New Gateway PC looks like a MAC

[mykalberta]

That thing is fugly. Why not make the screen the whole front and put everything else in the back.

[FlamingLonghorn]

Originally Posted by Juventus3

I also found this while I was looking around...
Student exclusive statistics:


http://www.macnn.com/articles/07/10/...with.students/

I am pretty sure that Student plan part adds up to way more than 100%...

[Juventus3]

Originally Posted by Sowa

I am pretty sure that Student plan part adds up to way more than 100%...

Yea, that just looked at the % of students using each type of computer that used a student discount to buy it. So 80% of the people using macs got a student discount, ~30% of dell users.

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by Ford Prefect

If not for Apple the computing world would still be looking at a dos prompt.

Yes, that's exactly what we'd be doing.

[MaDMaN_26]

Originally Posted by Ford Prefect

If not for Apple the computing world would still be looking at a dos prompt.

C:\> cd Ford*
C:\> del *.*
C:\> cd..
C:\> rmdir c:\Ford* /q

[llama64]

Originally Posted by Ford Prefect

It's not surprising manufacturers are starting to copy the Apple's look and all in one design ... the only surprise is it took them so long. Apple has always been the innovator. If not for Apple the computing world would still be looking at a dos prompt.

/sigh

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xerox_Alto
http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/ta...l/ch02s05.html

Apple was late to the party.

[Juventus3]

Originally Posted by llama64

/sigh

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xerox_Alto
http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/ta...l/ch02s05.html

Apple was late to the party.

in·no·vate [in-uh-veyt] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation verb, -vat·ed, -vat·ing.
–verb (used without object)
1. to introduce something new; make changes in anything established.
–verb (used with object)
2. to introduce (something new) for or as if for the first time:

That same year, in 1981, Xerox finally brought a machine based on the PARC technology to market. It was called the Xerox Star,[13] and it was a failure. Technically, it was woefully underpowered, slow, and overpriced. Hesitant and inept marketing did not help matters. Many of the developers, sensing more willingness from Apple and other emerging PC companies to push the technology, had started to bail out of PARC in 1980; the failure of the Star accelerated the process. Xerox, despite having pioneered the GUI and several of the other key technologies of modern computing, never turned a profit from them.

Apple has never claimed to invent the computer (they're just really good at making them better).

[Barnes]

Originally Posted by I_H8_Crawford

Actually, I think IBM was the first one to come out with an all-in-one design including a flat panel monitor - they released the NetVista x40 series back in 2001-2002, when the iMac was that ugly CRT screen with everything built in...

The TAM pic I posted is from 1997.

Table5--> I was being sarcastic.

That dell is kind of interesting. Way too much money though.

[Barnes]

Originally Posted by Juventus3

in·no·vate [in-uh-veyt] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation verb, -vat·ed, -vat·ing.
–verb (used without object)
1. to introduce something new; make changes in anything established.
–verb (used with object)
2. to introduce (something new) for or as if for the first time:



Apple has never claimed to invent the computer (they're just really good at making them better).

I believe the folks who developed the GUI for Xerox were more than happy that Apple could make use of their ideas as Xerox had no interest in it.

Good artists copy, great artists steal.

Never design what you can just steal.

And so on....

Good for Gateway for bringing some design sense but way overpriced.

[MaxPower]

Originally Posted by Barnes

Good for Gateway for bringing some design sense but way overpriced.

Surely you mean "Good for Gateway for stealing some design sense"

[Bertuzzied]

Originally Posted by Sowa

I am pretty sure that Student plan part adds up to way more than 100%...

haha maybe apple fanboy can explain that. I'm the chart was done on a pc. hehe

[Regorium]

Originally Posted by MaxPower

I used to say that the Apple vs PC argument was moot, because they target two different groups. Apples, out of the box, are far more suited toward media (music, movies, pictures, etc) and PCs are better for pretty much everything else. It depended on what you wanted. But now with the Apples' ability to run the Windows OS and software as well as any PC, there is no question left for me.

Apple nerds unite!

No.

