digg

Join DiggAbout

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

See the original image at gizmodo.com —

Apple's Year-End Report Card

gizmodo.com — Somewhere between 2006 and today, I stopped considering Apple an underdog. And I'm not just talking about their iPod numbers nor am I talking about their no-where-close to Windows marketshare. I mean, screw marketshare, really: Does Porsche outsell Honda?

show profanity settings
expand all
  • rickcarson, on 12/22/2007, -14/+50When Apple passed Dell in terms of Market Capitalisation I think that made a lot of doom-sayers sit down and shut up.

    I've been following Apple since Panther, and while the stock may go up and down, and batteries come and go, their product offering have (for the most part) gone from strength to strength. Plus they've had some good people (for the most part) running the finances, they don't seem to have problems with liquidity, their surplus cash 'war chest' is filled to over-flowing. The only thing I can think of where they aren't kicking butt and taking names is in market share. But given their stubborn refusal to kowtow to our corporate overlords this is hardly surprising. So only in market share are they the underdogs. And is it that big a deal? Only if they have profitability problems, or a sudden systemic failure to move forward or be creative, which they don't have.
    • fgsdfgdfh, on 12/22/2007, -28/+4I bought a little AAPL too, once I realized that Jobs has a dedicated group of mouthbreathing flunkies, it was a no-brainer. Thanks for making me a little richer, mactards. Pumped and dumped, just like Jobs does to you.
    • CLShortFuse, on 12/22/2007, -10/+1Buried your comment because it has NOTHING to do with the article.
  • clak, on 12/22/2007, -19/+6The only thing I have issue with is Gizmodo's repeated willingness to call AppleTV a failure, based on the hoped for sales numbers of one research firm (Forrester). If they were to do some actual research they would find that AppleTV is the best selling DMR in its category. On the other hand, Gizmodo's willing to accept the lie that the Xbox 360 is a success, when prominent gaming sites like Gamespot have pointed out as early as July of this year that the Xbox 360 has suffered a "$1.06 billion charge" for the Red Rings of Death and slowing sales, demonstrates to me their willful ignorance and/or dishonesty.
    • jimbojim, on 12/22/2007, -6/+13Apple TV deserves an F. It IS a failure, and is only a matter of time until Apple scraps it for something else.

      And the 1.06 billion "charge" was good on Microsoft's part, because that meant free 3-year warranties to all 360 owners. They should have never let the 360 out the door with the problems it had, but that was a mistake they made in 2005, not 2007.
    • sombreroman, on 12/22/2007, -3/+4Agreed. Apple TV isn't terrible for what it is, but it just isn't that good or special. It's kinda like Apple's Zune: functional, but a failure to live up to expectations or the competition. Honestly, the one thing holding me back from switching to an Apple life (to a macbook, ipod, iphone, and itunes, from a vista dell, creative zen, wino phone, and WMA music stores, just to give a sense of how big a switch it would be) is the lack of a good living room product. Apple TV will be a disappointment until it competes with Windows Media Center.
      • MephistoX, on 12/22/2007, -0/+4I disagree with your comparison to the Zune. The problem Microsoft faces with the Zune is the same one that Apple faces in the general computer market - They're trying to fight the other who's already got control of the market. The Zune has to fight against the iPod, a device that's been selling and been insanely popular with consumers since 2001. Plus, if you've bought any music on iTunes, you're effectively locked into using the iPod because that music can only be played on Apple's product.
        Microsoft's Zune really isn't that bad, and with Zune's second model, it has more features than the iPod, so from a technical standpoint it's the better product.
    • schoate09, on 12/22/2007, -2/+9Xbox 360 a failure? Let alone AppleTV a success? Do we have Phil Schiller in the room? Anyway, Xbox 360 is a great success, so many great games, and now that they're fixed, live service is tremendous, online is terrific, and I've been playing my working Elite 360 almost non-stop with no problems.
    • rpgmaker, on 12/22/2007, -2/+3AppleTV just couldn't live up to the expetations, for now at least (remeber the iPod...) but on the other hand every owner of the Xbox 360 is happy about their inversion and know what to do with it. Sure MS plays the catch up with Sony and Nintendo in terms of market share but it is a great product, its, along with MS Office, one of their best products.
      • Bootes, on 12/22/2007, -1/+2Uhm I'm not happy with my 360.... You can't make claims like that. However, I wouldn't call the 360 a failure. MS so far has the real games market which is exactly what they were going for.
    • Nerfdude, on 12/22/2007, -1/+5xbox 360 does what Apple TV is built solely to do. and it does it better.

      oh, and it plays video games, too. like, real ones.
  • happyseamonster, on 12/22/2007, -15/+35Jizzmodo sucks.
  • jimbojim, on 12/22/2007, -28/+57***** Gizmodo. I haven't seen a single bad Apple review come out of their site from ANY of their "writers."

    By the way, Apple TV should get an F.
    • theuniversal, on 12/22/2007, -6/+11I don't own an Apple TV, but the people I know who have one say they love it. Can you expand on your 'F' rating?
      • MacParrot, on 12/22/2007, -8/+12No, he really can't
      • nycmac247, on 12/22/2007, -6/+5He does not know how to rip dvds to mp4?
      • cthellis, on 12/22/2007, -8/+6"It does not do EXACTLY WHAT I WANT IT TO DO, while also being HALF THE PRICE, so therefore it SUCKS!"

