WSJ: Stylish PCs Will Attempt to Tackle Apple

There, fixed that for you.

The style of Apple's hardware helps, but people really but Macs because of the style and fit-and-finish of the software. Dell, HP, Sony, etc. can't do a thing about that: They get what Microsoft gives them.

Not only that, but while PC makers are now style conscious, that doesn't mean they're style aware. That is, they're making an effort to move beyond boring, plain boxes, but the results aren't always so great. Take, for instance, the Dell LCD pictured above. I've yet to see the thing in person, but I've seen several pictures of it, and it's incredibly ugly. All Dell did was graft on a big plate of glass, some cheap speakers, and $1,000 in price to an existing LCD monitor. I've described it elsewhere as the result of a high school shop class.

The PC makers are trying style for styles sake, much like those who make "art" from discarded scrap metal (another apt description for this display). That's a long way to go before they make compelling hardware designs. Even when they get there, they're still stuck with Microsoft, which is making the same feeble attempts at style on the software side.

apple doesn't focus on their displays... at this point, they're almost an afterthought. they're not nearly as striking as an imac or macbook, and the people who buy apple's displays buy them because they are DECENT LCDs. also, the fact that they come in some of the largest sizes around (i'm even hearing rumors of a 36") helps quite a bit. other than that, the sales of the smaller displays are abysmal (the 30" displays apparently enjoy some popularity.) why do you think they don't offer a 17" lcd anymore? most people with mac minis and other older desktops could care less what monitor they have (i, for one, have a 19" acer lcd and i just love it.)

if dell thinks a $1200 22" monitor is going to save them, they're wrong. that's appealing to the same people who buy bang & olufsen speakers, sure there are better options out there, but they got the name -- and thats just as impressive as the product itself.

only thing is; a dell is just that, a dell. this is why toyota started lexus and honda started acura... to get people to pay more for hondas and toyotas... this this is a guaranteed flop unless they remove that little glowing "dell" logo emblazoned on the front.

oh, one more thing, the xps one was done by sony a number of years ago as well... their current all-in-one is WAY sexier than dell's...

i'm sorry, i hate to sound like a fanboy, but it's just an exercise in futility... they are millions of dollars behind apple in the R&D department and until they REALLY beef up their design team, they're going to look exactly like a company ripping off a design from sony that sony ripped off from apple...

Take a look at that display--a sheet of plexiglas bonded to the front of a regular LCD monitor, all propped on a tripod.

Nothing has changed--they still don't get it. That design is all about flash and getting attention and not about design in the service of functionality. The PC industry is clearly too thick-headed to ever understand Apple's success...

(BTW, I love how the screen image is a distorted image of the 'smoke' iMac from 1999...)

Tacit acknowledgement that Apple is starting to eat their lunch?

After reading the WSJ article, I am still amazed at how much all but the design people seem to miss the point. Apple succeeds because its machines are functional, USEFUL, innovative and look good. When I read that people would be interested in machines with, for example, sports themes--without any other distinguishing feature--and would pay a premium price for the "privilege" of owning such a beast, it became stunningly clear how dense and shallow PC users are. I say this having been one for many years before seeing the light some six years ago. This is a sad, sad state of affairs. No wonder PC manufacturers can get away with mere cosmetic alterations and have the nerve to be proud of their accomplishments.

I don't know that it's shallow so much as uneducated. People have lived for years with these boxes which offered x features. Since a computer is a PC, and a PC is Windows, and the latest version of Windows is Vista then a Vista PC is what i need to get the latest and greatest right? To get a machine that is customized to look good, that's worth more right?

Usefulness is all about what it can do right? Can Macs do anything you can't do on a PC? No. Can PC's do anything a Mac can't? ...Gaming? Okay, PC it is.

Little is understood about the Mac way of thinking. Usefulness is about how you can do these things, knowing there is more than "the way". There is more than Windows. Options can confuse, but options in the right places are empowering. Having an understanding of how to achieve more, with less learning, effort and time can be really useful. Mac OS X goes a long way to accomplishing this and that's what many PC users are missing in my book.

dell may have some "stylish" computers, but they still don't have os x.

the whole philosophy behind apple is that the industrial design carries over into the UI, and as long as dell's computers run windows, they're gonna lack.

apple's computers are the closest thing out there to the concept of appliance computers. they provide a consistent look and feel, and you don't have to worry about the things just not working.

Looking at Dell's 'designs' all I see is design for the sake of design. Most of what they produce looks like crap, which tells me they are really only giving design a half hearted focus and probably have the soulless bean counters making the final decisions.

Apple is run by the artists. That's the difference.