What's with Apple's commercials?

Other Chit-Chat
#45

I will debate that by simply saying who in their right mind would buy a PC for 1800 dollars with a e6600 processor, 3 gigs of ram and a super subpar video card? What Gateway was doing was trying to appeal to the pro-mac users by coming up with an iMac… in black. Thusly they succeeded in imitating it by making it grossly overpriced, and underperforming. So I won’t be bias in that regard, buy the Mac if you are into wasting your money like that, it’ll sure as hell beat buying the wannabe Mac PC.

That isn’t the arguement i’m trying to convey here, thats an absurd choice of a PC to put against a Mac just because its whole goal for that PC is to be a “sleek artistic design” instead of being a work horse PC. Infact i’d go as far to say that PC is incredibly overpriced, incredibly retarded, and just tries to copy the Mac in all of its worst ways. I can say it succeeded in imitating the Mac, for the worse.

heres what i’d benchmark against that Mac…
Coolermaster Centurion 5 case - 55
Q6600 (quad core 2.4ghz) - 190
Asus p5k Pro motherboard - 102
Patriot 4 gig set of DDR2-1066 Ram - 112
WD 300gb Hard Drive - 70
NEC 8x DVD RW drive - 20
Nvidia GTX260 video card - 180
Enermax Liberty 620w PSU - 75
Vista 64 bit home basic - 90

Total - 894 before shipping, call it 935 after shipping. All prices from Newegg or remembered from the “hot deals” section at hardforum.com

That PC will obliterate any game out there, show incredible muscle in all processor intensive applications, and will just demolish inventor, cad, 3dsmax, solidworks, maya, Unreal Editor, ect. Not to mention the capability of slapping on a 50 dollar aftermarket heatsink (like the Thermalright 120 Ultra) and be capable of clocking that processor to atleast 3.2ghz easy on that motherboard. Heat would be the only limiting factor really, especially with 1066mhz RAM. (Asus boards are quite robust at overclocking, easily one of the best boards out there, probably only behind DFI).

It doesn’t try to imitate the mac, it just beats it. Flat out, period, end of discussion. This whole performance thing isn’t truly “Mac vs PC” its whats inside the box, not what OS you’re using. You can only buy the cookie cutter builds Apple offer you, but I can build whatever I please using Windows. I can put whatever I want in there, and come out leaps and bounds ahead in just the choice of components. You cannot argue a e6600 vs a q6600, or 1 gig of RAM vs 4, or a hd2600(rofl) vs a GTX260. The selections are so vastly different in performance. The fact that I would of saved 550 dollars by building the PC listed above is just sprinkles on top of the added performance.

Maybe i’m on an anti-overpriced anything crusade, not just an anti-apple crusade. It’s just that Apple gives the face of overpriced components. That gateway listed in that little Mac vs PC review is LAUGHABLE. I highly dislike that PC just as much as I dislike the Mac. It swindles users by offering an “oooh shiney yaaay” type of appeal instead of putting the components first.

#46

Well, of course you’ll be able to build a better PC for less money than a Mac if you build it from scratch (or if you buy it from a company using some sub-par parts), but that’s normal; manufacturers add cost for service provided, not just the hardware they put into it.

That having been said, I was sort of playing the devil’s advocate. Both PCs and Macs are overpriced from most dealers, especially the OSes…

Linux!

#47

<rant>

So wait let me get this straight… Billfred, Joe, Mazin and Mike you are all fighting over which is better an Apple or Windows. Now I’m not as smart as some who frequent these boards, but please dummy it down for me, I don’t understand it I mean they are 2 very different products, I mean an apple is a delicous fruit that grows on trees and has been known although unconfirmed to keep the doctor away, and windows let the light in and a cool breeze in on a warm spring day actually my window is open right now, and I am a little chilly i should probobly close it… Now maybe my pun is a little intelectually low brow but i think i get the point accross stop arguing just stop. Your not gonna change each others minds nor are you going to change mine or anyone elses (probobly) I mean whoopie Joe and Billfred LOVE MACs i gotta go out and buy 5 or OMG Mazin and Mike they love PCs Im gonna have to get more. I’ve used MACs, Windows and Linux, and to be honest the only thing I’ve never cared for is Linux, I am sure its got its perks I’ve just never put the time into learning them, and i have Win XP installed on my PC and plan on getting a MAC for when i go back to school this spring