        ...probably for the same reason lots of people hate the iPod because it lacks, like, OGG support. o_O
      • javaroast, on 12/22/2007, -6/+4Can you expand on your refutation of the F rating with something better than my buddy bought it and loves it? The "C" rating in the article if very generous. Jobs even claims that the AppleTV is a hobby for Apple. Trying to claim that jimbojim is way off base in his grade especially with the my buddies have one argument is how Apple fans lose credibility.
    • Nerfdude, on 12/22/2007, -5/+4no joke, apple tv definitely deserves an F. my xbox 360 has full access to all the media on my computer, in almost any format. my xbox with XBMC can do it, too, and you could have the same setup for under a hundred bucks.
      apple tv can watch anything that's been transcoded and dumped into itunes. WOW. what a useless product.
      • NotaFanboy87, on 12/22/2007, -3/+1How much was that XBOX again? and the hookup? and it DOESN'T work with iTunes? Shame shame shame...
        • Nerfdude, on 12/22/2007, -1/+2just under 300 for a premium with tax, with the kmart 20% off coupon from a few weeks ago. less than an apple tv.
    • happyseamonster, on 12/22/2007, -1/+2Well, for devices in this category, ATV is the leader... http://displaydaily.com/2007/12/18/apple-tv-tops-i ...
  • z0mbie2099, on 12/22/2007, -22/+69Gizmodo = Apple fan-boy porn.
    • Cory70, on 12/22/2007, -8/+2Yes..that is the damn truth...thats funny tho +1
    • HimThatSpeaks, on 12/22/2007, -2/+0Yeah zombies face = Gizmodo, and any other logical conclusions you can draw from that statement.
  • vx69, on 12/22/2007, -15/+47Wow what a kiss ass article, points out so many bad things about the iPhone then still feels the need to give it a A-
    • mooboy322, on 12/22/2007, -7/+2your giving apple more credit then it should, its should get a B at the most

      ~linux ftw
  • tutivlahos, on 12/22/2007, -13/+27"Does Porsche outsell Honda?"
    No, but does it cost the same?
    • fgsdfgdfh, on 12/22/2007, -18/+6At least the porsche can outperform the honda.

      Comparing Apple computers and regular PC's is more like comparing a gayboy honda civic with an oversized spoiler and fartcan exhaust to a pickup truck.
      • cowboy86, on 12/22/2007, -9/+2Um, I think most pickups would beat Honda's.
        • fgsdfgdfh, on 12/22/2007, -10/+7Just like PC's beat Macs. In the golden days, mactards would argue for hours, how one heavily optimized filter in photoshop meant that their G4's have 900 times the power of a PC. We all know what ended up happening.

          You are being sold an illusion of value.
        • cowboy86, on 12/22/2007, -8/+2After failing miserably to comprehend the original post I have realized I actually posted a pro-mac opinion. Let's get one thing straight, I am not gay, I do not wear turtlenecks, I do not weight 150 lbs wet, I do have a girlfriend. I would love to see someone do a study on how Mac actually make people have lower IQ's. You know, since they say they don't have to think and it doesn't everything for them. God I hate iTards.
        • PandarenLord, on 12/22/2007, -3/+4You're an idiot. Making something simple to use doesn't make you dumb. It's called good design and usability! Besides, if their computer is easy to use, they could spend more time improving their IQ rather than messing with something overly complex for hours.
    • cowboy86, on 12/22/2007, -7/+13Yea I don't get the mac= Porsche and PC= Honda thing either. So I'm putting an end to it now...
      If I could buy a Honda that had the exact same thing under the hood as a Porsche and was still the price of a Honda, I would sure as hell buy it.
      • MephistoX, on 12/22/2007, -8/+9The point is that a Porsche doesn't have control of the market like car manufactures such as Honda, but it's still popular and profitable.
        Apple doesn't have market capitalization like Dell or HP or so on, but it's still popular and profitable.

        That's the analogy.
        • rarson, on 12/22/2007, -3/+5No, it's not. The analogy is that they make a ***** more money selling FEWER cars. Not that I'm saying the analogy is accurate, but that's how Porsche compares to Honda, anyway.
      • prophetpimp, on 12/22/2007, -5/+18It should be more like PC=Toyota and Mac=Lexus. There is no difference, they just charge you more for the brand.
        • lostarchitect, on 12/22/2007, -4/+2No, it's more like Win=Honda, Mac=Ducati. They both have their frothing adherents, but they both do basically the same thing. One is a little more affordable, the other a little better designed.
          • Nerfdude, on 12/22/2007, -1/+3and when they break down, one you can find replacement parts for, one you're *****.
      • rarson, on 12/22/2007, -0/+3Porsche technology costs more than Honda technology, for starters. So, if Honda put the kind of engineering into their cars that Porsche does, they wouldn't be priced like Hondas anymore.

        Furthermore, because Porsche sets the standard for automotive engineering excellence (and they most certainly do), their vehicles demand a premium because they are, literally, some of the best cars money can buy. The fact that they are as cheap as they are (typically about half the price of a Ferrari or less) makes them actually seem like a bargain to most auto enthusiasts.

