Apple is using negative ads.

Apple harps now on the broken promises and buggy products that Microsoft has delivered release after release.

The ad is reminding consumers how they've been suckered for years...

Apple is no more nice guy. It's war now, baby. The Microsoft dinosaur is going DOWN.

Oh yes - did you remember the huge cash in Apple's war chest?

Apple is like a wimp declaring war on an MMA expert. STFU, wimp, before you get hurt...

Apple is going DOWN. Only a retard doesn't see that Windows 7 is simply the PERFECT OS, upon which you can build the perfect laptop/desktop "OS" and by "OS" I mean the core operating system with some sprinkled magic on top (third party apps) a-la Mac"OS".

Apple CANNOT compete with Sony/Dell/HP on high-end laptops. Nobody on a PC today will switch to a Mac if he saw the similarly (high) priced Sony with the third party software built-in making backup BETTER than the silly "time machine" (because they'll also "pre-config" some critical folders to get backed up to a cloud for you, etc) and full Outlook and Word (licensed and pre-installed) compared to some lame Mac-world alternatives, and some great AV-firewall pre-installed and config'ed intelligently to not bother the user at all, while we know Apple will try to prolong the "no AV needed here" nonsense and OBVIOUSLY get hit hard in the face again and again due to dumb users managing the get infected against all odds... Anyway it's all THIRD PARTY SOFTWARE -- has NOTHING to do with the core OS. And yes, Mac lusers see that "complete package" as the main reason they get that premium laptop instead of a PC -- "it's just so much easier -- it comes with everything I need!". So you like being FORCEFED good software instead of INTELLIGENTLY choosing the BEST for YOU? No biggie, PC manufacturers can (and will) do that too...

In the next few years, you won't get ANYTHING for switching to a Mac -- other than headaches of software/hardware you used before that no longer work. The only direction will be Mac ex-users switching to PCs once they wake up and realize they've been living in a dream. They're NOT on a better platform but rather on a constantly DEPRIVING platform -- deprived of infinite hardware and software, constantly limiting their choices to what the gods of Apple declare is good for them. The vast majority of Apple customers will lose faith in Apple as the "best" phone and computer maker simply because it will no longer be true even by their own definition of "best".

Apple is the wimp that didn't have a fighting chance with MMA expert Microsoft. No amount of false marketing will sustain them. Apple is history -- just pay close attention to their last dying moments now...

silly question maybe, but how much
of personal computers are apple boxes ??

5% ??

I just find the strong language like *declaring war* a bit over the top, when they are only a small part of the market.

...

"To win, Apple just needs to make more money off lower volumes. Apple doesn't need to gobble up market share."

If Apple really wanted to declare war on the PC industry (mainly Microsoft), they would lift the Apple hardware restrictions, and allow Mac OS X to be freely installed *and* supported on "normal" PC hardware. =)

Nope...

If Apple lifted the hardware restrictions, it would lose some of its most profitable market, the +$1000 laptop to other manufacturers, like netbooks.

You are one dude who really gets it.

"Dell started taking Windows 7 over the weekend."

They started what, taking it off the shelves?

"Apple positioned Macs as the alternative for people willing to pay more, which is a surprising number of buyers given the gloomy economy."

What is a surprising number of buyers?

I can't resist throwing a little fuel on the fire of debate. Best Buy is offering three -- count them, THREE -- Windows 7 computers for $1,200: Desktop (with 18.5-inch monitor), notebook and netbook. That's one three-PC Family Pack for the same price as entry-level 13-inch MacBook Pro. Reactions anyone?

http://www.bestbuy.com/s...Sku=9548297&count=1

LOL I like that is perfect for someone that does not need the biggest and best.

I'm reminded of Steve Jobs' comment: "we can't build a $500 computer that isn't a piece of junk."

I wonder what you get for $400 ?

He just meant that he couldn't build a PC that wouldn't run his OS and Apps like a piece of junk.

I can buy a $300 PC (Acer Aspire One) that will run Windows 7 just fine. :)

It's not the hardware... :)

Of course it's the hardware.

Apple has a hard enough time supporting their OS with their own "carefully-scrutinized and highly-tuned hardware".

Can you imagine the chaos that would ensue at Apple if they suddenly were tasked with supporting the thousands of various hardware combinations that Microsoft has successfully managed to do? =)

My point exactly. The problem isn't the hardware...it's the crappy software and software support. :)

Not all $500 PCs are junk. If the software runs like junk on them, it's not the hardware....it's the software.

Low res screen, when you close lid or shake it, making those squeaky sound due to cheap plastic.
Only cool about them is they're small... and compact....and errr tiny

This really hurts and sososo funny!
Can't even make perfect family for thier own home! That's Mac! Hahaha!

the simple fact is that a licensed platform like Windows has *direct* competition, which means prices will fall to as low as competition will drive it, even if some competitors sell at a loss just to get their foot in the door. this drives overall quality down as competitors try to make a buck wile competing amongst themselves and razor thin margins.

apple has a self-contained environment, which means they control the pricing, features, image, etc. and even though i would NEVER buy a mac i can see why other people do, apple has a robust platform that blends hardware and software, they make good, solid hardware, have a very hassle free help/return/repair policy (at a cost, yeah, more money for them) and a very good marketing team.

the real problem (for manufacturers) is that netbooks are good enough for most users, and of the users willing to pay more, many are buying a mac. compounding that, if you don't sell cheap netbooks, your name isn't out there at the low end, which means it's not as recognizable at the high end, which is bad for companies not named Sony...

@The Faceless Master Would you apply same logic to iPhone and iPod?

Windows 7 will rule. Those vendor locked crap wares will do nothing. On Oct. 22 within hours the market share of 7 will surpass the market share of OS X!! HAHAHA

Joe I started reading and then it just became blah blah blah blah blah. Could this artcile not have been a 1/3 shorter, do you not edit yourself at all?

I bought a mac mini 2.0ghz dual core 2 months ago... with my luck, now for the same price I paid you get MORE ram/Faster CPU!! gggrr

Not that I will notice the diff between 2.0 and 2.5, but still :) I can easily add more ram myself, but I dont want to try replacing the CPU when ram will be more noticable..

damn toys :(

Guys, guys, guys... cool down, please. Stop comparing personal experiences. Everything is about money, right? But with MY money I do what I want and I suppose everyone does the same, right? For me it doesn't matter that some Windows/Mac OS X "expert" tells my I'm doing the best deal (or not) buying a PC or a Mac. It's all about MY personal experience! All about what I LIKE and what I WANT. Period! It's MY money :)

Apple has good products because it controls both software and hardware. High end PC's also do that through rigorous hardware component testings, integration and microsoft driver certifications (HP, Dell and so on). These kind of control gives the end user some peace and a better "overall experience" but it costs more money. Go buy an Alienware laptop or some high end desktop and you get what I mean.

The problem in the PC market (a real jungle!) is the low end hardware and poor driver development. But... everyone gets what it has paid for. Cheaper hardware means lower driver development and more erratic behavior.

Recommendation? Buy something that fits you, your needs and your personality and forget all the fanboys opinions :))

I'm probably am a little different from most commenters here. I will speak kind words to both sides so I have yet to consume enough kool-aid to do the trick either way. I'm a long time Windows user who had never even really tried a Mac. I look forward to Windows 7 because I hate my Vista machine with a passion. I would love to buy a Mac, yet, I don't think I will. I've read enough to firmly believe I would like my Mac better than I like my PC (whether we like it or not, the fanboys got that way for a reason). I know enough people running both Macs and PCs that I think I deserve to use a Mac since I'm tired of spending time tending to my PCs when I should be using them. And no, like the common PC guy argument, I don't think Macs are perfect or without issues, but I am as convinced as I could be without actually having one that they are better experience than my fleet of PCs give me. Better doesn't mean perfect, and it doesn't have to.

Still I think Joe is right, the PC makers will overproduce at the higher end, and once this is recognized, they will be further cutting prices to move inventory. At that point, I'll probably be getting my next PC. It will have a kick-ass processor, 8GB of memory, and a 1TB drive. It will go without a monitor (I have a few of them already!) for a song. The Mac that I want (and deserve) will be much more expensive than what I'll actually put forth when the time comes. Hopefully Win7 gives me enough of a boost that I can live with my purchase -- I'm confident it will. I''ll also get to keep my personal investment into all the software I've used for years on my PC (this matters to me)

So here's my less than commonly stated conclusion -- Mac IS better, I deserve to get what I want, but my next computer will STILL be a PC. Sorry for not adhering to anybody's party line.