Apple uses proprietary components, not allowing you to customize (or perform maintainence yourself). Their iMacs use Laptop RAM, which is much slower than the equivalent desktop RAM. Video cards top out with the 8600GTS for the 24" screen. Using that video card and attempting to run anything more than iLife at 1920x1200 will cause your computer to just die.

Vista has gotten a bad rap, but that was mainly due to driver incompatibility with the literally hundreds of thousands of pieces of hardware out there. Mac OS is running in a black box, making it orders of magnitude easier to program for and make stable/secure - yet they still have to release patches at the same rate as Microsoft to fix critical security loopholes and massive bugs.

PC fanboys for life!

[Ford Prefect]

Originally Posted by MaDMaN_26

C:\> cd Ford*
C:\> del *.*
C:\> cd..
C:\> rmdir c:\Ford* /q

Very good. My dos isn't that good anymore ... I wouldn't have remembered all that. Actually, I kind of miss dos. Windows has never really turned my crankshaft, but I used to like dos.

[Juventus3]

Originally Posted by Regorium

No.

Apple uses proprietary components, not allowing you to customize (or perform maintainence yourself). Their iMacs use Laptop RAM, which is much slower than the equivalent desktop RAM. Video cards top out with the 8600GTS for the 24" screen. Using that video card and attempting to run anything more than iLife at 1920x1200 will cause your computer to just die.

Vista has gotten a bad rap, but that was mainly due to driver incompatibility with the literally hundreds of thousands of pieces of hardware out there. Mac OS is running in a black box, making it orders of magnitude easier to program for and make stable/secure - yet they still have to release patches at the same rate as Microsoft to fix critical security loopholes and massive bugs.

PC fanboys for life!

This is what you have to love about PC guy. Always starts talking about video cards, RAM, resolution, etc...

For myself, as well as 90% of computer users, the only thing that mattes is reliability. It was the major reason I switched to a mac a couple years ago, and continues to be the major reason today (along with the visually appealing systems they come out with). Without a doubt PC's are more customizable. How many people, when buying a computer, ask questions about the different types of RAM available? Honestly...

But for the heck of it...Let's talk numbers. iMac's are not made for gaming. Has Apple ever tried to say they were? Throw a Nvidea Quadro FX 4500 into a mac pro along with up to 16 GB of RAM and a 8 core 64 bit 3.0 Ghz Intel Xeon processor, and I'm pretty sure you can game to your hearts content in the same way you could you your "PC Gaming Rig(!!!)"

I feel like I should be welding a motherboard together after typing that.

As far as your analysis of Vista vs. OS X...You forgot to mention instability as a reason for it's downfall. Caused my incompatibility? Probably. OSX's reviews, especially in contrast to Vista, speak for themselves.

Let the pissing war continue...

[MaxPower]

Originally Posted by Regorium

No.

Apple uses proprietary components, not allowing you to customize (or perform maintainence yourself). Their iMacs use Laptop RAM, which is much slower than the equivalent desktop RAM. Video cards top out with the 8600GTS for the 24" screen. Using that video card and attempting to run anything more than iLife at 1920x1200 will cause your computer to just die.

Vista has gotten a bad rap, but that was mainly due to driver incompatibility with the literally hundreds of thousands of pieces of hardware out there. Mac OS is running in a black box, making it orders of magnitude easier to program for and make stable/secure - yet they still have to release patches at the same rate as Microsoft to fix critical security loopholes and massive bugs.

PC fanboys for life!

Hold on, Professor Farnsworth, my nose is bleeding... Ok.... got it.

I didn't know "performing maintenance" was a selling point for computers. I guess I better reconsider my stance.

I'll concede that for running a NASA flight simulator, an out-of-the box Mac probably won't cut it, but for the average human, Windows software is run with a Mac just fine.

And as far as releasing the same number of patches as Windows, I'm okay with that. You know what would p!ss me off? Having to mess around with all those updates and patches and still having an unstable system.... that would be terrible.

[Barnes]

You know what really grinds my gears...

My dishwasher uses all proprietary components not allowing me to customize or perform maintenance myself.