        By the way, Porsche has made several "inexpensive" models and they've always been very successful. Maybe not Honda pricing, but pretty damn close to it. The 944, 968, and Boxster were all excellent cars, as was the 914.
        • redfox2600, on 12/22/2007, -2/+2But the analogy doesn't work then. All an Apple machine is, is a PC with a nicer case.
          • rarson, on 12/22/2007, -0/+3And a different OS.
          • strangewill, on 12/22/2007, -2/+2OSes are not PC/Mac dependent, they just ship them that way.

            *****
          • rarson, on 12/22/2007, -1/+2And you can swap almost any engine into almost any car provided you have enough money and skill, too. What's your point? 99% of Mac users aren't going to go buy a PC and a copy of Apple's OS.
          • j1w2d34, on 12/22/2007, -1/+1You can only run Mac OS on Apple hardware.
          • redfox2600, on 12/23/2007, -0/+2"You can only run Mac OS on Apple hardware." Apple hardware? I'm probably using the same CPU that the mac uses. The only reason you can't run OS X on a PC is because Apple locked you out.
          • strangewill, on 12/26/2007, -0/+1@j1w2d34:
            No, you can run OSX on PC hardware. They've actually hacked OSX and removed the hardware locks Apple put on it, and it runs perfectly fine on a PC.
      • abigsmurf, on 12/22/2007, -2/+0For a more accurate analogy, Mac = Ford-era Jaguar PC= Ford. May require a more than passing knowledge of cars to understand though.
    • rarson, on 12/22/2007, -2/+9You missed the point. Porsche is the world's most successful auto maker. They sell a lot fewer cars, but they make an average $28k on every car they sell. That absolutely beats the piss out of every other manufacturer.

      http://www.mobilemag.com/content/100/354/C11441/
      • bjornski, on 12/22/2007, -7/+10So they gouge their customer, who is paying a HUGE premium on something shiny, which does exactly the same as the other option, to impress other people and compensate for their lack of [insert whatever here]?

        I guess the analogy DOES fit.
        • Nerfdude, on 12/22/2007, -5/+4high five.
        • rarson, on 12/22/2007, -1/+7IT'S A BUSINESS. Businesses exist to make money. Porsche's products are so excellent that they demand a premium that people pay for. You obviously know nothing about Porsche or their cars.

          Porsche gave us modern turbocharger technology, AWD technology, and the first car to have driver and passenger airbags as a standard feature, to name a few things. Their current 911 GT3 makes 415 hp out of a 3.6L, naturally-aspirated flat-six engine that has evolved from the first air-cooled VW engines that Porsche started out with. Their engineering is second to none and their street cars have all evolved through the technology that Porsche themselves pioneered through their rich racing history.

          By your logic, Kias demand the same premium as Hondas, Audis, BMW's, and Lamborghinis, because they all "do exactly the same." You're probably the guy that drives around with his brakes squealing and his Check Engine light on because you can't be bothered to learn enough about cars to actually maintain them properly. There's a reason why they're called "idiot lights."
          • strangewill, on 12/22/2007, -3/+2Make your post shorter:
            Businesses exist to exploit
          • rarson, on 12/22/2007, -0/+4It's too bad you didn't read any of my post, because you completely missed the point.
    • tupperbacharach, on 12/22/2007, -1/+7Q: "What is the difference between a Porsche and a Porcupine?"
      A: "With a porcupine, the pricks are on the outside."

      Q: "What is the difference between a Porsche and an Apple computer?"
      A: ?
      • buddhistMonkey, on 12/23/2007, -0/+1Q: What is the difference between a Porsche and an Apple computer?
        A: With an Apple computer, a leather interior is optional. On a Porsche, it's standard.
        • tupperbacharach, on 12/23/2007, -0/+0With an Apple computer, all options are determined by fearless leader Jobs.
    • happyseamonster, on 12/22/2007, -0/+2Should it cost the same?
  • mexretroshore, on 12/22/2007, -20/+6Stupid article. Nothing new. Apple products have always been superior. The difference is that there are more of them now.
    • truspect0r, on 12/22/2007, -7/+3LOL
    • cowboy86, on 12/22/2007, -11/+5Maybe superiorly overpriced.
    • fgsdfgdfh, on 12/22/2007, -11/+5superior at what? They are gift wrapped turds!
    • prophetpimp, on 12/22/2007, -10/+5are they "superior" because they come in pretty little boxes?
    • phlll, on 12/22/2007, -3/+3Apple III. Lisa. Newton.