@ cransmi: Interesting post. Applications are the real reason (and the right reason) people buy computers and operating systems. Preserving an investment in applications is a strong reason for picking an O/S. The MAC offers the opportunity to take your Windows applications with you with virtual machine technology. This solution is certainly not right for everyone and is, by no means, the cheapest alternative. You must spend the $80.00 for the virtual machine software in addition to any price differential between the MAC & PC hardware. You have to buy a sufficiently powerful computer to support two operating systems running simultaneously. Also, there would be no savings in anti-virus / internet security software. The MAC O/S cannot protect the Windows side from Virus/Trojan/Worm/Malware attack. Windows 7 does now have some level of protection built-in but I'm not sure how robust it is. My guess is you will soon be loving all of Windows 7's new features and snappy performance.

I suspect (and hope) Windows 7 is as good as it seems. One nice thing is that you have a simple upgrade path from Vista to 7. Also, I understand that there are few (none??) compatibility problems for any software that runs on Vista. If your computer has sufficient horsepower for Vista, Windows 7 should be no problem. I understand that the minimum resource threshold is lower. It is always a good idea to wait a bit after a new O/S is released to see how smoothly the updates are going and what other problems are surfaced by general availability. That may not be an easy thing to do if you are unhappy with your current O/S. Good luck.

Macs have Intel processors in them but they are still macs. Remember back in the early 80's, there were a lot of different types of PC's and you couldn't run a program that was developed for the commodore on a Atari. IBM developed the PC we know today.

Also they commissioned Microsoft for the operating system, which at the time the only thing Microsoft was working on was the BASIC programming language. Other PC manufacturers started developing clones of this computer and finally the IBM PC won the war.

Apple had a computer that everyone used. Remember the Apple IIe, that computer made Apple a force to be reckoned with. But, they decided that the Mac would be better. They didn't think that Windows would get as big as it did. But it did in 1990.

Steve Jobs has criticized Microsoft for stealing ideas. Apple did the same thing with SPARC Alto. Apple didn't invent the GUI.

Apple will never win with the PC. They made too many mistakes in the 80's for that to happen. There are a few things that will keep Apple afloat, people who work with graphics, the Ipod and the hobbyists.

this response is about 4 years out of date. "There are a few things that will keep Apple afloat" Um how about having the 4th biggest market cap of ANY American company. How about $35 billion of cash on hand? Yeah apple's really just scraping by thanks to a few niche products. Look Apple makes a ton of money. A TON. And as Jobs always says, "Make great products and the stock price will follow."

Here in Australia pretty much the entire range of Macs dropped in price between $300 and $700 AUD.

So now it's just a matter of waiting for those damn mobile Nehalems to find their way into the 17" MBPs and I'll be a happy (but broke) man... :)

I have been telling myself that I have no need for an updated machine. I have a 2 year old MBP that works fantastically. It will be an exercise in self-control to not pull the trigger. I have always said that I can resist anything but temptation.

lol.. I know the feeling...

But for the love of monkeys don't replace your 2yo Core2Duo MBP with a Core2Duo MBP - join the waiting-for-Nehalem club... :)

@ Viking369: Roger that!! Is there a Quad-Core in our future?

Yes indeedy :) there's the Intel Clarksfield Quad 45nm Nehalem with a TDP of 45-55 Watt, which isn't too shabby...
Then there'll be a 32nm version to follow pretty soon after which will drop the TDP even more...

This is a free market whether you like it or not. In a free market the consumer decides what to buy and companies must make marginal profits. Netbooks are the things that get the job done at a reasonable cost. A Mac is an overpriced PC running linux, why should anybody that doesn't care about the rest should buy this thing? The manufacturing cost of a Porsche is slightly higher than that of a VW Golf. The rest is hyper-value. Markets tend to balance away from that.

netbooks suck. Period

I just don't get the down on netbooks myself - I use both a pc (with Vista and Mint Linux) and a mac at home and am looking at getting an Acer 531 netbook with Win XP. I do SEO so i'm not a programmer, don't need tons of power really and a netbook would be very handy for checking listings, basic word and excel work and social media stuff.

I guess you need to remember - tailor your kit to your needs.

classicvibe "netbooks suck. Period"
Impressive post. Period.

Yes.

They do.

They are the biggest con job in the industry.

@adyberry I've heard rumors -- nothing corroborated to my satisfaction -- that netbook return rates are high. Many people buying netbooks do so for price and size, not realizing there is a difference in performance. Most buyers are choosing a netbook as a next PC not as adjunct to one. So the buyer ends up dissatisfied with the performance and manufacturers and sellers end up with crap margins and unhappy customers. It's a lose-lose by any measure.

Netbooks suck? Really?

Here is the thing, if you are stuck in an airport and rebooking flights for yourself on the fly, having a Netbook that you can grab out of a pocket or briefcase is a life saver.

The iPhone and UMPCs don't help here, as you need to type and browse and type even faster.

This is where the Netbook shines...

Also consider this... Netbook, same price as an iPhone, yet can run Win7 Professional on it.

So most of the time you watch Internet Videos and Netflix and listen to music or books (as they run well with the lid closed and in your seatback of your plane)... but then you need to do actual work on a spreadsheet or touch up some artwork on Illustrator, and you can also do that on this border line PMP computer, that has a real keyboard.

The next generation with Ion GPUs and touch screens will move the platform even further into the mainstream.

Now that I have said this, I was just like you and most people. I thought they were silly, cute but worthless, until I finally grabbed one on a whim.

So I understand why they look silly, but in reality, they are handy little suckers... Especially if you have 3G model and a Bluetooth headset, you have an 'unseen' PMP that does anything.

@ classicvibe: Don't hold back. Tell us what you really think ; > ).

Acer/Gateway/eMachines netbook return rates are high but Asus are doing better, as they have a better reputation for quality to uphold.

Have one of the "original" Aspire Ones. It does indeed, suck. I also have one of the new Aspire Ones. Beautiful system. Perfect for tossing in the wife's purse to use, well...anywhere.

I can't understand why everyone is so down on netbooks?
I mean if all you want to do is get on the net, check your email and do other little things like that why do you need a $600 computer?
I think netbooks are so popular is because people are seeing what they really use their systems for and do not see the value in spending $600 or more for a laptop, when they can get a netbook for under $300 and do what they want to do.
I have netbooks, laptops and desktops. When I want to play a game I use my desktop. If I want to check a email or something on the net then I use a netbook or laptop. Its just people realizing that they don't need a formula one race car to goto the store for milk.

Netbook, laptop or desktop they are tools and nothing more. You don't use a sledge hammer to pound in a nail, so why would you need a $600 or more system to check email? I bought my mom a netbook to give to her for Christmas because she does not need something to play WOW on or Crysis. She checks her email, gets some recipes off the net, IM's my brothers and sisters.

And really the whole Apple and PC thing is stupid its like "Oh I like Fords better then Chevy". Its just personal taste. I have Apples, Windows and Linux systems. Apples and PC's are the same only thing that makes them different is the design and O.S. I have bought HP computers and never had a issue with them and then bought a HP and it be crap. I bought a G3 system and had to replace it 4 times before it would work like it should.

The new iMacs just now have i7 processors in them. You could get quad core PC's for years and Apple is just now making them. iMac's do not have Bluray drives in them. Most high end PC's you can get Bluray drives.

The only good thing about Apples is their tech support is hear in the states, Unlike Dell were you always get some one from India. That is in my opinion why Dell is going down the tubes is they exported all their tech support to other countries.

I am typing this on a netbook right now because my laptops are on the other side of the room and my netbook is here in bed with me. I even use one of my netbooks as a file server. And as far as driver issues thats not Microsofts fault thats the hardware companies fault. If your old HP printer does not work with Windows 7 its not MS's fault its HP's. Most companies do not support their hardware for more then 2 or 3 years at most. I hate sounding even remotely like a MS fanboi but oh well facts are facts.

