Should I buy a Mac or a PC?

[MrForbes]

My 5 yr old P4 still works great, but I replaced the motherboard a year ago with a core 2 duo, which is really easy to do using a 10 year old ATX case.

I borrowed my brother's 3 yr old Mini, he gave up on it...I'm trying to find the attraction, haven't yet, I'll keep playing with it though.

Originally Posted by squirrel

My 5 yr old P4 still works great, but I replaced the motherboard a year ago with a core 2 duo, which is really easy to do using a 10 year old ATX case.

I borrowed my brother's 3 yr old Mini, he gave up on it...I'm trying to find the attraction, haven't yet, I'll keep playing with it though.

Once you start playing with Automater and AppleScript, a whole world of other uses opens up.

Also, Expose and Spaces make it impossible for me to go back to a Windows machine. It's just too darn convenient to use.

[Joe Matt]

Originally Posted by squirrel

My 5 yr old P4 still works great, but I replaced the motherboard a year ago with a core 2 duo, which is really easy to do using a 10 year old ATX case.

I borrowed my brother's 3 yr old Mini, he gave up on it...I'm trying to find the attraction, haven't yet, I'll keep playing with it though.

Congrats on comparing an old top of the line system with a bottom of the line. Want a biased cookie?

[MrForbes]

I'm not sure what you mean by that...I have a rather low end PC (it was low end when I moved up to a P4, and again when I moved up to a C2D, both processors were just a bit over $100), and the Mac Mini was bottom of the line.

Mac doesn't have much in the way of "low end", especially in the laptop department, when compared to PC stuff.

[Chickenonastick]

Originally Posted by Joe Matt

Congrats on comparing an old top of the line system with a bottom of the line. Want a biased cookie?

If the Mini is exactly 3 years old, the two systems (an old system w/ an upgraded C2D proc) and the Mac Mini should be comparable in terms of performance.


This has probably been mentioned numerous times, but I personally find Macintosh computers severely overpriced for the hardware being purchased.

For desktops, a comparable system being purchased part by part is often 25% cheaper than the macs' components altogether. Of course, it wouldn't have the stylish design of a mac or OSX 10, but it will often have equal or greater processing power (not to mention your choice of a dedicated graphics card )

Furthermore, if you like OSX that much, you could purchase the OS and install it onto your system (although the legality of that action is questionable)

[Chris is me]

Originally Posted by Chickenonastick

This has probably been mentioned numerous times, but I personally find Macintosh computers severely overpriced for the hardware being purchased.

For desktops, a comparable system being purchased part by part is often 25% cheaper than the macs' components altogether. Of course, it wouldn't have the stylish design of a mac or OSX 10, but it will often have equal or greater processing power (not to mention your choice of a dedicated graphics card )

The main thing here is Apple's insistence on not refreshing its own products. When they launched, the Mac Pro was pretty notable for being the most economical option for a high end desktop PC, and the Macbook Pro wasn't too far behind. Years later, they've upgraded slower than the rest of the PC world.

Originally Posted by Chris is me

The main thing here is Apple's insistence on not refreshing its own products. When they launched, the Mac Pro was pretty notable for being the most economical option for a high end desktop PC, and the Macbook Pro wasn't too far behind. Years later, they've upgraded slower than the rest of the PC world.

...And yet their sales are STILL crushing every other hardware manufacturer. Huh.

[Chris is me]

Originally Posted by CraigHickman

...And yet their sales are STILL crushing every other hardware manufacturer. Huh.

http://www.outlookseries.com/N4/Infr...hipments. htm

The first chart doesn't include Apple estimates, but the chart listing 4Q09 estimates clearly shows them in fourth, if that's how you roll.

Originally Posted by Chris is me

http://www.outlookseries.com/N4/Infr...hipments. htm

The first chart doesn't include Apple estimates, but the chart listing 4Q09 estimates clearly shows them in fourth, if that's how you roll.

Sorry, I was thinking back to a chart about operating profits, not sales. I keep confusing my graphs. The one I was thinking of is here, but it's not applicable to my earlier statement.

[MrForbes]

Gotta hand it to Apple, they know how to make money.