Digg

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

Leopard vs Vista 4: Naked Sales

roughlydrafted.com — Apple's Mac OS X Leopard and Microsoft's Vista follow different strategies in their prerelease marketing, product positioning, and market positioning. Here's a look at how both differ in the field of product integration. Daniel Eran, RoughlyDrafted Magazine

Bury

AlexaW 2 years 5 days ago, made popular 2 years 4 days ago

518 diggs
digg it

81 Comments
Who Dugg It?

laserius, on 10/12/2007, -29/+27Hey Dan - much better job on editing this one!!! I can't imagine how anyone could disagree with the points of this article - still an opinion piece but heavily based in fact. Microsoft is praised for what it does well and not entirely blamed for poor integration and a user experience that is less than desirable. It does seem there is a trend toward manufacturers developing both hardware and software - not so in the PC industry unfortunately (except Apple of course). Computers have become such a part of our daily life that the overall experience is as or more important than the cost of the box. Nice article Dan!
- TheCount, on 10/12/2007, -26/+30Man, where was this guy during WWII, he would have been the guru of propaganda.
- danieleran, on 10/12/2007, -28/+17do the math, I wasn't born yet.
  
  but thanks I guess.
- illt, on 10/12/2007, -17/+17i'm not gonna lie, i tried out vista today. it's fantastic.
  two fantastic os options, cant' wait.
- superkendall, on 10/12/2007, -22/+22People of Digg - users like TheCount are systematically trying to erase RDM stories like this one whenever they appear. Even with high Digg counts concerted efforts can get Digg stories knocked off the front page almost as soon as they appear.
  
  Now think for a second - even if you don't agree with the content is any aspect of the site so bad that it deserves not to be seen, especially if Digg users are in fact digging it? There are plenty of things that I have thought people were crazy for digging but instead of doing my utmost to prevent people from seeing it I have simply gone on my way.
  
  You can do your part to help fight cabal censorship on Digg by blocking users like TheCount, or anyone else in this story who suggests an overly irrational dislike of RDM. Use the small "Block" button next to the UserID, it looks like a square with a slashed circle in it.
  
  Of course now that you know who to block I risk you taking this (potentially) new knowedge of blocking technique and applying it to myself. If you seek to silence those who speak in favor of freedom to read, then do so - but think first, are you really helping to create the kind of site you want to visit?
  
  All I am asking is that people be allowed to see what other people have dugg. Is that so wrong?
  
  Block TheCount and others like him.
- harshbarj, on 10/12/2007, -16/+14superkendall:
  Perhaps the reason is if you actually read RDM's articles they are ALL heavily biased toward the mac and slam Microsoft and the entire pc industry. Sure the pc industry deserves a good slamming now and again but not over half-truths.
- ziadoz, on 10/12/2007, -12/+6@superkendell
  If you don't like the Digg system then find another social news site to use. The freedom to bury an article is one that everyone has, if you don't like that its tough. RDM is only spammed here to get some traffic, the articles are spam in the purest sense of the word.
- rickcarson, on 10/12/2007, -3/+17I honestly believe that anybody that has spent a decent length of time with both OSes will come out sounding biased at the end.
  
  The problem is, those who trash talk OSX are usually dredging up stuff from the 80s and 90s.
  
  Whereas those who trash talk Windows are usually dredging up suppressed memories of their ordeals in the 80s and 90s.
  
  Everybody has some emotional baggage that they are carrying around, which makes it hard to be objective.
  
  I for instance find it hard to trust Microsoft, because they have a past history of consistently over promising and under delivering. Does anyone know what percentage of announced features in Vista actually made it in to the final product? I have the feeling it is something stupidly low, like 10 or 15%. You see even some Windows fanboys complaining that Vista is not much more than a lick of paint on XP (surely they must be wrong, there must be more to it than Microsoft simply pulling the crank handle on the slot machine one more time).
  
  Also there is this thing of two steps forward, one step backwards. I don't know how many times an 'upgrade' meant my favourite features just disappeared.
  
  I think I'd honestly like to give Vista a go, to play around with it for a bit, see what it is like. I didn't like XP. I actually preferred Windows 98. Menus trying to guess what I wanted to do simply meant that it took much longer to find the things I wanted to do because stuff kept moving around. I want things in my User Interface to stay where I put them!
  
