3 ms·

It would be a sad thing to be if I did it with no reason. But I've been a huge open source supporter all my life, and I've always found Apple strategies to be u

by omegote 13y ago

It would be a sad thing to be if I did it with no reason. But I've been a huge open source supporter all my life, and I've always found Apple strategies to be undesirable, to say the least. Their products have always been overpriced and hard to use if you're not into their ecosystem (say, transfering a mp3 file from Linux to an iPod nano).

coldtea 13y ago
>Their products have always been overpriced I found quite the opposite. Nothing quite beats their prices. Here's an easy example: when the iPad came out at $499, the first competing touch tablets come out at $749 (and of course were crap compared to it too). It took competitors years to reach and go below iPad level prices. You also have to know what you're getting and compare like for like. You cannot compare a machine on the medium or lower end of the market with one on the upper end. Hi-end offerings from Dell, Sony etc, are the same (or usually more) expensive as Apple's offering, when you match features. And you still don't get them all. Was trying to get a PC laptop to match a Retina MPB the other day. I added the configuration options to match it and got it as far as $1700 for the PC laptop on the vendor website. It also had a VGA port as standard, that the MBP doesn't have. Seems like a bargain compared to the MBP I targeted that's $2599, right? Only the PC didn't have hidpi screen, had half the memory (8 vs 16GB), had a 750 HD and not a 512 SSD. Those differences easily match or surpass the $900 difference. What it also didn't have that isn't easily measured, but matters a lot? -- it wasn't as light (I carry my laptop a lot). -- it wasn't as battery effiecient (I use my laptop outside a lot). Heck, I'd pay the $900 even just for the twice as much battery life. When you add the with SSD vs HD, hidpi vs plain monitor and weight, it's a no-brainer. And there's other, minor stuff that adds up: it didn't have as a solid construction, it didn't have a magsafe-like power connector (tripping on a wire means the laptop goes down -- and I've had that happen in the past), it didn't have a multitouch-glass trackpad, it didn't have an illuminated keyboard, it's thicker, etc etc. Oh, and it didn't come with OS X (and for free!). I had to make do with the crappy Windows 8. Just that would be worth more than the $900 difference to me.
- omegote 13y ago
  Your last paragraph really takes away all the impartiality your comment seemed to have. Anyway, it would have been great to know which models you were exactly comparing, because I don't believe what you say about the PC being that bad. Also, there are some features in the MBP that don't make sense in a PC. For instance, retina display. GOOD LUCK with that resolution in a 15" display using anything other than OSX. Or the battery life. Of course a MacBook is going to have a longer battery life. They have iron-fisted control over everything, from the software to the hardware. It would be hilarious if with such dictatorial control they didn't have good battery life.

by omegote 13y ago

coldtea 13y ago

>Their products have always been overpriced I found quite the opposite. Nothing quite beats their prices. Here's an easy example: when the iPad came out at $499, the first competing touch tablets come out at $749 (and of course were crap compared to it too). It took competitors years to reach and go below iPad level prices. You also have to know what you're getting and compare like for like. You cannot compare a machine on the medium or lower end of the market with one on the upper end. Hi-end offerings from Dell, Sony etc, are the same (or usually more) expensive as Apple's offering, when you match features. And you still don't get them all. Was trying to get a PC laptop to match a Retina MPB the other day. I added the configuration options to match it and got it as far as $1700 for the PC laptop on the vendor website. It also had a VGA port as standard, that the MBP doesn't have. Seems like a bargain compared to the MBP I targeted that's $2599, right? Only the PC didn't have hidpi screen, had half the memory (8 vs 16GB), had a 750 HD and not a 512 SSD. Those differences easily match or surpass the $900 difference. What it also didn't have that isn't easily measured, but matters a lot? -- it wasn't as light (I carry my laptop a lot). -- it wasn't as battery effiecient (I use my laptop outside a lot). Heck, I'd pay the $900 even just for the twice as much battery life. When you add the with SSD vs HD, hidpi vs plain monitor and weight, it's a no-brainer. And there's other, minor stuff that adds up: it didn't have as a solid construction, it didn't have a magsafe-like power connector (tripping on a wire means the laptop goes down -- and I've had that happen in the past), it didn't have a multitouch-glass trackpad, it didn't have an illuminated keyboard, it's thicker, etc etc. Oh, and it didn't come with OS X (and for free!). I had to make do with the crappy Windows 8. Just that would be worth more than the $900 difference to me.

omegote 13y ago
Your last paragraph really takes away all the impartiality your comment seemed to have. Anyway, it would have been great to know which models you were exactly comparing, because I don't believe what you say about the PC being that bad. Also, there are some features in the MBP that don't make sense in a PC. For instance, retina display. GOOD LUCK with that resolution in a 15" display using anything other than OSX. Or the battery life. Of course a MacBook is going to have a longer battery life. They have iron-fisted control over everything, from the software to the hardware. It would be hilarious if with such dictatorial control they didn't have good battery life.