sorry to invade your bubble of unreality

You have 250+ Macs and you still think they run on Linux?

Check again.

I own mostly PCs and I manage 3000+ PC every day, but when I do get a chance to use a Mac I love it. It is like a breath of fresh air. For all of you who say Macs suck...ask someone who uses one. I don't hear much complaining from them.

Just a thought...

And if you eliminate people in Ohio, Illinois, and West Virginia, who are slow to adapt to change, Apple's market share goes up to 40%! I'm working on a formula that brings their market share to 200%

Quote

Guest wrote:

But hardware and software are two different things and I'm surprised that Apple has been able to get away with this "bundling" -- demanding that OSX can only be used on Apple manufactured hardware -- considering the aggressiveness of the European Union on monopoly and antitrust.

Why is this so hard for people to understand? Apple doesn't have a monopoly on anything, so there's no reason for the EU or anyone else to get involved with antitrust proceedings, etc.. Are you trying to say that Apple has a monopoly on the Mac OS? There are plenty of other hardware and OS choices out there. Should Toyota be prosecuted for not allowing other manufacturers to make Toyota-branded cars? *sigh*

Monopoly = a persistent market situation where there is only one provider of a product or service

Apple is hardly a monopoly in the PC / OS market. No company is obligated to open their IP to the world. Most companies in the PC / OS market would simply fail if they did not take part in the Wintel model. Apple is a cut above.

Educate yourself before you spew your ignorance from between your lips.

"it is very difficult and expensive to find an engineer to work on a MAC, most especially in a timely manner. "

1. Please look up the definition of MAC in reference to computers.

2. Do you mean finding a technician to work on a Mac or an engineer? Furthermore when you say "work on" do you mean service or use?

Apple's EULA may not even be legal, as this provision (that OSX must run on Apple branded products) may not be enforceable. if the Maclone company's lawyers think they can successfully fight this provision, then that may be the reason for the product offering.

I am fairly sure we will see this in court; It will be interesting to see if this is legal to put in a EULA. I know, for instance, patent rights do not prevent another company from designing compatible hardware, as in the case of proprietary shaped( or sized, or whatever) ink cartridges in a printer. Perhaps the court will see that this is an interoperability issue.

Quote

Anonymous wrote:

Quote

Intruder wrote:
Wow, amazing how many Apple haters come out to Apple-centric sites to spew their vitriol.

Absolutely amazing.

Paying 3 times more than a product is worth does not make you "ELITE" it makes you an elitist and a moron.

Please, oh PLEASE show us a verified link to a name brand company that produces a like product for 1/3 the price of a Mac.

An 8-core machine, expandable, 2G RAM, 256MB graphics card, 320GB hard drive, FW 400, FW 800, Superdrive equivalent for $930. With OS and support and all of the included software. Go find.

Until you can produce, STFU.

Quote

Guest wrote:
LAMO!

the joke of the computer industry...

If Appple (your spelling) is a joke why do MicroSoft, Psystar, et al try and emulate them?

Windows is closed and belongs in a closed system. Linux is open. Which is why Linux is such a better choice for a PC. So if you believe in being open, don't get your facts wrong. Don't be a half fast open guy, please. MS tries to close the PC and talk about it like they own it.

The faster the industry adopts Linux the better. That's the only thing that holds back Linux. There is nothing much you can do on Windows that you can't do on Linux. It's just a more popular OS made by control freaks who will try to squeeze as much out of yo for as little as possible. At least Apple tries to control what's theirs and not mine and are upfront about being closed.

On the subject though, if I buy MacOSX, I should be able to install it anywhere I want. Seems like Apple wants it both ways. They want to split hardware and software when they accused MS of being a copy cat, then they want it as a single when someone wants to install it elsewhere.

One of the reasons that Windows sucks so badly is because it is expected to run on every piece of crap labeled "PC compatible" on the market.