  But if I go work somewhere where they have Vista, judging by my experience this year I'll probably be locked out of the base machine and OS, and end up having to do all the programming remotely via VMWare or Citrix or a similar "please turn my expensive desktop machine into a dumb terminal" solution, because IT departments just don't trust Windows anymore. So this year my biggest gripe about Windows, wasn't even really about Windows.... bizarre.
BoathouseMac, on 10/12/2007, -9/+36"Most games are PC only."

Untrue. Most games are Windows only. Which means they can be run on a Mac.
- ImTheDarkcyde, on 10/12/2007, -21/+14you're both wrong, most games are DirectX (which is windows exclusive) and make porting a chore
  
  however games are making their way to macs slowly but surely
- coldphoenix, on 10/12/2007, -12/+3Try using the reply button next time.
- yoasif, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13Isn't the effect the same?
  
  If the game was based on OpenGL, but the developers don't want to port it to Mac OS, it's still a Windows only game, regardless of what toolkit or technologies they were using.
  
  And yes, a Mac running Windows /can/ install DirectX.
- zybch, on 10/12/2007, -12/+1But who wants to try playing newer games on the allready outdated video hardware apple are currently using? Change to a better vid card and OSX screws up, though windows under bootcamp will 'just work'.
- zzal, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0@BoathouseMac: Which means they can be run on an Intel Mac.
  Which means you'll have to buy a licence of Windows. Which most Mac users wont do.
luckyscs, on 10/12/2007, -13/+4burn.
spoonard, on 10/12/2007, -24/+10I agree. An avid gamer has no use for a Mac. Running Windows under OSX is just needless overhead when you try to scrape out every possible frame per second for your games.
- yoasif, on 10/12/2007, -7/+12Are you forgetting dual boot scenarious?
- SuitCase874, on 10/12/2007, -9/+7Depends on what you consider an "avid gamer".
  
  Boot Camp won't rob you of precious FPS, but the fact Mac hardware isn't designed around the needs of a gamer will - you'll have to settle for midrange graphics in an iMac, for example, rather than high end. I don't think this is a good reason to avoid a Mac, though.. just weigh it up: how many hours do you spend gaming, and how many hours do you spend using your operating system and applications? The choice of Windows and OS X can be seen as a choice between having a better experience in either of those spheres, and I think most people would pick the Mac if they evaluated things this way and learned how productive OS X can be.
- deepsub, on 10/12/2007, -4/+13"but the fact Mac hardware isn't designed around the needs of a gamer"
  
  Get over yourself... most off the shelf Windows boxes aren't 'designed around the needs of a gamer' either.
  
  There's a reason that Intel dominates the graphics market... Most Windows PC's have Intel integrated graphics, which require 'gamers' to buy higher end GPU's.
- superkendall, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12The MacPro is well designed for gaming - fast SATA drives and the ability to put fairly modern video cards in place, and to update them in the future.
  
  The laptops are not quite as good, but still offer respectible 3D performance for a portable.
  
  However most gaming is switching to consoles, and I really don't see the need to keep Windows around for games as much as you used to. Buy a 360/PS3/Wii and save yourself a lot of bother.
- panique, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6Sorry dude. Try playing BF2 at 2048x1536 on a Mac Pro, with everything set to "High" and 8x anti-aliasing. >60fps constantly.
- DarkRappey, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Speak for your self @ spoonard!
  I'm an "avid gamer," I can't stand windows. I wan't a Mac badly but it will be a while. But guess what? I don't use Windows I use Linux, lol it is that bad in my eyes. Ovcourse many of you won't agree with me, but like i said, speak for yourself...
- cthellis, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4It does indeed depend what we mean by "avid gamer," but most of the self-proclaimed sort have to remember that the bulk of PC gamers live on low- and mid-range products. (Or the "just-barely-higher-end-products-that-are-cheap-enough-and-become-worse-than-mid-range-in-the-next-generation" types.)
  
  So while "avid" may mean one thing to one set of people, it still gets subsumed in the realities of PC gaming: the vast majority are not on "high-end" rigs, because A) they don't understand hardware differences, B) they couldn't afford it, or C) they can only afford it once every few hardware generations, which makes them more like "mid-range" after 12-18 months. Currently, Mac hardware will slip in there just fine.
  
