Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Why are homebuilt PCs called clones? Aren't those Apples?

Tags:
  • Homebuilt
  • PCS
  • Macintosh
  • Systems
Last response: in Systems
Share
January 29, 2007 7:07:13 PM

I understand that this came from "IBM Compatibles", but today shouldn't it have new meaning?

I mean every MAC is the same and white like a Lucas StormTrooper TM. These are clones.

Every brand of PC looks different, and every one we build ourselves is different.

Why don't they use 10 Glad Barbage Bag guys in the MAC commercials and then people of every shape size and color to represent PCs?

More about : homebuilt pcs called clones apples

January 29, 2007 7:15:22 PM

Ignorant people are attracted to Macs because of their much more common then PC advertisements and some-what attractive computers.

PCs are extremely customizable compared to Macs, and can be uglier or more attractive depending on the money and work put into them. I can't think of anything Mac does better then PC.
January 29, 2007 7:26:06 PM

I totally agree.

Just find it totally ironic that MACs, the machines that are marketed at creative users, all look the same and totally lack creative design.

Whats the best they could ever come up with? I suppose the iPods would be the best hint...

Some new colors. Wow.

Anyone else agree the OS on the new iPhone looks JUST LIKE VISTA and Media Player 11?
January 29, 2007 7:30:37 PM

Quote:
I can't think of anything Mac does better then PC.


How about they actually work?

I'm a PC user by the way.
January 29, 2007 7:42:20 PM

Quote:

Anyone else agree the OS on the new iPhone looks JUST LIKE VISTA and Media Player 11?
That would be OSX which has been around much longer than Vista and MP11...
January 29, 2007 7:43:13 PM

Quote:

Anyone else agree the OS on the new iPhone looks JUST LIKE VISTA and Media Player 11?
That would be OSX which has been around much longer than Vista and MP11...

Indeed.
January 29, 2007 8:17:53 PM

Quote:
How about they actually work?


Is that a joke? If you have trouble getting a PC to work then I'm afraid you're not very experienced.
January 29, 2007 8:31:56 PM

Quote:

How about they actually work?


I disagree....
This is just from my experience, other users may find there experience not quite as dreadful.

My gf has had 4 macs (2 laptops, 2 desktops; she is a web designer) since I have lived with her. One of them had serious issues. The other three overheat or have very poor graphical performance.

Her Intel Core Apple notebook had every issue under the sun and failed to properly install things at least 50% of the time. It had it's logicboard replaced 3 times, 60gb hard drive twice, and the cd rom drive replaced as well becuase if It didnt fail to install, it would most likely fail to read the disk. It also shutdown or went to standby without warning when the computer was being used in any application.

Then

Her new laptop with the Core 2 Duo is fine but it's totally not worth the price for what it does.
My $800 Acer laptop does everything hers can do and mine runs games fine without overheating like hers does, her framerate is about 5 frames faster, but her laptop generates much more heat than mine and eventually shuts down.

Hers was $1299:
* 2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo Memrom
* 1GB memory
* 80GB hard drive
* Built in Webcam
* Overheats when playing World of Warcraft, extremely hot underneath
* Crappy Ventilation system (The fan blows towards the screen which is flat (the screen blocks the airflow)

vs Mine at $800 ....actually, I think I paid $900, but still:
* 1.6GHz AMD Turion 64 x2 (not as good as her Intel Core 2 Duo though)
* 1GB memory
* 120GB hard drive
* Built in webcam
* Cool as a cucumber and always on 24/7, cannot feel heat underneath it
* Removes hot air very efficiently through the side (nothing blocking it)

Thats enough reason to buy a pc laptop, I will admit that that her framrate is a little higher...but because it overheats...it's not worth it.

Also...