Apple has control over the hardware, they know they can trust it. By allowing someone to produce a non-mac machine that runs their OS, (with some kind of god only knows what emulation) the OS's stability will be compromised.

Operating system reputation is built on platforms where one vendor creates both the hardware and the OS that runs on it. Look at IBM AIX power series, Sun Solaris, and Apple OS X. these are all known for their reliability. The reason that enterprise applications use these platforms over Linux or Windows is the hardware and support. They are rock solid platforms.

>I can build my own computer and put any software
>other than OSX on it legally.ever wonder why
>that is?

I think you should clarify what you mean by *any* other software. The only reason that x86 architecture is the standard now is because too many people shopped on price instead of quality. It used to be things like IRIX and Solaris were tied to their platforms and were much better for it.

Just because x86 let's you put whatever you want on it, that certainly doesn't make it a better system if you are actually trying to get some work done.

You also clearly don't know what a monopoly is. But that's another discussion. SO maybe just get to your 7th period class and try and brush up on computer history later.

Windows is closed and belongs in a closed system. Linux is open. Which is why Linux is such a better choice for a PC. So if you believe in being open, don't get your facts wrong. Don't be a half fast open guy, please. MS tries to close the PC and talk about it like they own it.

The faster the industry adopts Linux the better. That's the only thing that holds back Linux. There is nothing much you can do on Windows that you can't do on Linux. It's just a more popular OS made by control freaks who will try to squeeze as much out of yo for as little as possible. At least Apple tries to control what's theirs and not mine and are upfront about being closed.

On the subject though, if I buy MacOSX, I should be able to install it anywhere I want. Seems like Apple wants it both ways. They want to split hardware and software when they accused MS of being a copy cat, then they want it as a single when someone wants to install it elsewhere.

Apple has not learned the lessons from the 80s. Microsoft dominates the market because apple forgot that the operating system and the hardware are independent. Similar computers will follow. Will you broaden the acceptance of the Apple operating system or watch your market share get punished again?

Um, sounds like anticompetive practices to me... The iPhone is hardly a comparison as it is the same HW. This is different HW

Quote

Guest wrote:

Quote

Intruder wrote:
Wow, amazing how many Apple haters come out to Apple-centric sites to spew their vitriol.

Absolutely amazing.

Paying 3 times more than a product is worth does not make you "ELITE" it makes you an elitist and a moron.

And the preceeding vitriol confirms something that one of the TMO moderators is fond of saying;
Apple users hate Windows
Windows users hate Apple users.

Numerous studies published here and elsewhere have shown that Apple products have very little if any premium WHEN YOU COMPARE THEM TO EQUALLY EQUIPPED WINDOWS SYSTEMS. Sure you can buy a stripped down laptop or PC, but you get what you pay for. I buy Apple because I require the quality and prefer the environment. That doesn't make me elitist or a moron.

Which brings up the second point; quality. Apple consistantly places at or near the top of independant quality and customer satisfaction surveys. Sure you can buy a cheaper system from Dell or Gateway. Take a look at where those brands have placed for the last 10 years.

So you may be happy with your system. That's cool. We got a $500 Windows laptop for my mom who only does e-mail. But when it comes to the computer I rely on, I'll get an Apple for the same reason my dad bought Snap-On tools. I know it'll work when I need it.

"In my opinion, by issuing C&D notices Apple is using anti-competitive business practices."

Practically any business can be sued for "anti-competitive business practices"...it's a meaningless concept, but one that makes millions for attorneys and takes millions from successful businesses every year because of ignorant judges and juries. We'd all be much better off if the anti-trust laws were repealed and successful businesses left free to succeed instead of penalizing them, or forcing them to support their competitors.

Quote

Anonymous wrote:
Apple has not learned the lessons from the 80s. Microsoft dominates the market because apple forgot that the operating system and the hardware are independent. Similar computers will follow. Will you broaden the acceptance of the Apple operating system or watch your market share get punished again?