  If you're really ballsy (the type who looks to Alienware or Voodoo, for instance), you'd be looking at a rig right around the same cost anyway (with a better built-in and available-from-manufacturer video card options, of course, and whatever nebulous case/mobo advantages you want to give to one party or another), and the Mac the ability to upgrade (and though I do know it can support up to 4 PCI-Express cards, I'm not sure if it has any SLI support options), which gives it the ability to at least keep up with all but the most "avid" types, who are extremely low in number, by comparison. (Heck, as the 8800 reviews are showing, you can STILL use one card to blow away all but the highest-end SLI/Crossfire options--and even them in many circumstances--and be an equivalent/cheaper purchase. ONE generation. And yes you can still SLI those, but just how many people are blowing $1300+ on video cards?)
  
  "avid" PC gaming is fun... but it's a far lower number than enthusiasts think.
Asheron, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11I run my drafting software eg: solidworks, autocad, inventor through parallels. Its fine for that. However I dual boot in order to play games. It just wouldn't work through parallels. Works like a charm for me.
- superkendall, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4Supposedly Parallels is working on proper DirectX support, to the point you could play games...
  
  There is another option as well, the Wine way where you replicate Windows libraries just enough to get games going.
  
  All I have really ever wanted to play from the PC side that I could not is Half Life 2. Whatever supports that, I'll be happy...
shiftt, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6this is offtopic but does anyone know what software can make pie chart like the one in the article?
- SuitCase874, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9Looks like Keynote to me. I may be wrong, but given the nature of the blog that sounds about right.
anglachel, on 10/12/2007, -8/+14nice "facts" I particularly like the pie chart that pits dell against microsoft, while I did read the article the reasoning is flawed at best, and I find it dificult to believe that microsoft controls 96.6% of the operating system market and apple 4.6 of the combined operating system/hardware market... the numbers just don't add up.
- danieleran, on 10/12/2007, -4/+13Well when you try to add 98% for Microsoft with 30% for Dell and HP you do get an absurd number of 100ths.
  
  Percentage = 100ths. If you have more than 100/100, you have more than one. In the case of market share, you can't have more than one, because there is only one market in question. When you credit both Microsoft and PC makers equally, you "get" the pie chart - Microsoft and PC makers are sharing their share. Apple doens't share with anyone.
  
  Of course, had you read the article, you'd know that, because it was plainly stated.
- anglachel, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2and when you read the comment you'll note that I took what was actually on the pie chart and multiplied by 2 to get the "software share" as microsoft has no stake in the hardware for desktop PC's. And got 97%, I did not mulitply apple by two because as you so clearly put the method of developing the chart was clearly stated.
  
  But you'd know that if you read the comment before replying to it.
- enaval, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0The other 3% can be PCs that are sold with no operating system, and which get installed either Linux, Solaris or OS/2 (I think OS/2 is still used on some places because of legacy applications).
Phyrefly, on 10/12/2007, -12/+17I thought digg was completely taken over by PS3-mania.

Seeing biased propaganda from a mac fanboy is very reassuring. This place hasn't changed after all.
- Hubris, on 10/12/2007, -9/+11Agreed.....nice to see some traditional Mac fanboydom amidst all the PS3 fanboydom.
- deepsub, on 10/12/2007, -6/+14Not to mention all the whining about fanbois from people who think their bitching is somehow more worthwhile than fanboi rantings...
- wilf, on 10/12/2007, -6/+5What the hell Phyrefly? Why are you calling it propaganda? You are the fascist for trying to supress other people's views. Jesus.
- Stirk, on 10/12/2007, -5/+8Define "fanboy", please. Anytime someone states their opinion, and its not the same as yours, you call them a fanboy.
  
  "I dont like Windows" --- "OMG UR A MAC FANBOY"
  "Personally, Mac OS X suites me better than a Windows PC any day" --- "WDF FANBOI GET OFF DIGG UR RUINING IT"
- Stirk, on 10/12/2007, -7/+1-Dig me down- (Digg is acting all screwey on me - double posts and everything)
consonance, on 10/12/2007, -14/+7I disagree with this article. It is conceptually flawed in one significant area. Mr. Eran is taking the end result (the present) situation of the market and turning it into the cause. That is to say, the article - much like the rest of the articles on his blog - reads like Mr. Eran started with the thesis that Apple is better, and he found evidence to support that. Everything is then built around that assumption. Mr. Eran isn't really explaining how things came about; he is simply redefining history based on the present.