      I rest my case.
      • Me1000, on 12/22/2007, -3/+3Apple II, iPod, iPhone

        There I rest my case!
        every companies has many products that fail, that is only natural, but Apple has done pretty well for itself!
        • phlll, on 12/22/2007, -3/+2And the OP said Apple products have ALWAYS been superior. You fail at reading comprehension.
  • cowboy86, on 12/22/2007, -7/+11Actually, based on their grades it's somewhere between a B- and A-.
    • j1w2d34, on 12/22/2007, -0/+0over all GPA 3.0 B
    • shawnanigans, on 12/22/2007, -0/+2There isn't even any A+'s to balance out the multiple marks below the A grade.
  • truspect0r, on 12/22/2007, -13/+2Now I get why these fanboys buy Macs. It's a Porsche!
  • neiltc13, on 12/22/2007, -28/+21A for Leopard? Get a grip. I put up with its nonsense on a daily basis and live with its horrid crashes, silly stacks behaviour and bugs galore. There's also not a single feature in it which makes it worthwhile over Tiger and it deserves a C at best for being a pointless upgrade for everyone.
    • truspect0r, on 12/22/2007, -17/+15OSX SP2 for the price of $129.00. DRM included!
    • virtualball, on 12/22/2007, -5/+4Im sorry, I meant to digg you down but hit the green button instead...
    • brycelb, on 12/22/2007, -1/+2I am sure you use it on a daily basis?
    • Chirp08, on 12/22/2007, -0/+4yeah leopard is definately lacking in stability compared to their past releases, that was the most dissapointing thing about it to me. Safari crashes waaay too often when trying to open it, its stable once open and being used, but for some reason If I browse with firefox for awhile then try to open up safari it will hang. the biggest annoyance though is the fact that I cant ***** copy anything to network drives at work, finder tries for 30 seconds, then throws an error leaving a garbage file. the worst part is that if I boot up windows through parallels I can connect to the same network drive and transfer the file no problem. So obviously its just the way samba is connecting to the drive. either way very annoying as a graphic designer dealing with 50-150mb photoshop files all day..
      • Nerfdude, on 12/22/2007, -1/+5wait... omg, OSX crashes?! i thought it was a rock solid OS built out of pure win!

        oh wait, it has the same problems as windows but you have to pay a fat premium on first party hardware to use it.
        • NotaFanboy87, on 12/22/2007, -3/+2Don't even think about it. To say that Mac OS X has the same problems as windows is like saying a kid just now getting acne has the same problems as a psychotic burn victim. I like PCs, I like the options, but I also know that Apple, the software alone... is the better option. I know why because I use it and it gets used. I do get options for my hardware, just not as many, which is fine. I can't really tell the difference between an NVIDIA 256 MB Graphics card and an ATI 256 MB Graphics card, can any of you? Oh, and whenever you price a custom dell or hp to have all the hardware as a mac, I seem to always find a $5-10 difference IN FAVOR OF THE MAC. Really now, let's compare Apples to Apples... shall we?

          HP:
          - Upgrade to Genuine Windows Vista Ultimate (64-bit)
          • Intel(R) Core(TM) 2 Duo Processor T7500 (2.20 GHz, 4 MB L2 Cache, 800MHz FSB)
          • 15.4" WXGA High-Definition HP BrightView Widescreen Display (1280 x 800)
          • 4GB DDR2 System Memory (2 Dimm)
          • 256MB NVIDIA GeForce 8400M GS - For Core 2 Duo Processors
          • HP Imprint Finish (Influx) + Fingerprint Reader + Webcam + Microphone
          • Intel(R) PRO/Wireless 4965AGN Network Connection and Bluetooth(TM)
          • FREE Upgrade to 160GB 5400RPM SATA Hard Drive from 120GB 5400RPM SATA Hard Drive!!
          • SuperMulti 8X DVD+/-R/RW with Double Layer Support
          • No TV Tuner w/remote control
          • 12 Cell Lithium Ion Battery
          • Norton Internet Security 2008
          • Microsoft(R) Works 9.0
          • Corel(R) Photo Album(TM) 6
          • HP Wireless Laser Mini Mouse (White) and Mobile Stereo Headset (1 pair, White)

          Vs. Apple:
          MacBook Pro

          The HP is $1972, the MBP is $1999....hmm
          • strangewill, on 12/22/2007, -1/+2HP != All PC prices
            Stop hand-picking data, it's obvious that you're buffing the prices for your argument, it's easy to see right through.
          • Marshalrusty, on 12/22/2007, -1/+2I am currently on a hardware-wise superior Dell laptop that cost $1700. No, Macs are not comparable in price. You can certainly make it seem that way, but I don't shop at the more expensive store for the same product.
  • fgsdfgdfh, on 12/22/2007, -31/+20"Does Porsche outsell Honda?"

    Porsche's do more than look fancy, the enthusiastic artistic and/or gay mac users confuse aesthetics with functionality. They are totally braindead; why would they idolize a guy like Steve Jobs? He publicly states that he is out to wring as much margin out of you as possible, and yet he is adored. He makes inferior products that die after a year, are encumbered by DRM, yet people adore him. The guy has a history of ripping people off, even Woz learned that the hard way.

    But I do salute you mactards, you guys are the ones who pay the luxury/stupidity tax that inevitably lowers the cost of new products(like capacitive screens). I'll take my ugly, but screaming fast, homebuilt PC over eyecandy any day(it's a good bit cheaper too).

    You can now digg me down, cattle.
    • cowboy86, on 12/22/2007, -13/+8lus, he wears those gay ass turtlenecks.
    • estvir, on 12/22/2007, -4/+6I agree with everything you said.. except my home-built PC isn't ugly. :D It's hard to find good cases that aren't ugly or plastered with neons and flames but there's some quality cases out there.
      • prophetpimp, on 12/22/2007, -2/+4I got a black piece of crap as a case and i love it. :D
      • bjornski, on 12/22/2007, -2/+3I don't give a ***** what the computer LOOKS like. It sits under the table, or in a corner. I don't put it on a pedestal in the center of the room, adorn it with lights, and show off my shiny toy to people that come over.

