My first time in an APPLE store

[Varine]

I'll be clear, I'm talking about a PC that isn't a Mac and runs Windows.

According to you, the only difference between a Mac and any other computer is the lack of the use of standardized form factors, which is increasingly true given that they aren't made totally closed anymore. So why would a PC suck because it isn't a Mac? Because it costs less and uses ATX form factors? Also doesn't come with any nice baggies.

This is because Apple make all their money on hardware in their Macs, and iPhones/MP3 players, unlike Microsoft which are mostly software, and XBOXs, etc..

They don't make their own hardware anymore, they buy from third party companies. They're using Nvidia cards and Intel chipsets a lot, they just don't adhere to the form factors, which right now ATX is standard so a lot of cards won't fit or the hardware is built specifically for the case. Microsoft only really makes software, and then the Xbox and Zune and some accessories like mice and keyboards and publish video games.

 

[Icyculyr]

According to you, the only difference between a Mac and any other computer is the lack of the use of standardized form factors, which is increasingly true given that they aren't made totally closed anymore. So why would a PC suck because it isn't a Mac? Because it costs less and uses ATX form factors? Also doesn't come with any nice baggies.

According to me? I don't remember mentioning standardized form factors.

They don't make their own hardware anymore, they buy from third party companies. They're using Nvidia cards and Intel chipsets a lot, they just don't adhere to the form factors, which right now ATX is standard so a lot of cards won't fit or the hardware is built specifically for the case. Microsoft only really makes software, and then the Xbox and Zune and some accessories like mice and keyboards and publish video games.

I never said they did make their own hardware, I just said they make their money on their hardware.

What form factors??? what is a form factor?

 

[Varine]

According to me? I don't remember mentioning standardized form factors.

That's because you probably don't know what they are, as an educated guess given you asking me what a PCI slot was. And the fact that you're asking what it is at the bottom of the post.

I will admit that I was wrong in that Mac doesn't use proprietary software (they used to and I assumed they still did).

And it's according to you that you can upgrade it easily.

I never said they did make their own hardware, I just said they make their money on their hardware.

It's not their hardware. They're just like any other computer company; they buy hardware from third parties and use it to assemble their own systems, just like Alienware, Dell, HP, Gateway, and any other computer selling company. They make money by drastically overcharging you, similarly to Alienware (although Alienware cases are amazingly designed), and by using general rhetoric as much as possible to make them seem better than any other stereotypical 'PC'.

Basically, the only difference between a computer running Windows, which has been stereotyped in their commercials as a PC specifically targeting Windows despite there being numerous OS's, is that it uses OSX. The hardware in it is the same, which I was wrong about I did think they used proprietary hardware mostly.

The form factor is just a general form that computers are designed around to make it easier to upgrade and change out parts. ATX (I don't know why it's called ATX) is the common one right now, it's essentially a basic blueprint. That way you don't have a bunch of people making motherboards that don't fit into any cases, it's all designed around the same concept so that you can put any motherboard into any case and not worry about nothing lining up. Apple threw that idea out the window, which is why my argument is still there, you can't upgrade it as easily because they design everything for aesthetic appeal along with effectiveness. They aren't taking into consideration you regularly changing out parts for newer ones that might not be the same size, and therefore might not fit.

If you design an operating system you can do the same thing Apple is right now, that's the only special thing about them as far as I can tell.

 

[Icyculyr]

That's because you probably don't know what they are, as an educated guess given you asking me what a PCI slot was. And the fact that you're asking what it is at the bottom of the post.

I guessed what it was, and I also had an idea of what a PCI slot was, I just double check.

It's not their hardware. They're just like any other computer company; they buy hardware from third parties and use it to assemble their own systems, just like Alienware, Dell, HP, Gateway, and any other computer selling company. They make money by drastically overcharging you, similarly to Alienware (although Alienware cases are amazingly designed), and by using general rhetoric as much as possible to make them seem better than any other stereotypical 'PC'.

Well, if you look at it from my perspective, I bought this computer, it's mine.
So I naturally say their hardware, since they own it, and are selling it in their machines.

