The Mac is a drastically less used, more expensive, and a slower computer (sorry guys....benchmarks vs reality).
(Large amount snipped, but you get the gist)
It always distresses me when I hear a fellow Mac user buy into the dark side's specious arguments. I'm not going to go through every point in Edward's post, but I 'll quickly hit these three points at the end of my post.
As to the rest of the rant, well, it's a bit misleading to say that the situation with OS X not working on older machines is a common one.
Apple took a big step when they brought in OS X, and optimized it for only the most recent hardware, but IMNSHO, they needed to in order to introduce what a really modern OS. Better that than just continually upgrade an old OS, that is so full of security vulnerabilities and other problems that it costs its users huge amounts of cash just to maintain it.
It isn't the first time that Apple has made a group of machines obsolescent, but it was the first time it was for such recent machines. Case in point, OS 9 won't run on pre PPC macs. but it does run on all the second generation PPC's. That's all the way back to, what, 1992?
In my books, that's pretty fair support. The switchover to OS X was a matter of necessity, and the limitations of their real-world ability to support older machines.
Now to quickly address those three PC user style points:
1) Macs aren't drastically less used, the Mac OS is, but only as compared to Windows. When looking at computer manufacturers, Apple was, for a long time, second only to Dell in market share. (I suspect they have slipped a bit, but then what hasn't in computers lately.)
2) Macs are more expensive. Well, I haven't done the comparison recently, but every time I've compared a new Mac price to a same quality, same feature PC, the final price is within the +- $100 range. Rather than comparing Mac prices to a Compaq with a low quality processor, try comparing against the equivalent model in Dell's Workstation line. Yes, Macs are pricey, but so are top of the line PC's.
3) Macs are slower. I've never put much faith in benchmarks either, but my experience is that Macs are as far from being comparatively slow.
The first PC I used for any length of time had a PII/350. My Mac at the time was a 604/200. Real world, intensive photoshop use, Mac was as fast or faster. Nowadays the PC I use at university is a 1 Ghz machine, and side by side, my Pismo (G3/500) is only marginally slower on a heavy photoshop render.
-- G-Books is sponsored by <http://lowendmac.com/> and...
Small Dog Electronics http://www.smalldog.com | Refurbished Drives | -- Check our web site for refurbished PowerBooks | & CDRWs on Sale! |
Support Low End Mac <http://lowendmac.com/lists/support.html>
G-Books list info: <http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-books.html> --> AOL users, remove "mailto:"; Send list messages to: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To unsubscribe, email: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For digest mode, email: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subscription questions: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Archive: <http://www.mail-archive.com/g-books%40mail.maclaunch.com/>
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Think Different Store
http://www.ThinkDifferentStore.com ---------------------------------------------------------------
