A bit of a computery question re: Choosing Desktops...

[bonj2]

Charing WHO "for every PC", and for WHAT. Windows isn't like the BBC and the TV license, where you have to pay regardless of whether or not you use windows. People with a non-microsoft OS have never had to pay microsoft anything.
Is this something the sandal-wearing linux brigade have been telling you?

 

[Nortones2]

Mac is cost effective because it has a reliable OS, it works without a lot of maintenance, and on-costs like anti-virus apps. But, if you want an inferior product like a PC, that's entirely up to you. Price isn't everything.

 

[ajevans]

Charing WHO "for every PC", and for WHAT. Windows isn't like the BBC and the TV license, where you have to pay regardless of whether or not you use windows. People with a non-microsoft OS have never had to pay microsoft anything.
Is this something the sandal-wearing linux brigade have been telling you?

OEMS. see below which was one of the findings of fact from the United States vs Microsoft case below:

"One of the ways Microsoft combats piracy is by advising OEMs that they will be charged a higher price for Windows unless they drastically limit the number of PCs that they sell without an operating system pre-installed."

Basically prior to 2002 if you sell PCs and don't put MS Windows on every single one you sell then you will get punished by MS financially.

http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f3800/msjudgex.htm

PS I've never met someone who uses Linux who wears sandals. It's a childish myth spread by retarded American teenagers.

 

[Melvil]

Oh goodness! I seem to have inadvertently set-off a Mac vs PC 'debate'!

Yes, perhaps a custom job is the better option...I'll have a look at ebuyer, cheers.

 

[HarryB]

It's like this. I use a pc at work because I get paid to use one. At home I use a Mac.

I have experience of using both for a wide variety of functions. The Mac wins hands down every time and Macs rarely crash.

I wouldn't dream of buying a pc even if they were only £200. In fact I wouldn't have one given.

 

[davidwalton]

They're not for the majority of users. You say there is nothing faster than you Mac. So? Who needs something that fast?

For the majority of home users, a Mac isn't cost effective. Why should anyone pay more than £500 for a pc that does everything most of us need, when the cheapest iMac is £800?

You will likely not have to change a MAC as often as you would a PC. Yes, the upfront cost can be more, but not over time it isn't.

If you will never have to replace a PC, only then will I consider your view that Mac's are not cost effective.

Standard application built for PC are also available on Mac. All the standard WP, spreadsheet, DB's, Graphics packages etc are made for Mac's, just as they are for PC Windows.

I use Adobe and MacroMedia products. Now one, and available on both platforms.

MS products are available on Macs,

In other words, applications that the MAJORITY of people use are available on Macs.

I have no wish to argue with which is better, as I have tried to point out; Horses for Courses.

 

[davidwalton]

but macs are just one of these things that never caught on really, aren't they?

No.....They used to be viewed as only for those with high graphics/sound/media application requirements. Not been like that for a number of years. OSX operating system has opened up the Mac to most software companies who do consider Macs viable enough to write for them, ie. even MS products can be run on OSX.

 

[davidwalton]

"illegally gained" oh do get over yourself.

and if you were the owner of Apple, you would of kicked the hell out of Bill Gates.

There is also the facts showing MS to be a Monopoly who is often in breach of acting in a reasonable way, and fined millions as a result, and told to change their ways. They are still in court over some breach or other.

 

[HJ]

If you get a PC you are stuck with Microsoft operating systems...

Have you never heard of Linux?

 

[davidwalton]

Have you never heard of Linux?

For individuals willing to have a PC at risk while the open code is sorted, or run less up-to-date versions, it is not something for businesses.

However, given that Linux has been around for so long, as long as nobody screws up, it should be stable, and mostly much faster than Windows.

However, if anyone is happy with Linux, they should be happy with a Mac. OSX is based on UNIX.

 

[HJ]

However, if anyone is happy with Linux, they should be happy with a Mac. OSX is based on UNIX.

So why pay through the nose for a Mac?

 

[marinyork]

Nonsense and how you can claim you aren't a fanboi after that post has me in stitches. And as for those happy with linux being happy with a Mac, that's nonsense too - apple are an just as much an evil company that make over-rated products with a shallow image and Steve Jobs is just as ridiculous as Bill Gates . All in good humour mind you. Thankyou for pointing out that profound point about OSX, I would never have known .

 

[davidwalton]

So why pay through the nose for a Mac?

If you are happy with a PC, thats fine. I like the Mac, and I like OSX. It works very well, and by buying something half decent like a Mac, it is lasting longer than most standard PC's.

 

[marinyork]

The only PCs I had problems with were those god-awful chips made by Cyrix, the 6x86 line. Went through 3 and 2 boards in a year. So bad it was funny. In comparison all other computers and consoles seem stable and reliable .

 

[davidwalton]

Nonsense and how you can claim you aren't a fanboi after that post has me in stitches. And as for those happy with linux being happy with a Mac, that's nonsense too - apple are an just as much an evil company that make over-rated products with a shallow image and Steve Jobs is just as ridiculous as Bill Gates . All in good humour mind you. Thankyou for pointing out that profound point about OSX, I would never have known .

If we should only buy things from small companies that are always nice, we won't get anything decent.

I prefer Apple over MS, but would be happy if another operating system came along that was a serious option, in business and for the individual.

BTW- Someone who is hopelessly devoted to something and will like anything associated with their particular thing is a fanboi. Arguing in favour of one thing over another doesn't make anyone a fanboi.

I am more against MS than I am in favour of Apple. If I could run a machine with an operating system that did exactly what it said on the side if the tin, and allowed me to run all the applications and devices I want, then I will be happy. Not happy with applications that are second or third best and only needed because a company has the market share.

So, give me a well built machine, with an operating system that works, and applications I can run. I know, I'll get a Mac, at least until something better comes along