I just built my new computer:
a little less than $1,900.00
DFI rd600
Intel Core 2 e6600 L630A983
Vigor gaming Monsoon II TEC
H.I.S x1950xt IceQ 3 Turbo
Corsair Dominator 8500CL5 2gb
Sony Dru-820a
LG GSAH22N
Seagate 7200.10 2x250 (500GB)
OCZ Gamexstream 850watt
Crystalfontz 635

She just bought a new one about 2 months ago (then new 24" iMac)
$1,999.00
Intel Core 2 duo Memrom 2.16ghz
250gb HDD
Nvidia 7300gt
1gb memory

...now tell me, who got the better bang for the buck, thats right, I did! No contest, hands down.

To make things worse, her new iMac freezes once every ~45min when playing World of Warcraft because her iMac gets too hot. When the game is running there are graphical errors that weren't present on her previous machine, such as polygonal spikes and texture glitches/malfunctions. To buy a new graphics card for it costs a crap load too, because it's not the G5, it's the iMac :roll. The best graphics card she can get is a mesely 7600gt :evil: 

Macs are a ripoff imo. If they actually worked really well (as they should for how much people are getting ripped of just to buy one) then I wouldn't have any complaints. But having to take her to get her Mac's repaired and replaced just shows the machines blow.

She has issues with her Macs all the time, but because her work requires a mac and all of the programs she use are specifically made for Macs she has no choice.

I'm sure some people have had great experiences with a Mac, but for my girlfriend and I ...well, you know the story.

And quantumsheep
"How about they actually work?"

I have not had any issues with any of the PC's I have owned...besides not flashing bios on the first computer I built. Everyone of my machines have been rock solid. If your having issues with your pc, then it must be a personal issue or something.

Everyone of her friends that owns a Mac (like , about 16 of em) will call BS on that, because they have all had issues with there Macs. They say that Pc and Macs both have there problems, and I agree. I don't think one platform has more or less errors than the other, I think they both have there troubles, and that I have just had a sour experience (bad luck I guess)

But price:p erformance wise, a PC just cannot be beat. Especially because you can build one.

That's just my experience and my 2 cents
~3lfk1ng
January 29, 2007 8:48:10 PM

The last time I checked MAC OS does not ship with a black skin, with black backgrounds. Quicktime has always been gray, so they sure as hell didn't get it from that either. I swear when I watched the iPod launch I was looking at a Vista ad.
January 29, 2007 9:36:20 PM

Quote:
Ignorant people are attracted to Macs because of their much more common then PC advertisements and some-what attractive computers.

PCs are extremely customizable compared to Macs, and can be uglier or more attractive depending on the money and work put into them. I can't think of anything Mac does better then PC.


Wow i couldn't have said it better myself...
~Cheers
January 29, 2007 9:51:50 PM

Quote:
I can't think of anything Mac does better then PC.


How about they actually work?

I'm a PC user by the way.

they work?? Have you ever had to support them on a large enterprise network?? They work after you have to redesign the network just so they can...

NOTE: not a flame towards you just trying to make a point

~Cheers
January 29, 2007 10:26:49 PM

Jeez, guys. lotsa folks bought Yugo's too. They were "cute". Could not do much with them but go from A to B, were useless after a couple of years, parts were non-existent. There is just a certain segment of the population whose emotional state require that they be members of contrarian cults, whether reality supports their views or not. But ,hey, if the cultists ever manage a produce a real computer that the whole population could use, was price/performance competitive and managed to play games as well...I'll take a look-provided I can house in a non- Jonestown case.
January 29, 2007 11:05:26 PM

I think the "clones" part came a few decades ago when IBM still had its OS proprietary, but some manufactorers were biulding ways to get around it. As it was explained to me way back in the dark ages, IBM had a code line that went something like "This is a genuine IBM product", while the clones put in a line that said "This is NOT a genuine IBM product". Computers being as they are, they ignored the word NOT and just read the rest of the line, allowing the machine and software to function. Thus the mimicked, or "cloned" the abilities of a genuine IBM. At a later time, IBM gave up and sold the licencing so that anyone could build computers or software for their OS, as long as a licencing fee was paid.