@ VampireFrost: You seem to have a lot of "tools" including both laptops and netbooks. I have heard cogent arguments for selecting a netbook where a laptop would be overkill. What is the argument for having both?

Well with laptops you can play games on, some new laptops are just as powerful as most desktops. Real estate agents will take laptops to people to show home listings. Kind of hard to show something on a netbook to 2 or more people. I go to lan parties and instead of dragging around a tower monitor etc I take a gaming laptop. When I go on trips I use my netbook as a GPS, with it I can download current maps and traffic info that most GPS don't do or charge you several hundred for. My Sony and Garmin both charge me $100+ a year for updated maps.

@vamp:

All good but: "Kind of hard to show something on a netbook to 2 or more people."

They are tiny. Easily passed around. :)

Click, click, pass?

Could even put two or three in the rotation. ;-)

...and it would still be cheaper than on MBP. :p

What Apple fanboys don't seem to realize, PC's still control 90% of the market. That speaks for itself as to which is more popular.

Which what is more popular? Which OS? No doubt windows is. Which PCs? HP? Dell? Acer? Apple? Which of those is making more profits? Mercedes is not the number 1 seller of cars, but nobody complains that the other car companies combined make up 96% of the market. Apple is a premium brand, high margin consumer device company, and they are doing quite well at it.

The only reason is because Windows never really had any competition. There wasn't a choice. That 90% were basically forced to use Windows. This is the stupidest statement Windows users can make. It's not popular, it's large market share is only by default. Understand?

Yes, people held a gun to every user of Windows out there and made them use it. You're right, I distinctly remember that.

@ FixXxeR: No, the reason Windows has the lion's share of the market today is they have many more high quality applications that people want to use. Want more market share? Deliver great apps at a reasonable price. If you build it they will come.

Today MAC offers a path for people to make the switch and take their applications with them. There is a cost for doing so but, for many people, it is worth it. Today, there are many good choices and we can pick the one that appeals to us. I think that is great.

rauckr, I fully agree with you. I had a /sarcasm tag at the end which did not display so that should have been apparent I was trying to be sarcastic. I hate people who act like people were forced to use windows. No one forced anyone else to use windows. Windows offers far more choice in applications and various other options than any other OS does. The applications are generally of higher quality than on competing platforms. Don't get me wrong, linux and apple have their applications which run beautifully and I am not a particular "fan" of any one particular OS or platform, I just realize that windows does offer more choice when it comes to application availability.

I remember a company that used to say the same things. It was something like, 50% of America drives GM vehicles and they love em, why should we improve them? Look where that got them. Microsoft's desktop sector is where GM was in around 1992, sitting at the top refusing to innovate. Back then no one thought it was even possible for Toyota to catch them. Look what happened.

Netbooks are a plague, huh? "I've complained about netbooks for months. They are cannibalizing Windows PC sales at an alarming rate." "they dramatically lower ASPs and margins and pull away sales from real laptops.". Said someone in 1979, "these PCs are a plague, with their low price and low margins taking away from the sweet margins of real computers. I can't wait till they just go away". Welcome to reality, Joe. Consumers are always right. A fundamental change is happening, and it won't go away.
[Edit: s-h-i-f-t is not a bad word.]

I've read most of the comments at the point that I posted this, but have a bit of a different perspective I'll add because it seems that, even though there is a fairly large amount of kool aid on both sides of the table, it seems like the perspective might be appreciated.

In the early 1990's, I worked at Apple on the operating system team, when it was moving to PowerPC. That chip smoked anything Intel had at the time (today's biggest supercomputers all use the IBM POWER architecture, and embedded applications flock to PowerPC for demanding uses), but Apple's OS was really a turd back then. No really, it was an embedded application running on top of a processor. This was Windows 3.1 grade stuff.

Until OS-X came on the scene, the best Apple could provide people was something akin to a hotrod Windows 95. It wasn't because they weren't working on it, but there was a combination of "not invented here" and a fatal lack of recognition of Moore's Law that led to an entirely new operating system being developed internally, until Apple and NeXT merged and brought some sanity back into the picture.

But it took a few more years for that to get sorted out.

This is really key because there are a lot of comments to this article that are talking about OS-X as if it has some kind of anachronistic UI that should be reviled. A few commenters pointed out that they like the simplicity because "it just works", and I would have to agree. I don't have too many spare brain cells or hours to waste these days, so it fits my priorities.

Cash, on the other hand, is an issue, and a few people have pointed out that the TCO on Mac, including the actual support costs paid to Apple v. Microsoft to get a working client terminal running against Exchange are far lower on OS-X than they are on Win. That makes huge sense for enterprise deployments, but not necessarily for "me and you". A few others have pointed out that the hobbyists out there will want to tinker, spending days on upgrading components like people used to do with stereo systems in the middle of the last century.

And before anyone accuses me of having more time than money, I'll tell you straight up that I have built multiple hackintosh computers... white box computers that run OS-X. Both for personal consumption, mind you, and it doesn't take too much longer than building an equivalent Win machine.

But it is a lot of time. It's sad to say, but with inflation, time is becoming ever more valuable, and unless you are going for a PhD in system administration (har), learning how to tune today's hardware and get it "just right" is a waste of time, which is a waste of money.

That money -- drum roll -- is the money that I would argue most Mac people don't mind spending for a very highly tuned experience out of the box.

I admit my guilt with hackintosh partly because my last machine is a "hackbook nano", a MSI U100 running OS-X. I built it a few weeks ago with the prayer that today's machines was going to include a quad-core laptop, and I didn't want to be sitting on my 17" Macbook Pro while the prices fell out of the clouds. But I gotta tell yas, this thing sucks rocks through straws. The single core Atom is really trying it's mightiest to please, but the reality is Apple did exactly the right thing by not shipping one of these. Worse, I miss a lot of things like the multitouch trackpad, the backlit keyboard, and being able to simply close the lid to put it to sleep, not worrying that the battery might be dead later in the day because I did that.

But *why* I put OS-X on a netbook, besides the previous explanation, is worth sharing as well. It's simple: Developers and advanced users that know UNIX shell cannot live in a DOS box. Linux is an answer around that, but it's impossible to run production-quality applications such as Adobe Photoshop on Linux. OS-X is the common denominator.

Finally, if I sound like a fanboy, let it be known that I swore off Mac when NT 4.0 came out, and I stuck with that lineage of operating systems for what must have been ten years. I didn't hate it, but when I got my first Mac after all those years, it was a G5 tower running Tiger (10.4) and it was like a breath of fresh air.

It seemed simple-minded, but I quit fighting the computer to get work done and I've owned two Macbook Pros, a Mac Mini and a Mac Pro since then. I don't mind giving Apple my money because they give it back to me in spades with the time they save me, and the reality is that the machines are valuable enough to sell on eBay at the end of my time with them that I don't even end up paying a premium to use them.

But make no mistake: This netbook experience has been like eating cold cereal and white bread for days. It's awful, and if that's the kind of experience that people are getting used to, I suspect people are going to switch in magnitudes that few can currently comprehend. We live in interesting times!

Hi,

I see that you are fair in general. But some arguments are "plagued" and you made several mistakes:

- installing OSX on a netbook (illegal, waste of time)
- then crying about that
- even thinking about using a netbook with production-quality products like Adobe's.
- loving NT has nothing to do with being an Apple fanboy :-)
- does the extra money you pay really pay for the time lost? Maybe for you but not for me. I'm really busy, too.

I'm being personal so I'd add that, given the very changing nature of hardware/software, what is the point of having a really really good/expensive piece of machine that will be functioning/obsoleted? That's where the netbook came in to play (nearly as important as the "fit the need" argument).

Good luck with your money ;-)

@ orangesauce: Indeed, we live in interesting times. I am waiting to see what the Apple Tablet machine looks like if and when it is delivered. Also, I currently am lusting (in my heart) after a Magic Mouse. I am going to show my prejudice by saying that Steve Jobs is a genius.

The key to taking it to the next level is delivering the native applications. Until then VMware and Parallels allow us to take our Windows applications with us. BootCamp is not the answer, virtual machines are (for those of us who choose MACs but need Windows apps).

