- staticx576
- |
- Exalted Legendary Member
you may know me as X[IGN]
Posted by: Iggwilv
*hands Kim a crowbar*
Here you will need this to help you get your foot out of the back of your throat, looks llike its in there pretty deep. And what is that on your face? Egg?! *hands Kim a washcloth*
Posted by: ZC Tango
(I bypassed most of the bits about subjectivity and where I wouldn't know what I was talking about.)
Why not to get Vista
By Apple
Posted by: 1. No upgrade nightmares.
Before you can even think about Vista, you’ll likely need a new PC. Or upgrades for memory, hard disk, and graphics card. Why go through all that hassle, when you can just get a Mac? More
Posted by: staticx576
My PC is more than powerful enough to max vista and then some. I haven't upgraded in over 2 years, and even then I only upgrade to play games, something that OSX still lacks.
You're missing the point here. Apple's target audience (with respect to this advertising, at least) is not the hardcore PC user, as you and many others on this forum seem to claim and be. Not at all. Apple is not going to waste its time attempting to sell a product to those who do not want it. Apple is too smart for that. Apple is aiming for the PC user on the fence, the PC user deliberating whether to keep his PC, or switch to a Mac. Apple is aiming this marketing campaign towards the PC user who would like to use a Mac, but wants to retain most, if not all, of his Windows programs, games, and/or periphrials.
This is where the Bootcamp and duel OS boot bit comes in.
Upgrade capabilities? It all depends on which Mac you get. If you opt for the all-in-one Mac (like mine D:) your best bet is to wait for the warrenty to run out, then do the warrenty-voiding upgrades. Or you can shell out 4,000-odd dollars for the huge Mac tower that has modular components. And it's not OSX that is upgrade-unfriendly, it's the Apple mentality that you shouldn't be able to open up the case and swap stuff.
I know Apple's target audience, but you have to understand I was replying to the original's poster's reasoning when he made this thread, to ultimately sell OSX to us, the hardcore gamers.
Posted by: ZC Tango
Posted by: 2. You can even run Windows.
The Mac gives you choices. With the latest software options, an Intel-powered Mac can easily run Vista or Windows XP applications. Not that you’ll want to... More
Posted by: staticx576
My PC can run windows too! irrelevant
And my Mac can run OSX. Astounding, innit?
Apple's point here is that Intel Macs can run both Windows/Vista and OSX, while PCs cannot run OSX. With all of the quite valid points in your posts, It's hard to believe that you did not pick up on that.
The whole point is why would I go and buy a mac just so I can run windows when I have a perfectly capable windows box that does it already, and it plays games(again, gamer) better than any mac aside from the Mac Pro, but that costs about 2-3x the cost of my setup.
Posted by: ZC Tango
Posted by: 5. Know iTunes? You know Mac.
You’ll recognize features like the library collection, playlist arrangement, and instant search in many Mac applications. So you’re something of a Mac expert already. More
Posted by: staticx576
itunes sucks IMO, foobar2000 is so much better
And iTunes rox, in my opinion. Again, like you said above, it's all subjective.
Agreed!
Posted by: ZC Tango
Posted by: 7. You can take it with you.
Most popular applications for Mac and PC use the same file formats, making it simple to exchange documents with friends and coworkers or move existing files from a PC to a Mac.
Posted by: staticx576
good, in that case I can just stick to windows
Again, Apple is aiming for the PC user who would like to switch to a Mac (Not the PC user who is happy where he stands), but wants to keep all of his old Windows files.
Which makes it pointless for the original poster to post here if he knows he is targeting the gamer audience
Posted by: ZC Tango
Posted by: 5. Still the most advanced OS.
No other operating system, Vista included, offers the rich features and simplicity of Mac OS X. And just as Vista tries to get closer (emphasis on “tries”), Mac OS X Leopard is right around the corner — ready to leap even farther ahead. More
Posted by: staticx576
The best part about this is they offer no examples of whats better, again just marketing BS.
Apple is surmising (perhaps too much so) that the reader is aware of the various projected release dates for Vista and Leopard. Not only that, but all of the various features and pros and cons of each OS.
You are correct- Apple didn't list any features of Vista, or Leopard's comparable features. Most likely because Microsoft was keeping Vista under wraps, guarding their business secrets and OS features so no one would steal them, and Apple was busy doing the same. Ah, this wonderful, trusting capitalist business world we live in.
(Such secrecy is understandable, however, when you consider that Microsoft pulled the patent for the iPod clickwheel right out from under Apple's nose. Was such a move dirty and underhanded? Of course, but it's fair game in the business world. Apple was a fool not to patent such fancy technology first. Now Apple has to pay Microsoft to use their own component to make an iPod. It makes me giggle and cry at the same time.)
No point arguing with something I also believe.
Posted by: ZC Tango
Posted by: 7. No hunting for drivers.
Just about everything works with Mac — even the stuff you used with your old PC. All you have to do is plug it in. A Mac has USB drivers for printers, external drives, digital cameras, input devices, iPod, and more. It can see Bluetooth cell phones and headsets, as well as FireWire cameras. No rebooting, no hassles. More
Posted by: staticx576
I dont hunt for drivers either on my windows machine...
I believe Apple is referring to physicially installing drivers. As in off the CD when you buy your periphrial and install the drivers. (My information is rather sketchy here, as I do not own a current PC that is in one piece. Must you install drivers with each periphrial you purchase?)
The honest truth is no, you do not. Windows comes with 99% of the drivers you will ever need and If it does not say such as video drivers that run faster than a 1984 computer(at least in XP, with Vista the drivers that came with it were absolutly fine for running Halo(only game I tested) at max settings with the framerate in the 1-200s. Although I suppose as time goes in vista's drivers will become dated and require you to find newer ones. Common items such as mice, keyboards, memory card readers, and external harddrives at least in my experence never needed drivers beyond what windows shipped with(I never needed to hunt for them).
Posted by: ZC Tango
Posted by: 8. Design that turns heads.
You won’t want to hide your Mac in a corner of the den. You’ll want it front and center in your life. The Apple style shows in every detail, from its sculpted surfaces to its gorgeous Mac OS X graphics. More
Posted by: staticx576
If I wanted to hide my PC it wouldnt be on the top of my desk.
Err, subjective. 5 yard penalty, both sides.
Just saying that classifying PCs as ugly beige boxes is incorrect. Maybe I could have been more clear?
Posted by: ZC Tango
Posted by: staticx576
Posted by:
10. More fun with photos.
On a Mac, you don’t need any extra software to make a photo book. You don’t have to leave your photo software to visit a separate website and wait for forms to load. All you need is a camera and a Mac. More
Posted by: staticx576
I dont want a photobook lol, I want to be able to tweak the image so it doesnt look like it came from the crappy camera most mac owners have.
They do make Photoshop for Mac, if that's the kind of image tweaking you're referring to. Most Mac owners? You don't know most Mac owners. I don't know most Mac owners. There are cameras, however, that are very nice (I would even venture to say top-of-the-line, but I'm no photographer, so I wouldn't know) that are both Mac and PC compatible.
In the end, it's not the OS that determines what kind of camera you are allowed to have. It all comes down to how much money you're prepared to shell out.
Then dare I say if windows has it's version of photoshop what incentive do I have to switch?