no allegiance to Apple; this post is being brought to you via Summer 2009's MacBook Pro only because it's a very solid notebook, Snow Leopard is okay, the battery life on this gorgeous 15" display is great, and I can't actually find a PC about which I like more things than this notebook.

That may or may not change with next month's release of the HP Envy 15.

To (kind of?) address your question, I switched for the hardware and no other reason. I enjoyed Vista. I very much like Windows 7. And I think that it's remarkably short-sighted to flock to Apple because of the brand / it's a "fashion statement" (no, it's not) / they want to be seen with a glowing fruit in Starbucks while updating their blog / whatever else.

If you can find a PC you would enjoy using, you should go with that PC. If the Envy is that for me, I'll gladly sell the MBP.

Your mileage, of course, may vary.

 

it's the only Aluminum computer that is priced reasonable.. but the envy might change that...

 

I would buy for the operating system not the computer, that is one of the reasons why I use a pc (and I have to use a windows computer for my work).

 

Unrelated to the main topic but what about Asus's UL series? What you may lose in power you can gain in battery life.

 

Windows 7 is coming out in about a month... if your main reason for wanting a Mac is that you hate Vista, you may want to wait and see how you like Win 7.

 

That was one of the biggest reasons I switched.

If you want to have cheap but lose Vista, switch to Linux. If you don't want Linux and don't think Apple is worth the money buy a PC. I'm sorry but this post screams flame bait.

 

I personally don't see how "long-term Vista haters" can like Windows 7.

As Jervis said, if you dislike Vista (and don't want to stay on XP forever), then you can also try out a Linux distro (boot from a LiveCD/LiveUSB if you don't feel comfortable installing it).

 

Yep, for me it's a combination of, 1: OS X- I'll never use another operating system again; and 2: I can't find a <1" thick 15" notebook carved out of a solid block of aluminum anywhere else.

However, that being said, my one main criticism of Apple computers is not the premium price compared to Windows machines, but the fact that Apple is never on the cutting edge of processing power- for example, I'd love a more powerful GPU in an Apple notebook, but unfortunately (for now) the best I can get is a 9600M GT (granted this is related to the size as well though). I'd also die for a 1680x1050 15" screen, but alas, I'm stuck with 1440x900 (at least until I snag a 17" ). However, this limitation can also be attributed to the fact that Apple wants to keep their product lineup as simple as possible, and also needs to appeal to as many potential customers as possible, which I understand.

 

As hot as my 15" MBP gets with the 9600M GT, I can't imagine putting a more powerful (and more heat producing) video card in it. They would absolutely have to increase the size to allow for some type of better cooling system. To me, it's a trade off...the compact size vs power. Ideally there will be new technology coming that allows for cooler running GPUs!!

 

Don't take the bait

If you want flame bait, go to a college football game. Even the ladies start cussing at the rival fans

Vista really did screw a lot of early adopters. I've always taken the stance to never buy 1.0. I waited almost eight months before I put Vista on any of my productivity machines.

Change is hard. Changing millions of machines is even harder. I remember the growing pains of OS X and it was unbearable. The first six months was tough for early adopters.

I do think those who want OSX on an affordable machine get the short end of the stick. Of course, there are those who take matters into their own hands....

 

Personally I think the refurbished models are reasonably priced. There isn't any laptop out there that costs around $1300, is less than 1" thick and has the aluminum body along with the speed of a macbook pro.

Previously my biggest gripe with other laptop manufactures was that they made relatively thick laptops but this seems to be changing, the acer timeline looks nice especially for the price.

 

I'm kinda digging the HP Envy that is supposed to be coming out soon.

http://gizmodo.com/5359331/hp-envy-hands-on-macbook-pro-clone-better-than-the-real-thing

 

I don't get why it has to be Apple vs PC. I have both and I think they are both great for different reasons.

 

Well Apple IS an OEM of PCs.... In any case, I'd say it is Apple who usually provokes others, not the other way around.

 

Perhaps because Windows 7 isn't Vista.

 

Mac OS X! thats probably then number one reason to buy apple computer.

the hardware is great (although more Quality Assurance is needed). lucky that apple support's policy is great, otherwise my opinions towards apple wont be like this.

the huge glass touchpad, the solid keyboard (that require 56 screws to attach to the top case), i really missed the magsafe when i use other notebook.

have you checked how much business notebook costs? you cant compare flimsy budget notebook's price with its premium counterpart, even though the outer spec is the same, the inner is not.

 

Because some people get bored...

