Pole that was a very stand up post. You've earned some more respect from me. Now go get yourself a Mac and be happy like the rest of us Macaddicts.
I know for a fact that the G4 and G5 processors, although made by IBM are different designs than PC processors and are ARGUABLY better than PC processors. I say arguably because it depends on the test, etc. Also Apple makes their own "logic bds". They fail less at the hardware level than other computers, ergo, they have better hardware.
I think the difference is that we're talking about the whole widget. The Apple motherboard is tested as a SINGLE UNIT + the same OS. This gives Apple a lot of control in their R and D testing. OS X is UNIX, uses true multitasking, multithreaded, journalling, multi-processing and 64 bit computing (if you need it). Engineering labs love this! All of this makes the whole system very well integrated and tested. I have to belive that this helps quality. The other items like PCI cards, RAM, hard-drives can be purchased separately from many vendors which cuts down those "propriety" cost. As far as the Chip. Yes, it's the IBM PowerPC. Apple used to use Motorola's PowerPC, but IBM's offered the best fabrication plants (plus engineering excellence). This is why Microsoft (and Sony) have adopted the same (almost) PowerPC chip that's in the Mac for their next generation consoles. They know a good chip when they see it!
This may be a silly question but I'll ask since I haven't a clue. Is it possible to build your own Mac similiar to purchasing separate parts for a PC (motherboard, cpu, hard drive, etc...) and putting it all together? I'm trying to find some way that will make purchasing a Mac more cost efficient, something I've been able to do in the past with a PC by selectively purchasing the parts myself.
I'd say your best bet to "build you own mac" would be to buy a little bit older mac, say a dual processor g4 tower, then build from there. You can't really start from scratch but buying an older mac will give you a great foundation to build upon. The G4 towers are still in service and will run the most current operating system for years to come. These macs are highly upgradable with plenty of pci slots and numerous options to keep them useful for years. I work on a dual processor g4 at work and its fast and reliable. If you want to build your own mac start with a foundation and build on that.
Although VooDooPope is right in what he says (you can customise a Mac), the answer to your question is no. As a proprietary computer, you can no more build a Mac than you can build your own X-Box.
The man issue here is "off-the-shelf" mother boards. Those can be found used but not new. Not sure about the cases. That might be available. But for the rest of the parts, yes they are "off-the-shelf." Heres's some articles on "building your own Mac." http://www.macopz.com/buildamac/index.html http://www.g4techtv.com/screensaver...d_Your_Own_G4_That_Will_Run_Mac_Software.html But you wont be able to get the *newer* G5 Chips. Unless you have connections! As far as what I do to save money... When, I buy a Mac, I get the Mac with only 256 RAM (lowest amount). Then, I go out and by my own 512 RAM for $100.00. Also, I never get my drives from Apple (or reseller) built in. I get them separately (Western Digital, Matxor or IBM). It's way cheaper! I'm using a (1999) model G4 (AGP). Well, guess what? I've played Halo on it at medium settings. How? Because I've upgraded the system to the max. I've streched as much possible use out of my G4. I've saved money doing this! Example... Original - > Upgrade G4/450Mhz Chip -> Sonnet 1.4GHz Single Chip (could have gotten the dual 1.3 for an extra $300) 256 RAM -> 1.1 GHz RAM 27GB HD -> 80GB x 2 HD + removable Firewire HD 20GB 2x - DVD-RAM (16 x 10 x 16) -> DVD-/+R/-RW/+RW/CD-R/+R Pioneer Drive 16 x 4 x 16 (40x 32 x 40 CD-R/+R speeds) 128MB ATI AGP Graphics Card -> ATI Radeon 64MB 8500 Hitach 17" CRT -> Dell 19" Flat Pannel Yes, this sytem can play Halo just fine! Again, I've put off buying a new system for now.
