iPhone

[LCR]

I'm not so sure, it's actually media, but then there's a lot of media attention ... so ...

Who's already bought an iPhone?

It won't arrive in Europe until fall and I think it's incredibly expensive, but the design and the touchscreen make me go all girly and giggly. I'm sort of tired of the media and the blogs telling me "Oh, God, it's Jesus! Only as a phone!". So, before I book a flight to NY just to spend too much money on a phone, is anyone here that can share some firsthand experience?

[FdL]

My 2 cents: Overrated + "it's only a phone".

Seriously, I know this is TEH tech gadget to have, but it's really nothing special. As with the iPod, Apple doesn't introduce any radical technological advance, but base their success in design and marketing.
Also, with computers they do the same. I remember when the craze was actually selling people computers with different colors in the outer shells of the hardware :S

Definitely not my thing. But, hey, go crazy, all the rest of the world is.

[LCR]

I know, that's what I keep telling me. It's just a phone. But it looks so good ...

[FdL]

Oh, sure. If it was cheaper we'd all want to have one. That's for sure.
And well, there are other units with similar specs and useability, but alas I never felt the need to have one.

In any way, what's important about the iPhone is that it will generate a technological trend towards all-in-one cell phone thingies. Which is good, because is the natural evolution for that tech niche. Eventually parts will become cheaper and units mored powerful and we'll enjoy the benefits of total portable multimedia connectivity. Ie, we're moving towards the Star Trek tricorder :P With internet and wi-fi and all, the possibilities are endless and very real, not too far in time.

What I don't like about Apple's marketing strategy is that it's based in associating the product with the brand name. That makes the general public think, for example, that the only way to listen to mp3s portably is an iPod, and this is so powerful that it actually has an effect. It's like making people think MAC = COMPUTER, COMPUTER = MAC. They're kinda aiming at this.

And to me it's no better than what Microsoft does with Windows and IE.

[Kitya]

I won't own one cuz I have to leave Verizon to use it. I think that's what I hate about it the most. You can ONLY use it with AT&T, and it's a crappy minutes plan they have for it.

Besides, I don't text, I don't send pics, I don't want to use my phone to surf the web. I can wait until I get home to do that, OR, if we're on vacation, I can use Hubby's laptop with the wireless card to check my email. All I want is a phone that will store my phone numbers, let me make calls, and let me take the occasional pic of my kidlet to use as wallpaper on my phone. I don't even own an MP3 player. I listen to Sirius Radio when I'm in the car, and I have all my cd's downloaded into my computer so I can just play them from there when I'm online.

[Mr the Geoff]

So basically this iPhone is a pretty looking phone that plays MP3s. I don;t know about in the states but on this side of the pond it's hard to find a phone that doesn't fit that bill already, so I can;t see myself stumping up the £100 or so extra to have a picture of a fruit on the front.

Then again my MP3 players isn't apple either, I spent about half the cost of a 30GB iPod on a 60GB Cowon. I just don't buy into that whole form over function thing.

[FdL]

Yeah, me too. And I agree with both Geoff and Kitya. It's a nice toy, but if I really needed or wanted something similar I'd buy one of those loaded palm-blackberry things, or even better a laptop, I guess...

I use a Motorola V3 cellphone and except for the lack of mp3 it's alright for me. I don't use the camera that much really, though I did suck dry the one in my old v300 in its day.

[SDF]

599 USD

Anyway, using it as a web browser or MP3 player KILLS the battery life, potentially leaving you without a phone. The front is one giant scratchable LCD touch screen. And it only has a very small amount of flash memory making it a poor MP3 player. I'd rather own a phone and an MP3 player myself.

[DraPrime]

The iPhone is just a nice shiny phone with too many features. I have a cell phone I bought back in 95, and I still use it. All I need is the ability to call. Think, do you really need all those extra options that the iPhone offers, and is it worth the cost? Probably not. Put a lower case i in front of anything and it sells well. If WotC called D&D iD&D then everyone would play it. Also, the PH would cost $100. The fact that people will actually buy an iPhone shows how much of an effect marketing can have on a lot of people. I got teevo so that I could go past the commercials and be able to ignore the crap that companies like Apple say.

[SteveMB]

I'd like to have a good combination phone, contacts info manager, and basic PDA. I'm not convinced that the iPhone is it, even leaving aside the issues of having to sign up with AT&T (with a lousy plan to boot) and paying six hundred bucks.

