The iMac 17" starts at $1299 and includes the ATI x1600 chipset w/128MB RAM. Not cutting edge graphics config for gaming, but adequate for most 3D shooters. Apple does little to woo game publishers to the platform. We need to see EA Games, Activision, Rock Star, and Microsoft all regularly porting their top 5 games to the Mac within 90 days of release on the PC to take the Mac seriously as a gaming platform. But to compare PC and Apple prices for a serious gaming rig, today you'd have to drop between $1300 and $3000 without a monitor to get a substantial XPS gaming system from Dell. Seems like an apples to apples comparison to me. Let's have this discussion when the Mac Pro comes out this summer.

Quote

Guest wrote:
I'm an IT administrator and freelance IT contractor, I work with x86 PCs only. Linux and Windows are my buddies. I've had to deal with many Apple systems in the past, and I can't say I've honestly had any better experience on them than I would have on a Windows PC.

I have worked with Windows, MacOS (version 8 and 9), OSX, and Linux professionally and personally.

Classic MacOS is garbage. OSX on the other hand I found interesting due to the interesting proposition of being able to use an honest to God *nix based system running Microsoft Office and Adobe products while using a single clipboard.

So I picked up an old system at a salvage yard and gave it a spin. To put it simply, I find the UI to be worlds more effiecient, less cluttered, less grating on my nerves (I'm damned picky), and littered with the kinds of features I'm no longer willing to do without. There is a spell checking service that tons of OXS apps use. What this means is that if your email client uses this service and you add a word, your IM program no longer flags it as incorrect. This also means that lots more OSX programs support spell check, because it's trivial to implement (I've checked). Were I typing this on OSX using any of a number of web browsers, this text entry box would unline mispelled words, but this is Firefox on XP Pro. Yeah, Google toolbar, but teaching 20 programs using their own spell checkers that my last name is not a mispelled word is not worth my time.

With time I found more things that are very useful, like why the hell can't XP show folder sizes in list views? This would be helpful and the hack I've installed does a poor job of it. It's not that OSX is perfect, far from it. It's just set up in such a way that after I got used to it, and learned the ins and outs, that I get more done while using it, clockspeed deficit and all.

Quote

Guest wrote:
I can also honestly say that I've seen more Mac OS systems crash than I have Windows XP systems crash in the past 5 years. I'm a C/C++ programmer, MS/My/Pl/SQL, and web interfacer on the side, and I wouldn't even consider Mac OS as any sort of a reasonable platform to develop anything on. Frankly, there just isn't a decent market for one thing.

The school network where I'm at now has been brought to it's knees every single year I've been there with the exception of this year due to worms wreaking on the Windows systems. It's not that this is unavoidable, it's that certain actions have not been taken to keep this from happening so much. Alas, I'm not in charge, and those who are don't seem to care. I never trust any system unless I've set it up myself or I know and trust those responsible for doing it. There's simply too much incompetence out there. Incompetence is the only thing I can think of why I was able to open a 600 layer photoshop file on a G4 there in 5 minutes, that I gave up on opening with one of their 1700Mhz Windows machines. And in fact, they don't really do much to their Macs, but they install all kinds of horribly written, home baked crap onto the Windows machines. The fact that the Kinko's PC was so much slower had nothing to do with Apple or Dell or Apple or Microsoft. It was all about Kinkos.

Quote

Guest wrote:
I'm the kind of person that will pay for a quality product. Looks don't appease me unless there's something to back those looks up under the shell. With Apple's new switch to the x86 platform, what good is buying an overpriced x86 PC with a proprietary OS on it...

Very reasonable arguements until this point...

Under the candy shell is ten tons of *nix goodness, and what little isn't there can be installed or easily replicated. I'm not a big X11 fan, but Apple even includes a native X11 server. Now I must say that I was kinda annoyed when I found that OSX lacked the Linux "rename" command. However I wrote a small script using ls and awk that recreates the rename command in a few minutes. Since one of my interests is automated network management, having a no-problem desktop that runs damned near every script that I've ever written without change is awesome. The free included compiler uses GCC as a compiler and fully supports ANSI C++. The actual standard C/C++ code I've written compiles on Linux and Solaris and basically whatever I thrown it at, endianness aside.