        It's not a fashion statement. It runs programs.
        • estvir, on 12/23/2007, -1/+1Good for you, do you want a medal? :P See, there are some of us who like function AND form, amazingly enough, with emphasis on the first. My case isn't anything extravagant and probably wouldn't even bring about a second look, but it's simple, clean and well designed.

          http://www.coolermaster.com/products/product.php?a ...

          What's the harm in choosing a decent case instead of grabbing the nearest beige box? Also, when you do decide to not grab some generic case you end up with a high quality one with many things some basic thing wouldn't have.
          • bjornski, on 12/23/2007, -1/+1It runs programs.

            I don't care.

            A machine isn't "better" because it's shiny. If you want to spend money on that, go ahead. It doesn't make it a better machine.
          • estvir, on 12/23/2007, -1/+1Are you illiterate?
    • fatejudger, on 12/22/2007, -3/+15Wow, what's with all of the hostility this morning? I own a Mac, but I don't go around acting like a pretentious ***** like many of my Mac-loving brethren. I, personally, believe Vista is a good OS, but I prefer to run OS X or Ubuntu because I prefer their design methodologies. Furthermore, I think it's a stretch to claim that many macs are more expensive than their PC counterparts. Take the Dell M1330 laptop, a beautifully designed and constructed computer, which is priced almost identically to the Macbook at any price level. For me, like many others, the decision was an obvious one: if the prices and quality are roughly equal, choose the computer with the better operating system.
      • Spamcan, on 12/22/2007, -0/+8It's a knee-jerk reaction to a ***** brown nosing article, pay no attention to the anti-Apple reverse fanboys. Trying to use logic as a defense against people who refer to you a "gay fag mactard" is a fairly pointless use of your time. Pretentious assholes exist on all sides and we'd all be better off if they could be stomped out, alas, if this thread is any indication thats not going to happen anytime soon.
      • lostarchitect, on 12/22/2007, -3/+10I find that the "anti-apple fanboy" crowd is far, far bigger and louder (and probably smellier) than the actual apple fanboy crowd. i don't quite get why they hate macs so much--noone is making them buy one. i don't like harleys, so i don't buy one. end of story.
        • knightboat, on 12/22/2007, -2/+4Agreed. These anti-Apple people keep coming into Mac stories complaining about gay guys with turtlenecks and elitist suckers that would die for Steve Jobs, but I don't see any of those unbearable Mac people that they keep saying are everywhere. All I see are unbearable anti-Apple trolls ***** up every Apple story's comment section. It seems like you see one of those fabled ***** insane Apple fanboys for every 20 vitriolic trolls that have nothing to do but spread pointless hatred just because of computer preference.
        • bjornski, on 12/22/2007, -5/+2See, now I would have dugg you up except for your "and smellier" *****, stupid comment.

          You've shown yourself to be one of the "good smelling" trendy iTards.
        • strangewill, on 12/22/2007, -2/+2Tell that to digg statistics, it's obvious that statistically, it's vice-versa.
    • nycmac247, on 12/22/2007, -3/+3Yeah, I'm sure your ugly PC gets you laid - do you also buy suits from Kmart?
      Better to be tough, angry and alone instead of have a little class?

      • truspect0r, on 12/22/2007, -4/+3Guess what a fanboy with a nick nycmac247 devotes his life to?
      • MrSteamTank, on 12/22/2007, -4/+3And your mac helps you get laid? I honestly can't understand what people see in macs. Higher pricing, lower specifications, limited compatibility and hard to upgrade for pleasing external and internal aesthetics? I guess you don't care what products do as long as they look pretty.
    • EvilAnimator, on 12/23/2007, -0/+1You are an idiot.
  • thebigsix, on 12/22/2007, -21/+4Hmmmm, Microsoft sell a Zillion copies of their operating system around the world, but their product isnt' that good. Apple sells a few million copies of their operating system and they are the best thing since sliced bread. Oh but Apple sells a Zillion copies of their iPod and they are great, but Microsoft sells a few million and it's a failure. Microsoft has billions of dollars of cash on hand and wall street frowns, but Apple has billions of dollars of cash on hand and wall street is just besides themselves. Please explain this concept to me...oh my bad, must be that new math!
    • cowboy86, on 12/22/2007, -18/+1Let's do the math... thebigsix= *****.
      • fgsdfgdfh, on 12/22/2007, -12/+4STFU brokeback cowboy. Macs are big margin, the overpaying homosexual market has been cornered and is being exploited by Jobs.
        • cowboy86, on 12/22/2007, -9/+1Dude I'm anti-mac here. Calm your roll. Btw, the insult was completely lame.
          • MacParrot, on 12/22/2007, -1/+6Are you three really arguing over who hates Apple MORE? None of you can figure out that each of your comments was anti-Apple (whatever that means)? With pundits like you against Apple, no wonder they're on a roll.
        • juicebag, on 12/22/2007, -0/+10Good to see a mature conversation.
          • fauxXenophanes, on 12/22/2007, -1/+5Merry Christmas !