For instance, Mr. Eran contends that Microsoft sells so many copies of Windows because Microsoft has a monopoly. That is not entirely true. While Microsoft does indeed have a receding near monopoly, the reason for Microsoft's monopoly is unexplained by the original assertion. Microsoft developed an operating system that is compatible with many variations on the same hardware. Computer manufacturers picked up Windows and partnered with Microsoft to create the monopoly. So, the truest statement would be that Microsoft sells so many copies of Windows because Windows was designed to work on different hardware setups.
- danieleran, on 10/12/2007, -7/+18I never suggested that Microsoft has high volume sales because they have a monoploy.
  
  Rather, I've written histories of how Microsoft developed the PC market, and credited Microsoft with building that market -- which didn't really exist prior. Most people who write about Microsoft seem to think that it got its "market share" from Apple, which isn't true.
  
  Why you'd erect a strawman and brutally attack it isn't obvious. Are you unable to reach the website and actually read the article? Maybe I could email it to you.
  
  Vendors didn't come to Microsoft to get its fabled OS; Microsoft dragged PC makers kicking and screaming into the world Apple had already invented. It then set up barriers to prevent any effective competition.
  
  Working with 3rd party PC makers doens't create anything "open," its just a proprietary system that locks up the PC. Microsoft's monoploy comes from its predatory non-compete contracts it had all its hardware partners sign.
  
  That hurts the market for Linux, it killed the potential for commercial OS's like OS/2, BeOS, NeXTSTEP, and a desktop Solaris, and prevents Apple from sellling Mac OS X to PC users.
  
  All the PC users cry about the iPod being a monoploy due to market share, but nothing prevents anyone from entering the market or selling their own MP3 players, and there are plenty of competators doing business.
  
  That's not the case in the PC OS market, where the only competition is an unpaid volunteer group running Linux and giving it away.
- consonance, on 10/12/2007, -9/+8Look, Mr. Eran, I kept my side of the debate civil.
  
  I have not contended that Microsoft took customers from Apple.
  
  Where is the strawman you speak of? I can see that perhaps my side was not worded as well as it should have been, so let me clarify myself. Microsoft has a monopoly in the PC market. That has nothing to do with Apple. I didn't mention Apple at all in my first comment.
  
  The way I see it, Microsoft built an OS that was designed to work on different kinds of computers and then clamped down on the vendors. But you probably see that by now, there's no reason to abandon Microsoft; Apple isn't about to put OS X on PCs, and Linux is far from being a major competitor in the desktop environment. The state of Linux is the result of Microsoft's stance on open source. By now, there is no substitute for Windows - especially when Microsoft can sell licenses at $25 per unit. This is a perfect example of Microsoft's power as a monopoly: Perfect price discrimination. If Microsoft sold every license of XP Home to vendors at the retail price, vendors would have to raise their prices, opening up the window for Apple to steal PC users with a clearly cheaper retail price. Instead, Microsoft can sell units at a price that will still garner Microsoft a profit.
  
  In a completely unrelated manner, you have introduced your own strawman: The iPod. I do not have an issue with your stance on the iPod's "monopoly" from an economic point of view, it is completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand, and it was not mentioned until you brought it up. I might comment, however, that the market for MP3 players is a monopolistic competition, which is a combination of both monopolies and perfect competition markets. It is, however, fully irrelevant.
  