It's Mac OS X or OS X and yes, the 601/604/604e processors certainly beat anything Intel or AMD or Cyrix had at the time. That brick wall they hit certainly hurt though because the 7xx series was lousy in comparison.

"Apple's new product release timing is clearly deliberate, designed to pull attention away from Windows 7."

Lol this just makes me think of a little girl trying to show off her new drawing in a large crowd. Nobody is even going to notice her.

haha yeah, Apple's in a great position... less than 10% of market share, and they can push PC makers around http://www.newsy.com/vid...dows_7_microsoft_heaven

I think, every year more and more people get comfortable with PC's in general which mean's more people will and would like to customize or even build themselves a PC which Windows wins. Another point is that I don't think Apple will make their computer's cheap like Window's ones. There overpriced and not worth it compared to the counterparts(price wise, I play games so I would never use a MAC or Linux, if I didn't game I would use Linux since its Free and I can install it on any computer). If you were givin $2500 what would you choose, http://tinyurl.com/yfmj5o2 (link to newegg) or http://tinyurl.com/yku76wo (Apple site, bottom right is what I'm comparing it to).

Overpriced? Not so. Macs (not MACs) just have a different focus, usually focusing on what makes them portable or gives them more wireless features first.

If I was given $2,500, I'd get the 17-inch MacBook Pro. Why? Because it's actually portable, which is all the more impressive for the size. Try carrying that 10-pound Qosmio X505 around for a few hours around campus or at a conference and see how long your shoulder lasts or how long the system runs on battery. The Mac weighs 6.6 pounds and runs for up to 8 hours (more like 6-7 real-world, but still).

When you get older, you'll learn that it's not all about your frame rate in Crysis Warhead or whether you can watch Blu-ray movies.

@ v4npro: If I were given anything less than $1,000 (and not allowed to supplement) , I would buy a Windows 7 laptop. If I were given $2,500, I would buy a MacBook Pro so fast it would make your head spin. Having said that, the Windows machine would likely be quite nice for many purposes and the newly minted Windows 7 OS looks like a winner.

Yeah, I suppose your right, that Toshiba battery last around 3.3 hours, but I'm sure with tweaking it can get higher, but it doesn't say what your doing for it to last only that much. So yeah uo to 8 hours around campus is a good amount of battery life but I got a different mind set, I don't do school work what ever has better sets for the price I would get.

The coincidental timing goes along with last year's October releases and the year before and other October releases. The fact that Microsoft is offering something in October is odd since they've normally gone for August, right?

@bousozku You are correct that Apple announced new products during the last seven Octobers. Windows XP also launched in October, 2001.

What's different this time is arrangement around Windows 7 launch. Apple typically announces earnings on a Wednesday, not a Monday. The Monday earnings announcement followed by new Macs a day later sets up good distraction from Windows 7. Next up: Apple's Windows 7 attack ads.

"Next up: Apple's Windows 7 attack ads."

Good luck trying to find something to attack (something that's actually true and not absurdly embellished, unlike most of their other ads).

I agree. What is sad is that when Microsoft finally did it back to Apple, (only Microsofts ads were the truth), Apple threw a fit and made threats to Microsoft over it telling them to stop.

I can't ever recall one single commercial by Apple that actually tells anything about their own computer or what it does. EVERY Apple commercial is nothing but an attack ad.

I also think some people have this stupid idea in there head that if something(Apple) costs a fortune, then it must better. Which couldn't be any farther from the truth.

Which is kinda like what small local politicians seem to do here in the UK - spend all their time and money going on about how rubbish their opponents are, they don't actually say what they themselves will do differently.

Yes, apple is very good at pointing out what others have done wrong in the past but can't seem to do anything with regards to showing how their product actually is equal or better than those flamed products. Apple, to me, seems like a poor kid who was picked last at the volleyball games in Physical Education in elementary school and then goes on to bad mouth the more athletic kids for being picked first. If apple had any sort of credibility, they wouldn't have to resort to insulting the competition or pointing out their shortcomings and would let their products stand on their own merit.

Plus, the whole argument about apple vs microsoft is moot considering Apple makes its money in hardware, microsoft in software. MS does not produce computers which are vendor locked to specific hardware. MS Produces an OS. Apple produces both and the irritability I feel when I use OSX, yes I own a Macbook pro, is just astounding. You can dress it up in a fancy apple, paint it red and even add a little stem, but in the end, a turd is still a turd.

@ bousozoku: The general timing of the Apple new product release may not be unusual but the exact date is not likely a coincidence. The blockbuster earnings report was clearly timed for maximum effect. Apple would be dumb is they did not suck up as much oxygen as they could. One thing Steve Jobs can't be called is dumb.

It would have been all for naught if the new products were a bust. Have you seen the new iMAC? Wow!!!!!!!!!! It has workstation level capability. Also, I simply must have a Magic Mouse.

@ FixXxeR: I understand the MBP can be easily sold on e-BAY. No computer (or O/S) is right for everyone. You can correct your mistake and take advantage of the high MBP resale value.

Well, the attack adverts are pretty tame, as are those from Microsoft. They should use political consultants, if they really want to sling mud.

I just bought a refurbished MacBook, as the price dropped another $100 and $749 for a machine that lasts 4-5 years isn't bad at all.

@rauckr:

Steve Jobs is a lot of things (maniac comes to mind) but he's not dumb.

I am impressed with the choices on the largest iMac. Having quad core processors is a first for a consumer Apple machine. It's just too bad that the notebook computers would be too hot. The 27 inch display gives a lot more room for the processor to breathe.

@ bousozoku: The rumors I hear suggest a quad core MBP is on the horizon. The latest generation Intel processors have tames the heat.

@rauckr: They'd still have to put an underclocked quad core into a 17 inch MBP to get it to work and that's not going to happen.

I don't know how they can declare war on PCs since they are now PC now as well since using Intel CPUs. Though, they are good at shooting themselves in the foot on quite a few occasions in the past.

They don't like netbooks because they couldn't got away with trying to overcharge for one as they do with most of their products..

It's commonly know that in todays terms a"PC" means a Windows computer not Intel. Man I've heard some whoppers but that was just dense.

is that not just the Apple propganda tho? They may not like to think of themselves as a PC, but they would still call a Linux running PC a PC wouldn't they?!
There was a brilliant sketch in Only Fools and Horses when Trigger and Boysy (sp) are at the pub - the landlord scoops to portions of some stew out of a pot onto 2 plates. To Boysy he hands it to him: "Beof Burginion - £5", to Trigger: "Beef Stew - £2.50"
Apple may like to think of themselves as being "above" the PC (ie Windows using) market, really they just have their OS and clever marketing to convince people otherwise.

Oh yeah, totally, because a company who has a 10% market share is capable of "declaring a war." Is it like a pretend war in a digital sandbox in Steve Jobs' wet dreams?

"But what has the geek world been babbling about for the last 24 hours? Apple."
Crapple pleeeaaase! Don't offend geeks like that. No one who knows anything computers would bother getting a Wackintosh.

I just curious what having anything to know about computers has to do with not buying a Mac. I keep hearing you people say that but where is your proof? I'm asking because I'm just not clear on how Macs are not as good as PC's.

"No one who knows anything computers would bother getting a Wackintosh."
Ah, nothing beats the smell (or stench) of a fanboy. Grow up.

Because Macs are like Fisher-Price My-First-Computer toys... Proof? Have you seen or used one?

Did you pick that up on one of the hipster Mac forums or something? Nothing beats the smell of a Mac user using the same lame epitaphs over and over again.

So proof is my having seen or used one? Let's put this another way. If I was shopping for a new computer for personal or business, why wouldn't I want a Mac? Why would a PC be better?

Maybe because you can get a PC with twice the specs for half the price?

@siryak, Price is a relative thing. One's perceived value is different from another's. I find a value in what I paid for my MacBook Pro. I like the fact that it is brainless, I just use it and it works. I know some of you love the tech side of Windows and that's fine, but I don't. I use Window's because I have to. By choice, I choose to pay more for a Mac so I can get my value out of my computer. So for me, Mac is a better value for me. With that said, I appreciate your honesty.

