Amiga.org
Amiga computer related discussion => General chat about Amiga topics => Topic started by: cynkronyze on November 23, 2009, 05:34:02 PM
-
I know its not related to Amiga but lot of you out there are hardware guru's meditating for the next biggest thing !!! .......and i really wanted to know before i make a purchase........
Now that the Mac is on the intel bandwagon, does intel produce custom Mobo's for Apple or is it all the same.
What i really wanted to know was is there any difference as of right now between Mac and regular peecee hardware .....besides the OS.....
P.S any news on the Natami project their forums dont give much news out...........
(i really want another computing platform.)
Regards,
Cynk
-
AFAIK, Apple still designs the mobo's - just utilize the Intel chip. Component wise, I'd like to think that my Apple hardware is superior. And after a couple of decades of using just about every brand computer made - sure seems like it. My experience has shown that surely Apple products are better built than the generic AMD/WinTel mobo for PeeCee's.
One thing people often fail to realize with a Mac purchase is all the great software you get with it. Whether you want to believe you're paying for an innovative looking case design or not, can't escape the reality of the bundled software. The entire iLife suite is amazing and actually, I personally do not need anything fancier for writing a letter, editing a photo, cataloging my record or game collections, making a movie, storing my music, etc. Wouldn't trade *any* of that for *anything* made for a PeeCee. Mac's work and they work extremely well. Once you bite into the apple so to speak, you'll never go back to all the hassles that come with PeeCee ownership.
-
Once you bite into the apple so to speak, you'll never go back to all the hassles that come with PeeCee ownership.
I disagree.
I went all Mac for one year and it worked, but I still preferred Windows so I sold the Powerbook G4 while it was still worth something. I have a couple of Macs lying around still, but only because I got them for next to nothing. I'd never buy a new Mac again.
As for the hardware, the Intel machines have alot of hardware identical to what's being sold in PCs, but they aren't generic boards.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9mg6wrYCT9Q
Eric Schwartz said it best. XD
-
Im pretty sure its spelt "PC". With a little maturity we can have a constructive debate instead of a slag-off fest :)
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9mg6wrYCT9Q
Eric Schwartz said it best. XD
:lol: thats ones cool vid!!
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9mg6wrYCT9Q
Eric Schwartz said it best. XD
Yeah, I've seen that video - awesome! Definitely no doubt here which computer we'd all like to see "mainstream" again. lol
@Tone007: I think it really is a matter of what you get used to. I have very little patience for modern computing anymore and no way could I tolerate a WinTel box today. Since computing for me is more or less a utilitarian venture, I believe that things should just 'work'. Not fudging around with drivers, install problems, spyware, viruses/resource hogging anti-virus programs, etc. What I was trying to convey also is that the Mac platform (hardware and software) has more of that 'old skool' charm to it. In other words, even though you may mostly just use a computer as an appliance of sorts, the Mac does seem to even make that more "fun" somehow. And now with the Intel CPU, people can choose to go either way if they want (errr... that didn't come out right). lol
-
I believe that things should just 'work'.
What I was trying to convey also is that the Mac platform (hardware and software) has more of that 'old skool' charm to it.
Sounds a bit contradictory to me, "old skool charm" and "just work" don't really fit in the same category. When do Amigas ever "just work?" Getting them up and running with all the addons and software the way you want them to is usually a project that makes configuring a PC from scratch seem like child's play.
I will agree that Apple computers are more appliance-like due to the OS design and the limited hardware configurations it needs to support. I'll be first in line when they start selling Espresso machines, but only if they come in black.
-
I use both macs and PC.. and in general it doesn't really bother me which I use... although I do put a 2 button mouse with scroll wheel on the mac, I don't get on with the whole single button thing... But that's just 'cause I'm used to 2...
I'l state a few things that I have noticed about the 2 systems over the years (If I get somethign wrong, please correct me but do tell me HOW I am wrong, not just that I am)
(Note: Below I use the term "Mac" for Apple OSX configurations on apple hardware and "PC" for windows configurations on standard PC style hardware)
If you want to be able to pick exactly what hardware you want then you kinda have to stick with a PC otherwise you're stuck with what apple considers to be a "mac"
If you want an operating system that feels fluid and responsive, I can't fault OSX at all.. it has to have the best "feel" out of most OSes, it just seems to flow naturally...
