foxnews.com — "A family in my neighborhood has been all PC since the PC XT. But the eldest son is going off to college and says he wants a Mac. It's the vanguard of a new generation gap. He's never owned a Mac but he's gotta have one ? a good sign for Apple."
Jul 28, 2006 View in Crawl 4
dcmacheadJul 29, 2006
If I'd had the money when I went to college, I would have gotten a Mac. Back then, the price difference was very discernible. Today, I hear people saying Macs are more expensive, which is an "apples to oranges" comparison. You absolutely positively can find a sh*tbox laptop for $500, but for a true spec peer, the cost difference is negligible. Especially when you consider you get real software on Macs versus shovelware for PCs.Best of luck with your new Mac. I think it will serve you well. As a tip, make sure you've got a backup regimen in place--not that you'll need it with a Mac, but you'll appreciate it when you hear about people finishing term papers and forgetting to sav them.
mikecermJul 30, 2006
Every student goes off to college with a laptop these days. Mac laptops, even the Macbook, are NOT affordable to the vast majority of students, neither are they necessary. Macbooks are not a bad deal at all for the segment of the market they occupy. Unfortunately, you can get a perfectly good Dell with a Core Duo for $700. It's not as cool, but it's half as expensive.Futhermore, the $700 Dell is far more computer than the average user or student needs. They need to check their email, they need to instant message with their friends, they need to browse the internet, and they need to write a term paper every once in a while. Spending an extra $500 bucks so your bitchy daughter's laptop can match her iPod is not something that most parents will consent to. Apple will see a few switchers this school year, but not many.
iplayyouandmeJul 30, 2006
@Qtip42Community college?You'd be hard pressed to find a College of Art, Design, Radio and TV, or Communications within a university that doesn't use Macs as their primary platform. They are also very common in the Sciences, since OS X is UNIX. LINUX is great for scientists, but it's not mainstream (consumer) computing nor does it have the spit and polish of OS X.
quixJul 30, 2006
"Nothing like the smell of self-satisfied, "holier than thou" mac users in the morning..."Yet oddly enough I find the smell more appealing then the pungent, bitter aroma of ignorant Apple haters spewing their irrational blather on every Apple digg...
brbrandonJul 30, 2006
I love my MacBook Pro. But keep in mind it has a single-layer DVD burner (not dual layer), and the video card is 256MB (not 512MB like the Dell).
fungifredJul 30, 2006
But, you are one of those people that doesn't get it. People want their PHOTOS on the computer not a folder of .JPG files. Apple embraces new ways to use the computer. Windows still does everything the same way that it did in dos, just now, it is a folder of .jpg files instead of .txt files. I want to manage music and songs, not .mp3 files. These other people want to also. In Windows, you take the problem of digital photos and make the photos into a computer thing by storing photos in files and collections of photos in folders. On the Mac, it is still made to be a computer thing underneath but, all the user sees are pictures. Apple solved digital photos by making the computer do the photo thing. If you keep thinking that, the average user just wants to check email (in a browser) browse the web and open a bunch of jpeg files, a win 95 machine is all they need
atomic1fireJul 30, 2006
first time thats been said on a fox news related peice but yeah that was a good read
lonniehJul 30, 2006
Copy and paste from Gateway custom configuration page"Gateway? NX860X
superkendallJul 31, 2006
"increasing hardware support"From what? There is already Applecare. All it would mean is perhaps more options for fixing a Mac. I can live with that..."backwards compatibility"They already do this, OS X is maintained on older Mac versions for several years. And of course nothing forces you to buy the latest version of OS X. Backwards compatibility is no worse than on Windows."licensing OSX to other computer vendors"No need to do this, even at volume Apple could produce them - it would mean more assembly plants."cheaper hardware"Possibly but possibly not. The mini could actually serve a lot of desktops very well, and if Mac sales really took off ecomy of scale would make the models they do sell cheaper.As it is for some models they are already at the same (or slightly lower) prices as Dell for equivalent hardware."And if Apple had great success they'd be facing even more monopoly and antitrust issues than Microsoft."Well since even with dramaztic increases in sales that issue is years away, we'll see what happens when that comes - but I don't see why they would face more issues since they don't really bundle anything the same way Microsoft does nor to they have resellers they force to operate in a certain way since they make all the hardware.
klawzAug 3, 2006
@Quix - "Funny, last quarter Apple had over 12% of the laptop market."WRONG, show your sources, this is wrong. Maybe they had a 12% increase in sales, due to people owning older Apples upgrading to the new one, but they aren't even close to 12% world-wide marketshare of laptops.
klawzAug 3, 2006
@ Quix - I suppose you believe everything you hear negatvie about a non Apple product, but believe nothing (courts, papers, etc) said in a negative manner about Apple products right? Give me a break. Ipods are created in work sweat shops (news talking here, not me). You see what I mean?
quixAug 3, 2006
"WRONG, show your sources, this is wrong. Maybe they had a 12% increase in sales, due to people owning older Apples upgrading to the new one, but they aren't even close to 12% world-wide marketshare of laptops."WRONG (if you realize you're misconstruing my comment):<a class="user" href="http://arstechnica.com/journals/apple.ars/2006/7/25/4753">http://arstechnica.com/journals/apple.ars/2006/7/25/4753</a>That's 12% of the U.S. portable market. I never said 12% worldwide. Because the original comment I was responding to that mentioned 4.5% of the market applied to the U.S. market as well, not world market.