</rant>

#48

I find it interesting that people keep bringing up the fact that you can build a PC for less than a Mac. What about those of us who don’t have the time or knowledge to build a PC? My dad and I discussed building a PC (I am a lifelong Mac user at home; Windows at school). We consulted with a friend of mine who has taken a class on building computers. He told us that to get really good performance out of it, we would have to put in around $1000. But he also told us that building a PC from scratch is not easy. My dad doesn’t have the time and I don’t WANT to put in the time it would take to build a PC(and that the cost would be better spent on getting me a new/refurbished MacBook for college). The computer I am working on right now is almost two years old, cost $1200 new, and is running better than the new PCs my school got last year - although I do not know the specs on those machines. But trust me - EV Nova loads in about 4 seconds on this computer, takes 30 seconds on those ones :wink:
As I see it the biggest difference between a PC and a Mac, at least concerning me, is a PC’s ability to run more games. I would REJOICE if I were able to play Americas Army 2.8 or Oblivion. But that is the ONLY reason I would want a PC over a Mac. Even if I had the money I would not be willing to shell out $1000 to play games. I’ll stick with Wolfenstein ET for now. It is enough fun :slight_smile:

On the subject of commercials - I really dislike the new Microsoft commercial. I don’t understand it. It kind of reminds me of a kid looking for attention. “Hey look over here look over here!” They don’t inform me on the OS. And why the heck would they talk about “stereotyping” people as PCs? I just did not understand how this was related in any way of how their computers work. The Apple commercials are more saying “Sup. Dude check this out. Pretty sweet, huh?” When they first started their ad campaign, I was thinking “Wow Mac has ads now?!” followed by “Ooo thats cool.” I think that is a better way of getting customers than saying “HEY OVER HERE!”

#49

The Apple commercials I’ve seen are not informative on the OS either. If Mac and [strike]PC[/strike] Windows were running for political office, the Mac ads could easily be classed as “attack” ads. (The ads in question are the “I’m a Mac”/“I’m a PC” ones.) The Windows ones are much harder to class as attack ads. Maybe distraction ads, but nothing more.

My POV is, I don’t care what OS I’m running, as long as it works.

#50

Thats true. But at least I understand what they are trying to tell me :slight_smile:

#51

I’m not sure if this has been mentioned, but Mac OS X is based on Unix. the reason i find this kind of funny is just because other Unix based operating systems include Linux, Solaris, and BSD… the common factor being that all of these are free… OS X however, for some reason is $130 (as though they don’t charge enough for their hardware to just give people the OS for free) vista is at least made entirely by Microsoft, but Mac is mostly components you can have for free only a little more shiny so people will pay for it.

so… i’m mostly just trying to say that i find it disgusting how Mac brags so much in their ads about their unique features when most of them aren’t unique at all

(however i should mention that i’m quite biased on this issue, i use Linux Ubuntu, and windows vista)

#52

The car analogy brought up earlier is a good way to put it. Neither is superior across the board. OS X has strengths in certain fields, Windows in other fields.

For example, Gaming. Windows dominates this market, no contest. There’s no point in comparing the gaming power of a Windows machine to that of a Mac. It’s like saying my Audi A4 can drive faster than your sailboat. Entirely different purposes, entirely different focus. Currently OS X is focused on workflow, mainly in the visual field. Windows is currently focused on the more industrial fields, be it gaming or industrial design.

That being said, if we go down to a lower level of specificity, you will find certain gains in favor of each OS. If we look at drivers, there’s a clear winner. Now, I’m being general here. For the average user (who wouldn’t even get what drivers ARE), OS X has better driver support. Reason? The user never has to touch them. Every now and then a little update bubble tells them to click yes, and they’re done. On Windows, it’s a much more manual and confusing process (!!!for the average user!!!). It involves knowing your hardware, finding the right driver on a site, and installing it without error. For the average user, Drivers are easier managed on a machine running OS X.

If we look at brute force, ignoring cost, OS X leads again. OS X supports up to 32 GB of RAM, two 3.2ghz Quad Core processors, 4TB of disk space, and 4 x ATI Radeon HD 2600 XT 256MB for graphics. Granted, you’re paying out the proverbial donkey for this. There is NO windows system that can match this performance; the OS simply doesn’t supply native support for this amount harware.