  And I have a personal comment to add: I am perplexed. I offer a subject of debate, and you attack me for it? I read through your article in its entirety. How else could I disagree with you about anything? I find it insulting that you disparage your own readers, simply because they disagree with you. I made no personal attack on you, so why can't I expect you to do that same? In the past I have said some inflammatory things about your opinions, and I won't pretend that never happened. But that has nothing to do whatsoever with right now. I raise an honest concern in a polite manner, and you respond with ad hominems and overgeneralizations? Is that how you treat all of your readers? Do I have to have your exact opinion to not prompt such a base response?
- deepsub, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2digg me down
lucas448, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4i would defiantly switch form ms to mac if ti worked on PCs.... the bottom line is me and my family are not going to go out and buy a mac after buying a new 1000-2000 Sony vaio a little while back. but a 100-200 OS I'm all in
monkeybuffer, on 10/12/2007, -10/+8A: Microsoft doesn't and never has had their developers working around the clock to get drivers out for 3rd party hardware. They get the manufacturer to write the driver, and they just ship it with the OS, or make you download it from them.

B: "Highly integrated" is NOT a good thing. If you buy a Mac, you have one... Count it ONE company to buy from. That means you're spending more because there are no 3rd party companies competing for your money. Apple has nobody to drive their costs down (except it's PC counterpart of course). The point is, once they've got you they've *GOT* you. Not so with a PC.

I admit Windows / PC does have it's shortcomings and this guy makes some decent points. But most of the article just harps on Microsoft. Linux will bring down the evil empire soon enough. With the high price, and ridiculous EULA Microsoft plans to put on their new OS, I guarantee folks will start looking for alternatives. And while linux may still not be ripe for the home user, it's working it's way there.

The big thing keeping most people from adopting it I think is the lack of game availability. Even my brother won't install Linux or buy a mac because it won't play most games. HE DOESN'T EVEN GAME ON THE PC! People buy the system that's cheapest and most versatile. And unfortunately right now, that's windows.
- drjekelmrhyde, on 10/12/2007, -6/+2NEVER we wont see Windows going down anytime soon to linux its too mainstream like IE to Firefox I love FF but it will never crack 35% of the market
- Chmarr, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10So, perhaps it's more accurate to say "highly integrated" is a double-edged sword.
  
  I LIKE the fact that I don't have to play the download-driver-dance. I'll gladly pay a bit extra for that privilege. I'm DONE mucking around with BYO machines. I want something that JUST WORKS and the Mac gives me that.
- danieleran, on 10/12/2007, -8/+12monkeybuffer,
  
  You're right that Microsoft doesn't write all the drivers for 3rd parties, but they do support a lot of crap, don't they? Why is PS/2 in a PC from 2006? That's only an easy example, the real issues of legacy obvious though.
  
  And "highly integrated" is a good thing. It's certainly easier to find Linux drivers for Macs because its a finite set of hardware and there is a critical mass of interested parties. Try to do the same for some random PC. Intel Macs run Windows better than PCs. They have slick features like FW and target disk mode and other stuff is just nicer: optical audio, no legacy, etc.
  
  Your arguement suggests Apple has no competitive pricing pressure from PCs, but that is obviously absurd. New Macs offer some of the best pricing availble for quality PCs. The only way you can find cheaper PCs is to use crappy no-name components or pick PC models that offer outdated or severely limited hardware features.
  
  Any PC in the league of a Mac is in the price range of a Mac.
bigvics, on 10/12/2007, -18/+7I used to go to school with Daniel Eran and he used to get alot of flak for being the only openly gay student on campus. Mad props to you Daniel for getting through that, it looks like youre doing good.
- danieleran, on 10/12/2007, -8/+10Haha jokes on you, I didn't go to school :P
- rubeus, on 10/12/2007, -7/+6That sounds like a compliment but I think it's a veiled insult. I don't like any of his "articles" either but, don't start bringing gay people to his level, that's just taking the back way out. (haha) I don't think he's gay; his picture collages are subpar.
fremeer, on 10/12/2007, -8/+7Slightly misleading atricle claiming that being tightly intergrated is apples strength. In my opinion and the opinion of any PC builders out there its the fatal flaw that stops people from buying mac. i dont want some company to tell me what i should have on my comp and then charge me slightly more because of it. No upgrade options for mac either.
Linux is nearly there but at the moment they need to learn from Mac that sometimes less is more, make the options more streamlined, less code heavy and focus on easy initial set-up for a beginner.
Microsoft at the moment is the only one that caters for the ppl out in the majority of cases. They might only do a decent job but sometimes a 3/5 for everything compared to a 5/5 for only one or things is better.
Vista is interesting in its design, parts of it remind me of linux in terms of protecting the user but due to microsoft needing to keep things slightly similar in terms of use alot of problems can be still found that should be fixed like the aweful cluttering the occurs due the unstable way that microsoft installs programs, it needs to learn from either linux or mac and make self sustaining programs that dont require constant maintanence all the time, automatix for windows would rock.
- superkendall, on 10/12/2007, -6/+10I never did understand where this whole "can't upgrade a mac" idea comes from.
  