If you want to run all the latest games, then you're stuck with windows for now. yes, I know you can get WoW and other games for the mac, but there just isn't quite the volume of mac games being released.
Cost is an issue. For the specs you get apple hardware seems a little expensive. I know it comes with a lot of software with it.. but initial cost is a big factor for some people.
My main quibble about OSX is... that there's too many damn versions of it and things are only compatible with never versions... it wouldn't matter if the upgrade was free, but it isn't.
Now for my major windows complaint... Ever since XP SP2 came out the OS has become a lot more bloated than it was before... Vista made it worse and Windows 7, whilst seeming slimmer, just moved the fat somewhere else. It also looks awful! Vista and Windows 7 are gloomy and depressing. Windows XP was not the best design either with it's kiddy look, but at least it was bright and colourful.
Mac hardware support bugs me a little... While it's true I can go out and buy any hardware that says "mac compatible" on it and plug it in and it just works with no drivers, there's a lot of hardware that I do like to use and the "mac compatible" hardware is too expensive... Scanners being the worst (At least last time I looked)
Summarising my complaints:
Macs have a nice user experiece and are easy/fun to use but if you want to play a lot of games you're probably out of luck. And if you have specific hardware requirements, maybe go somewhere else.
PCs are "cheap and cheerful" but are not built to last. The OS is clunky and bulky due to the massive range of hardware that it aims to support. But if you're a big gamer, step this way.
I'm a Mac and a PC and I like both sides.
-
The song is about the game Portal, which is only available on Microsoft Windows, Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9mg6wrYCT9Q
Eric Schwartz said it best. XD
(http://msn.mess.be/data/media/393/Alien_Banana.gif)
-
There isnt as much difference as you'd think. Does Apple extra engineer some of the acessability features such as the side-loading opening they had on the G3-G4 towers? Sure they do. But other than that its all components. They're main design win is the case and I have a feeling most PC case manufacturers are just afraid to overengineer in convenience like those since they have no control over how high or side the CPU cooler will be that the user gets. Or exactly where the RAM will be and how high a clearance they need for it. Apple has extra comfort of knowing all these things going in since they have one motherboard going into it. Then if they want to reuse it for another machine they design the motherboard around the limitations of the existing case.
That said, you generally always saw no personality in PC motherboards. A bit of personality in Mac, and tons of personality in the real old school machines like Amiga, Commodore, etc. Names silk screened onto them, etc. Last MB I saw with some style was a G3 from Apple with an Apploe silkscreened onto the MB.
-
Sounds a bit contradictory to me, "old skool charm" and "just work" don't really fit in the same category. When do Amigas ever "just work?" Getting them up and running with all the addons and software the way you want them to is usually a project that makes configuring a PC from scratch seem like child's play.
Old skool charm as in: happy and glad to be using a computer productively vs. pissed off that you need to constantly be tending to its every need like you do with WinTel. Especially when worrying about the health of your HD, viruses, adding new hardware to one or replacing its power supply, mainboard or other cheaply made 3rd party component that just blew. Old skool to me is C64, Atari 8-bit, TI-994/A, Apple ][, stock Atari ST, Amiga, Tandy, etc. Most of these computers came with what you needed to get going right away. In almost all cases, adding a fancy new color monitor, disk drive, tape drive, printer, OS, modem, graphics tablet, light pen or whatever was a snap. Almost as easy as simply plugging it in and knowing a few command lines that were readily available in the manuals you used to receive. Closest thing we have to this ease of use today is a Mac system.
And Amiga's "just work" whenever I turn them on :-) Okay, besides some of the voodoo and rain dances one sometimes needs to perform when substantially adding on to their Amiga system... but I digress, I thought we were talking about WinTel compared to Mac products? And there's no comparing the two as far as configuration and ease of setup. Mac's are and will forever be vastly superior in that regard. The architecture and their business model commands it and that's the main premise behind all their products.
-
APple chooses quality hardware, the motherboards are custom design and everything is tested to play nice together. No wasted ports, when something is useless they remove it. They're great machines, they tend to just run.