Now’s the time when that wonderfully touchy subject of Cash gets brought up. Hands down, as far cost goes Windows systems are superior. You can’t beat the 200 dollar complete machines you’ll find at a Walmart sale. For the average user, this is the logical choice, and I wholeheartedly agree with it. Why spend extra money on something that you won’t use?

Now we move out of the realm of the average user, and this is where it gets touchy. Some prefer OS X for various reasons, some prefer Windows for other reasons. Rarely will you find arguments made for either side that are devoid of opinionated statements.

For my personal choice, I’m currently with OS X on a Macbook pro sporting 4gb of ram, highest video memory option, and largest fastest hard disk available. Why did I pick this? I was heading off to college, to do college-y stuff. For me, that entails surfing the web, reading emails, and writing papers/presentations. I don’t game, and the closest thing to industrial applications I partake in is CAD. For CAD I’m able to use bootcamp, with no problems. So for a college student like me, with no real loyalty to either Mac or Windows, I wanted only a few things out of my laptop: Good battery life, Large and bright display, reliability, fast boot time, and clean hardware. I’m fortunate enough to have cost not be a barrier for this computer (note: this was before the crash. Times are little tougher now.), and so I was able to narrow down my search between two machines. For me, it was either a Falcon Northwest TLX, or a Macbook Pro. I eventually decided on the MBP for a few factors: The boot time of OS X is quite rapid, the MPB has great battery life, and gorgeous display.

I realize that each “camp” has their own reasons for choosing whatever machine they chose, and I respect both options. Being someone who has no loyalty to any company, I will be more than willing to switch back to a windows machine once Microsoft succeeds in building a product that tops my MBP in my eyes. Again, this is a personal opinion, and I hope I’ve steered away from insulting either camp. Whatever comp suits your needs and constraints, hurrah to you. I have what works for me, and I’m glad that the companies are on decent enough terms to allow a good amount of interoperability.

…Ok, I’m all written out for now… I might come back and address the ads later.

#53

I doubt the game play differences are the result of the OS differences. But I might be wrong - especially if you and I have different opinions about where the OS ends and the game applications and graphics libraries begin.

#54

The idea of that was the lack of native games for OS X. There simply aren’t as many. There are ports, but for the higher end games, they don’t perform nearly as well.

#55

Understood - Thanks

#56

most popular games for windows can run in linux through a handy dandy thing called wine, and usualy at the same speed and in some (not many) cases faster, though i still usually use windows for games, i just find it comforting to know that when i move out and go to college and can no longer use my dad’s computer for games i’ll be able to run them on my laptop using the OS that works best for me.

#57

They generally do have very well working products. The problem is that they’ve built up such a horrid reputation that everyone ignores that fact. It’s their fault for the reputation but I have no idea how they can fix that problem.

See above. They are trying to break the reputation that Vista is a horrible operating system.

#58

Who likes Microsoft’s ad’s striking back at apple?
I personally think their pretty funny. and they put apple in a hotspot, especially this one

#59

Say what you want, but my polycarbonate MacBook has been the best laptop I have ever used. Considering that it can be had new for $1k and my last laptop was a $700 HP that’s given me no end of trouble (not to mention lacking several features), I just can’t stand anymore people that complain that Macs are so expensive “when you can get a dell for $x hurhurhur.”

#60

With the exception that the laptop she buys for “$699.99” in the commercial has a starting price of $799.99 and doesn’t meet her specifications at that price (unless you consider 2.0 GHz “speed”).

#61

She’d have to spend almost twice as much to get anything faster from Apple, and quite a bit more than that to get one with a decent sized screen.

I get a kick out of the comments to the video…lots of Mac true believers…

#62

Best Buy has a very similar computer for $699.

Not saying the computer is great or anything (the 1440x900 resolution at 17" is a pretty low density of pixels/inch, as I’ve seen 15" screens at 1920x1200), just that if all you do is browse the Internet and write email and use Microsoft Office, that computer is just fine.

#63

It doesn’t really apply to college students shopping for laptops, but a large, low resolution screen is easier for us old folks to see

#64

Just to clarify, I wasn’t trying to restart the apple vs. PC debate (which is really two entirely separate debates of hardware and operating systems that always get lumped together for no good reason) or say that HP’s make bad or overpriced laptops. I was just pointing out that the commercial irritates by very much bending the rules they set out at the beginning of it, and showing a price not indicative of the actual product she buys.