Aplle never did this, which is one reason that IBM grew by leaps and bounds, why Apple went nowwhere.
January 29, 2007 11:29:13 PM

Quote:


Anyone else agree the OS on the new iPhone looks JUST LIKE VISTA and Media Player 11?


ahah
you are an ass!! :lol: 
January 29, 2007 11:33:34 PM

Quote:
The last time I checked MAC OS does not ship with a black skin, with black backgrounds. Quicktime has always been gray, so they sure as hell didn't get it from that either. I swear when I watched the iPod launch I was looking at a Vista ad.


you want colors?

here you go


And when you know something about computers, don't be afraid to post :wink:
January 29, 2007 11:37:02 PM

As a mac user, by now I can only recommend mac pro workstations and macbooks. never an imac (has too many cons).

The consumer has to choose the machine by the software he wants to use. Or if he's dumb, just for the looks.
January 29, 2007 11:43:39 PM

I'd definately call Mac a clone-trooper. PC is much better when you build it yourself... more bang-for-your-buck and much more flexible. It's like ordering from Dell when you order from Apple; everything looks the same (and ugly) and the different options are too expensive for lo-quality junk.
January 29, 2007 11:45:11 PM

Quote:

How about they actually work?


I disagree....
This is just from my experience, other users may find there experience not quite as dreadful.

My gf has had 4 macs (2 laptops, 2 desktops; she is a web designer) since I have lived with her. One of them had serious issues. The other three overheat or have very poor graphical performance.

Her Intel Core Apple notebook had every issue under the sun and failed to properly install things at least 50% of the time. It had it's logicboard replaced 3 times, 60gb hard drive twice, and the cd rom drive replaced as well becuase if It didnt fail to install, it would most likely fail to read the disk. It also shutdown or went to standby without warning when the computer was being used in any application.

Then

Her new laptop with the Core 2 Duo is fine but it's totally not worth the price for what it does.
My $800 Acer laptop does everything hers can do and mine runs games fine without overheating like hers does, her framerate is about 5 frames faster, but her laptop generates much more heat than mine and eventually shuts down.

Hers was $1299:
* 2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo Memrom
* 1GB memory
* 80GB hard drive
* Built in Webcam
* Overheats when playing World of Warcraft, extremely hot underneath
* Crappy Ventilation system (The fan blows towards the screen which is flat (the screen blocks the airflow)

vs Mine at $800 ....actually, I think I paid $900, but still:
* 1.6GHz AMD Turion 64 x2 (not as good as her Intel Core 2 Duo though)
* 1GB memory
* 120GB hard drive
* Built in webcam
* Cool as a cucumber and always on 24/7, cannot feel heat underneath it
* Removes hot air very efficiently through the side (nothing blocking it)

Thats enough reason to buy a pc laptop, I will admit that that her framrate is a little higher...but because it overheats...it's not worth it.

Also...

I just built my new computer:
a little less than $1,900.00
DFI rd600
Intel Core 2 e6600 L630A983
Vigor gaming Monsoon II TEC
H.I.S x1950xt IceQ 3 Turbo
Corsair Dominator 8500CL5 2gb
Sony Dru-820a
LG GSAH22N
Seagate 7200.10 2x250 (500GB)
OCZ Gamexstream 850watt
Crystalfontz 635

She just bought a new one about 2 months ago (then new 24" iMac)
$1,999.00
Intel Core 2 duo Memrom 2.16ghz
250gb HDD
Nvidia 7300gt
1gb memory

...now tell me, who got the better bang for the buck, thats right, I did! No contest, hands down.