Would be a valid question if not for the fact that their market share is increasing rather than decreasing. And has been for the past few years against an established OS (a reversal of fortunes vis a vis Microsoft Windows vs Apple in the 80s and 90s).

Yeah. I had a bit of a typo there. That was supposed to say "Microsoft-branded hardware"... but I think most people figured that out. It was a hypothetical scenario, that was the point. Microsoft doesn't make these sorts of demands and couldn't even if they did manufacture/piece together computers.

I agree that Apple is a great design company. Their OS is super-duper and their computers are slick. However, I don't think it is right for them to sell their OS and tell others that they cannot install and sell it themselves. I can run that piece on any intel based machine now. What makes Leopard so special/different from Windows that it is not treated the same way? Just because Apple doesn't want us to build and sell clones doesn't mean that it is right.

And, yes, Microsoft has exhibited some ingenious (although shady) marketing tactics: allowing pirated software to proliferate unchecked for years, getting customers hooked, then initiating a strong anti-piracy campaign so they can pull in that revenue on the next release. This, my friends, is why most offices are stuck using Windows.

mac mini is 10x smaller than this thing. They use laptop parts to make it that size, i.e. the higher cost. Plus mac is a branded, premium product.

The common misperception is that you actually buy software. You don't. You buy a license to use the software. The extent of that license is stipulated in the EULA. The EULA is a legally binding agreement.

Quote

Intruder wrote:
The common misperception is that you actually buy software. You don't. You buy a license to use the software. The extent of that license is stipulated in the EULA. The EULA is a legally binding agreement.

Exactly, and that is why it is different from, for example buying a Chevy engine and bolting it onto your Ford. You own the part. You don't actually own the software.

Is this right? I don't think so. When I go to a store and walk out with a box containing software I want that software to be mine. But such is the established practice in the industry right now.

I do wonder how far companies will try to go with this idea? Could they say that book you bought is not really yours and then try to crack down on people selling used books at garage sales?

Monopoly: exclusive control of a commodity or service in a particular market, or a control that makes possible the manipulation of prices. Apple (and Linux) provide an alternative to PCs running windows. But where is the competition for someone who wants a MAC but can't afford a Mac? Many years ago, there were Mac clones offered. That company was very quickly forced out of business. Any thoughts on this?

Monopoly: exclusive control of a commodity or service in a particular market, or a control that makes possible the manipulation of prices. Apple (and Linux) provide an alternative to PCs running windows. But where is the competition for someone who wants a MAC but can't afford a Mac? Many years ago, there were Mac clones offered. That company was very quickly forced out of business. Any thoughts on this?

Monopoly: exclusive control of a commodity or service in a particular market, or a control that makes possible the manipulation of prices. Apple (and Linux) provide an alternative to PCs running windows. But where is the competition for someone who wants a MAC but can't afford a Mac? Many years ago, there were Mac clones offered. That company was very quickly forced out of business. Any thoughts on this?

There is a difference between controlling a product and controlling a service or an industry. Microsoft effectively controls an industry with Windows. And it is what they do with that control that has been challenged (there is nothing illegal about having a monopoly, but it does restrict what you can do once that monopoly has been established).

Your question could just as easily be asked "Where is the competition for someone who wants a Ferrari but can't afford a Ferrari?" Answer: You don't get a Ferrari.

An 8-core machine, expandable, 2G RAM, 256MB graphics card, 320GB hard drive, FW 400, FW 800, Superdrive equivalent for $930. With OS and support and all of the included software.

$930, I'm assuming this is 1/3 the price of a Mac Pro ($2800-ish)? Well anyway, a Dell desktop with a quad core, 2gb, 500gb hd, dvd-r, 256mb card, and Windows is $800. Now it didn't quite meet your specs so I don't know if it even counts, but I'm not sure everyone needs 4 more cores for $2000 more.

Requiring that you own apple hardware to use the OS is not a monopoly it is not anti-competitive.

