Replies

Final Cut HD Pro (pro video editing), iLife (seamlessly integrated consumer media production and management, free with every Mac), Xgrid (instant, easily-managed clusters), Logic Pro (pro audio creation), Xsan (ultra-cheap SAN creation and management), Remote Desktop (haven't seen anything that good on a PC), and of course there's OS X itself.

Not a bad list. Let us take a look at it:

FinalCut Pro: I'd be using Adobe Premier on my Windows box. Linux folks use Kino or other packages.

Xgrid: This is a server product, in which case I'd be going with either Microsoft Cluster Server (Windows Server 2003 Ent. Ed.), or a Linux clustering solution if desired. This wouldn't do a thing for the typical home user.

Xsan: Another server product. I'd go with a linux box running iscsi-target, which is quite easy to set up, and I'd use the Microsoft iSCSI Initiator to connect my XP box up to it. Cost? $0 for software. Apple charges how much for Xsan? [worth note: I think Apple could be a leader in the enterprise hardware market, but they're more interested in selling iPods instead of selling their rackmount servers and RAID arrays, which appear to be excellent products]

Remote Desktop: What? You can do that with a Windows server, or an XP client. For free. Or I could go with the classic VNC, again for free. Pff, I can even use a Linux workstation to remote back to my Windows XP or server box.

OS X itself: I'd dare to say that NeXT, OS2 and BEoS serve as testimonies to the fact that an OS without software is a doomed OS. OS X without worthwhile software is just eye candy. OS X might look nice, and it might be a pretty nice rebundle of BSD, but without the software, it's pointless. And if by "software" you mean Linux titles, I'd wonder why bother with OS X in the first place? Just run Ubuntu or any other Linux flavor on a basic Windows box and save loads of cash.

My position is this: Apple sells overpriced consumer PC hardware and a markets it to the AOL crowd. They hype the ability to run Windows software, in effect, admitting that the software users want to run is Windows software. In my opinion, folks would just be better off buying a much more inexpensive Windows PC in the first place. Folks are entitled to buy what they want, and if they want to pay too much, they're welcome to do so.

My position is this: Apple sells overpriced consumer PC hardware and a markets it to the AOL crowd. They hype the ability to run Windows software, in effect, admitting that the software users want to run is Windows software. In my opinion, folks would just be better off buying a much more inexpensive Windows PC in the first place. Folks are entitled to buy what they want, and if they want to pay too much, they're welcome to do so.

KittyCat, I know about 60 Mac users... and and only one of them uses AOL or ever did.... and he is a 50 year old retarded man who uses it to email his mother. Most Mac users made an intelligent decision to leave the Windows world and embrace the Mac. (Over 1,000,000 switched last year alone.) Quite frankly, most of Mac owners I know would be considered power Windows users before they abandoned the platform... Many of the are still forced to use Windows in their work, but CHOOSE to use Mac for their own personal computing.

You have been spouting your anti Mac propaganda on this thread... most of it years out of date. .. and ignore those of us who know what we are talking about when we provide you with the facts. Several times you have demonstrated your ignorance of the modern Mac. You claimed familiarity with Macs because you owned some in the early 1990s. YOU are not even aware that modern Macs can run Windows natively... despite all of the publicity the Windows crowd has ascribed to this achievement in the last 10 months, you asked if it was done by "emulation"!

What, via emulation? In that case, I can fire up VMWare and run about any OS on the planet, and thereby any amount of software I want. . . .All the Mac people are excited about emulating Windows. . ."

And:

They hype the ability to run Windows software, in effect, admitting that the software users want to run is Windows software.

Actually very few of us "Mac people" are at all excited about emulating Windows. . . or running it natively. Why should we want to go back to the environment we dumped?

Hype the ability to run Windows indicating Mac users really WANT to use Windows? You have to consider the target audience of the Mac ads... it is not those of us who are already using Macs... it is targeted to those who have Windows, are dissatisfied with their experience, but who need the "security blanket" of a fall-back position of being able to run what they are used to.

Apple itself has only one out of seven currently running television ads that even mention that capability. Even those who have purchased a new Intel Mac with the intention of running Windows find, that after a month or two, they are almost exclusively running OS X.