[WildBill]

The only advantage offered by the iPhone vs the top blackberry, palm treo, etc is that it has a much better internet browser. If you just want email from your phone a blackberry is still better. That said, I own a treo (which I love to bits), and I want an iPhone because I love new techie things. But I will wait until palm comes out with something that can browse as well as the iPhone. And do everything else the iPhone can do. And have a qwerty keyboard.
just my $0.02

[Wojiz]

It's like making people think MAC = COMPUTER, COMPUTER = MAC.

lol, propaganda.



599 USD

lol, giant enemy crab.

[dehro]

can't remember where, but I've read an article somewhere that said the company actually making the i-phone will make a very similar and unbranded one and sell it for a percentage of the price of I-phone.

that's chinese companies for you :smallbiggrin:

[Sewer_Bandito]

Personall, I think owning one is begging for you to get mugged. Talking on one in public instantly tells you that

a. You have a 600 buck phone, that's small and very easy to steal

and...

b. If you can afford to have that, you probably have a good amount of money in your wallet.

I'll just go with my cheap, hand-me-down 6 year old cell phone I got from my brother.:smallsigh:

[Tom_Violence]

I know, that's what I keep telling me. It's just a phone. But it looks so good ...

You terrify me!


So, before I book a flight to NY just to spend too much money on a phone

You really terrify me!

The fact that Apple offer you a (pitiful) part-exchange on your broken iPod when you go to buy a new one steers me well clear of anything they sell forever more.

[DraPrime]

I bet that if Apple sold iCrap it would work. People will buy anything with i in front of it.

[AngelAndrius]

lol awww you bunch of whiners.

Macintosh is a great company that not only uses great marketing. Their usability and interface is top notch and their actual technology is either competetive with other options or flat out beats the other options into the ground.

I'd like to see microsoft (or whoever) come out with a 600 dollar phone and see how successful it is.

Like you said, you all will just have to wait until someone else makes a competetive product like the iPhone for cheap so you can be smug in the 300 bucks you saved while all the cool people laugh at you.

:smallamused:

sorr just had to play devil's advocate

*plays with his new iPhone

[purple gelatinous cube o' Doom]

I can tell you one thing, I'm sure not going to pay $500 for a phone, I don't care what features it has.

[Wojiz]

Mac is a company built around the fact that people are too stupid to use more intricate and customizable software.

[FdL]

lol awww you bunch of whiners.

Macintosh is a great company that not only uses great marketing. Their usability and interface is top notch and their actual technology is either competetive with other options or flat out beats the other options into the ground.

I'd like to see microsoft (or whoever) come out with a 600 dollar phone and see how successful it is.

Like you said, you all will just have to wait until someone else makes a competetive product like the iPhone for cheap so you can be smug in the 300 bucks you saved while all the cool people laugh at you.


Sorry, your post is too stupid to let it pass.

Macintosh uses great marketing period. As they said, they could sell any crap as long as they made it look cool and put and "i" in front. Usability and interface, as design, are secondary things for a tech toy. I don't really think they are so far technollogically from the rest. As we've said, this toy brings nothing that any other similar gadget can't do.

Having a 600 dollar phone is for elitists. You say it yourself, you say you are willing to pay all that money to be "cool" right now with your iPhone. That whole paragraph is all that is needed to understand your post... :s

I don't think a phone's function is to make someone "cool". I know there are ridiculous symbols of status in our society (cars to some, computers and tech to others, clothing, women, bling etc). And yeah, there are companies that cater to this and Apple is one of them.

But well, if you like it and you have the money to pay for it, enjoy it, dunno. I don't think it's that great but I understand that some people do.

BTW, whoever said it's a mugging flag, totally right, man :) I don't know, it's something too expensive to have on you...I wouldn't flash it in public. Heck, at that price I wouldn't take it out of my house!!!! :D

[Mr the Geoff]

Like you said, you all will just have to wait until someone else makes a competetive product like the iPhone for cheap so you can be smug in the 300 bucks you saved while all the cool people laugh at you.


$600 for a phone?

My god that's ludicrous. Macintosh is only about great marketing, from what I have heard this iPhone has nothing that isn't currently available at a fraction of that price.