People need to realize that Apple is not the business to sell there OS they are in the business of selling computers. Which in fact can run Winblows just fine.

Quote

Guest wrote:
Monopoly: exclusive control of a commodity or service in a particular market, or a control that makes possible the manipulation of prices. Apple (and Linux) provide an alternative to PCs running windows. But where is the competition for someone who wants a MAC but can't afford a Mac? Many years ago, there were Mac clones offered. That company was very quickly forced out of business. Any thoughts on this?

I totally agree! Sure there are lots of car companies selling other kinds of cars, but I want a Lamborghini but can't afford one. Why should one company control the whole Lamborghini market?!?

Can someone please block this idiot's IP addy? It is obvious that one person is making most of those guest posts when they happen every couple of minutes and suffer from the same idiotic style.

Not trying to debate the points of this article, but I did think it was interesting. From back in January:

http://blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/?p=942&tag=nl.e550

Quote

Guest wrote:

Paying 3 times more than a product is worth does not make you "ELITE" it makes you an elitist and a moron.

Please let me know which laptop matches these specs for $366.

http://www.apple.com/macbook/specs.html

I am quite interested in your claim! Thank you!

Quote

Guest wrote:
Not trying to debate the points of this article, but I did think it was interesting. From back in January:

http://blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/?p=942&tag=nl.e550

Time to repair disk permissions; I clicked on that link, but they denied permission to see the page.

Quote

Guest wrote:

Well anyway, a Dell desktop with a quad core, 2gb, 500gb hd, dvd-r, 256mb card, and Windows is $800.

Wow, a "Dell Desktop" is it? Can you be a little more specific? Maybe some kind of name or model number?

Things changed apparently from Feb to March, at least according to Fortune. That's where I got the 21% figure for the consumer market.

http://apple20.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2008/04/01/analyst-apples-us-consumer-market-share-now-21-percent/

Quote

Sir Harry Flashman wrote:

Quote

Guest wrote:
Not trying to debate the points of this article, but I did think it was interesting. From back in January:

http://blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/?p=942&tag=nl.e550

Time to repair disk permissions; I clicked on that link, but they denied permission to see the page.

Heh, seems I'm getting a 403 error as well when I try to view it now. Anyway it was an article on building a Mac Pro equivalent for 1/3 the price.

On a serious note, the Mac Pro is tough to beat in price because it uses some high end parts (i.e. server parts) that are not cheap, even if you buy them and built it yourself. Although if you upgrade it at all through the Mac store, you pay a decent premium.

Quote

Small White Car wrote:

Quote

Guest wrote:

Well anyway, a Dell desktop with a quad core, 2gb, 500gb hd, dvd-r, 256mb card, and Windows is $800.

Wow, a "Dell Desktop" is it? Can you be a little more specific? Maybe some kind of name or model number?

]

Yeah, it was the cheapest dell desktop on their site with a couple upgrades. The Inspiron 530 is the moedl. And it's consumer grade hardware, as opposed to the professional grade mobo and cpu's in the Mac Pro. So I know it's not apples to apples (no pun intended), but I just wanted to throw out an example of what a PC the 3rd the price of a Mac Pro looks like (at least a pre-fab PC).

Quote

Guest wrote:
So I know it's not apples to apples (no pun intended), but I just wanted to throw out an example of what a PC the 3rd the price of a Mac Pro looks like (at least a pre-fab PC).

Well what's the point of showing something that doesn't do the same thing, but costs less?

I could show you a suit from Macy's that's 1/3 the price of a Mac Pro.

Do you wanna see it? Or would that just be a waste of your time?

Exactly

I live in Mexico and I can tell you that around here most of the computer-related decition making, is mostly based with the budget in mind. (Also take into account that we pay like 40% more than you for everything and have less than half the income )
I built my computer from scratch with the components I liked for around USD$500. (AMD XPІ+4200 2.2 Ghz, 2 GB DDR2-667Mhz, Gigabyte Motherboard with Nvidia Chipset, 250GB HD, 16X DVDWR and GeForce 8400).
Intended for light-gaming it's decent.