(http://www.yahoofreak.com/animated%20emoticons/Violent%20Animated%20Emoticons/microwave.gif)
-
save2600, agree with most of your points, Macs just work for obvious reasons. But this "...adding new hardware to one or replacing its power supply, mainboard or other cheaply made 3rd party component that just blew..." is nonsense, don't you think? What's the problem with the fact that you can add new cheap hardware to your computer? Plus, it's not like you have to, nobody's forcing you. And that generic PC hardware malfunction more often? It may well be true if you buy on the cheap (which you cannot with Mac - again, an option), but the truth is you can buy quality components and still spend significantly less than on a comparable Mac.
Edit: I also cannot agree that Apple chooses quality hardware as persia says. It's not my experience, but I've heard a lot of people say that you should never buy first revision of anything Apple, because there are always problems, especially with their notebooks. Although I suppose the situation is probably much better today than it was let's say 5 years ago. They have nice cases, but quality components? I think they use mostly the same generic hardware as any PC builder today. Drivers and compatibility, that's a different story, of course, in this regard they are hardly challenged by Windows, logically. Today's Mac is a stylish case and OS - my $0.02.
-
AmigaOS 4.1 is better than OS X.
-
@koshman: Is it nonsense that I have made a career out of replacing, upgrading or repairing garbage 3rd party components from PeeCee's for a great chunk of my life? Nope. Unlike a MayTag repairman, glad to have WinTel boxes to work on! They're just not welcome in my home. Completely assembled and functional that is ;-) Which brings me to another point: you know how many Dell, Packard Bell, Gateway, Compaq, HP, etc. users literally 'give' me computers or parts of their computers for free? Modern equipment too. You nary see this phenomenon with Mac people so often. Actually, only time I get Mac stuff for free or next to free is when a school or business decides to upgrade and their accountants have written off their old electronics. And in relation to the original posters question: Mac products have a much better resale value than PC. Always have. Always will. Long live the IBM compatible platform. Without it, there'd be *that* many more Americans unemployed ;-)
-
AmigaOS 4.1 is better than OS X.
I'll drink to that. Then again, I'll drink to just about anything. lol About an OS being "better", my only qualification to that is the software it'll run. When it comes to the Amiga, I'm not an Adobe or Apple snob for the sake of being a snob. If current Amiga apps were as functional as say the iLife suite was, I'd have no problem switching platforms and steering away from thinking of the SAM/AROS/MorphOS/AOS4.x systems as little more than hobbyist computers.
Personally, I'd love to ditch my Mac's for Amiga, but I'd need comparable performance and that just ain't happening yet. And the thing that sucks about investments, is how much stuff you have tied up into these things. Knowledge too. Like a photographer, tough to change bodies when you have all these other lenses. Having said that, I'm a Pentax guy that has been kinda stuck for a while. Would like to go Canon or Nikon, but. one of these days :)
-
You nary see this phenomenon with Mac people so often.
That's because the Mac-heads paid way too much for their hardware to consider giving it away, and most likely invested other ridiculous sums of money having it serviced or upgraded at the Apple store. I wonder what percentage of them are crying because they can't run the newest OS on their pampered old hardware, and now they can't get anything for it in resale.
-
save2600: Does anything what you said contradict with what I said? I don't think so. Sure, the problem is that with the wide range of components, many of them low quality, clueless consumers can make a mess of it (often do...). I can feel your pain, I have had my share of it over the years, too. Still, it's not like you can blame the platform for it.
I like Macs, I really do. I just think that most of their advantages are byproducts of the lower penetration (no viruses) and proprietary hardware (stability, compatibility etc.). Their ability to design UIs and market the computers is unrivalled. I wish I were wealthy enough to afford an Amiga, PC and a Mac at the same time :lol:
Edit: and yes, Macs age better, they still look nice even when they are old and obsolete - eg. the original clamshell iBooks :)
Btw, the Eric Schwartz video is awesome!!! I haven't seen it before.
-
@Koshman: Well, when you asked if me thinking that many more PC components fail is nonsense - yes, there was contradiction there because I can blame the platform. Architecture of Mac does not foster end users to fiddle with their computers nearly as much as PC users. Not that that's a valid argument anyway because one might argue that the average Mac users is 'smarter' or more technologically savvy than the average PC user (which is always going to end up in a numbers game and Tone007, before you flame this comment, think about ALL of the clueless computer people buying up those $400 complete HP systems at Wal-Mart and then them taking said computers to Best Buy or their local PC shop where they too get gouged on service). Which is a sentiment that I would happen share since I personally know that_many_more savvy Mac people than I do PC (and before someone takes this out of context, I also know a good handful of brilliant, not just with computers, but super-smart PC owners - lol). But... back to people fiddling with their computers that aren't qualified... if a PC user was happy with their system the way it was (they hardly ever are and thus begins the circle of installing a new program, adding a new card, etc), the fat fingered human factor would hardly apply as they wouldn't have put themselves in that position in the first place had they bought Mac.