The lack of being proprietary is what has kept Macintosh in the "niche" market. They made a decision early on to be proprietary, and IBM went with open architecture....thus the PC took off and the Mac went into obscurity. The Mac is a better PC, IMHO, but it is too late, the genie left the bottle in the 80s, the PC will always dominate. Mac has less than 2% of the world's market share and 3% of the US market. Link The Mac users are a dedicated vocal bunch, but if an election were held, they would be soundly defeated. DD
So in essence you're saying that PC processors are ARGUABLY better than G4's and G5's? Logic boards (motherboards) are a type of hardware - one of many in a computer. Simply because they fail less does not mean that Apple has generally better hardware. It's a game of semantics, but an important one because people usually fall prey to the usual Apple marketing mumbo jumbo that often ends up being half-truths. I agree that the OS is better and for certain apps the processor is better, but ... I do not agree that you cannot find better general hardware on a PC.
Nope, you're wrong. The quality of a computer is more than just the sum of it's parts. Apple is an industry leader in packaging and ergonmic design. Some people have wised up and are willing to pay a little more for a machine that "fits" and "feels" better than the PC equivalent. Pick up a powerbook or ibook and type on it's keyboard for a few hours, and then do the same on a Dell laptop, and you'll understand what I mean. Put a new iMac next to an all-in-one Compaq, and you'll see the difference. Quality isn't just what is in the box, but how the box works as a unit. Apple also pays much more attention to Quality Assurance than most manufacturers. My office deploys hundreds of new Dell boxes every year. Each passing year, the QA of Dell boxes has been dropping like a rock. Apple continues to be more consistent with QA. Design problems are typically fixed in newer versions of hardware. Their technical support is as good as it gets, and their extended warranties are some of the best in the industry. How many manufacturers will extend a warranty on a workstation with a 3000 dollar flat panel LCD to 3 year for under 200 bucks?
Nice try. G4 and G5's are better processors built by IBM processor manufacturing division than PC processors made by anyone else because they have a better design arcitecture. I spent years at Apple in front of data that PROVED that Apple's are more reliable in an out of box comparison to any other PC manufacturer. To me, and lots of other folks, that means the hardware IS better. Since I can also take any Apple computer from the Apple II to a G5 and put it back together and have it work, I think I know how the components work and how often they fail.
The good news is I got my monitor, er, DISPLAY back today. It would have cost me close to $500 bones if it were not still under warranty. They replaced the LCD screen and regulater (I think). In other words, they replaced everything but the plastic frame. I'm going to wait until next week to turn my computer in to get fixed. I can't wait to hear the diagnosis on that.
No need to get your panties in a wad Mulder, we know you rule the world of Apple's tech world - calm down. Regarding the "nice try" comment. I wasn't "trying" anything. You stated that ARGUABLY the G4's and G5's are better. If it's ARGUABLE, then it's ARGUABLE both ways, otherwise it wouldn't be ARGUABLE, would it? Your words, not mine. Maybe a poor choice of words on your part? The fact is it is arguable. As a matter of fact, I could put together an AMD Athlon64 machine that could obliterate an Apple at doing some things. Remember when the G5 came out with the fanfare that it was the fastest computer you can buy and had 3rd party tests to prove it? It was quickly proven those tests were rigged to favor the Apple. The Apple G5 was tuned so that it performed well in those benchmarks while the PCs were not tuned and some even had their Hyperthreading turned OFF. Nice job twisting the truth, Mr. Jobs. Neither processor is the best for everything and in most cases the people that buy either processor wouldn't notice the difference, but I know the boys at Apple don't want the "common person" to know that. The fact is that for things as incredibly CPU hungry such as protein folding algorithms, single P4's can sometimes outperform dual G5's. Regarding the reliability ratings. I agree Apples are generally better, but Pole gave one example of the "massive" difference. Bejezuz, I have a standard G4 keyboard at home that has the same QWERTY flat layout as I have