"It just works" This line just makes me laugh every time I read it. My PC works just fine too. Also it has twice the specs for half the price. I mean for crying out loud I can get a laptop with 4GB of RAM, 320GB HDD, and a Core i7 in it for the price you are paying for a C2D, 2GB of RAM, and a 160GB HDD. For that kind of difference I better be able to control the fregin thing with my mind.

are you over 60? Thought so...

Actually it seems Macs are better than PCs. At least the prices should tell something!

I don't like the OSX, because it's normal that it takes time to learn to use, but it's actually stupid for such a so-called "advanced" OS, not being able to let me customize things such as full-screen application view, keyboard shotcuts for all routines, etc. Some one said this before: it's MY computer, please let me personalize it to my need :-)

You will laugh at me on this: Apple-crafted Xcode program, after installation, indicate nothing on what to do to open it. Well it's supposed that a new user had to look around to learn that the application does go in to Applications folder. Great, talking about save time with the extra money. No you don't.

It's a different story if you do have money and want to pay for a better in general product though, because there are absolutely better things: design, new and useful technologies, thoughts, etc.

But, I wonder if all people not buying any more Apple products such as iphone, with the ridiculous charging cable so that I have to bring it along all the time, maybe one day they will change it to USB. Just a dream, people still buying it because it really is a great product, and buying it make us cool :-)

Oh but I can. http://www.shopping.hp.c...rformance/dv7tqe_series

Now I challenge you to find me a Macbook with those specs for that price. If you can do that I will kiss your ***.

@ TujuMaster: If minimal cost and limited capability are adequate, a netbook (or other low cost) PC is the logical choice and Windows 7 will likely make it an attractive package. If your needs (including reliability) are greater, then there is a choice to be made and it is worth a careful trade-off. No one answer will be right for everyone. The MAC product line has many strong contenders and is worth a very serious look. Total cost of ownership is a key consideration.

Netbooks are a hot commodity these days but it appears they are killing PC vendors at the bottom line. They are eating higher margin laptop sales.

@siryak:

Start with the exact display resolution and show me the equivalent machines, then show me the machines that have twice the specification, and finally, show me those for half the price.

@siryak - so configured to try to match an apple the hp costs: ~$1800, and that is without all the anti-virus, intrusion detection, anti-spyware, etc... you need with a Microsoft Windows box

According to you a Mac would be twice as expensive so let's see what i can get for $3600, hell i can pretty much equal those specs for around $1999 in a mac book pro and get more in most regards, but let's see what i can do for $3600... I could not hit twice as much at $3600, but i did get a 1920x1200 display, 8GB RAM, iLife '09, one year of One on Once support. etc... yeah, the processor is slightly slower in some benchmarks, but unless you run benchmarks all day, you are not going to notice any difference, especially with how slim and fast OSX is.

@bb2: In the installation of Xcode, it suggests /Developer/Applications as the directory.

If you someone cannot read or follow instructions, they probably shouldn't be developing software anyway, right?

ROFL!!! I am dieing to see what you configured to come up with $1800 that supposedly matches the specs of the Mac.

"and that is without all the anti-virus, intrusion detection, anti-spyware, etc..."

I can get all of that for free...Nice try though.

As far as the 1080p display goes that is irrelevant. There is not a noticeable difference between 1600x1200 and 1080p.

This line it somewhat accurate "Macs will compete against PCs, but in the PC market Windows XP (and some Vista) will compete against Windows 7."

However, I think the biggest competition for Win 7 is not the Mac -- it is XP. The Mac has a niche and may grow slightly, but the success of XP being entrenched EVERYWHERE is the major hurdle for Microsoft.

That is true. Apple did the same to my friend who runs a non-intel Mac. He is stuck where he is unless he buys new Mac hardware, he is being left behind by Jobs and Co. At least if you get the right hardware for Win7, you can easily run XP in a virtual desktop. And after testing, it actually runs you XP apps faster than your old PC. And of course, there is always dual boot.

@ frankwick: I think (at least for the moment) you are right. So why has Microsoft failed to provide an upgrade path? You must buy a full copy of the new OS and start over (several days work if you have many applications). The excuse that a clean install will be a better experience strikes me as disingenuous. Microsoft is swimming in bright talented software engineers. How much different in price is the sum of a Vista upgrade plus a Windows 7 upgrade compared to a full copy of Windows 7. When you look at it that way, it is clear the XP base is being punished so Microsoft gets their money either way. The real upgrade path is to install the Vista upgrade and then to install the Windows 7 upgrade.

Where did you get that cr@p from
I just ordered two upgrades @ $65CAD and the upgrade for Vista is in place and Xp is a full install. Big deal, for years I have just installed the upgrade software and reloaded the data files. This is not a big deal, at least we have not had to pay for 18 upgrades to Jobs over the same period'
Honestly, most of the calls for help come from my 'MAC' friends but who cares, they use their PC for different reasons.
Heck, they use the same suppliers for the HD, RAM, printers, routers etc. the rest is just JOBS greed'

If you want a Mac buy one. It's your choice. They are not for me. I really like windows 7 and I like the thought of having a choice of multi vendors. I guess it's a freedom of choice thing. The array of vendors keeps the prices down. The Windows driver concept is amazing when you think about it. They allow any hardware maker of any kind to integrate with their OS which is running on a PC of any kind. We take it for granted but when you think about it, it is amazing.

In fact, this is how Apple Boot Camp works. MACs are PCs. Apple made Windows drivers. You can boot Windows on a Mac not because of the genius of Steve Jobs but because of the Windows driver model.

The irony being if someone tried to make a Mac driver so I could run snow leopard on a VM on my PC, they would get taken to the cleaners by Apple for daring to touch their beloved OS (see Psystar).

To me its not about the hardware that these Apple vs PC battles are over, its about the OSs - Apple hold such tight control over their OS, they can say that "it just works", whereas windows is so open to 3rd party stuff, and the scale of their market means they are always gonna have clashes and slowdowns.
Apple are control freaks if nothing else - I guess that appeals to some. To me they're just the obnoxious rich kid in the playground that like to show off their expensive new shoes, puts others down, throws tantrums when it cant get its way and bullies any others that they feel threatened by.

cause i can install a VM with any other OSs on it?... apart from Macs OS of course.

you're aware Darwin BSD is open source, and quite free to distribute, modify and install, right?

of course, the shell isn't, but OSX is Darwin BSD with a very refined shell - or UI... try installing the core of Windows with a different UI for free (you can swap the UI if you really want to... but you still have to pay for the OS to do so)

i didn't, no.
i know apple do tend to take the best open source products out there, tweak em then sell em off as their own.
i was following the Psystar story and how Apple are trying to take em to court for selling PCs that can run the Mac OS - obviously this is a tthreat to Apple cause they make their money on the hardware and if you can skip that step and get the OS, they lose out big time to all those people that would like the OS without the price tag or hardware aesthetics.

@ moogaloo: I believe your point is correct that many Windows problems are due to their support for a stunning breath of hardware and the mixed quality of third party driver software. Windows 7 could be a real step up and I understand Microsoft has made a major effort to verify third party software quality. Let's keep our fingers crossed.

@ moogaloo: I have yet to think of a reason for running OS X in a virtual machine if OS X is the primary operating system. Perhaps you were making the point that this option is not available on a Windows machine and, if so, I agree.

it wasnt my point... i'm not entirely sure what they meant!!!

we can all install VMs and run other OSs, apart from Macs OS of course.

but i dont know what point you're referring to!

yeh - i guess that was my point. I'm not sure what fatty's point is tho... I'm confused!!

I guess what i can say tho is as having developed websites on Macs and PCs, having VMs is useful to get native setups of IE6 in XP for eg. for testing site in different environments.
Thanks to VMs, any setups can theoretically be replicated... apart from that is, running OSX in anything but a Mac.

That MS have made Windows so open to anything is probably their strength and also their achilles heel. They have a big job on their hands trying to make their OS compatible with other 3rd party drivers. Whilst its arguably the 3rd parties responsiblity to get it working right, it does look bad on MS if they dont.
Apple by contrast are very picky about what they allow, and hence can say they have a very stable environment... but tbh, i would have a very stable and easy to manage life if i never have to leave the house and deal with anyone i dont like... it would "just work" but its not realistic, and is tbh pretty damn arrogant as an approach to life. I tend to find this same arrogance in some Apple users.
Which once again comes back to my point that Apple are defined by their exclusive attitude. Its the one thing that any brand has that means they can ask for over the odds price tags for their product. when they lose their exclusiove tag, they lose their "value" as people are so quick to call it when people say Macs are overpriced.
If Gibson started making regular guitars for a couple hundred bucks they wouldnt be Gibson, and couldnt charge as much for a Gibson Les Paul as their brand has devalued. The fact the use a side business, Epiphone to meet this "cheaper" market shows this.