Furthermore, I'm sick of hearing the Windows crowd refer to OSX proprietary like it's somehow more closed than Windows. In reality I can download 70% of the source to what makes OSX work and I can talk about it. When was the last time you legally saw source code for core Windows files? Were you under an NDA? Because OSX is so open, some random programmer was able to take the driver for the trackpad on my wife's older mac laptop and add all the features Apple supports on their new laptops. When is the last time you heard about someone distributing a free driver for something that was based on Microsoft code?

Furthermore, the config files that make the OS work are in human-readable XML and are readily alterable. You can add localizations to existing commercial (non open) programs without reverse engineering or compiling anything (since the Cocoa API stores these files as text).

While OSX is in fact a proprietary system, it's only partially so. And it's orders of magnitude less proprietary than Windows. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprietary_software)

Perhaps the word you were looking for was "mainstream"? If so you'd be entirely correct. OSX is not mainstream.

Quote

Guest wrote:
There's one thing that really ticks me off about Apple though, their advertisement. They act like they're better than everyone else, like their $#!% doesn't stink.

So now, it's that they come off as assholes? They think they're french or something?

Of course they're assholes, they all are. Microsoft is selling us all down the river to the MPAA/RIAA. If Microsoft didn't offer them draconian DRM, the MPAA and RIAA would still be forced to deal with them. The point is that Microsoft wants the draconian DRM too. This is not good for consumers. Further not good for consumers is _requiring_ Digital Signitures for the owner of the machine to install a driver, but that's happening too. Apple may be elist snobs who charge a bit too much, but they let me do what I want to do with the machines I've bought.

I give Apple money and they leave me alone. I give Microsoft money and they keep telling me what to do. I really don't need the hassle. The strange thing was that this used to be the opposite. Windows was editable. You could hack the crap out of it. But that's certainly coming to a close. MacOS was crap and had no CLI...

Quote

Guest wrote:
I'd also like to ask why in the world would you be running linux on an x86 Apple PC when you can get a cheaper PC, with probably more power, elsewhere? If you dual boot, sure, that's fine, but I'd probably chose linux over Mac OS if you're compitent to navigate the depths of linux distrobutions in the first place.

This took me some time to figure out what you were talking about....

Ummm, no... what I said was... I'm looking forward to picking up one of the new Intel based Apple towers (whenever they finally release them). Then I can dual boot OSX and Windows. That way I can buy one machine, not two. One machine that runs OSX for projects/productivity, and Windows for playing games. My hope is that Apple gets a clue that they have customers who are gamers. And they'd make more money if they put together a tower that was a decent gaming system (whether you'd have to reboot under windows or not). The point is that keeping up with two platforms is expensive and they lose money due to this.

And it would absolutely help their bottom line. The new MacBook Pro machines are decent laptop gaming systems when booted into Windows. If they produced a decent gamer tower, I'd be willing to spend more, and I'd have more to spend, because I wouldn't have to have a second machine for gaming.

It just occured to me that you might not know:
Running Windows XP is supported on Intel-based Macs (but don't call Apple for Windows support issues): http://www.apple.com/macosx/bootcamp/

It's interesting to note that the OSX version of WINE has come far enough that the Windows version of MSIE 6 will now run on OSX. Novices need not apply, it's still rather technical.

Note: My Linux and FreeBSD boxes are x86 machines. I had machines comprising 8 different ISAs at last count, although I haven't gotten all of them running yet.