And yes Tone007 - I agree that service costs on a Mac *are* or can be expensive. I know someone that needed their mobo replaced on a Powerbook once. Cost him $800+. Too bad he didn't have Applecare. lol I don't believe in extended warranties myself - BUT... this is where it becomes a numbers game and both sides can show themselves in a positive light.
-
AmigaOS 4.1 is better than OS X.
That's because the Mac-heads paid way too much for their hardware to consider giving it away, and most likely invested other ridiculous sums of money having it serviced or upgraded at the Apple store. I wonder what percentage of them are crying because they can't run the newest OS on their pampered old hardware, and now they can't get anything for it in resale.
I can't speak for all Mac users, but I've learned the hard way that constantly upgrading your OS is BS and unnecessary. That trend is something Apple learned from their marketing division having watched all the "suckas" constantly upgrading Windoze with those incessant service paks. lol And I can't stand Leopard at all. Sure, it might be fine for the Intel based processors, but I used it for a little bit on my G5 and it felt too bloated for my tastes. An no, have absolutely no desire to upgrade my computer because it doesn't run a less efficient OS happily.
I do know a LOT of Mac users though and none of them are crying over Leopard. Most know from research and other users (we're a close knit bunch) that it doesn't always make sense to upgrade. I'd say that earlier versions of OSX on older platforms are infinitely more useable, stable and reliable than previous and comparable incarnations of Windows running on frankenPC's.
-
That trend is something Apple learned from their marketing division having watched all the "suckas" constantly upgrading Windoze with those incessant service paks.
Kind of different, as the service packs are free, and as for incessant, there were 3 service packs for Windows XP over its 9 year lifespan.
I'd say that earlier versions of OSX on older platforms are infinitely more useable, stable and reliable than previous and comparable incarnations of Windows running on frankenPC's.
A copy of Windows XP from 2001 can be service-packed and patched right up to current, for free, while a copy of OSX from 2001 will have a hard time finding software to run, and will require you to spend money to upgrade it. Believe me, I've played with enough old versions of OSX to realize after a certain point the old versions just really aren't viable. Thankfully, it's also very easy to pirate, so I've never had to pay for a newer copy.
-
I will defer to your expertise here about the servicepacks Tone... as a user, I gave up on the WinTel platform shortly after the Win2000/WinME debacle. Still professionally sold PC's compatibles by the time XP came out, but I wasn't convinced. And neither were most of our customers as many a machine came back.
-
AFAIK, Apple still designs the mobo's - just utilize the Intel chip. Component wise, I'd like to think that my Apple hardware is superior.
*snrk*
One thing people often fail to realize with a Mac purchase is all the great software you get with it.
Double *snrk*
-
Wow now thats a debate....but if I ask you this - mobo for mobo, OS for OS, processor for processor, with same challenging benchmark tests run on both systems (the mac & peecee) which one would come out trumps.....
Cynk
-
Apple designs own mobos but still use mostly PC parts like CPU, RAM, Graphics chipsets ect. Basically you pay a bunch for an OS. The Mac OS is in my opinion not any the bit better than windows 7. I have used both for years and am a professional IT person. The mac OS isn't anymore secure than windows and actually in certain areas has more holes in it, thing is that with only 5% of the market no one really cares to make viruses, worms, malware ect for them. I have a new Toshiba Laptop i bought for $500 that has a 16"HD lcd screen, DVD Multi Recorder with label flash, wifi, and all the other bells and whistles, you'll never find an Apple laptop new with specs anywhere near that for any where near the price. Also the H/W like graphics chipsets they use are a little dated in terms of whats available. The Mac is a good computer, but think twice before spending the dough. Also all this that you get what you pay for when they listed the top laptops for not having issues and lasting beyond the traditional three year mark Toshiba and Asus made the top mark with only about a 14% failure rating, and yeah Macs didn't rank in the bottom but they also weren't on the top. So $500 for a laptop that has gotten high marks for lastability, quality and performance with a 16" screen and more or $1300 for a laptop that also gets high marks (not as high tho) and only 13" screen, smaller KB and older H/W specs. Just my 2 cents!!!