It's not a drastic overcharge, but it is more expensive than a PC with the same parts.
But you get to use OSX, and a heap of free bundled software, if Windows 7 had Time Machine, Expose and Spaces, I'd use Windows more.
It's the easiest thing ever to insert Graphics Cards, Hard Drives, RAM and Optical Bay Drives into the Mac Pro imo.

I think the reason why PCs are cheaper, is because they have such a variety of parts that they have to be cheaper to keep up with competition, I may be wrong, but I'd bet that's it.

The form factor is just a general form that computers are designed around to make it easier to upgrade and change out parts. ATX (I don't know why it's called ATX) is the common one right now, it's essentially a basic blueprint. That way you don't have a bunch of people making motherboards that don't fit into any cases, it's all designed around the same concept so that you can put any motherboard into any case and not worry about nothing lining up. Apple threw that idea out the window, which is why my argument is still there, you can't upgrade it as easily because they design everything for aesthetic appeal along with effectiveness. They aren't taking into consideration you regularly changing out parts for newer ones that might not be the same size, and therefore might not fit.

I think Apple threw that idea out of the window so you can't upgrade it.
Think about it, in my mind, having a smaller set of standard parts used, means the OS should be more stable.
They chose to make computers that should ALWAYS work and never crash.

I wish I could compare a Mac and a PC with identical components both running Windows, and a Mac and a PC running OSX/Windows.
I could see the real price difference, and how fast each computer is.

 

[Varine]

I think the reason why PCs are cheaper, is because they have such a variety of parts that they have to be cheaper to keep up with competition, I may be wrong, but I'd bet that's it.

That's what I'm saying, they use the same parts as a PC. They don't get special things from the manufacturers, it's the same things you're going to get in a PC, which is what I was wrong about. I didn't know that, like I said I thought it was still proprietary.

Think about it, in my mind, having a smaller set of standard parts used, means the OS should be more stable.
They chose to make computers that should ALWAYS work and never crash.

No, the OS is really just the graphical display and format of the hard drive. It's not greatly affected by the parts in your computer (albeit good parts will make it more stable), it is to some extent, but I don't think you're viewing it the right way. The OS is just a program that's constantly running and displaying the GUI, and it's the basis for other programs to run. That's really about it.

I wish I could compare a Mac and a PC with identical components both running Windows, and a Mac and a PC running OSX/Windows.
I could see the real price difference, and how fast each computer is.

They would be the same. That's what I'm trying to get across now, I was wrong about the hardware I know that now. The OS is the only really big difference. Which I think a lot of people don't understand, like I didn't, but a lot of people that do like Macs, probably don't get that either.

And the last Mac I used crashed more than my computer does. Don't know what it was, but... really didn't want to run whatever I was trying to open. Forget... it was like 3DS Max or Photoshop or something, I forget.

 

[Icyculyr]

No, the OS is really just the graphical display and format of the hard drive. It's not greatly affected by the parts in your computer (albeit good parts will make it more stable), it is to some extent, but I don't think you're viewing it the right way. The OS is just a program that's constantly running and displaying the GUI, and it's the basis for other programs to run. That's really about it.

Yeah but windows PCs crash all the time, I thought it's mainly the hardware.
I say this because I run Windows on my Mac and have never had one problem.

And the last Mac I used crashed more than my computer does. Don't know what it was, but... really didn't want to run whatever I was trying to open. Forget... it was like 3DS Max or Photoshop or something, I forget.

I doubt it would have been 3DS Max, I don't think it's compatible with OSX.
What Mac was this, and what OS was it.. do you know?

Kind Regards

 

[Varine]

Yeah but windows PCs crash all the time, I thought it's mainly the hardware.
I say this because I run Windows on my Mac and have never had one problem.

No that's because Vista was unstable for a while. I haven't had an issue with it yet, personally. A lot of time's it's because viruses though, which Mac's don't have a lot of because not many people target their OS because it's not as popular.