As an educated individual, I would think you would question the most obvious flaw in your article in order to address it. If Steve Jobs is so concerned about preventing violent games from showing up on his hardware, then why is he so quick to promote violence and sex-laden movies on his desktop, laptop and portable (iPod) hardware? The answer is easy. Money. There is a lot of money to be made by reselling Hollywood. And it is far easier to do so compared to the resale channels for games. And if you suggest that it is a parent's responsibility to chaperone their children and what movies they watch, I will point out that the same goes for games. There are just as many, if not more, violent movies as there are video games. Some more graphic than anything I've seen in games (Hostel, Silence of the Lambs, Saw 1 and 2, to name a few larger budget ones). In any case, it appears that you have some more thinking to do on the topic. As for Apple and gaming, I've given up on that unless Intel pushes them toward it with new processors. In fact, we're already seeing the possibilities now that folks can easily load Windows on their Apple hardware. If only driver revisions weren't controlled by Apple, then perhaps we would see some truly good optimization of the mediocre hardware in their machines. I love my Powerbook G4 (which is what I am writing this from), but I can't retire my Windows PC for the simple fact that I can always build one that out-powers anything that Apple has on the market. Pity that.

I have a concern with your assertion that Apple is highly focused on the professional or small business market. Apple's warranty options just don't support that. Nearly every other major PC manufacturer provide an option for on site support generally within 4 hours of an outage. Apple simply does not even offer on site support in many areas or at all on laptops. How can a professional expct to rely on a tool that when it fails must be sent out for several days?

Bravo. I wholeheartedly agree with the article, with one caveat:

Spore for OS X damn well better simultaneous launch with the PC version.

Gee, I can't plug a camera into my XP box, and a window pops up asking if i want to download the images, or browse my camera? I have yet to see a digital camera that isn't know.

I haven't had a BSOD in over 3 years, I very rarely ever get system freezes. Now, I will say, I will not touch IE with a your computer, I only use FireFox. But, none the less, there isn't a single thing in those current Apple ads that is correct about a Windows machine. Hell, Linux does all that.

Can someone please call Apple, and tell them to quit comparing OS X to win 98?

ummm, what??

I've been a Mac user for years, and I always promote the Mac to my PC friends. But if you're going to promote the Mac as machine designed for the benefit of mankind, one that is full of peace, love, and understanding intentions, I'm going to be sick and throw my powerbook out the window. Give me a break, man. We're not all New Age flower children here.

I'm also a 46 year old, mature, successful, not-living-with-my-parents, gamer who keeps a Windows PC just for that purpose. It's a shame I have to have two personal computers in my home, but until Apple wakes to the realization that gaming is a huge and growing market that they are ignoring, much to their low market share chagrin, I'll have to continue giving my money to Bill as well.

Don't overthink this.
The complaint is that Apple does not give CUSTOMERS the option to get the cutting edge of Video cards for their systems, even as a BTO option.

That is BS plain and simple. Their marketing likes to tout graphics performance but they run middling cards in their systems.

In today's brave new Intel platform, where might I have the option of running the most powerful graphics cards available? I guess on the unreleased successor to the PowerMac. Will it be there? I doubt it.

Will they even OFFER options for dual or quad SLI cards?

Is it all about not wanting to pay for driver development for their platforms from ATI and NVidia beyond low end or middle of the road graphics cards?

Apple does promote violent gory games, on their site and elsewhere. Straw man fallacy at work!

I, too have noticed that Apple, and specifically Steve Jobs, is very pro-family. When he spent more than a half hour demoing iLife during the last big keynote, it really "sunk in" to me, and I realized how much he loves families. If this is the case, I think he should avoid supporting liberals like Al Gore. Yes, Gore is a faithful family man and Gore even has a degree in religion from a Christian school. But he supports contraception, which is not something that helps families to be formed, and it's totally against the laws of nature... after all, no animals have ever used a piece of plastic or a chemical to make sure that sex is reduced to mere pleasure. And Gore supports abortion, again which is not something that makes people value their children. And he supports gay "marriage." Again, anti-family. Steve Jobs comes so close to getting it right but then he goes and supports liberals. And the QuickTime/iTunes page frequently pictures offensive images from Madonna album covers and so on. It would take a genius to figure it out, but some how Apple should forge ahead into a lifestyle that doesn't involve trashy album covers, music filled with curses, and pro-abortion politician board members such as Al Gore.

God bless Apple, God bless Steve, and God bless everybody reading.

I am strongly inclined to buy a mac book (with boot camp) just for this reason. I like OS X, but I want my games.