            Ya filthy animal.
    • lostarchitect, on 12/22/2007, -2/+3It's not about numbers, man.
      • strangewill, on 12/22/2007, -0/+2Yeah that would lead to logical deductions or something.
  • slimasian, on 12/22/2007, -4/+13Apple has done a stupendous job of riding the halo effect of the iPod into the seeming juggernaut that exists today. Now, by no means am I an Apply fanboy, but from a business perspective, you gotta admire what they're doing. Their bread and butter, software/technology usability, extends across all their platforms. Their cost-value proposition to the consumer: we make using technology ridiculously easy (and they do).

    If anyone ever downplays the significance of user friendliness, point them in the direction of Apple...their stellar usability is more than enough of a value proposition to warrant profit margins 50% or greater...and that's on their NON computer lines like the iPod and iPhone.
    • tupperbacharach, on 12/22/2007, -1/+1***If anyone ever downplays the significance of user friendliness, point them in the direction of Apple...their stellar usability is more than enough of a value proposition to warrant profit margins 50% or greater...and that's on their NON computer lines like the iPod and iPhone.***

      I would not point anyone to Apple for "stellar usability." I would point them to Apple for stylish aesthetics (that are rather generic from the POV of a product designer) and for stylish and showy marketing. I would also remind them that the stylish look will wear more quickly than that of a non-stylish counterpart.

      In regards to usability, here are a few significant usability problems with Apple computers, off the top of my head:
      - programs don't really close when one closes the program's window (confusion; errors; and hidden processes slow down performance);
      - the model/metaphor of trashing/ejecting to unmount and/or remove hard drives media is (inaccurate and confusing; "trashing dives" invokes fear and dread in the user, similar to the old "bomb" icon);
      - the maximize button on the window really doesn't maximize the window (confusing to new users, can force unnecessary scrolling);
      - the round mouse (no need to explain);
      - monitors that can't tilt downward (not very usable when placed above eye-level);
      - defaulting to "jelly-blobs" as widow widgets, instead of descriptive symbols (requires errors for comprehension; frustrates the colorblind; an inadvertent click of the toolbar blob can cause lengthy searches from new users on how to recover the toolbar);
      - the target of the default "jelly-blob" widgets is too small -- limited to the jelly-blob, instead of encompassing the window border from top to bottom (slows work; shifts the user's focus);
      - the menu-bar of a program always appears at the top of the screen -- with todays' wide-screens, this set-up often puts a menu miles away from its window and from the user's focus (the drawbacks of this configuration are far too numerous to list here, suffice it to say that the drawbacks more than destroy any minute speed benefit of "infinitely large" targets on the screen edge)

      Also, exactly how is the Ipod interface more usable than any other mp3 player?

      And, the fact that the Iphone doesn't have tactile buttons is a major usability disadvantage -- one has to constantly watch each key-press to work with the Iphone.


      ***Apple has done a stupendous job of riding the halo effect of the iPod into the seeming juggernaut that exists today.***

      Sadly, when a company to becomes a "juggernaut" off the marketing and sales of a passable mp3 player, the indication is that we must be deep into the "age of mediocrity."
  • minorthreat, on 12/22/2007, -11/+6except a Porsche is a car everyone dreams of having, because not only is it somewhat fast, it looks beautiful. If your somewhat of any computer enthusiast at all. You would realize that on old beat up 67' Chevelle with a rebuilt motor and engine work done could be alot faster and cost half as much and your pretty Porsche. The Mac's are marketed toward that crowd of people who think there computer(that noone ever see's) has to look pretty on the outside. If you like pretty things, then yes a Mac is for you. If you want to be all around versatile while still being just as fast and being able to repair yourself, and being able to change your operating system whenever you like, then a Mac isn't for you.
  • SOS84, on 12/22/2007, -14/+10In reality, Leopard get a C or C-, same as Vista. Both are disappointing. Leopard is not as good as stated and Vista is not as bad.

    iPhone, I honestly cannot rate it, I don't have one, have never used one and will never own one. All I want or need is a basic camera phone.

    iPods, more of the same. They get a B+. Solid quality but still not as good as directly competing products from Creative, Sandisk and...gasp...Microsoft.

    Computers. Well, they sell outdated parts, and still refuse to offer even a decent graphics adapter for any computer they make whether it be the iMac, MacBook or Mac Pro. Throw in the fact that they continually rape their customers on memory, HDDs and the like and the best grade I can give them is a solid B which is mostly due to the solid quality of their hardware.
    • strangewill, on 12/22/2007, -1/+1I will agree on the competing products point, getting my Zune for
    • fugazied, on 12/23/2007, -0/+1I'd stick with A- for Leopard. Some time machine issues and some shared network issues. But its beautiful, stable and the new features are far beyond other OS at the moment.
  • dakbonsa, on 12/22/2007, -1/+5If you calculate in scale of A=4, A-=3.7, B+=3.4, B=3 and so on,
    you get around 3.34
    I don't get how you could calculate that into an A
    • HimThatSpeaks, on 12/22/2007, -0/+2i suppose it depends on the weight of the subjects. LIke what if you get an A in math and a C in citizenship, does that mean your overall performance is a B. Or is it still an A because citizenship does not matter?
      • strangewill, on 12/22/2007, -0/+1Weighting is the inverse term of "how much of a waste of time this is".
  • doctordbx, on 12/22/2007, -5/+8I have always thought Macs are more like Volvos. The reason being Volvo has the highest loyalty out of any car manufacturer and the people that do buy them always seem a little odd.
    Anyway, they're just computers... just things. If you defined yourself by the logo on the keyboard you thump... you have issues.
    • Nerfdude, on 12/22/2007, -0/+2volvos are pretty much the safest cars on the road. that said, i'm not trying to draw a parallel here.
      you don't see people slapping volvo stickers on their laptops.
  • CLShortFuse, on 12/22/2007, -5/+13Fanboys are ruining Digg. We get it already! ENOUGH!