on my Dell that I'm typing this from work on. And guess what? There are HUNDREDS of keyboards you can buy aftermarket made by dozens of companies for the PC. I've typed on an ergonomic Microsoft keyboard for years and I have no problems with it As for the laptops, I'll take your word on it for now, but I'm looking for an Apple laptop at the moment and I'll let you know if its keyboard layout makes all that much of a difference. Regarding the extended warranties. You're actually paying more (generally speaking) for the computer to begin with. For $200-$300 I can upgrade my mobo, processor, and *maybe* a video card 2-3 years down the road on a PC if I go for genuine upgrades and not top-of-the-line parts. Heck, I can get a completely new Dell system at times nowadays for around $400. So I'm sorry, the extended warranty for $200 means about as much to me as some of the silly extended warranties that are pushed by Best Buy. Some are good - some are ridiculous. You touched upon Dell quality going down and this is well-known in the industry. I wonder how Apple's quality will suffer if it actually has to support any semblance of a marketshare. Should be interesting. As for packaging and design - yeah I'll concede that to Apple. They shore r purty. Or as is said so often in the IT world - perception is everything. This thread is interesting in that it's had people from both camps defending their turf. Here's an unbiased opinion : I love both platforms. I own 4 PC desktops/laptop. I own a 733 MHz G4, and I will be getting either an iBook or PowerBook in the next few months. I've run UNIX variants (mainly Solaris and briefly SuSE/Red Hat Linux) on a PC and I have OS X which is UNIX-based. I don't use my G4 anywhere near as much as my PC's. Why? 1) The obvious reason is that everything at work revolves around PC's. I can't do work I take home on my Mac. Strike against the Mac for me. 2) I can do email, surfing, etc. on both platforms, yet I choose to do it on the PC more than the Mac. Why? Because there are so many more choices in software that are free or shareware on the PC platform. I don't know if it's changed recently, but about 2 years ago I tried to find a good IRC client for the Mac. I think I managed to get Snak. For a company that loves interfaces and design, that app was horrid in comparison to something like MS Chat (which I don't care for either) or mIRC (the standard). Ask people like Faos how important it is to be able to run stuff your buddies or someone else sends to you (referring to running the EXE file). 3) The Mac platform is safer due to the fact that every hacker, virus-writer, and cyberthug isn't going after it like they are Microsoft. This is a plus for Apple - means little to me since I take steps to prevent viruses, spyware, hacking, etc. 4) Some people like the beauty of the Apple computer. It looks great, but I don't care about looks - I use computers for work and play, not for a design statement. If I did, I could still get aftermarket cases for PC's that look nice. Nod to Apple in this department, but for me, it makes no difference. 5) Hardware choices. Without a doubt the nod goes to the PC side for me. Competition brings on better pricing and more choices. I can choose from a bucket of fruit or be given a banana. I choose the bucket of fruit - I'll take what I want. Apple has realized this as well as we've seen it become less and less proprietary. They lost the market when they didn't cater to the common folk, now they're trying to win them back. Nothing wrong with that. But... like I said, nod to the PC. 6) In about 20 years of using a computer with about 10 being on the PC side, I have had 3 failures on the dozens of PC's I've put together. Two of them were bad sectors on hard drives. One was because I was stupid and connected a keyboard to the computer with the computer still running. Most of the time this more than likely wouldn't cause a problem, but in my case, it shorted the mobo. Reliability is better on the Mac side, but it's not so skewed wildly that it would swing my views on either platform one way or the other. You also hear about fewer problems simply because there are fewer Apples and Apple users out there. Go to any Mac user forum that has a tech support area of any reasonable size - it sure as hell ain't a ghost town. I'm sure Faos is finding this out. Nod to Apple nonetheless. The main thing here is - how are you going to use it, what will you be sacrificing by going with one over the other and what's it worth to you? Educate yourself - don't buy into the blind sheep mantra of either side. Damn, that was a lot.