Come to think of it, so does my car, and my fridge, and my furnace, and my clock radio, and my television..................

I would love to see these 24" iMac's die at 1920X1200. I guess my buddy's work quad G5 with dual 30" HD cinemas is totally useless as a video editing system eh?

[I-Hate-Hulse]

Originally Posted by MaxPower

I used to say that the Apple vs PC argument was moot, because they target two different groups. Apples, out of the box, are far more suited toward media (music, movies, pictures, etc) and PCs are better for pretty much everything else. It depended on what you wanted. But now with the Apples' ability to run the Windows OS and software as well as any PC, there is no question left for me.

Apple nerds unite!

So why pay for 2 OS licenses? That's economic how? If your software need is for Windows based software, why run an emulator so you can use prettier browser and media software?"

I've always been amused at Mac fanboi's when it comes to the 'horses for courses' argument. Not sure why they have the burning need to promote OSX as the 'Bestest-OS-in-the-world-ZOMG!!1!1!" for all users. Can't they accept that Mac's are good for a certain segment of the userbase and Wintel for the rest?

BTW - you Nikon users suck. Canon clearly rulez, Bestest-cameras-in-the-world-ZOMG!!1!1!

[Regorium]

Originally Posted by Barnes

You know what really grinds my gears...

My dishwasher uses all proprietary components not allowing me to customize or perform maintenance myself.

Come to think of it, so does my car, and my fridge, and my furnace, and my clock radio, and my television..................

I would love to see these 24" iMac's die at 1920X1200. I guess my buddy's work quad G5 with dual 30" HD cinemas is totally useless as a video editing system eh?

I never talked about the G5. I'm talking about their mainstream offerings like the iMac, and the MacBook. It's no better than crappy computers offered by Future shop or something, yet people drool over them because they're "shiny". Heck, this thread is started based on looks of a computer.

Originally Posted by MaxPower

Hold on, Professor Farnsworth, my nose is bleeding... Ok.... got it.

Ha ha, hilarious. Really helps your credibility that's for sure. Not sure where you got that I was attacking you, but that's okay.

Originally Posted by MaxPower

I didn't know "performing maintenance" was a selling point for computers. I guess I better reconsider my stance.

I'll concede that for running a NASA flight simulator, an out-of-the box Mac probably won't cut it, but for the average human, Windows software is run with a Mac just fine.

And as far as releasing the same number of patches as Windows, I'm okay with that. You know what would p!ss me off? Having to mess around with all those updates and patches and still having an unstable system.... that would be terrible.

Everyone keeps saying that Vista is so unstable. Have you run Vista? For me, I have it on one computer (my GF's), and haven't had a single problem so far. Most people I know also do not have issues. The few that do are usually based around a piece of hardware with bad drivers, and slowly these are getting ironed out. I still believe Mac OS is a step or two better than Vista, but I just choose not to pay the $500+ premium for the same parts as a PC.

[MaxPower]

Originally Posted by I-Hate-Hulse

So why pay for 2 OS licenses? That's economic how? If your software need is for Windows based software, why run an emulator so you can use prettier browser and media software?"

I've always been amused at Mac fanboi's when it comes to the 'horses for courses' argument. Not sure why they have the burning need to promote OSX as the 'Bestest-OS-in-the-world-ZOMG!!1!1!" for all users. Can't they accept that Mac's are good for a certain segment of the userbase and Wintel for the rest?

BTW - you Nikon users suck. Canon clearly rulez, Bestest-cameras-in-the-world-ZOMG!!1!1!

Who mentioned economics? Not me. If I need both OSs, I'll buy them, that's it. And as for fanboy's accepting that Macs are good for a certain segment, reread my post that you quoted.

[MaxPower]

Originally Posted by Regorium

Ha ha, hilarious. Really helps your credibility that's for sure. Not sure where you got that I was attacking you, but that's okay.

Sorry, didn't imply you were attacking me. I consider the nosebleed a humorous affliction of the nerds. I was joking that your post was so nerdy, it gave me a nosebleed just reading it.