Jasper

But Windows XP didn't have Windows Genuine Advantage, does it? It's WGA I'de watch out with, they require a serial per isntall (wich is kind-of odd, what if you're PC fails and has to be replacd, and you want to install Vista again). That's what happens when you isntall twice with the same license, I guess.

TV Show now on iTunes UK... ...and off iTunes US. Byebye, NBC!

Sorry to bring that up again, but reinstall every 5-6 months? My god, it's a burden to be windows... Does everybody have that experience when using Windows? Make me glad that the only maintance on mac is cleaning up your files...

My guess would be firewalls problems. Try this risky tidbit for a second: turn off your firewalls and try to login into a trusted website. Still no luck? Than you're probably having some difficulties with your network connection or your latop, but nothing I can guess or solve from out here. (That and I'm on mac, so it doesn't make it easier - but I know my way around the full-screened (pun intended, motion) Windows®)

Uhm, I actually mean: install Firefox on your computer. Or opera. Not the one on your Wii or the laptop - the one on the pc with the problem, so you can test if it's the pc (it could be a general firewall issue). If it works on firefox or opera, than it's IE that's having nice quirks again. Start using your alternative browser and start to love it, since IE still feels like the worst browser of the lot.

Maybe you should see if it's IE that's causing your problems. Download firefox, install it and try to run it there. If that works fine, the fault is in IE and not anything else.

Oh, and I still say that (don't I takeo?) but that's not what this discussion was about, see? We were just comparing mac vs. pc in pricing range and hardware. We weren't talking about 'how great we were', we were just eliminating a misunderstanding about Macs that says that they're expensive for their prices. Because we have a comparison table here ('hey, the end price is the same for both configurations!') doesn't mean we're trying to say how great macs are. We're trying to say how not-overexpensive they are. And Haggis, did you even read the original article from Takeo? Have a gander over there, will you? before you throw in that comment of yours. The article clearly points out that you do get the same bang for the same bucks. Hell, even more bang for the same bucks. Without that article this entire agument wouldn't be here? Man this seems pointless. Macs are apparantly equally priced as PC's, accept that! And the markets they're aimed at has nothing to do with it. Just because Wii and PS3 are aimed at different markets doesn't mean you can't compare them, now does it? And in the end both want the same market: every frickin' consumer that wants to buy it.

Again no trace of a single argument.

You still need my hand or not? (Website still not on)

See, exactly what I mean? How the hell can you make a decent argument if they just say 'not true', without anything to verify it? Okay, lock the thread - I'm tired of people just wandering around saying 'no' because it's cool. I'm tired of this. Every time a man with a mac opens his mouth, others respond as if we're suicide-terrorrists, soon to explode. No really. They don't even expect us to make a decent argument anymore. I know the misconception that all mac fans are just as avid as Takeo (sorry, dude), but that's not true. Apple isn't perfect and my iBook ceases to function every now and then and I'm sure loads of mac-owners have these problems. just as much as Windows users. But please, for god sake, take my arguments seriously and I will accept your counterarguments if they're true. I'm not a mac fan just saying 'no' because Steve told him to do so. (To put things in perspective, I found the latest Apple-announcement completly stupid and the conference was considerably bad, while Takeo understands this conference as being great (and it appears mostly for the sake of 'it's apple!')). Take the regular people seriously, will you? Ah heck, you can't change this group of (I-will-bleep-this-out-before-I-get-PM-'ed-or-kicked-out) over here, apprantly...

To be fairly honest, the last page here is exactly what you are saying: but that's all thanks to you. If everybody is talking about 'not talking about it', then off course they are talking about it. So you guys are constantly saying that it's going off topic even though by saying that, you yourselves are entirely off topic. But that's just one man's opinion. But the price comparison is a nice thread, to be fairly honest. The only problem is that nobody really wants to accept any of our arguments. People have this thing about Apple 'overpricing', even though in comparison they have great hardware for great prices. Buying a mac is like buying an expensive PC. But because there are also cheap-ass PC's for less than 600 euros, people are thinking that macs are expensive. How hard was that one to swallow, people? You disagree? Look at the facts. Yes you can't choose that much what's inside of your mac, but if you opt for a mac it's like buying a high-end PC model. Prices are almost equal. I really don't see why people always stray off. When we just mention something like MacOS (and how great we feel it is) in between the lines somewhere, people are jumping all over us trying to tell us why it ain't. Now let's all enjoy a huge piece of pie and discuss this like a decent book-club. Uhm, forum.