  Let's start with notebooks, take the Macbook. That has user servicable RAM and Hard drive - how often do laptop makers make it easy to swap out the HD? That's a valuable upsell point to them.
  
  Now take the Macbook Pro - OK, the HD is not as accessible but it also offers expandibility in the form of the ExpressCard/34 interface, so you can hook into external SATA drives.
  
  And of course both systems offer lots of connectivity options like firewire, gigabit ethernet, USB 2.0, Bluetooth 2.0, and so on - that can be used to hook up the same things you'd hook up to a PC to the Mac. Only usually you don't need to load drivres first.
  
  Now go on to the iMac. It's really essentially a laptop with a larger screen, still offerig the same expansion and connectivity of the laptops but with a larger form factor more suited to a fixed location.
  
  Lastly there is a MacPro. It has PCIe. It has many banks of memory, and four of the easiest to use SATA 2.0 bays you have every seen - and if that's not enough just plun in an eSata card to hook into a RAID.
  
  Where is the lack of expandibility in a system that offers more connectivity options that many PC's and also supports the same expansion standards on desktops?
  
  Would it help you to learn you can buy a new video card for a Mac Pro? I've found over the years that the whole "expandability" in many peoples minds boils down to being able to do the odius and endless video card upgrade cycle. Well sir, on a Mac Pro you can get on the bandwagon if you feel so inclined.
- panique, on 10/12/2007, -6/+8Looking at it from the other side, superkendall, PCs aren't really all that upgradeable either. I use a Mac Pro as my daily driver, and Mac has been my primary machine for quite some time, however I also am an avid gamer and have kept a PC just for gaming. So, here is how it has gone down for me:
  
  Quite a while ago, I had a 1.8Ghz P4 System with 768MB of RAM. Eventually I could not plug a new video card into it because it was only AGP 2x and all the cards were AGP 4x minimum. I started looking at upgrade options, and basically ended up with a new system because my RAMBUS RAM from the 1.8Ghz wouldn't fit the new motherboard that could do AGP 8x. Oh yeah, and Intel changed the CPU socket. The hard drive seemed a bit small, and it was PATA. While the new system could use PATA or SATA, I figured I could either strip the one component worth cannibalizing from the 1.8Ghz system, or I could keep the system intact and give it to someone else.
  
  Ok, so eventually I have a 2.4Ghz Socket 478 system with AGP 8x running RAID 0 on a pair of SATA drives. I was able to later put in a 3.0Ghz chip, and basically paid $200 per CPU each time, whereas if I had simply paid $400 for the CPU to begin with, I would have had the performance the whole time.
  
  Eventually, I wanted to put a hotter chip in the system, but then the socket had changed from 478 to LGA775. I'd have to put in a new motherboard to go that route. It didn't seem worth it, so I played the video card upgrade game for a little while. Eventually I topped out at an Nvidia 6800GT. Wasn't quite getting the frame rates or quality I wanted from BF2, and I was really waiting for the 7800 to come out, then guess what? Same problem again. I couldn't upgrade the video card unless I went tp PCIe.
  
  Ok, so I have 2GB of Corsair RAM in the box, and now a 3.0Ghz Prescott socket 478 chip, and I start looking for a PCIe mobo. None of them supported socket 478, nor did they accept my PC3200 DDR RAM. Instead, I would have to basically buy a whole new system, and at the time it would have cost around $2000 for the hardware alone. No operating system or other software, though I could take my BF2 DVD with me, so no biggie there.
  
  The stories go on and on back through the past couple of decades. ISA Slots. Local Bus. New CPU socket configurations. Different DIMM slots. It all changes all the time. Aside from hot rodding an odd CPU upgrade here and there, basically the idea of being able to upgrade a PC is an illusion. When push comes to shove, the PC forces you to buy a new system.
  
