I think there's a good concept behind the "Macs don't game," but it's only one of the reasons. Windows drives hardware sales, we all know that. New versions of Windows bloat some, require better hardware to feel as snappy, whatever. OSX, thanks to its locked platform, could afford to optimize over time and whatnot, so even upgrades from Tiger to Leopard don't impact system performance very much. The two things PCs do that Macs don't - game and run various upgrades of Windows - point out the hardware's limits faster than you'd ever notice it on a Mac. I imagine that's why life cycles would be different, if they are. That and that normal people often just notice their computer slowing down, so they run out and buy a $700 shelf unit rather than diagnosing and fixing their problems. You buy good components and your life cycle will be just as long as a Mac user's.
PCs probably have shorter life cycles because people buy off-the-shelf PCs that manufacturers make as cheaply as possible, and cheap components usually mean shorter life
...I don't see myself plunking down money for something that a mass production factory (Mac or Intel format) decides is best for me.
That's why when you select your computer, with some of them, like the Mac Pro, you can specify exactly what you want. Now, you can't do that on say the iMacs because in order to keep them so dang thin as they are, everything needs to be in just the right spot. That's including the laptops too.
Aside from the operating system. Macs are now identical to pc's. The only difference is a tpm module (iirc) that allows the os to run. But that shouldn't be a problem for much longer as the OSx86 project is working on it all the time. It kinda works right now for hardware that is close to the macs hardware. But the problem is that there isn't a whole lot of driver support for macs since they run on 1st party hardware.
Anyway, point is, when you buy a mac you are buying their (really nice and ohh so sexy) engineering/design and also the operating system. Which again, is so sexy. I love it. But, vista isn't too bad.
0
LeonardoWake up and smell the glaciersEagle River, AlaskaIcrontian
edited March 2008
Windows drives hardware sales
No, not really. That only applies when new Windows versions are released. What's the time gap between XP and Vista - seven years? And yes, I haven't changed operating systems in that time period (and still won't for probably another year or more).
That's why when you select your computer, with some of them, like the Mac Pro, you can specify exactly what you want.
1) As you can with Dell and several other mass production brands; 2) that wasn't my point anyway. As a home builder, not choosing proprietary architecture or parts, I can continually upgrade all my systems any time I feel like it, procure the components form a choice of hundreds of online sites, traditional stores, or private trading markets. I don't depend upon a limited set of options from a mass production corporation. I also don't get taken to the cleaners - Dell or Apple motherboard, in example - when I wish to upgrade. Just one example: (I bare my soul, this is embarrassing) last night I destroyed a motherboard (doing something stupid, in a hurry, late at night - perfect storm). After determining that the motherboard was indeed a useless collection of wire traces, heatsinks, capacitors, and microchips, I paid for and ordered a new high performance, high quality motherboard within a few minutes. Now mind you, I live on a mountain side in Alaska. The shipped-to-my-door price, two-day service, was $114. After the mail in rebate, it will be $84. The ease and low expense of upgrading is likewise.
Try that with a Dell or Mac, or any other proprietary boxed computer.
Laptops are another matter. It is possible to build a laptop, but it's like building in a Mac in that options are very limited. If I were in the market for a laptop, I would seriously consider a Mac. My employer provides my laptop so I take what is provided. (I'm huge fan of IBM ThinkPads, too. Haven't tried the Lenovo flavor yet.)
I have a dell latitude 830 and say it's by far the best laptop I've ever used. Dedicated graphics card, c2d proc, 2gb ram, and a 5hr battery life to boot. It's a marvelous machine and will most likely give me brand loyalty to dell for laptops. For desktops though, I will always build my own. Why buy a mac when I can build a c2d or c2q pc and put osx on it using the x86 project?
Disclaimer: I run OSX via OSx86 on my rig and it's in perfect working order. I still live in Vista day-to-day. OSX is just a fun diversion every once in a while, a toy to play with and see how it works and whether I can use it viably someday. Right now, I use my Windows stuff (Steam, 2xSMP with AffinityChanger, TiVoToGo - but that's a whole other story) way too much to be able to stay in OSX for more than a day or two.
TiVoToGo really irks me, though. It's free to transfer any show off your TiVo to your computer while in Windows, but to get the same functionality in OSX, you have to spend $40 or $50 to get a Toast plugin or something. It's like they know Mac people will pay more for things, so they charged them for it or something. Screw that. So I transfer them in Windows and DirectShowDump them to mpg for the portable viewing.
I have a macbook pro as my "work" computer. To be completely honest, very little work gets done on it, it's all done remotely through vnc to another pc. It dual boots (bootcamp) osx and xp. Because I don't do anything intensive on it in either XP or OSX, it doesn't really matter what OS I'm in. That said, I'm much more comfortable in XP than OSX. When I'm in OSX, I'm constantly upset that things aren't where I'm used to, or that something just doesn't seem quite right. However, I like that OSX is *nix based, as it gives me a functional shell without cygwin.
While I'm sure that's not all that helpful, I'd probably suggest a PC. Macs are pretty, they have some nice features, but I just like the XP platform better. And I'd definitely take vista over OSX, still.
This is an old saw for me, but others in this community and I have been delighted with this outfit. You basically can put together your laptop and, on some systems, have them put on or NOT put on the OS and do it yourself.
My only complaint about my macbook is the craptastic onboard graphics hinders my TF2 playing. I love being able to dual boot, but find myself using OSX more often for chat, web browsing and document editing. I run 10.5 and XP SP2.
Comments
Marmite wins the lifetime test
That's why when you select your computer, with some of them, like the Mac Pro, you can specify exactly what you want. Now, you can't do that on say the iMacs because in order to keep them so dang thin as they are, everything needs to be in just the right spot. That's including the laptops too.
You mean: Mac Pro. Apple no longer makes the Power Macs.
Anyway, point is, when you buy a mac you are buying their (really nice and ohh so sexy) engineering/design and also the operating system. Which again, is so sexy. I love it. But, vista isn't too bad.
Try that with a Dell or Mac, or any other proprietary boxed computer.
Laptops are another matter. It is possible to build a laptop, but it's like building in a Mac in that options are very limited. If I were in the market for a laptop, I would seriously consider a Mac. My employer provides my laptop so I take what is provided. (I'm huge fan of IBM ThinkPads, too. Haven't tried the Lenovo flavor yet.)
TiVoToGo really irks me, though. It's free to transfer any show off your TiVo to your computer while in Windows, but to get the same functionality in OSX, you have to spend $40 or $50 to get a Toast plugin or something. It's like they know Mac people will pay more for things, so they charged them for it or something. Screw that. So I transfer them in Windows and DirectShowDump them to mpg for the portable viewing.
While I'm sure that's not all that helpful, I'd probably suggest a PC. Macs are pretty, they have some nice features, but I just like the XP platform better. And I'd definitely take vista over OSX, still.