    But sticking to the ARTICLE, I'll say I have to agree with most of the rating. A few are too high. I value 3G on my phone so I'll pass on the iPhone Gen1. Right now, I'd give it a B and if they open up official 3rd party support, A-.
    I find Leopard to be rather disappointing. I've never never had a problem with Vista64, it has never crashed once, even while Beta 2. A quick disabling of the UAC and it's really preferred. As for Leopard, I wasn't impressed. Very little was changed and everyone claimed it was going to be the next greatest thing from Apple. The things I like Macs for (mostly video-editing) wasn't really enhanced. The OS went through minimal changes. I'd give it a C+ to B-, not sure yet, but I've been running Leopard for months. As a regular user of Mac OS X, Leopard didn't really do much for me. I find it to be overhyped. Even Gizmodo's review just talks about how popular it is and how bugs were fixed. It didn't really say what's so great about, which I still don't understand, and I've been using it as my main PC since release.
    • JonLatane, on 12/22/2007, -1/+2I disagree. Here's my Leopard story: I keep backups of my data that I update around once a month or so, but not terribly regularly. About 3 weeks after updating to Leopard, I stupidly spilled beer all over my Macbook and my hard drive, logic board, screen and pretty much everything else was destroyed (except my third-party RAM upgrade!). After getting it repaired, I brought it home, popped in the Leopard install DVD, plugged in my external hard drive, and selected to install from a Time Machine backup. Everything worked perfectly.

      Time Machine alone makes Leopard 10 steps ahead of anything I could ask for, and the improved (must faster) Spotlight, Mail, iChat, Finder (and QuickLook), and integration of iLife into, well, everything are just icing on the cake. (P.S: iLife integration, especially into all file dialogues, really is awesome; use it sometime and you'll realize what you've been ignoring. In fact, integration is EVERYWHERE in Leopard, and that's what I really love about it, whether it's Mail + iCal or anything else.) Anyone who complains that Leopard is no big improvement over Tiger has obviously not had enough time or paid enough attention to these features.

      You also have to look at the frameworks Apple's laid down, especially Core Animation. I realize a lot of developers have yet to make any use of it, but once they do, it will make for a much more pleasant experience with all your applications. Just look at how much it's improved Finder (what with QL and all), Mail and iCal (with the new event dialogues).
  • collywolly, on 12/22/2007, -3/+6You can tell it is going to be a fanboy article when the car analogy comes by the third line.
    • digitalvik, on 12/23/2007, -0/+2Good observation! You can tell really...
  • Nerfdude, on 12/22/2007, -6/+5Apple TV: "It's Like An Xbox That Doesn't Play Games"(tm)
    • MacParrot, on 12/22/2007, -2/+1Nerfdude: He's like a digg commenter that doesn't make sense
      Hey! This is fun!
  • denmark98, on 12/22/2007, -3/+0I couldnt see how comparing a top tuned world class sports car like a porsche to a well made, top selling car company like honda. Is apple the porsche wanting to be the Honda or is apple a bugatti not caring about the rest of the car field or what. We like apple because they defy microsoft nothing more nothing less. It is the same we get from google but as soon as google makes a move and asserts their power in a way that it is obvious we will dislike them too.
  • suprememilo, on 12/22/2007, -2/+1what about the NSX?
  • happyseamonster, on 12/22/2007, -3/+3Who is Jizzmodo to grade ANYBODY? Besides, you wait a few months for the numbers to come in.
  • zzt711, on 12/22/2007, -3/+3Fanboyism. Flag as buried
  • InnerBlueAbyss, on 12/22/2007, -5/+2SO let me get this straight, your giving a phone with half the features of a PDA, but with the same price tag. A Half ass Wannabe Linux OS that YOU HAVE TO BUY (See Fedora 8 Please.) Dumbed down so people dont have to learn, the reason why Mac's original only had ONE mouse button. Id rather compare Mac and PC's to Fisher Price Plastic Roller Cars to REAL cars. Thats right, buy a REAL computer. Also your giving "computer" hardware that is double the cost of what you can get for a PC with half the performance? All of these are getting an A? You are all Morons and Fanboys.
    • MacParrot, on 12/22/2007, -2/+1Please put down the Ho-Hos and Cheeze Doodles and say what you really mean? I should buy a Windows PC or install Linux to make YOU happy? There's nothing wrong with either one (I use an XP box all day and have no significant issues with it), but here's a thought; buy the computer and OS that has the programs you want or you prefer.
  • EvilAnimator, on 12/23/2007, -2/+2Suck it, Wintards!
  • internetworld7, on 12/23/2007, -4/+1THIS IS PERHAPS THE SINGLE GREATEST ARTICLE EVER PUBLISHED ONLINE IN 2007!!!