  Going back to looking at it from the Mac perspective, if I were willing to mortgage my future, I could buy a couple of Kentsfield QuadCore chips and squeeze a speed bump out of my Mac Pro. Probably won't help the gaming at all, but will definitely reduce the time on those builds in Xcode.
- g4dualie, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5PC builders don't buy Macs, period.
  
  The PC builders I know never bring up the subject of Macs either. All they ever talk about are statistics and benchmarks and how to squeeze another clock-cycle or frame-rate out of their box.
  
  In fact, PC builders are some of the most knowledgeable tinkers I know. They're generous with their knowledge too! They're always willing to discuss chip-sets, jumper settings, and where to score the best deal on RAM.
  
  They pride themselves on their accomplishments and are known to conduct marathon sessions to rebuild a box from scratch over a long weekend holiday. They take an almost scientific approach to their work and I have no doubt some could assemble a box with their eyes closed.
  
  They don't add anything to the mix that can't be overclocked, tweaked, modded, or hacked. They possess a good working knowledge of wiring, soldering, and heat-shrink. Some even get creative with lights and cooling.
  
  They are all about choice too. They're quickly turned off by any source that doesn't offer a good, better, best selection of parts, new and used. Their known to pride themselves on their Twenty-Year Boxes too, which consist of a large source of extra parts cannibalized from machine long since dead.
  
  Yeah, so when I get a chance to actually read something they've written on a computer, I consider it a rarefied experience indeed!
- cthellis, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Tinkerers exist for the Mac, too, but since they don't have near the levels of hardware or sources out there... they'll certainly be subsumed by the rest of them on the PC end. And yes, it is much easier/cheaper to BE a PC builder (though probably about half of them are split between "wanting to build a machine cheaper" and "wanting to spend through the roof to always have the FASTEST RIG IMAGINABLE" so cost concerns aren't always the case), but they're an extremely small segment of the overall market, and even most of them "buy new PC's" most of the time in the form of new motherboard/CPU/RAM/video cards combinations when standards have changed enough. They're still spending a lot to keep up, they just do it in more frequent, smaller chunks.
  
  The things people are most likely to change on their own voluntarily (as opposed to when their old hardware breaks on them and their only choice is "buy a new part" or "buy a whole new computer"--and even THEN they go with option 2 a whole lot) are adding more RAM or some random PCI expansion device that likely had a USB equivalent anyway. Hard drives on OCCASION, but they usually find the hassle not worth it. The vast majority of hard drive "upgrades" come hand-in-hand with old hard drive failures. Macs don't really have an issue with those, at least.
  
  Certainly there are more limitations--and are more annoying to do on their more commodity-grade desktops (iMac and mini)--but these are not things the vast, VAST bulk of people do until their parts start going out on them. (And if that doesn't happen as much on the Mac, they'd be perfectly happy with it; not to mention it speaking well of Mac's part selection or warranty services.)
  
  At any rate, most people don't realize how "highly integrated" their Dells and HPs are, anyway--only not in the good way. (Just in the "proprietary connectors" and "case/mobo designs that make it a giant pain in the ass to replace their parts with anything but THEIR parts.) And they don't understand or care what their parts are, so long as the system boots up and "works for them." Which is the form of "high integration" that Apple aims for. Repairing a Mac is certainly a bigger pain (outside of AppleCare, which is MUCH less painful than most other warranty services I've seen, especially what with all the retail stores about) because of the parts and extreme customization, but I also see them rarely come IN for parts failure (outside of a hard drive or two), so... (Much less even than their low marketshare would dictate.)
  
  It seems they're doing things right for the vast bulk of computer consumers. ...and I never really hear good arguements for or against whole platforms in the general sense based on the needs of tiny segments. Those arguements are only good for those tiny segments.
grumpyrain, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5"Macs aren't more expensive because Apple ships them with an OS, just as Microsoft's bundling of Internet Explorer does not raise its cost for Windows. Windows would not be cheaper if the company removed IE, just as Apple wouldn't save any money by shipping Macs without Mac OS X."

If that were true, then Apple sells some way overpriced hardware. Hardware wise, Intel based Macs are no different than a Dell or a HP. It is OS-X that sets them apart from their Windows counterparts. It also implies that OS-X adds no value to the hardware alone, which is untrue.
- wnxwnx, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Perhaps the point focuses more on the marginal cost of providing specific features in the OS; any cost is a burden of Apple or Microsoft, while for Dell this is not the case.
  