As to your assertion that Macs are "over priced", I posted a comparison of the new Mac Pro with the closest equivalent Dell, using the SAME or equivalent components... and the Mac Pro was $1100 cheaper than the Dell with the same processing capability. You didn't acknowledge that except to anecdotally dismiss it:

"And the price quote? I went over to www.pricewatch.com and got tired of wading through hundreds of similar combos, . . ."

That is an outright fabrication. There may be as many as ten combos that meet the criteria... but you provided none for comparison. Time after time, when Macs at EVERY PRICE POINT are compared with PCs with similar quality components with similar capabilities, the Macs are either competitive or less expensive. . . before the suite of included software is included.

You challenged us to:

Gimme three titles available only on a Mac that would convince somebody to buy a Mac.

Antirepublicrat provided you with a list that HAVE convinced "somebody to buy a Mac", but you then apparently changed the challenge to find something that can't be done on the PC. I don't know of anyone who has purchased a PC so they could run "Adobe Premier". They buy Adobe Premier to run on what they have... but thousands of professional videographers HAVE purchased Macs specifically to run Final Cut HD Pro... and many who already have Macs have purchases new Macs to run it better.

You claim to be knowledgeable about Macs but posted this:

"Xgrid: This is a server product, in which case I'd be going with either Microsoft Cluster Server (Windows Server 2003 Ent. Ed.), or a Linux clustering solution if desired. This wouldn't do a thing for the typical home user.

Xgrid is really not a "server product". It is software that is designed to link multiple single computers (Xserves or even desk top Macs) into a supercomputer cluster to attack large number crunching problems... it is not a super file server. You asked for programs that would cause people to buy Macs... this one alone has sold tens of thousands of Macs.

By the way, while I will grant you the Linux Clusters, where are the Windows clusters on the top 500 list of fastest supercomputers?

They say that when you cannot argue from facts, attack the opposition. That's how you started.

You entered this thread with a nasty slur against all Mac owners. You said:

"A company that sells vastly overpriced merchandise that appeals to a too-trendy-for-you hipster crowd that simulatenously wants to look cool while being too dim to figure out how to use a normal PC.

You continued this character assassination of all Mac users in a following reply:

They still cater to the hippy-dippy Ultra Lib crowd just as always. I don't know, they seem as if their entire marketing effort amounts to "We're AOL for hardware! Can't figure how to use a PC? Use a Mac!"

I make my living FIXING the software screw ups of your favored platform for Professional users. My clients who have chosen to migrate to the Mac have far less need of my services while still maintaining their professional operations.

Quite frankly, KittyCat, most of the Mac users I know got tired of the much more complicated maintenance required on the Windows platform... and found there was a simpler way. The same work can be accomplished without the overhead that Windows forces you to accept. The Mac users value their time much more than that.

Have you EVER used OS X? I doubt it.

FinalCut Pro: I'd be using Adobe Premier on my Windows box. Linux folks use Kino or other packages.

You said programs people want, you didn't say stuff that had no equivalent. If equivalents are allowed, then there's no reason not to buy a Mac, because equivalent software is out there. Hoever, Final Cut is considered far better than Premiere. It's why Adobe stopped making Premiere for the Mac.

Xgrid: This is a server product,

People don't buy servers? I was talking all markets. Besides, MS Cluster Server is barely catching up to what's normal in the industry. Xgrid goes beyond that and will harness the power of any desktop or server in your organization, including remote systems on the Internet.

Xsan: Another server product. I'd go with a linux box running iscsi-target

Xsan is a bit beyond that. It will create and manage a very large SAN. You normally get such software from companies like EMC and Cisco and pay big bucks.

emote Desktop: What? You can do that with a Windows server

Basic stuff. I use the Windows one all the time. Look at the Apple site to see what Apple's can do. To start with, they've rolled up system management and remote control of a user's session into Remote Desktop. It's also fully scripted and will automatically perform system updates and software installs, as well as do massive logging and reporting (quick software auditing). You can even observe any number of systems (including Linux and Windows) in action:

You need to get a bunch of different management software to do this on Windows or Linux.

OS X without worthwhile software is just eye candy.

There's a lot out there, thousands of titles from educational to pro apps.

My position is this: Apple sells overpriced consumer PC hardware and a markets it to the AOL crowd.

You haven't seen the comparisons? For features, a Mac tends to be the same cost or cheaper than a PC. They just don't sell in the ghetto PC AOL market.