To make things worse, her new iMac freezes once every ~45min when playing World of Warcraft because her iMac gets too hot. When the game is running there are graphical errors that weren't present on her previous machine, such as polygonal spikes and texture glitches/malfunctions. To buy a new graphics card for it costs a crap load too, because it's not the G5, it's the iMac :roll. The best graphics card she can get is a mesely 7600gt :evil: 

Macs are a ripoff imo. If they actually worked really well (as they should for how much people are getting ripped of just to buy one) then I wouldn't have any complaints. But having to take her to get her Mac's repaired and replaced just shows the machines blow.

She has issues with her Macs all the time, but because her work requires a mac and all of the programs she use are specifically made for Macs she has no choice.

I'm sure some people have had great experiences with a Mac, but for my girlfriend and I ...well, you know the story.

And quantumsheep
"How about they actually work?"

I have not had any issues with any of the PC's I have owned...besides not flashing bios on the first computer I built. Everyone of my machines have been rock solid. If your having issues with your pc, then it must be a personal issue or something.

Everyone of her friends that owns a Mac (like , about 16 of em) will call BS on that, because they have all had issues with there Macs. They say that Pc and Macs both have there problems, and I agree. I don't think one platform has more or less errors than the other, I think they both have there troubles, and that I have just had a sour experience (bad luck I guess)

But price:p erformance wise, a PC just cannot be beat. Especially because you can build one.

That's just my experience and my 2 cents
~3lfk1ng


Im kinda hurt you called the 7600gt measly, just you wait until i get my 8600 ultra :?
January 29, 2007 11:50:50 PM

Quote:
I'd definately call Mac a clone-trooper. PC is much better when you build it yourself... more bang-for-your-buck and much more flexible. It's like ordering from Dell when you order from Apple; everything looks the same (and ugly) and the different options are too expensive for lo-quality junk.


What part of what I have said you didn't understand?
Expensive? Maybe the macbooks. not the others.
Give me a same spec workstation at the same price of a mac pro.
January 29, 2007 11:58:53 PM

Where is your 24" monitor? is in the price?
I don't consider the imacs expensive, if you keep in mind the way they mount a pc attached to a monitor, which increases production costs and time. But yes, they have too many cons. If you have a problem you can´t open it and solve the problem. or if you need to replace some part that has gone boom, if have to send all the compute to maintenance.
January 30, 2007 12:11:01 AM

What I think is great is that apples ad about how pc's suck came at the same time they switched Intel and became a pc. Now there pushing the fact you can run windows on a mac. Apple is just dell with less option now and there own OS. They gave up and just became a software company kind of sad really. Really what mac people hate is windows,they don't even realize you could put Linux on a pc and it's all most a mac at a fraction of the cost.
January 30, 2007 12:20:25 AM

I sure don't understand all this petty dumping on Apple computers. My first two computers were Apple - back when you had to almost be a programmer to operate an IBM computer - but since then I switched to pc's (its ironic how IBM was allowed to steal that designation) to have access to the larger software selection for it. I don't see ever going back - but I see no reason to dump on Apple.
It serves a particular market for certain designers and for people who want the simplicity of intergreated hardware and sofware with ease of use and dependibility.
There was a time when Apple was the enginerring leading and innovator - including in hardware appearance. So they are not now because they have so many competitors. Still no reason to trash them.
Dell appeals to certain markets. Other suppliers - included component supplies for the BYOB crowd appeal to different markets. Apple has a niche just like everyone else.
All the dumping is very juvenile.
January 30, 2007 1:44:02 AM

I totally agree with you.

I don't dump on Apple because they obviously fill a niche, seeing as they still sell a lot of machines and are available everywhere.

1) I just hate the way they market their product. Its totally based on fallacies.

Their lack of viruses comes from the fact most of us don't have one and their reliability comes from lack of software choices (as they are so strictly regulated). If we all bought Macs, they'd have to loosen up control to developers (who would make buggy apps) and MAC OS would suddenly be prime targets for ad/spy/malware/trojans/etc. because of market share.

2) Their cosmetic design is out of place with their software design.