I have been using Mac's for years and even own iMac G3 Green and iBook G3. Since then, I've been more PC-centric at work and home. Since Apple started using Intel Chips, I've have renewed interest in Mac and OS X.

Now that Apple uses Intel Chips and released Boot Camp, owners of Intel Macs can boot into Mac OS X or Windows. The next version of OS X is supposed to include Boot Camp. At the same time, I've heard of some people booting hacked OS X onto generic PC's.

Although I like OS X for its stability, security, interface and well-designed applications, I do concede that Windows has way more support in terms of games (and other applications). With Boot Camp (or hacked OS X), users can now have both.

As for the original post, I believe it's all about marketshare. More marketshare --> more willingness for developers to develop for the platform.
With Apple's transition to Intel and new ad campaign, only time will tell if this will affect their marketshare.

It isn't Apple's fault that the Mac isn't a hot platform for gaming.

It's the developers' fault. Most PC game developers are so bitterly lazy and careless, they refuse to even consider how their games might run on limited hardware, and god forbid they actually OPTIMIZE their code. No, they'd rather not worry about restrictions and just dump a sloppy and unoptimized game engine on to the latest hardware because all the excess power lets them get away with it. Then repeat the process again and again, as newer hardware becomes available.

If personal computers only saw upgrades every 5 years like game consoles do, the PC gaming industry would suffer a collective heartattack, because by and large, it can't cope with developing for a platform that stays static for any more than four months before being replaced with something newer and faster. They could squeeze a damn fine looking game out of even the least powerful Macbook, but they won't, because they're allergic to the level of effort that console developers apply regularly.

That's the problem.

There won't be much reason for complaint once all Macs are shipping with Boot Camp as part of the OS. Then everyone will have the ability to play PC games on their Macs and the whole issue will be moot.

I'm currently playing Oblivion on my Macbook Pro and it runs beautifully. I've already got a list of other games I want to try out, and I'm happy that I don't have to wait for anything to be ported to the Mac - who cares - it's the same game either way.

One machine to rule them all.

If you look at market research, who drives the electronics economy? The buying power of kids desiring new toys! Advertisers know that by advertising on Saturday morning cartoons, and other TV shows aimed at children they can have a great impact on the economy. Look at McDonalds and their success. Not to mention, Apple's lack of attention to kids led them to lose a lot of school systems in 2000 to 2002. By not getting there early, by giving kids games, they miss out on opportunities. If they did that, kids whose minds are most able to be changed would see the Mac as a great machine to use. Without enough schools using Macs anymore, and losing ground in the gaming market, Apple is going to lose the hearts and minds of young ones. If the people entering business don't ask for Macs out of school, chances are the business will stay PC compatible. The cost of not doing games big time is gerater than the cost of doing it. They should take a few losses to get greater long term games.

Quote

Guest wrote:
It isn't Apple's fault that the Mac isn't a hot platform for gaming.

It's the developers' fault. Most PC game developers are so bitterly lazy and careless, they refuse to even consider how their games might run on limited hardware, and god forbid they actually OPTIMIZE their code.

Optimizing the huge games on a single ISA is extremely expensive in time and effort. This is why ID makes so much money. Making an optimized game engine is now so complex that it's easier to license an existing one for the huge amounts of money that can cost, and that's what many companies do. Licensing the Quake/Doom engine is so expensive that John Carmack had three Ferarris at one point. How much did it cost Vavle to use the Havok engine in Half Life 2? Probably much more than my house cost.

That's for one platform. Now consider that when you're writing optimized code for PPC you'd be using completely different approaches to make it run faster. Sometimes writing fast code for x86 is exactly the opposite of what you'd do to make it run fast on PPC, Sparc, or whatever. So to put the ISAs on a equal setting you'd have to basically start from scratch on portions of your codebase.

With the switch to Intel, I don't imagine that will be a problem anymore.

I've recently read that Microsoft had finally caved in to developers and will not handicap OpenGL the way they had first planned to. This would have been another thorn in a developer's side for making optimized cross-platform games.

Optimizing code is an extremely difficult process. It's very time consuming, and most people cannot do it to gamer standards.