@ moogaloo: I think I got my signals crossed. A senior moment.

"Apple's new product release timing is clearly deliberate, designed to pull attention away from Windows 7"

Alright... with the attention span people have these days they will have forgotten it in 2 days even without the launch of a major version of the OS the entire world runs on. The screen resolution of those Apple laptops is still unacceptable. Stick with a pro vendor if you need to get work done and use those toys to impress chicks - if you have no other options...

@preinterpost For some reason, the geekdom memory is longer with Apple.

Something I left out of the post: It's unusual for Apple to announce earnings on a Monday. But Monday makes sense in context of getting earnings out one day and new products the next day.

"The screen resolution of those Apple laptops is still unacceptable."

Could you please be more specific? I'm having no trouble at all with my MacBook (or my HP, or my wife's Acer)

@beowoooolff;

He's either talking out of his a** about having a larger screen (ignorant twaddle), or is truly concerned about 8-bit vs 6-bit with dithering in regards to true color depth. I've only seen a few rare folks genuinely concerned about this, most of the time it comes down to them having read something about Apple's use of color depth in their original advertising for some of their monitors that claimed a certain number of colors but could only actually get them through dithering, which is not the same (at least for graphic artists).

preinterpost isn't usually one to ramble on about things he knows nothing about, so I would hazard to guess he's been talking to some graphic designers.

More Pro-CrApple ads by paid Betanews shills. Must be hurting for money big time if you have to hawk this overpriced, proprietary, vendor lock-in iCrap. Why buy a plastic, white-box status symbol that looks exactly like every other white-box status symbol when you can buy a completely customized Windows or Linux machine for practically half the price? There is nothing CrApple hardware or software cannot do that you cannot do on the much wider range of hardware and software available to you with Windows or Linux.

BaaaWaaahahah ha ha you Mac fanboys kill me. You can not understand why everyone does not rush to a Mac. You are the same people who can not believe someone would not vote for Obama. We don't use Macs because we have business to do. We make money running applications that solve business problems. Unless you are a graphic artist (and even that can be done on a PC now) you just use your Mac for fun. There once was a difference but today there are not many programs for the Mac that do not run great on a PC... Even the Mac OS can now be hacked to run great on a $500 PC. So why does Apple charge $1500 for the same hardware?? You guys kill me!!

Broady, do me a favor and price a PC note for note with a Mac. Then come back and let me know. I use both Mac's and PC's for business and the cost is about the same when you configure exactly the same product in both hardware and software. Running a business requires not just component costs, but implementation, compatibility, and most important efficiency. The Mac's have free exchange support, the PC are $400. The Mac's are Unix and integrate very well with most of our legacy mainframes, the PC doesn't without more 3rd party help. The cost for unlimited remote administration is $500 on a Mac $4000 for a PC (based on comparable remote access software with an unlimited site license). Plus, the IT department doesn't have to spend as much time on these machines so that's less money out of my pocket. For what it's worth, I personally don't care if you buy a Mac or not or if you vote for Obama or not.

OK - 16 months ago I bought a quad core 2.67GHz machine with 1TB HDD, 4GB RAM with a 512GB GeForce 8900GTX.
I use it every day for work - I can run photoshop, dreamweaver, spotify, tweetdeck, 4 browsers, various documents and explorer windows, ftp, a virtual machine (running XP for the detestable IE6 testing) email client and get no significant slowdown, even when I'm running 2 windowed Eve online clients on medium gfx settings in the background (AFK mining / trading!!)... and I do all that running on the much hated Vista.

Lets see what as close a match as i could find on Apples store would cost... £2900 for the low level Mac Pro compared to the £1300 that mine cost over a year ago!
And of course no, it's not "note for note" - thats impossible - its a not a Mac - thats the point, but the specs are the same.

Yes I will be upgrading to Window7.
and No I wont be tempted to go and buy a Mac.

@ TujuMaster: I can't verify your administrative cost info but, if public domain data exists, there may be a number of people here who would like to see it. Total cost of ownership (or life-cycle costs) are key to penetrating the corporate market.

Is the Magic Mouse only for the iMAC or is it compatible across the line? I looked at the picture and read a description and I want one!!!

The are nice and a next step in modern looks, but they DO NOT take computing to a whole new level. Give me a break.

My question was: Is it limited to the iMAC or is it compatible with the entire MAC line?

@rauckr Only the newer Mac

@ minardi: I read a report today that indicated OS X 10.6.2 wll support the Magic Mouse on any Mac that can run Snow Leopard.

The problem is of value as well, regardless how good Win7 is the Windows brand is commoditized. So Apple can afford to charge more for the same or lower specs (whether OSX on lower specs is comparable to Win7 on higher specs is a matter of opinion). This in turns triggers a race to the bottom in terms of price on the windows side to differentiate players.

I'm in a market for a new laptop (13-14in) - not netbook, work on a day to day basis with Macs, PC and Linux so whether i go with a Mac or PC is a matter of price and laptop quality. I've been watching BestBuy and Newegg for the past 3 months and frankly all PC laptops are crappy junky heavy clunky cheap plastic things. My sweet spot is between 600-700 dollars. If I can get one that's comparable in build quality to the macbook at 600 PC made a sale. At 700-800 i need to be convinced and may hold out another 3-6 months with the current hardware I have, even if I end up buying a PC 6 months from now PC still lost the sale when they needed it most. At 800 and up for a Win7 PC the sale goes to Mac no questions asked.

I'm betting I'm not alone in this position. I don't particularly care about the (PC) manufacturer's margins, because basic economics dictates as long as there's demand someone will figure out a way to tap that market...

If you want a MAc, I applaud you because I prefer them as well. However, if you really want Windows, I have seen some new aluminum laptops that look like they are MAC clones (HP??). I suspect these machines will not be that much cheaper than an equivalent MAC but I could be wrong. MAC has traditionally refused to compete in the low end of the market claiming they cannot build a quality machine at those prices. Everyone has their own opinions on price and value. Take a good look at the major vendors offerings (hardware and software) and judge for yourself.

I can't believe Apple is using a 32-bit kernal along with Physical Address Extension in Snow Leopard. The amazing geniuses at Microsoft have long since abandoned this technology due to the massive performance hit it causes.

The amazing geniuses at Microsoft have left out a large portion of the older drivers when it comes to 32-bit versus 64-bit. Some of us who work on legacy equipment still need those drivers. As for Mac, the kernel is bootable to 64-bit natively as it's included in the OS, Microsoft's is not. So a Mac that uses legacy equipment can use 32 and new Macs with drivers can use 64. But I guess you knew that.

Snow Leopard has both 32 bit and 64 bit kernels available and can boot into either one depending on hardware and software compatibility. There are some machines that are potentially compatible but the 64 bit kernel is locked out at this point awaiting a software / firmware update. Oh, by the way, the performance hit is quite modest for most applications according to the benchmarks I've seen.

Apple will never gain more than 10% market share, to many people love pc's and the compatibility and affordability. I'm embarrased by the way Apple handles every Windows release as a personal war.. Grow up Apple, if you want to succeed in the computer market, then offer products people are willing to pay for, not expensive junk that deletes your data, takes forever to upgrade, is slow and buggy, and has an ugly 10 yr old ui.

I didn't realize that so many people loved PC's. Can you explain to me how PC's are more compatible? Also, 13 million people last year paid for junk? That's funny. My HP dv6910us only lasted one year while my old Apple G4 is still working after 5. But I guess a junk product that works for 5 years is really, after all, junk. Clearly, you need to check your info.

How are PC's more compatible? Well....

First, I will assume you meant, "How is Windows more compatible", since both Mac OS X and Windows run on, you guessed it...PCs.

