Negative Ads.....

Buying something because of a 30 second ad or not buying something because if it is silly to me. Test it out, see if you like it, and buy it/not buy it because of your own reasons.

I'm fine with the ads...it's just, well...Macs can technically be PCs too! Can't we all just get along?

 

Well Apple makes up like 1% of the computer user population? They're allowed to alienate since thats precisely the crowd they're selling to.

Also Macs do suck. You spend money out the ass for their software. Not hardware. If that lawsuit related to allowing Mac software by a 3rd party to run on PCs is allowed, then you can expect Mac to go down pretty fast.

 

Sometimes I give a company respect for calling out the competitors by name. But yeah they're kinda annoying in that it represents the Apple "culture". Ads work but most people arent completely dumb. If the product is superior people will find out sooner or later. Word of mouth and positive personal experiences still sell

 

As a PC user, I find some of those commercials funny. I know a lot of the crap they spew are lies, but it's clever. Hey I'm a PC...pushes Apple products to people who make their purchasing decisions based on ads.

I hear a lot about how great Apple software is. Any programs in particular? Wait, do you mean running the Mac OS on a PC? It would be pretty cool if I could choose which operating system to boot at the start up. That would kill Apple hardware, but really improve their software sales.

Vista is Windows XP with a sleek Apple-like interface. I like it, student edition ftw. Downside is it requires more ram, but those sticks are cheap these days.

 

I believe its market share is up to about 8-10% now. And from what I've seen on campus the past four years the younger crowd's eating up Apple laptops in class.

Yes, you ARE stereotyping. I drink frappaccinos, not lattes.

Also Genius Bar rules. Had a rare faulty casing that had a crack in it. I went to the Galleria, dropped it off and it was replaced in a couple hours. The fact that I didn't have to ship it off was great.

 

Well one of the big attractions to OS X is that its fairly hacker proof. The consumer base is so small that hackers really have no interest in creating code to exploit them. PCs are easier to exploit because of this since their consumer base is so large. Since Windows has to make so much 3rd party software accessible, and accommodate for various hardware to run a PC, they're easier to exploit.

The beauty of a Mac is that the hardware is already provided for you. You can't buy a 3rd party video card or RAM. You have to get it from Apple. Because of this they can sell their Macs for an enormous price since there's not competition. There are no hardware driver related problems. It's easy to hook up.

The OS is sleek and easier to learn for the near computer illiterate user, which is attractive because newbs are more likely to fall for the usual trojan viruses on dirty websites and don't know how to fix it. You rarely get that with Apple since few hackers have any interest in such a small consumer base.

The software they're so well known for is for website designing, iTunes, Photoshop, Movie creation and editing, and I'm sure there's more. Again all this software is easier to learn for beginners. I'm not really familiar with it all.

I got a niece that goes to a private school where Mac laptops are required. It's consumer base is growing I guess. I've been interested in buying one but they're so overpriced. It'd basically be an overpriced computer to check e-mail with.

I guess if you got that many college students getting loans to buy an expensive computer like that, no wonder so many are in such debt.

Here is the lawsuit I was talking about. It's settled already.

http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/10/19/1511231&from=rss

"Psystar and Apple have agreed to alternative dispute resolution to keep the public eye away from their disagreements, and to reduce legal costs. This will eliminate any rulings that would set a precedent over Psystar's claim that Apple is violating anti-trust laws by tying Mac OS X to only their hardware and thus creating a monopoly. This could result in a profit for Psystar's business, but eliminate their line of open-computing Mac-compatible PCs. On the other hand, what's to stop a similar company from doing the same thing?"

Basically Apple is dependent on their software to sell Macs. Without it, its just another overpriced PC that can't run games.

 

I was put off by them from the very start.

Maybe their commercials work and maybe they don't. I think it is odd strategy to depit potential consumers of your product as dim witted if they aren't using your product.

 

those commercials are, for the most part, hilarious and devastatingly effective

so much so that windows was forced to launch a series of "counter" ads... "im a blah blah and im a pc, etc"

 

Macs may not have wizards for every task but I've never found anything that I couldn't do on mine. And the vast majority of after market hardware you can buy will work on a Mac. Replacing stuff on a Mac Mini or iMac can be difficult because of the form factor, but standard hardware works just fine.

 

But that's the consumer market, which is a non majority of the overall market when you include enterprise computers that corporations run on. When you include the consumer AND enterprise market, Apple has a very small share. They have almost no enterprise level market share, especially in bigger corporations. Sure there are a few niche companies here and there that use Macs, but most do not.

Also, and I'm asking because I truly don't know, but can you run enterprise software on Macs? Software like Oracle, Peoplesoft, SAP, etc.

 

i am confused by this whole pc vs. mac.

pc = personal comptuer
mac = personal computer

shouldnt it be .."i use windows.." and os x vs. windows.