To be fairly honest, what was wrong about the PC. vs Mac thread anyway? It was just a discussion. But this is about price comparisons and we're looking at added value. We've discussed the OS as a added value, then we're looking at the added applications htat given added value. Now Takeo thries to rais the hardware for it's value. So up untill now it's pretty on-topic, except for those 'this is pc vs mac all over again' whinners who obviously can't think of any good arguments to play a role in the dicussion. Isn't it point to stay on topic? Than why is everyone on this page (except Takeo) straying so far from the topic? Pathetic.

So generally, when you're buying a PC, you're jus guessing on what software you egt on it. Flip a coin and hope that it's good - but with a little bad luck and you're stuck with worthless trials and spyware. With macs you have a lot of software pre-installed, but most of it works and has a use, a function, and can be found on the Apple website to be included in your sparkly-white mac. So in essence, this means that you have better software coming with your mac for sure. And maybe you've got good software on Windows. But again, with mac that means it adds value to the package - you're assured you've got iLife. With Windows you're assured of barely anything. Like someone used as a counterpoint: 'you just use NERO to burn your discs' - NERO is not an application that comes pre-installed on every computer, that depends on the manufacturer. Application add value to macs, but not to Windows, since you barely know what you'l get untill you open the package.

Yeah - but still. In essence, you're not allowed to install Vista on any other computer than the first you install it on (that's officially, though), so at that end you have the same comparison on mac, except you have to buy a mac and have little choice of what to buy. Yes, but I think you get my point. So still, the OS is the most important value addition.

Do you have proof of this? Since you're making a valid point - but not one I was aware off, if it's even true. And if you buy a mac, you get a full install CD boxed with it. And I think you're wrong since you can move your OS to another drive and reinstall it again using a copy of the OS disc. But you could be right, McPhee.

Oh, and by the way: th OS and the design (but the design has no actual retail price) are the only things that differntiate the computers apart. So the OS has to satisfy the £100 price difference, no? That's why it turned out OS vs. OS again.

If you're wrong, I'm off track? Hey, OS is important none the less if you buy a computer and if we aqre talking about the value of a computer, the OS has a play in that too. So if you want to know how much Apple's are overpriced, then try checking the OS. The OS itself is worth the overpricing. Don't say I'm of ftrack when you're too stuborn to admit you were wrong about the choice-thing. Sigh. You're tiring me.

Choice sounds like a terrible thing? Why don't we give the entire OS (let's call this one Mac OS X Ultimate) for half the price of Windows Vista Home Preium. Now why do we need choice if we get everything and then we can choose what we use, whilst paying less than if I choose for an OS that leaves me less choice of things to do. No really, wouldn't everyone trade in our 'choice of OS' for 'one full-featured OS with choice of what to do?'. Really, your perception of choices makes no compelling argument. An increasing number of people complain about finder? I guess you read that on a site that doesn't know that a mac use a mouse as well, and that switched the iPhone for Nokia's latest and reviewed it as 'spectaculairy apple-crap'. You know what I mean.