Quote

Guest wrote:
Don't overthink this.
The complaint is that Apple does not give CUSTOMERS the option to get the cutting edge of Video cards for their systems, even as a BTO option....

...In today's brave new Intel platform, where might I have the option of running the most powerful graphics cards available? I guess on the unreleased successor to the PowerMac. Will it be there? I doubt it.

The question is, can they keep you from using a white box card you buy from the store? Probably not, at least not completely.

There really haven't been as many differences between Macs and beige box PCs for years. When I bought my beige G3, I took a non-Mac Voodoo 3 card and flashed the BIOS with a Mac BIOS and voila. It's now a Voodoo 3 PCI card for Macs. The reason the BIOS had to be flashed was that the Open Firmware based Macs used a different signal in order to initialize and maintain the video card. PCI is PCI, (32bit 5v standard set by a committee). AGP and PCIe are likewise.

So now that they use the same signals as Dell or HP. The cards will work at least until the OS begins to load. I don't think that will be a problem either because as the pirate community has found out, OSX can be hacked to run on a Dell.

What remains to be seen is driver support. This means that regardless, when booted into Windows the cards will work the same way they'd normally work in a Windows system. Under OSX you might not have thing like 3d acceleration, which requires driver support.

Quote

Guest wrote:
Will they even OFFER options for dual or quad SLI cards?

Dual, I sure as hell hope so... I'll be annoyed if they don't.

Quad, I really don't care, this doesn't even work under Windows very well. Nvidia does not support Quad SLI on non-OEM based machines. And the reviews of the Quad SLI Alienwares and Dells have shown tons of problems. Basically it's something for people who are wealthy and can afford to drop $4000 to $5000 on something that doesn't work very well, or people whose heads rattle when they shake them.

Quote

Guest wrote:
Is it all about not wanting to pay for driver development for their platforms from ATI and NVidia beyond low end or middle of the road graphics cards?

This is the important question. Will ATI and Nvidia finally port their monolithic drivers to OSX? If they do, there will be nothing stopping gamers like me from replacing whatever crap Apple puts in the video card slot with something more hardcore. 4% of the computer market is still may sound small but it accounts for over 4 million machines shipped per year. Marketshare figures only cover how many machines are sold, not how many are in use. So the installed base is far higher than marketshare shows.

BTW ATI and Nvidia pay Microsoft for the drivers they write for Windows. This is done through the driver certification program, where ATI and Nvidia pay Microsoft for every WHQL certified driver they release. Vista will require WHQL certification and Digital Signatures for all of it's drivers.

Quote

LaurieF wrote:
Response to previous two guests:



Anonymous #2: The game isn't compulsory. If you don't want to play it, don't play it. Play music instead. It's not a reason not to by an iPod. (PS I didn't know that game was there - it's not very good, BTW)

[Goes off to spit into the wind]

Laurie, the game was not mentioned to impugn playing of games or iPod but to demonstrate what a silly conception (video games bad...Apple good) prompted the moronic article. Someone please cut that guys internet connection.

I think this article is flawed because it presumes some equation where games have such a seriously negative connotation as to discredit the Apple brand.

Moral debates about the moral worth about videogames are simply far too weak -- and largely disregarded by the general public who have made vids a bigger industry than film or music -- to have much an effect on Apple's image, much less having any particular truth content themselves. In fact, in most ways, games are an extremely creative medium of the sort that Apple's brand is associated with producing! Have we already forgotten that Xbox development kits were Apple hardware, or that a lot of indy machinima is editing in FinalCut Pro?

The latent question that goes unasked in this article is "what is Apple supposed to do?" Vids are fundamentally an economy of scale and platform, and as such, are a game Apple can neither dominate nor direct, but they certainly can and do play. We call these "BootCamp" and "MacIntels", of which the MacBook Pro can be considered a competitive PC-gaming performer. I happen to be playing HOMMV, FarCry and WoW on it right now, and the performance is very good.

I'd say that in the last few months Apple has done a lot for Apple gamers, though Mac gamers continue to stand still as a marginal market.Just as they always have, and always will -- moral arguments aside.