 

The stupidity of this discussion ranks above PS3 vs 360, but below Ford vs Chevy.

 

Not enough user control? I can go into Linux on my Mac and accomplish anything I need to do and I can do most of what I need through the OS itself.

I have plenty of 3rd party software as well that I obtained at low cost.

 

I can go to windows on my windows machine to do everything i need it to. I don't dual boot, well, because Vista does everything it needs to.

The video editing community is leaving Mac, all that's left are old fuddy duddies that really can't get with the times. I like DX10 a hell of a lot more than anything the OpenGL community puts out (well, except the G1 google phone). I love it when people talk about Photoshop and the CS4 suite, and even the idiots who do autocad on macs. They make me laugh. Why boot two OS's when one is enough?

As for software, hands down, you can find the most variety of software on PC, as well as the support is much more extensive. True, the geniuses are great when they can solve a problem, but there are many occasions when they just junk out the product SEE: iPhone. The PC community is quite extensive and finding an answer is much easier than on Apple. There are many more third party tech companies that know PC then there are Mac techies.

It's best said in that you go mac if you really don't want your computer to do much, and if your cash is burning a hole in your pocket. You go PC if you want greater possibilities and you're not trying to make a statement. SEE: Justin Long.

 

Umm....Macs come with 3rd party video cards made by NVIDIA and ATI. You also don't have to have Apple-branded RAM (I don't think there even is such a thing). You can buy whatever RAM you want. Not to mention running Windows, Linux, etc.

And Photoshop is a (3rd party) professional application, as is FinalCut Pro, Microsoft Office, and a bunch of others....not sure what your assertion is re: software for Macs being for beginners. Just because their in-house stuff (iMovie and Garage Band, for example) is easier to use means it's for beginners? Can't agree with that. Yes, those two examples are aimed at consumers, but you can do some very impressive things with those apps. I wouldn't call them beginner apps just because beginners can do something with them, that's for sure. The average consumer doesn't use Word for an eighth of what it is actually capable of doing, but can still do the basics. Does this make Word a beginner application? Don't think so.

And you say you're "not really familiar with it all," yet you seem to have some pretty concrete opinions on the Mac platform as a whole, so I don't know what's up with that, either.

It is also pretty well-accepted that the Mac's Unix-based OS is inherently more secure. Yes, the smaller market share probably is a factor, but again: Unix is more secure. Doesn't mean it can't be hacked or that viruses 'don't exist' for Macs.

Third-party software and hardware is readily available and has been for many, many years, so you're wrong again there.

FWIW, I'm typing this post on a PC running XP. I'm going back to Apple first chance I get (i.e. when this lappy is done and I can afford a new computer).

If you're a hobbyist that wants to mod a computer, Macs probably aren't for you. Apple doesn't (and never has) targeted that crowd. You pay a bit more for specific hardware running a specific OS, but their plan is go give the consumer the most seamless experience possible, which is fine by me.

In my view, the ads in question are designed to directly refute your points, which are common misconceptions about Apple that have been around for many, many years. On top of that, these ads are what Mac users have been clamoring for for well over a decade back when Apple didn't advertise at all, so there's that, too.

 

Your arguement if flawed in that Unix is not the whole reason of why Mac OS is safer. It's reduced compatability. As for security too, do the research, Vista is actually (if we're talking about OS stability, firewall protection, and protection from intruding software) much safer. Mac OS in it's Unix base has more points of vulnerability (over 200) while Vista only has 32 points. The issue that comes up is that more code can compile on Vista and all in all writing a virus in Vista (for now) is easier to do because coders are more versed in it. If Apple's marketshare were to increase, the ease of coding malicious code would increase as well. The best way to explain it is, you can't get the flu from a dog, your genetic information is too varied from it. But, if a dog were to magically evolve into a monkey and caught the flu, you'd be much much more ceceptable to getting the flu. As Mac's evolve to the functionality of PC's, their security will be in question. Look at the fact that it wasn't until the intel Macs that the first forms of spyware and viruses started to pop up for OS X.

Believe me, I like Unix, but if you've ever set up a linux box of any sort you know it's a pain in the ass.

What people seem to forget, Apple has really never been about the User. Look at why PC's took storm so quickly, it's a term called PC-Compatible. When apple finally decided to do that, that's when they started to come back from the dead, but i honestly don't think it will ever be enough.

 

I use what I think is best for what I want to accomplish and I don't give a **** what anyone else thinks about it.

 

I like the ads.

I've never owned a mac and don't intend to. PC works well for me and the software I need is configured for the PC.

But the ads are funny.

 

I don't dual boot. If I use Linux commands on my Mac, I simply bring up the terminal app and type in the commands.

I don't understand your comment concerning booting two OS(es) to run Photoshop. There are versions for Macs.

I have never had a problem using google to find any answers regarding questions about my Mac.