    I just got my brand new Macbook Nov. 30th with 2GB of RAM!!! Woooohooooo!

    Apple Rocks!
  • witte, on 12/23/2007, -1/+5How to load a Gizmodo page on the iPhone:

    1. Click Gizmodo link
    2. Bury iPhone in backyard
    4. Wait 30 years
    5. Dig up iPhone
    6. Wait couple more minutes
    7. Loading....
    8. Loading.......
    9. Loading.................

    10. Done!
  • freesf, on 12/23/2007, -2/+1Digg Year End Report Card: D
    Problem: letting stupid people post stupid articles and waste everyones time
    Solution: required that everyone posting an article on Digg is over 14 years old
  • witte, on 12/23/2007, -4/+4Loading...... I realize it's not Apple's fault that Gizmodo is such a bloated, out-of-date website, but since I'm sort of on the topic, I have to ask -- does anybody else think Mac OS X is SLOW?

    After using the latest and greatest Macs exclusively for 8 years now, I agree Macs are very intuitive. Getting a Mac to function the way you need it to at any given moment is pricelessly easy. Sharing for example, very simple. And iLife is great too.

    BUT MY GOD, Mac OS X is slow! Menus, windows, and buttons on Macs HAVE NOT been programmed for efficiency, with professional users in mind. Menus, windows, and buttons on my 2.6 GHz Celeron running Windows XP with just 256 MB of ram are NOTICEABLY more responsive than those in OS X on my dual-core MacBook Pro with 2 GB of ram. It's indisputable. Windows and panes on my Macs often lag behind the cursor, fail for a moment, don't move with the cursor or drag smoothly, lag-to-scroll, or alas half the time just stall with this "Beachball of death". And buttons on Mac dialog boxes and windows sometimes have to be clicked TWICE! Even after the button animated its click action! What's more, menus don't work correctly either yet. Sometimes you can count two or three seconds before a Mac OS X menu appears after being called.

    As a pro user, I'm finding that as I become quicker, OS X's laggy interface is becoming more and more intolerable. Sometimes I actually must tilt my chair back and wait, filled with silent rage, other times it's just a matter of seconds, but the frustration sticks with me. I can see that a noticeable portion of of my day is wasted, spent waiting for my $2600 Mac to catch up to various commands. My GOD, this is 2008! We are in the age of the dual-core intel! The age of the sea otter! What a disgrace!

    And the frustrating thing is, I KNOW other people think Mac OS X to be slow. Other folks I know have admitted that Mac OS X is slow. And I know Apple KNOWS how miserably SLOW Mac OS X is, because I can see they have been trying desperately to fix it for eight years, because it's been slowly improving, especially with Leopard.

    But I've had enough. I am sadly convinced this amazing OS can no longer keep up with me. Spotlight in Tiger summed it up perfectly: SLOW to the point I couldn't even use it.

    Apple, f** off -- your OS is asking TOO MUCH of my machine! I need my machine to pay attention to ME, not you! You need to butt out!

    Sometime in January, I will switch to Windows XP at work. And as time goes by, I expect to spend a greater and greater amount of my time in Windows, because XP's windows, menus and buttons behave responsively. In Windows XP, changing focus happens instantly. On a Mac, you can WATCH IT HAPPEN.

    To me, responsive windows, menus, and buttons are BY FAR more important than iPhoto, ITunes, and 24-bit gradients and icons, end all the fine touches that make a Mac beautiful. Plus, my Mac seizes almost daily, so Windows XP seizures won't be an issue.

    I'll stick with my Mac OS X at home, but at work, it's over for Mac OS X ---- I'm tired of cursing and sighing all day long as this operating system stalls and sputters its way through my workload. I HAVE TO SWITCH to UGLY XP! Apple, you are making me do this! I have no choice!

    Ugly is ugly, but if turns out that ugly gives me peace of mind and gets me home before dark, I'm sticking with ugly.
    • digitalvik, on 12/23/2007, -1/+2Can I subscribe to your comments! Really insightful!! :)
      • Virgule, on 12/26/2007, -0/+1I mostly agree. OS X can be so sluggish at times it seam the damn thing is laughing at us and loading times can be abysmal to say the least. It want RAM. More than what you have, anyway. There is no such thing as a snappy "click BANG" interface. Its a must have. Period. Sluggish, slow and unresponsive interfaces lead to great frustrations and anger issues. There is no excuses for the 'slug' with today's gigahertz and gigaram and gigadrives with gigapowers..
  • BTime, on 12/23/2007, -1/+1Having worked in a Tech Shop the past couple of years that also services Apple computers, there's no way they would get an "A" for this past year. Not to say that the tech is bad, but their laptops / desktops have been plagued with service issues all year long.
  • EEdesigner, on 12/24/2007, -1/+0When you used the term Porch vs Honda, did you not mean Porsche vs Yugo? After all, we're talking Microsoft here...folks who would be long in the trashbin if they produced hardware (which actually has to be reliable).
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.