I agree MAC is a gorgeous OS. Thats why MS ripped it off for Vista. But why put such pretty software inside of a glossy, cutesy white box? The new iPhone is so appealing (to even non-Apple folk) because its a nice change from the iPod/iMAC. It shares nothing in traditional Apple design. The black and silver hardware looks like something SONY would design, and the software is not blue/silver/white. It reminds me of the Optimus keyboard. The only hint Apple had anything to do with it is the fact that the icons are MAC OS caliber. Who is copying who now with all the black on black marketing? Apple/SONY(PSP,PS3)/MS? Take your pick.

Give me a MAC themed around the iPhone, and I just might change my mind on buying one.
January 30, 2007 1:49:14 AM

I buy a lot of things based on looks. Maybe that makes me dumb. Oh well.

You accuse me of not knowing anything about computers, but you don't see me buying an ASROCK motherboard, let alone being proud enough to put it in my sig. Bet you're proud of posting your picture too.
January 30, 2007 11:32:50 AM

Sorry to reopen this but...
http://www.apple.com/getamac/

Some points...
1) Hmm pretty good point, though overheating sorta knocks that point. -1
2) I can roll with this point. +1
3) I don't like the white look; I prefer the custom PC cases that you can easily get. I don't like the PC on the monitor, either. +0
4) Since when did Microsoft engineers do all the virus-protection? Until a few years ago, anyone who had half a mind would get something like Norton or something similar. Microsoft programmers don't do that junk... oh and "A Mac offers a built-in firewall, doesn’t advertise its existence on the Net" is untrue; didn't they just say that on the Net?????? -1
5) Ok good point with the OS... I just don't like the entire thing so w/e. +0
6) Whatever with the point that they now run smoothly on Intel chips... you can't just buy a PC you want; it's not that custom. -1 (for customizing)
7) Does this actually work, anyone? I don't know that many people with good webcams. +0
8) M'kay... I see the point with this one. Windows doesn't do a great job (in XP). +1
9) Never tried it; no comment. +0
10) PodCasts are available on Windows and you can make them on WIndows; just a bit harder. +1
11) What? Where is the need for a garage band preforming IN your computer? +0
12) Adobe Premire, anyone? +1
13) And no custom hardware supported, ne? -1
14) Windows Vista responds to this... I have no problem setting up a good PC and running it stable. +0

The tally (from my POV)... +0!! Yeh... they have as many good points as bad points from what I feel. I'll stick with universal Windows; it works and it is flexible... oh and there are about 10x more official games for WinXP and porting to Mac is the LAST thing most studios do; they usually offload to other studios.
February 2, 2007 7:09:13 PM

Quote:


you want colors?

here you go


And when you know something about computers, don't be afraid to post :wink:


Wow did you take this pic at the pro-MAC march??? LMAO :roll:

~Cheers
February 2, 2007 7:55:23 PM

The Mac thing is incredibly ironic.

They are marketed to people who "think" they they think "different" to the majority of us, ie the PC crowd. They are also marketed to people that value looks over performance, and style over substance - those two groups of people are closely aligned.

It's basically a fashion item for the shallow.

The people that buy Macs and actually think they are different when they belong to sub group that includes hundreds of millions of people are deluded. It's like people that get tatoos actually think that they - SEPARATE them from the crowd, that it makes them individual. Tatoos do the opposite.

What tatoos actually do is to identify you as a follower, a sheep, a copyist. Mac is similair, though not to the same extent.