Quote

Guest wrote:
i remember not 6 years ago steve stood on stage with john carmack making a point to show how the mac was great for games and john then made a point to say how easy it was for developers to compile for mac in the quake 3 engine.

i remember before that, at the launch of the original imac how steve again stood on stage showing off virtual game station from connectix. again touting how great the mac is for games.

if you think apple is willingly staying out of an industry that for the last 4 years, has outgrossed the motion picture industry youre severely misguided.

They love to show off something "cool" when it is done, but they are not out there actively promoting the development of new gaming products. Microsoft has a games division, so should Apple.

And for those of you worried about image, let's face it, Apple is out to make a buck. If it thought it could do it with games they would. For some reason they don't think they can.

Well someone seems to have a bias against gaming. I agree with much of your article but...

Quote

Computer games, as we've come to know them, are mostly (not always) about aggressive behavior, conflict, battle, wars of power, domination, and sometimes, in the worst cases, some very unwelcome social behavior. To put it bluntly, death and destruction.

Apple's public culture appears to celebrate, on the other hand, creation and life.

Please, there is no moralistic atmosphere that Apple is emanating. A fight to keep the brand in a certain bracket of professionalism perhaps. A fight that has kept their computer sales in the 2-3% market-share bracket. Look at the recent statistics, despite huge growth and insurmountable popularity Apple is losing marketshare. Gaming is what people do on their computers now. Non-gamers are a semi-minority. Apple needs to figure that out, or much to my chagrin I'm gonna have to switch back to a Windows Box. Weee.

The average age of the video game player is now 30. I do not call people of that age 'youth' or 'kids' or 'children'.

There has been a very real lack of innovation and imagination brought to gaming in the last decade, with few exceptions. The future of gaming lies not in a lawnmower device [loud!] inside of a desktop PC. It lies in the eye of the game designer, and unfortunately the all-too-bland "everything must be FPS-style" attitude has already reared it's ugly head wreaking the detrimental existence we see today.

Realism is not about polygons, it is about pulling you inside the game. Too bad not many people of influence to/in the gaming industry understand this...

Perhaps this is one of the reasons why people wish Apple to be of more influence in this arena?

-Sad Gamer

I think its not to hard to make the mac a 'gaming' machine.

You just need to make the graphics chipset upgradeable. Give every desktop Mac a PCI-E card that can be replaced or built-to-order with newer, faster cards. How much money would that cost Apple?

I like Minesweeper on Windows and Solitare can pass a lot of time but really you have to credit Apple for including GNU Chess.

It fits in with Apple's brand much better. Sure there are some very good free Chess games available for Windows but Microsoft have never thought that their users want to do anything more than click a mouse rapidly. Incidentally, I think Minesweeper is an excellent way to hone mouse skills on the PC but for me it is a puzzle game based on speed. Chess is a challenge on many more levels for me.

It seems to me that most of you have an archaic view of computing. You're much too focused on specfications.

Average users don't care about Apple, Microsoft, or what type of CPU a tower has. Heck most people barely understand Pentium or whatever! People are interested in features and utility. What can I use it for? What can it do for me?

PCs have really evolved in the last year or so. PCs are no longer "game" machines. Mine has a HD Tuner, remote control, it's connected to my entertainment system. I use it for gaming, surfing the web, and of course other utility purposes as well.

Computing is different today than it ever has been. Often time adults today don't even realize what they can do with computers. Most of them think they're just for doing a spreadsheet, or Internet access. They don't understand that they can publish photos on the web, use their computer as TIVO device, etc. It's not "I don't game", it's the option to do so. Macs really can't offer that at this point in time, so for most it's a step in backwards direction.

Quote

Anonymous wrote:
I think its not to hard to make the mac a 'gaming' machine.

You just need to make the graphics chipset upgradeable. Give every desktop Mac a PCI-E card that can be replaced or built-to-order with newer, faster cards. How much money would that cost Apple?