Who said anything about "dominating?" As far as Apple is concerned, it's not about "dominating." It's about innovation, industrial design and specialized markets. Apple is still a billion dollar company that's extremely healthy (especially due to the iPod sales). I never expected the Apple "market" to get past 10%. It's not in the nature of the company. It's always more expensive because of the design and demographics they target their products to plus the R&D cost (PC manufactures share design cost). Just like Mercedes or BMW will never have a larger market than GM or Ford. They target audience will always differ. Especially if you can't afford one. I mean, I always hear, "Why should I buy a Mac for $1000.00 when I can get a PC for $600.00?" Price has always been a key issue. That will never change. And there will always be people that CAN afford it. Thus a market. So, be it. "Niche market" for life. Oh well. Apple will not die. Even if you want them to.
Other than hardware problems. Many of the PC support calls are related to Microsoft OS issues. Which they say, "It's not our problem. Call Microsoft." So, that has huge effect on Dell/Compaq/HP support calls. You have to take this in consideration when factoring what Apples support would be if they had larger audience; they key here is that Apple does not use "Windows."
Dell has always used Microsoft OS's. At one point they had among the best service in the industry. The problem is they grew by a huge amount and they shipped some of their calls offshore. While I agree that the OS causes a lot of the problems - Dell's growth by leaps and bounds was also an issue. Going from an also-ran to the biggest PC-maker on the planet hit them. As for "Apple will not die". Times change, technologies change, some of the most stalwart companies go bye-bye in the blink of an eye or get jettisoned into historical obscurity in the same instance. No company is immune to that death - not even Microsoft. No company is immune to being relegated to a doormat in the industry no matter how visionary they are. Look at Xerox as an example. This is why Microsoft is quietly making investments into things like home theater, biotech companies, etc. No company that dominates an industry will dominate unless the industry itself survives - so what better way to protect obsolescence than by investing in multiple industries.
Not sure why you posted that. Give me more credit than that. The MS OS post was related to me trying to make a point on how Windows has an effect on the support issues of the hardware/PC company. It was just a simple statement. Which was answered... "While I agree that the OS causes a lot of the problems" But I hope you aren't saying that Windows 95 and 98 were easy to service! So, "best service in the industry" is relative. But since ALL PC's (IBM clones) used Windows. There wasn't much else to compare it to in relation to the desktop (except Apple). Back in those days the IT market analyst called the PC service market the "Golden Hell." Make lots of money fixing buggy Windows (device driver hell!). Hey, it's a job and it pays the bills! What would they do if they actually made a stable OS....job security gone! So, they didn't want to change a thing. The customers had no real choices since it was one OS company (MS) controlling the PC clone market. Thus, the PC user had to suck it up and deal with it. The "Apple will not die" was in reference to the market share post. Apple is not in any immediate danger of going under. As long as there are millions of Mac fans willing to purchase their products. But, if you stretch the term "will not die" to mean the infinite future (never). Then, fine. All companies die. Sure. So, maybe I shouldn't have implied "never." Yes, Dell is the ONLY PC maker that really has really flourished and survived the dot.com bust. Gateway and HP's Compaq DIVISION have not been so lucky. Not the extent that Dell has. HP (Compaq's mother company) is a different company so I shouldn't bring them into this fold. They do more than just servers/desktops. They are more technology company; broader markets. Now, if you want to talk about PC companies "dying." You need to look at the PC Clone market. Gateway has a better chance of "dying" than Apple (Dell is in a better position to put Gateway out of business than another other company). This is due to the PC market becoming more and more homogenized (as Microsoft sits on the fence and laughs). This was evident after the dot.com bust when hundreds of PC/server companies went out of business. After the dust settled. Apple was still standing. And they are branching out into the music market (iTunes/iPod and Music store). Their creativity and uniqueness can't be ignored. As long as they keep innovating and offer a product for demand, they will be fine. By the way Xerox is a 12 billion dollar company today. Not bad for an "industry doormat."
DavidS, In regards to the industry doormat issue for Xerox, what part of that 12 billion comes from the computer industry? It seems that you missed his point about Xerox. Some of the people that worked with Englebart went on to work at PARC in the 1970's........even with that edge in having a Tech Center like PARC, Xerox was unable to capitalize on WIMP in a commercial sense. The opportunity was there.....Xerox failed in that regard.