Windows can be installed on anything. Mac OS X can be installed on...Apple PCs. That narrows the install-base for Mac OS X by a large margin right there. So lets look at mainboards. I could likely count the Windows compatible mainbaords int he thousands quite easily. Mac OS X? Probably closer to 10 or so.

The junk comment, by both parties, is anecdotal BS. We have a G5 here that lasted all of 3 months before requiring a new logic board and a new cooling system. It still never worked right (plug in a 24" Apple monitor, and it constantly reboots without warning). We also have an MBP that our IT department has yet to need to touch for more than just it's initial setup.

On the flip side, we have many windows systems also that fall into both categories (Dell) and I personally have a 6 year old HP ze2113us laptop running Windows 7.

So yeah, the "junk" comments on both side are, well...junk.

What your problem with the PC was that you bought an HP. I have yet to come across a good HP computer. All they are is trouble, no matter how affordable they are. Your bad for buying a terrible brand, not the PC's.

That's not true. I have HPs and Dells and all are fine. In fact, the only non laptop I have is an HP Media Center machine. I purchased this in 2005 (I think) and it has ran perfeclty every since. On second thought, I did have to replace the original video card but it has still been an excellent machine. The amazing thing is that I only have 1 GB RAM and it runs Win7 Media Center very well. VERY well.

Back to hardware, my wife is a pro photog and she has an HP 17" laptop which she abuses daily. It has held up great for her travels and coffee spills etc...

@PC_Tool, you are correct about "junk" being anecdotal. My G3 died about two years after I bought it. I had Apple Care but it still should not have died. What get's me is fan boys that can't come up with logical opinions other than to say things are junk.

My question about compatibility was more directed towards software. The way I see it is both operating systems have their own merits. I use Mac's for most of my everyday use but I dual boot Windows Vista for my Zune and select other operations. I just interpreted his statement as a knock on software. With the exception of Zune, my Mac can do anything my PC can do.

@Marcador, You are correct, HP is a horrible brand and I should have never bought this machine. It was cheap which is why I got it. I don't blame Microsoft for the problem. Every update Microsoft pushed in Vista made my computer less and less compatible with HP hardware but HP can't seem to update any drivers. Then they abandon support after one year. All Microsoft does is jockey software.

This may well be determined by the Windows 7 market acceptance. I predict a big initial bow wave of Windows upgrades due to pent-up demand by Vista haters. I also suspect the terrible XP upgrade path (start over) for the ~ 70% of the Windows installed base still running that version will ultimately hurt Windows 7 adoption rates, at least until those users are ready to buy a new machine. The one piece of data I don't have is how many recent PC purchasers opted for XP. That would be an interesting stat.

HP can't be that bad. They are the #1 selling PC brand. Any manufacturer has some percentage of lemons. Tech support also has quite a bit to do with brand perceptions. I have never purchased an HP computer although I have purchased a number of good printers from them. I bought Dell machines until I moved to the MAC two years ago. At one time Dell tech support was top notch but I observed that it degraded before I made the switch. I'm not sure where they stand now.

I find MAC tech support to be generally excellent and I suspect that helps Apple achieve the consistently high customer satisfaction ratings. All platforms have their fanboys (and detractors) and the MAC is no exception but I suspect most customers are pragmatic and looking for value.

OK, you had a problem with HP, how is that MS's fault?
Jerk, get a life'
OH, have you checked, they all use the same HD, ram etc.

The think is, Apple have set themselves up and exist as an expensive niche - their stuff has the air of elitist expensive items, which is why people want them.
its the same as designer clothes, or cars.
the cost of their stuff isn't siginifcantly more than the cheaper brands, but the marketing and percieved value means they can ask that much. as soon as they become popular and mainstream, and dare i say it, high street, they will cease to be the exclusive domain of the few and will lose their appeal.
And there's a danger that the popularity of the iPhone will do this to Apples brand.
But Apples brand depends on being expensive designer items that most people cant afford.

Whilst we're talking about PC brands, I would highly recommend pcspecialist.co.uk - they build good PCs for good prices, they know what they're talking about and have a good range of stock.

Let's see now. Macs can run either Mac OS or Windows or Linux. Windows PCs can only run Windows or Linux. And you think being limited as they are somehow makes them more compatible. Good luck selling that line of BS.

I suppose someone who drives a KIA or other low-end vehicle would like to believe that people purchase BMWs and Mercedes Benz vehicles only for status like 'designer clothes.' They'd be equally wrong.

"Let's see now. Macs can run either Mac OS or Windows or Linux. Windows PCs can only run Windows or Linux. And you think being limited as they are somehow makes them more compatible. Good luck selling that line of BS."

The number of OSes you can run makes little difference in the face of the fact that most folks run *one* OS.

How many motherboards can I install OS X on again? How many can I install Windows on?

I said before in another post that Microsoft is it's own competition and I think Joe may have hit the nail on the head. The thing that makes Microsoft smart is it's really not their war. Microsoft gets revenues regardless of the margins of the PC makers so all they have to do is sit back and relax. This is going to be one interesting price war to witness.

of corse they will make more money, all apple products are way over priced and people are willing to pay for em.

I agree with most of your comments but the MAC operating system is not the reason MACs are more expensive unless you meant that the MAC OS is the reason Apple feels justified in charging a premium price. I suspect that, when you price a truly equivalent HP or DELL, the price differential is modest.

I suspect Microsoft would like to drop the registry but the legacy application compatibility impact would be horrendous. I have questioned why they did not make the break and support existing applications in a virtual machine. However, that would have the vast majority of their applications running in a VM for the foreseeable future and they may not want the performance hit. That may or may not be the correct choice.

Not true on the virus front. Every piece of software can be hacked and Apple is wide open. The registry is just a database for storing configuration info. The alternative used by Unix, and by extension Apple OS is text files, which of course are hack proof. As the Apple OS becomes more popular, AV software will be a must. In fact, Snow Leopard includes a limited AV. By being late to the security game, Apple is in a position of playing catch up.

BTW, my daughter bought an Apple because it was trendy in the classroom. Now the thing is so slow even after several attempts to fix some bug deep in its guts that she gave up and switched to a PC. Oh and it cost about $500 less than the Apple.

Despite what all the misinformed Apple fan boys, fact is that Apples are far from perfect (but they make up for it by being more expensive). Hold me back from that.

Why do people insist on bringing the Windows registry into Mac Os versus Windows OS arguments?

It's all ready been established that Apple is working on a their own version of the registry database to put an end to all those configuration files all over their systems.

I think the Mac OS IS the reason Apple charge a premium on their PCs.
It only runs on their own PCs so by controlling the environment they run on, they have less troubles maintaining the OSs.
To me, Apples selling points are its OS as being an intuitive and stable platform (i would personally disagree on both counts, but anyway) and having sexy looking hardware that create an elitist, exclusive image (again, something I'm not overly bothered by).

As far as i know, their OS is not at all more secure that Wondows, its just that hackers tend to go for whatever will cause the most damage on as big a scale as possible, and prefarably with some political edge. With that rationale, its obvious they go for the PCs that every big government organistaion is using.
I do think its only a matter of time before Macs start popping up on the hackers radar as Apples become more popular - their recent profit listings wont help either as sooner or later they will be seen in the same profiteering, mega-corporation light that MS are and hackers will see a new challenge opening up.
Could be wrong... we'll see.

@ dizzy_davidh: Where has the Apple registry project been documented???? It sounds like a tall tale to me. If they wanted to cripple their O/S, that would certainly be one way to do it. Steve Jobs can be called many things but stupid is not one of them.

"1) The cost of virus/spyware software, and the time taken for constant security patch downloads."
Really? I use open source for both my virus and spyware products and have never been impacted by any kind of time lost for updates and/or security patches and because both products are open source, I pay nothing for it and get the same protection. Also, ANY OS IS SUCCESPECTABLE TO VIRUSES!!! When will the common sheep of the world realise that?!

"2) The system slowing down, and crashing resulting in both data and time lost."
ANY system will slow down and crash over time, no matter what OS you are using. Common fact: hardware fails due to heat and extended use. Not even a company as specialized as Apple has released mainstream liquid cooled rig as of yet. But even then, the liquid cooling system would need proper maintanence or else it will fail.