...and in some twisted irony, these juvenile X vs Y debates keep forums alive--

 

An ironic statement if I ever saw one (assuming of course that you're a PC guy)

 

Agreed -- and one person has different reasons compared to another person. One of the most ridiculous posts I've ever seen on this forum was from someone talking about how so-and-so should get a Mac because of how beautiful they are and how it's great to be seen with one in public. I think I said a few things out loud that the forum would just censor into oblivion if I type, but they mostly hinged around the words "obnoxious", "shallow", and whatnot. But my reasons are my own, and that person is obviously free to get whatever s/he wants for whatever reason.

An Apple is a PC in the strictest sense of the word. It's just a variation on a theme, and drawing more of a line in the sand than the one which already exists is petty.

 

ORLY? Not to be rude, but last time I checked, my there are almost no laptops with much better spec. then 13" for even same price...

 

Windows 7 is still heavily based on Vista. Worsen performance a bit, use the old taskbar, remove a bit of the polish and you're back at Vista. I'd still say 7 was a larger upgrade than Leopard to Snow Leopard, but it definitely wasn't as big as one that many are making it out to be.

+1 XD. But they started it!

And last time I checked, there are . Dell's SXPS 13 and a few Asus offerings are the first that come to mind.

 

Windows 7 and Snow Leopard are both very minor releases. I think it is really hard to make the argument that either is significantly larger than the other. Snow Leopard is at the $30 price point ($25 on amazon).

Windows 7 is either free or $30 for students depending on their school, $100 for everyone else (I think, correct me if I'm wrong).

So both reflect the fact that they aren't huge updates in their price.

You can look at the wikipedia pages for Snow Leopard and Windows 7 and then see if you if still hold the same opinion.

 

$100 for an upgrade is ridiculously expensive. Vista Home Premium OEM install (not upgrade) isn't even $100.

 

i'm looking at $120/$200 for home premium/pro upgrade,

and $200/$300 for the respective full versions.

nevertheless, you can get it for a lot less. students have access to home premium for either $30/free depending on their school's memberships. anyone with a .edu email address can get the server version of windows 7 for free through dreamspark, etc.

i think you could preorder home premium/pro upgrades for $50/$100 also.

point is, the pricing is pretty low and pretty competitive compared to Vista, for example. and keep in mind the upgraders could be coming from windows xp.

and with both operating systems the main benefits versus the previous iterations are performance boosts and UI tweaks. Snow Leopard offers some new features for developers, Windows 7 offers some new speech and handwriting recognition stuff, SL has some built in screen capture software, Win7 gets support for additional file formats.

nothing too epic or major in either camp.

 

Did you read the reviews? Also, I had used sXPS 13 for couple of days- so hot you can't even touch it.BQ is also lacking.And price is almost the same.

 

I don't need to read the reviews considering I own one (though I have). That said, I touch mine all the time . The price is quite a bit better than that of Apple. When I purchased mine (before Apple's price cut), my ~$1,180 unit was in the price range of Apple's $1,800-$2,000 units in terms of hardware specifications. The SXPS 13 still ranks quite a bit better in terms of hardware specifications. The SXPS 16 (which now has Core i7 CPUs) would rank even better if one needs a larger screen.

 

Well, that explains a lot... and where did you find that prices? I paid 1150 for my 13" mbp, and another >100$ for 500gb HDD and 4gb ram

And don't think of me as an mindless fan, I have 9 pc notebooks in my room ATM...

 

Yet build quality is measured by something as subjective as "It doesn't fell solid."

It amounts to saying "this medicine workes better because my intuition says so."

 

I spent 25 years+ on nothing but Windows OS , from Windows 3.11 and Dos 6.0 , and i just needed a change , I loved Vista much better than Xp apart from the UAC which got on my nerves.

So i have had my Mac around 3 months and am still not certain whether i prefer OS-X it`s just very different.

You still get program crashing, and becoming unresponsive and unexplained 100% cpu usages, but it have never had a total crash or BSOD

 

If you want to switch, switch; if you don't, don't. It's your computer, what can we say to change your mind (and why should we)?

Most people switch because they are tired of the alternative or they're just curious. If you don't fall into either category, then don't switch; simple as that.

 

I can count how many threads like this went the wrong way, and ended up closing.

 

I lost count.

Now if GCD get mass adoption, THERE is a reason to go Apple. Unlikely though, since it still requires a discrete action from the developer.

One day, oh one day, Parallelization will be enforced at the hardware level.