You raise more questions than you answer, Sanchez. Can you answer all the questions you raised? Os X is more functional because it's visual interface wasn't just designed to look pretty. How nice AERO may look, Windows classic works just fine on it (and even Luna looks pretty functional). And Classic saves you space. There is no need for AERO to run, except it just looks better and eats your computer's power supply. I think what Takeo meant is that if you look at OS X, the space in it is pretty but just as well usefull. The interface doesn't include to much visual clutter (I'm looking at you, explorer) and is simple to navigate. Yes, it looks good. Yes, it works well. No, it doesn't lose to much space just for the sake of looking good. And you do have to watch out for virusses, not? Think about every mail you open, about every file and make sure that windows verified your acces ('Are you really sure you want to open that file? Yes. Really? Yes. Really? Stop bugging me, Windows!'). On mac you can open what you want, chances of finding a virus are small. And the latest hack people found in Apple's latest and greatest OS takes nine hours of an open safari window (no closing!) to work. Au contraire to hacking into Windows in a matter of minutes. And come on, you're totally off course with your 'Do I care about iLife? DO I care about the weight of my laptop?'. To be honest, everyone cares about the weight off their laptop. I think that's why Apple's very first portable computer didn't sell. And iLife, I use it every now and then. it may not be groundbreaking, but at least it works and makes it easy to get your movies from any digital camera to your PC without having to scroll through ninehundred drivers and seventy applications before I have my movie burned on DVD. Just two applications, one to cut it, one to write it. These are just a few things that Windows doesn't really make as easy and that Apple - at least - markets for the value they have. And they're free. No-one can complain about a free application, now can they? Oh, and MacOS X sells one edition against Windows that sells six. One edition with all the features. One. Not two like XP or six like vista, but one. To use Steve Jobs' words: X Starter Edition: $99. 'Mac OS X Home Basic edition: $99. Mac OS X Home Premium Edition: $99. MacOS X Business Edition: $99. macOS X Enterprise Edition: $99. MacOS X Ultimate Edition: $99. Sounds like a fair deal, no? And I'm not counting the server editions just yet, pal. You're totally off track and just searching to offend people, Sanchez. At least use viable arguments to prove yourself and not just questions to answer questions.

Yes, macs come with 2 Gb RAM - but the OS will run just as smooth on 512 Mb, really (I'm using it and even Photoshop CS3 runs quite smooth on my 1.23 Ghz, 512 Mb RAM iBook). And yes, every six months there's some refreshment, but the last iMac model was on the market for 2 years. Yes, they adjusted the inside every once in a while - but mostly insignificant changes, like bumping up the processor speed with 0.2 Ghz (wich doesn't make a lot of difference, really) - but the compujter prices remain the same and the value remains (mostly) the same for two years. Every six months Apple changes a few pieces to make the puzzl;e more interesting, but still - the big updates come once every two years. Vista will not run smoothly on 512 Mb RAM with full options enabled. I'm pretty sure of that. AERO won't function - and really, what is Vista without AERO? MacOS X works on any mac, on any RAM configuration starting from 312 Mb of RAM and higher (trust me, a friend of mine runs Tiger smoothly on his PowerPC G3 580-or-something Ghz with 320 Mb of RAM). So yes, Vista adjust to the RAM - but the entire Vista can't adjust on anything below 512 Mb.

But that doesn't say anything about this discussion at all. It works just as well for mac. Macs are a great value thanks to their OS, the design and the fact that you don't buy it and feel helplessly lost already. By wich I mean - buy a PC - any - there's a better one out there. With mac you're assured that the coming two years, you're still using the topo-of-the-mac-bill. The mac bill might not sem so powerfull in numbers - but I tell you, the OS certainly backs up that one. Here's a major difference: Windows Vista requires much more powerfull computer whereas MacOS X does not. So why would they give you a megathon of RAM if the system doesn't need it? So you look at Mac RAM and say 'hey that's little' - but in fact, it's enough to get you running. So why are we looking at the numbers? Who can get the tasks done is what we should look at and who can do it the fastest. And macs just don't need that much RAM to do the same thing as Vista, so it doesn't need more. It doesn't need as much Ghz as a PC to do a task, so it doesn't have it. That's my opinion, though?

Okay, I have been trying to tell him that for months. Yet he doesn't seem to understand that somethings are not that great on mac, but hey - still love my mac, though.

You know, Haggis - what you're saying is that people who eat apples (okay, pineapple's if you prefer - it's fruit, not incorporated) shouldn't say why theirs are better than Banana's? You're right that wichever you prefer is your choice, but that doesn't make one or the other better, does it? Is it? I'm pretty sure one is better than the other - but then again, they are very alike. That didn't make any sense at all, did it?

I didn't say inconvenient. For professional purposes, a Mac can do better things (Certainly in graphic design, and it does all the rest equally). But it lacks gaming. Fair trade.

Because macs are fancy and Apple is in the position to ask that much. A lot of that money goes to the great design (heck, they showed a side-to-side view of a Dell and a Mac with the same configuration) and the other for their OS. But on the other hand, the OS is more appropriate for the professional workspace than Windows (sorry, factoid) and thus it feels betetr for thaat than for gaming, off course. Ah well, no discussion, just opinions. I'll keep updating in the first post.