Mac is a brilliantly marketed alternative to stuff that works better.
May 22, 2008 4:41:34 AM

Clone = unlicensed hardware using a proprietary element that belongs to someone else without their permission. Thus, a homebuilt Mac, often called a Hackintosh, is a clone because it uses the Mac OS outside of its prescribed operating environment and violates the EULA, which is a contract and thus enforceable by law if such violations amount to damages (lost sales) that are worth any reasonable amount of money.
Mac (not MAC, it's not an acronym, and it's not your computer's hardware address) is the platform; Mac OS is the operating system; Apple is the brand, and cannot be plural as it applies to products besides to computers, unlike Dell, which is synonymous with PCs, much like the rest of the manufacturers.
The license to use Mac OS is ownership of compatible, Apple-branded hardware and is not transferable to other devices. Copies of Mac OS are cheaper because buyers of the software already own the license to use it, unlike Windows where buying the software includes buying the software key, hence the expense, and why "upgrade" versions of Windows are cheaper than standard retail versions.
In the mid 90's, officially licensed Mac clones were sold in great numbers at lower prices and were popular with businesses and education facilities where reliability and virus immunity were important.
Before anyone starts crying "Monopoly!" let me ask you this: How do you like playing Halo on your PS3? You don't "own" a game, you own a license to play it within enforceable limits. This applies to all software to which you do not hold unrestricted rights to manufacture and distribute to your credit, which is pretty much any piece of commercially (and freely) available software.

Mac Pros use specially-designed server motherboards and components for reliability and sustainability, as opposed to regular PC towers with high-end consumer hardware at half the price. These are aimed at professionals (hence "pro") in the graphics, music, and video industries. Engineering firms will often use Macs as well, though this is not as widespread. Consumers need not apply. It costs money because its a business investment meant to efficiently make more money in return.

The industrial design (read: looks) is important for Apple's image, because anyone will be able to tell "Oh, that's an iBook G4" rather than "Oh, that's a Dell Inspiron something-or-other-long-confusing-combination-of-numbers-and-letters-that-changes-every-six-months."

The heat issues have all long since been fixed since Intel introduced the new Penryn processors, and Core 2 Duo was cooler and more efficient than Core Duo (which was a last-minute hack-job on Intel's part in response to AMD) to begin with.

G5 is the processor, not the computer which has the processor designated in the name. G3, G4, and G5 were all supplied by Motorolla/IBM, who were unable to produce a G5 mobile chip that met the battery-life and performance requirements set forth by Apple; this prompted the switch to Intel.

The interface is designed to be intuitive, with many fewer sub-menus to dig through to find that one particular menu that may or may not help you accomplish what you need to do.

Recent hardware designs have made Macs much easier to service and upgrade than past versions (with the exception of the MacBook Pro, which has used the same iconic design since 2001, and the MacBook Air, which altogether was not a very inspired idea).

Mac software is more reliable because there are fewer hardware variations to account for in initial programming. This is on purpose. This is the purpose.

I have yet to find a mainstream PC that did not need 3-4 hours+ of updating and bloatware-cleaning before being close to presentable to a discerning end-user.

Vista is horrible. The only all-around-stable Vista machine I have found is an AMD64-based tower with 4 GB of RAM and an ATI HD 3-series graphics card running Vista Ultimate x64. That runs it just fine, and works with almost every piece of 32-bit and 64-bit software thrown at it.
Vista was built all-new from the ground up, as opposed to Longhorn, which was supposed to be an evolution of XP. The decision to start anew led to he instability seen today. As a result, XP is the longest-running Microsoft OS ever. It was based on NT, so it already had many bugs worked out from the start. Mac OS X (read 10) had two revisions before it became stable, but it took two years rather than 5, because it is based on rock-steady Unix, much like Linux is. Every subsequent version of OS X is an evolution of the previous, and thus developers can focus on bugs that exist solely in new features and changes rather than sift through every line of code in the operating system.

Apple DOES occasionally design and sell a useless piece of hardware. Case in point: the G4 Cube. Get over it. Other manufacturers do this on a regular basis.

Apple has the highest customer satisfaction rating of any computer company, as stated in a study conducted by PC World. Their tech support carries the same distinction.

66% of all computers sold over $1000 were Macs. Macs aren't really available under $1000, but it shows that people willing to spend more than that are more willing to buy a Mac.