Now... how much would it cost me something like that in the Mac version? (Despite that it isn't a gaming plataform)

My point is that for us around here Mac isn't mainstream because of the price. A low-cost Mac would REALLY make a difference in this kind of market.

Quote

Tiger wrote:
In case you missed the memo so to speak last week, Apple's doing just fine with the masses. So much so, that if you eliminate the business sector, which is slow to make ANY changes, Apple has now captured 21% of the retail computer market.

That's a far cry from the days a few years ago. Why? Because their products do in fact appeal to the masses and are selling very well in their retail stores and online. The pendulum has swung the other way for now. Try as they might, Microsoft is going to suffer a few years longer from the regime and market they built around Windows and face it, people are sick of it. Is Apple going to fare any better? No, but for now, it's what's new, novel, and NOT ticking people off more than with just minor annoyances. Face it, 75,000+ viruses for the PC platform, still not ONE for MacOSX in the wild after 8 years of the OS being released. Do the math...

21% in your dreams. Maybe 21% of macobserver readers.

Quote

Guest wrote:
Hell I would have bought one just to try the O.S. out.

I am tired of Microsoft and I am not too impressed with the Linux offerings.

Just get a mac mini. $600 isn't really that much.

I am so sick of seeing people claim Apple hardware is expensive without evidence. I will admit I haven't done this with a Mac Mini lately, but when I took the specs of an XServe and went comparison shopping at Dell and HP I found that prices were +/- $100 sometimes one way, sometimes another.
Because some PC makers make cheaper machines does not mean Apple is expensive. Go ahead, put together a PC package that is covered by a similar warranty -as a single product- (not manufacturers warranties on a bunch of parts) with similar specs to an apple, with service from one place, and then compare prices. Go ahead, I can spec out an HP with specs similar to the $13000 Mac Pro fully loaded, and guess what, it costs about as much.
Now, yes, I can buy cheaper PCs, and often the lesser specs are all I need, but just because there are no equivalently cheap Macs doesn't make Macs overpriced.

everyone knows macs are for fags and homos who cares linux rules the world and everyone knows it...

hah.. yeah, lets just eliminate the business sector..

they count for what portion? pfft.. lets just forget'm

Vista is the sound that Microsoft dropping the ball makes. But the thing that will keep most people and businesses away from Apple is the price pure and simple. This is exactly where IBM was when Compaq got into the business. Way back when IBM tried to hammer Compaq but in the end the consumer won. Some people want BMWs and some people want fireflies as well as everything in between. So let Apple do what it wants with its own hardware but if Apple freely lets this machine exist then Microsoft will die. If Apple kills this machine then they will always be an also ran. And for you fans of Apple; do you think that Microsoft will learn from the Vista disaster? I suspect that this is Apple's best chance at beating 50% market share. The next version of Windows will potentially be lean and mean and a tough competitor to match.
And for anyone who argues my price issue; most people will buy what they can afford with no ability to compare technical specs so a brand new $600 laptop PC with a 15" screen looks exactly like a $1200 Macbook except for your $600 you get 15" instead of 13". So for the un-initiated you get 2 inches more for half the price.

Quote

Intruder wrote:

Quote

Anonymous wrote:
The real business model seems to be for all of the PC users that love the Mac OS because it really is vastly superior to Vista, but scoff at paying double the price of much higher performance PCs.

But they both run much more slowly than XP.

Maybe you should tell Norton that there isn't a business there then, or maybe you should at least do a search on Google first.

http://www.symantec.com/norton/products/overview.jsp?pcid=ma&pvid=nav11mac

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=viruses+OS+X&btnG=Google+Search

At least we will have the lawyers to amuse us for awhile... Who knows, Apple could very well be behind this. Might have to run out and buy some more stock...

electronic fuel injection V eight ?