  You have an interesting point though, OS X majorly sets apart and increases the value of that hardware.
- superkendall, on 10/12/2007, -6/+14Many Macs are cheaper than the equivilent Dell - the MacPro and Macbook Pro are good examples.
pantuky, on 10/12/2007, -12/+4This guy is a pure horse-***** propagandist. He tries to lump all computer functions into one pie and say: Here is Windows XP's share, and it is only 48%. In point of fact, the only item we have ever been interested in discussing is the modern desktop market. I'm not interested in curmudgeons who continue to use a Mac SE/30 or an Amiga A1200. I am not interested in how many HP/UX servers Transamerica uses to keep track of their title insurance. I am not interested in the many Sparc II workstations that are currently rusting in the basement of Royce Hall UCLA. I am interested in the contemporary population of desktop users. That is all. Only this and nothing more. When this is our defined subset, Microsoft controls between 85-95% of the market, and Apple has about 1.8%
- g4dualie, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7In point of fact, the only item we have ever been interested in discussing is the modern desktop market.
  
  Heh, heh, heh.
  
  The only one bringing up the obscure references to outmoded computers is you. There was no mention in the article at all about the items YOU brought up.
  
  As for market share where Apple is concerned, do you have a reference or link to your figure of 1.8% you have provided the Digg readership? Inquiring minds want to know whether you're actually quoting a reputable source or just offering up your own brand of horse-***** as it were... ...we're waiting.
bunni, on 10/12/2007, -12/+5I'm a mac guy - but RDM is drivel. I'd like to see his overture logs on days he gets on digg. I buried this story as spam.
- g4dualie, on 10/12/2007, -5/+8I buried you because I don't like liars.
- iLux, on 10/12/2007, -6/+6I am a macguy - but bunni is driven. I buried him cause he spams
ziadoz, on 10/12/2007, -10/+5These articles are pure propaganda, its not even disguised well either, or interesting to read (unless you like the obligatory, omfg Microsoft is the cause of all the worlds problem 'jokes').
- wilf, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8Excuse me, what is wrong with airing an opinion? That's all Daniel is doing; saying what he thinks
- ziadoz, on 10/12/2007, -8/+2At what point did I say he couldn't air his opinion? The fact is this is an opinion piece on a blog, which keeps trying to pass off as a professional magazine. Not only that but more often than not its factually inaccurate and biased, not what I expect from credible journalists.
- wilf, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Alright then, what's wrong with airing an opinion on his website? Or in a magazine? I think plenty of magazines, particularly political ones, have a bias and opinion of some sort, else it would just be like reading a dictionary or wikipedia.
  
  "its not even disguised well either"
  
  His opinions aren't meant to be hidden.
  
  Sure, if it's inaccurate, that's a very valid point, but I don't think most of it is.
- ziadoz, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2You didn't even read my reply. Articles like this are purely propaganda designed to cause arguments and generate traffic for the website, nothing more. Its not a good quality article, and it detracts from some of the better content on Digg when crap like this gets on the front page. The beauty of Digg is people have the freedom to say what they like about the articles, and like many others on here I think the majority of RDM's content is drivel.
rcardona2k, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5I love virtualization: Windows belongs in the cage of a virtual machine whether's it's Parallels, VMware, etal. I'm SO glad virtualization is kicking Windows off the hardware!
weslobombs, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5god these comments are ***** stupid.

macs are upgradable.

from third parties.

you ***** idiots wouldnt know because you are all PC whores.

go look for yourself. its called the internet.
blackvlad, on 10/12/2007, -6/+3More splogbam from DRM...
Tilneys, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3PC fans are so concerned about their crappy systems that they feel this huge need to block out and rubbish RDM?

Makes you wonder why. Insecurity? Threatened? All that, and they never even tried using a Mac. So no expectations of any balanced decisions here.

Conversely Mac users have opportunites to use PC's daily.. and doing it reinforces our knowledge that they are in every way WORSE than Apple Macs.

Full stop.
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.

Leopard vs Vista 4: Naked Sales

Login or register to add a comment