 

[Icyculyr]

I'm sure that some of reason that Macs aren't targeted is because they don't have the same market share,
but if you could make a virus that could potentially effect 300 million macs world wide that have NO protection against it, you would.

I believe it's because of OSX's unix base, viruses can do more on Windows than they can on OSX.

No that's because Vista was unstable for a while. I haven't had an issue with it yet, personally. A lot of time's it's because viruses though, which Mac's don't have a lot of because not many people target their OS because it's not as popular.

I've had a look on the sevenforums.com a lot of people post about having problems with windows 7.
Technically it's not released yet but your using either RC Build 7100 (which I'm on) or Build 7600 (Release build) or something in the middle of that.

 

[sqrage]

I'm sure that some of reason that Macs aren't targeted is because they don't have the same market share,
but if you could make a virus that could potentially effect 300 million macs world wide that have NO protection against it, you would.

I believe it's because of OSX's unix base, viruses can do more on Windows than they can on OSX.

http://db.tidbits.com/article/9529
http://news.cnet.com/8301-27080_3-10318972-245.html

 

[Icyculyr]

This is OSX Leopard, additional security has been implemented in Snow Leopard

Since it took Charlie Miller only 2 minutes to compromise the MacBook Air, it's clear that he walked in the door with a complete exploit ready to go. That's far different from creating one on the spot

I'm sure it took him several weeks or months to come up with this.

The researchers I work with, most of them Mac users themselves, frequently identify Safari and QuickTime as particularly problematic programs to secure, and none were surprised by the contest results.

QuickTimeX in OSX 10.6 improved it's security significantly iirc.

With Leopard, all the hooks are there for a very secure operating system. We just need to continue to pressure Apple to finish implementation and make it far more difficult for our platform of choice to lose next year's contest.

Apple could improve security much more, but there is no need for it because it's not under attack, whether this is primarily because of Apple's smaller (4.5% I think) world wide market share or because like I said you just can't make the same sort of viruses for OSX as you can for Windows, or a combination of the both, I believe the latter option (that it is partly the market share, but also the security of the OS)

And yes I disagree with Miller that it's primarily the market share that stops OSX being targeted.

Even if I'm wrong, and it's not because the security of the OS, then it doesn't make sense that a virus writer would target Windows which has 90% of the world wide market share I think, but is more secure, and leave Mac alone who have 4.5% of the world wide market share, which is probably something like 300+ million Macs that are completely unprotected.

 

[Tru_Power22]

Even if I'm wrong, and it's not because the security of the OS, then it doesn't make sense that a virus writer would target Windows which has 90% of the world wide market share I think, but is more secure, and leave Mac alone who have 4.5% of the world wide market share, which is probably something like 300+ million Macs that are completely unprotected.

Macs can get viruses that are just as dangerous as windows viruses. Maybe even more dangerous because of the serious lack of Antivirus software.

Oh and why target "300+ million computers" when thats 4.5% of the market share when you could get the other 95.5% by just working a little longer on your program.

 

[Icyculyr]

Oh and why target "300+ million computers" when thats 4.5% of the market share when you could get the other 95.5% by just working a little longer on your program.

Because those 300 mil should be more likely to get that virus, taking into account that OSX users generally have no Anti-Virus and are expecting to never get viruses... where as the 90% of PCs out there have protection and know they can get viruses.

Macs can get viruses that are just as dangerous as windows viruses. Maybe even more dangerous because of the serious lack of Antivirus software.

I guess we just disagree, I could pull info off previous threads I've asked about security of OSX vs PC but I don't want to, had a bit enough of this subject already.

 

[Jackal]

Oh and why target "300+ million computers" when thats 4.5% of the market share when you could get the other 95.5% by just working a little longer on your program.

I always found that argument a bit odd. I'd always assume the viruses 'share' would be proportional to the market share, but they're not.

 

[Varine]

I always found that argument a bit odd. I'd always assume the viruses 'share' would be proportional to the market share, but they're not.

Why? Mac users are mostly obsessive Apple fans, so most people writing them probably are not that into them.