|
WolfRune writes: PCs, by their very nature, are closer to Open Source than Macs. IBM developed the original specs, and then opened things up to the market. While this obviously was a mistake for them, it's been a boon for the general populace. Without this, there would BE no "clone" machines, only the kind of monopoly that Apple now maintains.
Related to:
Linux Desktops will get killed by Microsoft this Christmas
|
|
My housemate has a new (as of September) Mac,
which he bought for video editing and 3D graphic/animation development
(supposedly, the primary purpose for Macs these days). While it has
some nice features, and the case is aesthetically pleasing, he has
found it to be an exercise in frustration.
Apple support has been absolutely terrible, providing "fixes" that
either cripple the already questionable performance, or telling people
to live with the problem. Also, they have been well-known to remove
threads from their official support message board if the issue is one
they do not wish to recognize.
In terms of performance, a computer with dual processors and 4GB of DDR
memory SHOULD have stellar performance, but in a side-to-side
comparison with his old computer (a 1st-generation P4 with 768 MB of
RDRAM), most functions were no better, and some were in fact slower!
Apple has long tried to sell itself as a sort of counter-culture
phenomenon, but in truth it is more monopolistic and controlling that
Microsoft ever could be. I would venture to say that Microsoft wishes
it could BE Apple - Microsoft's repeated attempts to gain some
domination of the PC hardware market, while damaging, have not been
entirely successful.
Microsoft's O/S and applications may be buggy, but at least they
usually admit to errors, even if it's quietly. Apple won't even admit
they made an error when they chose a poorly-performing battery for
several early generations of iPods, or that there is a real issue with
their new iPod Nano's screen.
Finally, while the general populace may not be interested in assembling
their own components in to a computer, what about those who DO have
such an interest? Apple not only limits your customization options, but
your upgrade path is narrow and short.
PCs, by their very nature, are closer to Open Source than Macs. IBM
developed the original specs, and then opened things up to the market.
While this obviously was a mistake for them, it's been a boon for the
general populace. Without this, there would BE no "clone" machines,
only the kind of monopoly that Apple now maintains.
Oh, and a Dell XPS system is a gaming-centric PC, so there's not much
point in comparing it to a Mac G5, considering that there are few
equivalent benchmarks to run the two against each other. |