An increasing number of employees are requesting the adoption of Macs in the work place because of the overall ease-of-use and reliability, which leads to higher levels of productivity. Companies don't go all-Mac because Apple is unwilling to do full-on corporate hardware brokering because its focus on consumer sales is what made Macs so desirable in the first place.
roughly 55% of all incoming college students who plan to buy a laptop for school intend to buy a Mac. As future members of the national corporate workforce, this means more people with experience with Macs and fewer people willing to put up with day-to-day hassles involved with Windows.

There is always a Mac that can do anything a Windows machine can do, and often is better suited to do it. Whatever Mac OS and Unix can't do, Mac will run Windows (often more stably than a PC) to get it done.

Any truly knowledgeable "iSheep" will tell you that there are four divisions of Mac fans: The knowledgeable professionals, the knowledgeable enthusiasts, the daily-to-day Windows converts, and the dreaded "iFanboys".

People who complain about the white plastic, it's going away, just for you. Well, not just for you, but it is going away. It was mainly used because the style was truly modern simplicity. Look in any modern design catalog from the past 20 years (or better yet, the Museum of Modern Art in New York) and you'll see where the influences come from. The chintzy stuff that Sony designs falls apart and wears much more quickly than recent Macs, and are priced to match Macs blow-for-blow without any of the Mac benefits.
Macs have a second-hand resale market that returns a decent chunk of change. PCs don't. Sell an old Mac and it returns enough of its purchase price to make it cheaper than a PC.

Don't buy a Mac with extra options that are easily user-serviceable. You will get ripped off. Up until recently, Apple charged $700 to upgrade from 1GB of RAM to 4GB. Hard drives are closer to market value, however. Either way, if you replace the parts yourself, you can sell the old parts on eBay and recoup even more of the cost of upgrading. The average consumer saves money by not needing tech support as often as a PC.
Consumer PCs as a whole have reliability and performance issues. The people reading this thread are not average consumers because they know quite a bit more about computers than 80-90% of the population. Just because you can build a cheaper, better gaming PC doesn't mean that Macs are pointless to users who only need something to do everyday tasks without fuss or a steep learning curve. Many people who are computer savvy choose Macs anyway for the same reasons.

The iPhone did not copy the graphic style of Vista. Vista's AeroGlass was a response to the OS X Aqua theme. The iPhone, which uses a specialized version of OS X, uses the colorful GUI it does because it takes less thought to process what is being displayed by high-contrast color-coded 3-D esque buttons on a black background. Trust me, thinking is at a premium these days. Vista doesn't quite use the same concept as the iPhone because the GUI isn't high-contrast and simple; the GUI is purely stylistic. Mac OS X is stylistic, but doesn't use the same high-contrast themes because expanding that theme to a large screen is a strain on the eyes, whereas the opposite is true on a small screen. Also, it is much more important on a small mobile device to be able to rapidly process less display information, because productivity is based on a limited range of uses. On a computer, it's more important that vast amounts of visual information are distinguishable, which requires that there not be a repetitive high-contrast pattern of icons across a large screen area. It is better for items to be complementary, yet separate, and not be a continuous pattern. But I digress.

Yes, Apple is brilliant with marketing. This is mainly to distinguish it as an alternative many people may not otherwise consider when intimidated by the task of mucking through the many quirks and nuances of Windows without any actual computer experience. Look at the Rinkworks Computer Stupidities website to see what many consumers face when dealing with computers and you'll see why.
It all depends on how you value your time and money.
You got time and skills enough to get Windows to work for you? Good for you, use it.
Strapped for cash but time is still a commodity? You could go with a new low-end PC that does everything you need, or you could get a used Mac that does everything you need. You gotta weigh the pros and cons of each and decide for yourself. A great number of new Mac users buy second-hand equipment for a cheap entry price to Mac-itude, but this obviously isn't suited to all of the people all of the time.
It's not about "thinking different" (which hasn't been their slogan for quite some time now). It's not about being hip or cool or trendy or anything like that. It's about whatever you think it's about, or want it to be. What works, works. What works for some people doesn't always work for others, and that can be taken both ways.
No, Apple isn't faultless (its just less faulty than some others).
No, Steve Jobs isn't God (He's a brilliant tyrant of demigod, though).
Yes I use a Mac.
No, it doesn't do everything I want it to do, but it does what I need it to do without much fuss at all.
No, fanboys are not officially supported peripherals, nor are they prerequisite. Windows users shouldn't support such behavior either, at any point in the spectrum.