"3) Unstable OS resulting in seriously impaired productivity over time."
Is this not a re-hashing of #2? I'm sorry, but any OS can also become unstable over time. As a user downloads and installs/uninstalls applications, the OS starts to get less and less responsive. Also, response time is more perception than actual use. When you first got that shiny, new computer, it was zippy and fast. 6 months later, it's not feeling quite as zippy or fast, is it?

"4) The cost of computer technician repairs, and complete loss of productivity."
Right, because an Apple machine will NEVER have hardware issues (as discussed in #2), then there will be no need for a technician repair. I'm sorry, but doesn't Apple have repair centers all over the world? I would be very upset to be employed there. Based upon your logic as it must be a truely mundane and pointless career choice with many, many days of doing nothing.

"5) Identity theft on a PC is much more likely, and can result in huge costs."
This one HAS to be the best. So, simply becase a machine is NOT an Apple machine, you run a greater risk of identity theft? Seriously? Have you really been spoon fed that much propeganda? Identity theft has almost NOTHING to do with the OS or hardware that OS runs on. It has to do with the user being duped into providing said information and/or poor storage of personal information.

"Talk to any Mac user, or better still, use a Mac OS, and you will discover Macs do not use anti virus software. Why do you think the Pentagon uses a computer OS based on the same secure Unix based system?"
Again, back to #2. Just because a system does not ship with anti-virus installed does not mean that they are not succeptable to attacks. Your definition of a virus seems to be very narrow indeed. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_virus. I have seen viruses attack nearly every major OS (including a nasty one that infected a bunch of AS400s years ago).

"So why will Microsoft never get it right? Because from day one, Microsoft has always facilitated the marketing firms out there who need to know your likes and dislikes, to sell you product. They drop cookies into your registry, the same registry which is also wide open to all the hackers and phishers in the world."
Again, someone so ill informed... The registry is secured now more than ever and Windows 7 is securing it even more. First off, cookies cannot reside in the registry. Cookies are small text files that are only contained in the temporary storage of your browser. Secondly, malware cannot "find a home" in the registry. It is nothing more than a configuration database. Thirdly, web browsers on windows CANNOT access the registry except through 3rd party addons which you, as a user, have to allow. Granted, in the past, this was not the case, but let's deal with today, shall we? All of the major browsers (I'll even throw Safari in that group) now require explicit permission to install any sort of addon that requires access to the file system and/or the registry. Also, wasn't it rumoured that OS X 10.7 was going to include a configuration database of it's own so that independent configuration files would no longer be needed? Strange, sounds to me like a registry.

Please, get informed before you start making blanket statements that have little substance and are based in fiction.

"Exactly who is talking about Windows 7 today or will tomorrow? Or gasp, on launch day -- Oct. 22nd?"

Me, me... oh, and me.

I think Joe may have suffered a breakdown. Is this the same Joe we know and love (to hate)? Perhaps he feels his commentary has been too one-sided and he is trying to compensate.

@rauckr It's the same Joe. There's no trying to compensate for anything. I'm indifferent to Apple and Microsoft. I write what is -- not what I want it to be. Today's story is Apple's grand strategy.

I've found that the majority of people who buy Win PC's have never used or experienced Mac OSX. But most all people who buy Mac's have used and experienced Win PC's.

Doesn't that say something about ignorance?

BTW, those who think Mac's are overpriced no nothing about marketing and the true driver of sales... it's called the VALUE proposition. If you charge more and deliver equal or greater VALUE people will pay it, if not they won't. No Company can survive in a free market economy by being perpetually "overpriced".

When you are buying a Mac, you are really buying OSX. As for the hardware, PC magazines themselves have done price comparisons and found that spec for spec, Macs are NOT "overpriced". BTW, how do you compare a laptop machined from solid piece of aluminum to one made of stamped metal and plastic?

The thing that cracks me up when Win PC Fanboy's tout Win OS running on cheap PC's is the fact they tend to pride themselves on being technically knowledgeable, when in fact that is the problem. Their tech ego makes them feel smarter than they really are... and they need to be in order to constantly tinker with their PC's. Why does an entire ecosystem of techs for Win PC's even exist?

BTW, I have a network of 4 Macs, 1 HP and 1 Dell. The advantage of Win PC's is as someone said, the infinite customizability. I built a shredder gaming machine for my son that I could NOT do with a Mac.

I use both WinXP and OSX DAILY so my opinion is based on EXPERIENCE not OPINION.

"how do you compare a laptop machined from solid piece of aluminum to one made of stamped metal and plastic?"

They both hold the laptop together, so who cares what it is made out of?

"Macs are NOT "overpriced"."

BS! Whenever an equally spec'd PC(which has the same components inside it that an Apple does) cost half the price that is OVERPRICED. Show me proof because looking at the numbers it looks SEVERELY overpriced to me. Don't give me this "oh the case is made out of solid gold" BS either because I don't care. All I care about is what is on the inside.

very thoughtful piece by Mr. Wilcox, thanks. much better than the typical and shallow mac/windows "pundits".

the "other shoe" Apple has yet to drop is the much rumored iTablet. in essence Apple will use the iPhone to compete against PC netbooks, scaled up to netbook size. it won't do everything Win 7 or Snow Leopard can, but it will run 85,000 apps! Apple thinks this will avoid cannibalizing its own laptop sales like netbooks have done to Windows.

with the big hints of some new product before xmas by Apple yesterday, wouldn't surprise me to see that announced early November, to really complete a before and after marketing strike against Win 7. fair or not, it would immediately dominate the media and once again make Windows 6.2 look ... old.

Just briefly then, as a professional webdesigner, I use PCs daily and have no problems doing my job. I have also used Macs a fair bit for similar development work and find their OS to be frustrating, unintuitive, and just as unstable as Vista.

@siryak What car do you drive? What garments are you wearing when going out? What wine do you drink? What type of food do you eat? I care. Too bad you don't

:D
very good.

yep - i'll be talking about win7.
i have been already, and i quite likely will be in the future too.
does this Joe and Shilling etc really think the annoncement of a bunch of new Macs are gonna make me think, "duh.... my PCs rubbish, and i have a few grand burning a whole in my pocket, why don't i just go out and buy a Mac"?
nope, i just go out and spend just £150 doubling the RAM of my PC to 8GB, and tripling its hard drive space.

This analogy is severely flawed. First of all there are plenty of laptops out there that look better than a Mac. Also with the specs that those laptops are packing it isn't the rolls royce you are making it out to be. I put more stock in what is under the hood. Even if I did care about looks I still wouldn't choose a Mac, because I don't like white electronics.

lol

Ok, so I went to apple and looked up a 17" CrapBook..3.06GHz C2D 4GB of RAM 500GB HDD, $2800. A comparable HP laptop with the same processor, hard drive size, and memory...$1500...Looks to be a huge difference there. Unless you don't know how to count then I guess you would say they're the same.

I did in my post higher up in the comments. So yes I can.

@rstat2 @siryak i've come across fatty's approach on this one before - i think their point is, when they ask you to compare Macs with a PC, and then ask them to provide components / specs etc, and saying that you cant beat a Mac...
What they're saying is Macs have something that cant be bought anywhere, for however much money you throw at it, outside of the Apple store.

You could show them a PC with double every single spec you want and for less money and they will still say that the Mac beats it.
I'm not sure if this comes down to some moral highground / superiority complex that says having a Mac label inherently makes it better, or if it is because they paid more for their machine, or if its cause it can run OSX which your PC can't, but there's something that seems to make them unable to reason along the same battle lines that you and I seem to operate on.

Oh well...Unless they can actually post me some proof rather than pulling numbers out of their a** I am not even going to bother fighting with them. I have showed my proof. Where is theirs?

"Why does an entire ecosystem of techs for Win PC's even exist?"
The same could be said of Apple also. Even though most people are ignorant to the fact that Apple technicians do exist.

i second that!! :)

Seems Microsoft at the moment have greater fun/allies with Windows 7 where the recent years, the most hated Bill Gates...

Well I love Windows 7!

If there's a Mac logo on the system, then you're paying high price due to royalties.

Apple is just a label.
Thats why I got 2 Apple stickers with my iPod Touch.
Maybe if I spray my PC white and silver and stick em on the side, the quality of my work will increase by more that 100%.