 

I'm in the same boat as op, I dont see why so much for Apple prodcuts, I've been thinking whether or not i should get an Apple, Sony or Lenvo, now since HP entered the game with Envy my decison is a lot harder. I was playing with the apple, i dont really like the touchpad..its not like the one laptops have, where there are two solid buttons..If apple lowerd prices they would be richer..

 

Ha, you're certainly one of the few that doesn't like the new trackpad. Also how much richer do you think Apple should be? Richer than the billions of surplus cash they already have? The majority of it came from Mac sales.
You certainly have a lot to learn about business, lowering prices may draw more customers but it doesn't necessarily make companies richer.

 

I felt the same way about the touchpad when I first saw one, now I love it. Just because it is different than what you are used to doesn't make it inferior.

I was very much against Apple for years until Vista made me wonder what was so bad about OSX. After some research and playing around with a Mac I decided that I liked it better than a PC. Its not so much a hardware or software thing its the total package that makes it worth more. You get hardware, software and support from a single company. Anyone who has ever had a computer problem and got bounced between MS and the manufacturer can understand the value in that. I also like the iLife programs and find them much easier to use than those included in Windows. I also like iWork for the price and ease of use. For me a Mac provides a much smoother experience where I find myself working WITH my computer more than ON my computer. Experiences vary and some like the PC environment more.

 

Not really Microsoft will not standby and watch they are rolling out DirectCompute.

They are moving toward parallelization that is why Intel is using Quick Path Interconnect (Core i7) and AMD moved to HyperTransport long ago.
A unified BUS allows better fast communication between different components

 

He makes a valid point. No point lowering the price if the market is willing to pay for it. I do question the motive for having a large amount of cash lying around. Usually companies that have large stashes of cash lying around are mulling a takeover....

Edit:

punctuation FTL.

This really doesn't address the issue of parallelization. Hardware engineers have it easy. Software engineers have faced far far higher barriers into parallelization. Which was the point of my post. Quick connect and HyperTransport do little, if any, to ease the Software Engineer's pain.

GCD is making that pain go away. But it isn't a permanent solution, nor a solution to build on.

 

Isn't that suppose to be as bad as BSOD?

 

To be fair, I've had the Kernel Panic which pretty much is the Mac equivalent of a BSOD only it's a lot more elegant (with the darkening curtain-like drop) but I have to say I've had that happen exactly once ever since switching to Macs well over a year ago, and I've tried so many times to reproduce it but failed - still have no idea what caused it the first time.

In contrast, BSODs happen significantly more often (unfortunately even on 7 RTM) that, at least in my experience, you can't even compare the two for frequency. That's the advantage of a closed system I guess where I truly think Macs are a lot more stable than the Windows environment - Not saying it's MSFT's fault but the openness of the Windows environment, whether you love it or hate it, has a price and it's stability, or lack there of, IMO.

 

Well that would be the purpose of Microsoft's Parallel Extensions or Intel's Threading Building Blocks.

 

I sometimes feel like I'm one of the few people on the planet who hardly ever has any sort of computer issue. Maybe it's because I'm Irish, or I just live a charmed life, or... something. On Windows XP / Vista / 7 over several years, I hardly ever had/have any real problems of note with maybe one or two real exceptions. Blue screens not attributed to a dying hard drive or overheated video card because I did a crap job of installing a third-party HS/F? Very few.

(With the possible exception of a semi-dud sent to me by Sony once.)

Running OS X 10.5-10.6 over a grand total of two months, I had one kernel panic and one Preview.app crash (that thing needs autosave), and that's really it.

 

Don't worry you are not alone the only time I had a BSOD was during testing of my CPU undervolt settings.

 

I'm not familiar with either set of libraries so i cannot specifically comment on them

I'm not a software engineer so my viewpoint maybe misinformed. But from what I understand, taking advantage of multiple cores involves FAR more than just making a bunch of threads. Often times it takes entire rewrites of your code. It is a fundamental shift in programming from serialization to parallelization (or is it parallelism?).

I just know it would be easier if the hardware made it easier to split up your threads. A lot like the RISC v CISC debates from way way back.

But I'm hijacking the thread so it ends here.

Nah, I'm with you here. Visit the Windows forum and countless people will pipe up with the same story. Since this is the Apple forum, there are obviously people here who have been disenchanted by Windows in the past and agreeably switched to a different solution in their life.

 

No, it's normal. Windows doesn't guarantee BSODs on every machine for every user. It's the same with people who have an Xbox360 that hasn't failed or a PS3 that did fail; it happens but don't take it as a valid sampling of real life statistics.