The tower Macs are upgradeable, which are the ones most comparable to the Alienware-type gaming machines. The issue is really more with ATI and NVidia than with Apple in the case of graphics cards. They have to make the drivers/firmware compatible. Evidently that is happening more now with (I believe it is ATI) common firmware in cards that are interchangeable between Macs and PCs.

I'm a 35YO IT professional, I work in online data backups. We're a Windows and *Nix shop, and I switched to the Mac platform at Christmas at home for the opposite reasons of the referenced post / poster.

After my PhD boss brought in a g4 iBook and worked it over (shells, admin taks, AD integration, etc etc), and it worked flawlessly, I was hooked. Seeing the iBook, coupled with yeat ANOTHER "Stupor Tuesday" batch of patches and reboots was a powerful cocktail, indeed. It took awhile, though, to convince myself to pay the premium price that Macs carry.

But, the Sat. before Christmas (2005), I took some bonus $$$$, went to Fry's, and switched. I love it!

Now, I don't game, at all. I don't have a dog in *this* fight, but I can say this: as an IT professional, I would run my entire operation on *Nix and OSX if I could. My one gripe with the Apple world is that the choices for software are far smaller. It's like you can get, as an example, 50 programs to do spreadsheeting in the Windows world, and 5 in the OSX world. And the name of software in the OSX world.... that's insane, too! "BonJour" for printer sharing???

I digress... I just wish Apple would be more focused on the "normal" business markets. OSX can beat Windows head to head, I'm sure of that. They just need to GO head to head.

On the comment on "death and destruction," why then does Apple post/support many movie trailers that promote/include just that? How can they say no to violence with games and yes to film?

Quote

Guest wrote:
i remember not 6 years ago steve stood on stage with john carmack making a point to show how the mac was great for games and john then made a point to say how easy it was for developers to compile for mac in the quake 3 engine.

Actually I think it was to show off something he made for the geforce3 which was shipped in a mac before pc/ibm/whatever had them. If you take a look at John Carmack's programming history you'll see that he started off programming on apple II Maybe John is one of those people who'd love nothing more then to program openGL games on monster mac's ? Maybe apple missed the hint there before more great 3D engines came out from other developpers then Carmack who used to be the sole 3D programming god on the planet. Guess he had too much power for apple :p

Quote

Anonymous wrote:
...My one gripe with the Apple world is that the choices for software are far smaller. It's like you can get, as an example, 50 programs to do spreadsheeting in the Windows world, and 5 in the OSX world. And the name of software in the OSX world.... that's insane, too! "BonJour" for printer sharing???...

Granted, you can find 50 programs to do spreadsheets in the Windows world, but in reality how many of them are actually worth the money you pay for them, and how interoperable are they? One of the biggest problems with the Windows world is the amount of chaff there is regarding software.

And Bonjour is not the name of printer sharing. It is a cutesy name for ZeroConf, a way for things to self-discover each other. It works for computers as well as printers (which I'm sure you know, being in IT, so no insult intended). You can always call it ZeroConf and confuse the heck out of everybody!

It's apparent that you're not a gamer, but how could anyone who claims to understand Apple not cite the Pippin in their analysis of why it wouldn't go into gaming? I agree with your conclusion but your route getting there wasn't compelling.

The whole article is based on the idea that games=bad.

This is an antiquated idea, which the overwhelming statistics posted in some comments above show. The writer shows his age and his moral bias a little too much to be considered a legitimate journalist.

But this article underlines my biggest problem with Apple, the holier-than-thou attitude that nearly every single mac user adopts as soon as they buy one piece of white plastic. Just because you use a certain brand of computer, you are not a better person.

You're not even that savvy of a consumer, because it's clear that these people are easily influenced by the image that Apple projects through its advertising.

The truth is, Macs break just as often as Windows boxes. I've seen it happen, I have a lot of holier than thou friends who complain about taking their Mac to Tekserve while praising the system in the same breath. And I'll reiterate what above posters have pointed out, if Apple had a market share higher than 2%, there would be a lot more viruses for OSX. Macs are less powerful gaming machines and much less customizable, while being more expensive. I guess the white plastic tree is an endangered species, its costs a lot to manufacture anything using it.