Yes this post is unreasonably long.
Yes it's a day (year) late and a dollar short.

Yes.
May 22, 2008 7:19:32 AM

My school is running on almost pure mac, thank god for the computing studies who need windows. Anywho, there are alot of snob posh kids (year 11,12) who often flame my group of friends for using windows. Wth? and i kid u not they try to tell us mac kicks p.cs ass because vista took its display from mac and they are saying game companys will be making more games for macs... I never had a problem with mac users before this because i always believed it was a good os system for... perhaps editing? but what the fudge is with these peoples aditude, they are a self deluded bunch and i have been finding it recently mac users attack me and try to convert me to mac. Mac is becoming like a well advertised cult and i am finding myself unable to resist attacking macintoss users, i especialy love the response to yeh what can your windows do that my mac can't. "well i think i'm going to play a game", "what game?" "any?".

Regards Parswaddle
a b B Homebuilt system
May 22, 2008 5:23:09 PM

nioin3k said:
Ignorant people are attracted to Macs because of their much more common then PC advertisements and some-what attractive computers.

PCs are extremely customizable compared to Macs, and can be uglier or more attractive depending on the money and work put into them. I can't think of anything Mac does better then PC.




They are a LOT easier to work with in a network setting in my opinion.


That said, how many of you people have used a mac? Macs are not bad, overpriced maybe. But still on the whole they do just work. The macbooks had a few issues, firmware updates seem to help with that though.

I've been using/working on pc's and building for almost 10 years. My first pc was when Windows 95/98 was the mainstream, so I have a good idea what I'm talking about. However I've also got my degree in IT, as well as my apple certification. If you ever use a mac, say a laptop, try out the locations feature, it is wonderful. If there's something microsoft needs to rip off of mac, that's it right there. For example, I work for a school district. Mostly mac, but some Windows as well. But we have all static IP's, and with a different scheme for each place, easier for admin purposes, the locations feature is great, if you want to move somewhere else, a couple of clicks and you are set up. Some of the ways for example if I want to connect to a server with a mac, I just go to the go menu, type in the ip, log in and pick the folder I need vs windows I have to sit there and map a network drive.

I've still got a pc, probably will for a very long time b/c it can run all my games and programs and I will keep upgrading and building, but since I started working more with macs, I respect them a lot more. For your average user, they are simple, straightforward, and for your functions like surfing the web, typing, email, photo editing, etc. They are simple, quick and easy. Not too complicated. If you want to game and what not, that's mostly pc territory still. But look at as people have mentioned how close vista and Leopard are in appearance. Anyone else see the day when these OS's will be compatible and run programs written for the other? Who knows. but I used to be against macs to. But start using one on a regular basis. It tends to grow on you.
March 14, 2009 4:27:04 AM

LOL some thread, no answers...

I think we're over thinking the word clone....sci-fi is to blame bunch geeks are we? :p 

CLone also means replica, which is WHAT we build if we dont buy it from a manufactured dealer, think like cars, you build a cobra they call it a replica, you build a computer you call it a clone. :) 
June 9, 2009 1:50:40 PM

The #1 thing that Apple does is marketing. Somehow they manage to keep Apple users hooked and could sell them Ice cubes at the north pole as long as it had an Apple logo on it, all while paying 50% more.
!