-
I disagree.
I went all Mac for one year and it worked, but I still preferred Windows so I sold the Powerbook G4 while it was still worth something. I have a couple of Macs lying around still, but only because I got them for next to nothing. I'd never buy a new Mac again.
As for the hardware, the Intel machines have alot of hardware identical to what's being sold in PCs, but they aren't generic boards.
I also purchased PowerBook G4 (http://www.hirudov.com/apple/PowerBookG4.php). For the period I own it, it turns out that the laptop is switched off sometimes even for weeks, while I use my Amiga on daily basis. The Mac OS X is just not attractive to me, but may be this is because I used Amiga for more than 15 years almost everyday. Hardware wise, Macs are expensive, so if I go for new non Amiga based computer, it will be Windows compatible PC, not Mac OS X compatible PC (Apple).
-
@ amigakid: a little OT, but personally I would (and do) prefer 13" over 16" screen in a laptop.
@ drHirudo: luckily basically any PC sold today with non-exotic hardware is compatible with both Win and MacOSX (unoficially, of course). Although MacOSX on non Apple certified HW kind of beats the purpose - good drivers, compatibility etc.
-
AFAIK, Apple still designs the mobo's - just utilize the Intel chip. Component wise, I'd like to think that my Apple hardware is superior. And after a couple of decades of using just about every brand computer made - sure seems like it. My experience has shown that surely Apple products are better built than the generic AMD/WinTel mobo for PeeCee's.
One thing people often fail to realize with a Mac purchase is all the great software you get with it. Whether you want to believe you're paying for an innovative looking case design or not, can't escape the reality of the bundled software. The entire iLife suite is amazing and actually, I personally do not need anything fancier for writing a letter, editing a photo, cataloging my record or game collections, making a movie, storing my music, etc. Wouldn't trade *any* of that for *anything* made for a PeeCee. Mac's work and they work extremely well. Once you bite into the apple so to speak, you'll never go back to all the hassles that come with PeeCee ownership.
http://www.tgdaily.com/hardware-features/44709-apple-laptops-less-reliable-than-asus-toshiba-sony
Via statistics, reliability rankings with 1 with lowest malfunction rates.
1. ASUS (Taiwan)
2. Toshiba (Japan)
3. Sony (Japan)
4. Apple (USA)
5. Dell (USA)
6. Lenovo (China)
7. Acer (Taiwan)
8. Gateway (USA).
9. HP(USA)
American PC vendors nearly mirroring their Detroit auto makers.
-
After Commodore had disappeared, I considered to buy a Mac, but instead I bought a PC.
Apple makes beautiful designs, but the price is very high for the configuration you can get. For the same amount money you can get a faster PC configuration, more features and more possibility to upgrade your hardware. Even other manufactures building whole PC's en notebooks also have beautiful designs.
-
Wow now thats a debate....but if I ask you this - mobo for mobo, OS for OS, processor for processor, with same challenging benchmark tests run on both systems (the mac & peecee) which one would come out trumps.....
To answer this one, same hardware, same performance. The only thing that might be a variable is how an app is coded for the particular OS. At that point it's a tossup. Benchmark apps are generally good at isolating particular components of your system, so if you test identical CPUs on a Mac and PC, the results should be pretty close.
You can run Windows on an Intel Mac, since the Intel Macs use the same hardware as PCs, it shouldn't run much differently than on a PC with similar specs.
-
For me OSX is the big win with Apple. I use Mac for live music work, it's more stable has less issues and better (music) software support. Trying to use WinXP in an environmen as demanding as a live music performance was horrible.
The old PPC Macs were very expensive for what they were, cost a lot and very underpowered... The new intel Macs are as powerful and as reliable as any brand name PC.
Before I moved to Mac, I spent quite a bit of time in the Apple store trying the machine out to make sure it met my needs... The OS felt a bit weird for about 30min as I had been using Windows for 5 years at that point... But the OS is more Amiga like in operation, and iLife gives you a complete productivity suite for free :)