Get one of these (http://shop.carphonewarehouse.com/pay-monthly/o2/xda-mini-s/o2/) instead for 1/4 the price. same big lcd touch screen, you can get 2GB memory cards for it, you can use it as a PDA, a MP3 player, it takes videos, runs windows etc etc all for £60 ($120). It used to be a bit more expensive but they have been around for 2 years now so the price has dropped.

Personally I prefer a phone that's just a phone, but I know a couple of friends with these and they are proper toys. One of them even got the upgrade to make it a GPS thrown in for free.

[LCR]

You terrify me!



You really terrify me!

The fact that Apple offer you a (pitiful) part-exchange on your broken iPod when you go to buy a new one steers me well clear of anything they sell forever more.

I wasn't really being serious, you know ...

[Setra]

Like you said, you all will just have to wait until someone else makes a competetive product like the iPhone for cheap so you can be smug in the 300 bucks you saved while all the cool people laugh at you.
I'm sorry, but saying elitist crap like that urks me.

I have never met people whom refer to themselves as "cool", who weren't a total snob and/or jerk. Being cool is not defined by the items you have, and if you have to have a phone to be cool, then you're obviously not at all cool.

On that note, what's so great about the Iphone? Can't you pretty much replicate it with a Camera Phone, and an Ipod video?

If I had $600 to waste on an Iphone, I'd get another stick of ram, and get a couple games, and of course save money for Assassin's Creed.

And have plenty of money to spare.

[Elidyr]

I remember some 6 years ago when people actually compared their cool new phones. Seems the "cool" people are just starting to catch up eh?

Personally, my only wish for a cell phone is long battery life. Anyone know how often does one have to recharge iPhone?

[WildBill]

An iPhone is totally not going to be mugger bait. I reguarly use my Treo (not far from 600 without a new contract) in areas that aren't the nicest. Smartphones have become ubiquitous. Look around in NYC, half the people on ohones are holding a treo, a blackberry or something similar. We're not getting mugged at a disproportional rate.

[Wojiz]

Mugged?

No, probably not.

At a much higher level for a risk of theft, especially if you leave it around?

Yeah, probably.

[Mr the Geoff]

If you leave your phone anywhere in view, you're asking to lose it, no matter how nice or not it is.


A common trick round here in pubs is to come round selling something or doing a charity collection, lean over a table with a pamphlet, and while the pamphlet is covering the phone, whip it into your pocket then walk away.

[FdL]

If you leave your phone anywhere in view, you're asking to lose it, no matter how nice or not it is.

QFT, with anything. That said, flashing something that is recognizably expensive does incite muggers.



A common trick round here in pubs is to come round selling something or doing a charity collection, lean over a table with a pamphlet, and while the pamphlet is covering the phone, whip it into your pocket then walk away.

Yeah, and it's awfully sad how most stealing tenchniques have to do with tricking good willed people and are based on their charity or generosity. Because the reaction they create is that people become suspicious and stingy (and resentful!), which ultimately hurts those who ask help out of real need. And that contributes to make the world an awful place... :S

[DraPrime]

Like you said, you all will just have to wait until someone else makes a competetive product like the iPhone for cheap so you can be smug in the 300 bucks you saved while all the cool people laugh at you.

First of all, competitive products already exist. Second of all, according to you wasting money and believing everything you see in a commercial is cool.

[Wojiz]

First of all, competitive products already exist. Second of all, according to you wasting money and believing everything you see in a commercial is cool.

Great job failing at critical reading.

[Hermit]

If you leave your phone anywhere in view, you're asking to lose it, no matter how nice or not it is.


A common trick round here in pubs is to come round selling something or doing a charity collection, lean over a table with a pamphlet, and while the pamphlet is covering the phone, whip it into your pocket then walk away.

Someone's been watching "The Real Hustle" :p

[DemonicPenguin]

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1638442,00.html

Time article making fun of the iPhone.

[Muz]

Have you seen the emperor's new iPhone? It's AMAZING!! I MUST SELL MY CAR TO BUY ONE!!
:smallwink:

[WildBill]

I'll probably end up getting whatever competitive phone palm makes when I am do for an upgrade. Having my pda and my cellphone merge and be able to use the internet has been wonderful for my organization, and improving that technology makes me very happy.

[Bob_the_Mighty]

I must say this: iPhone will do for phones what iPod did for pods.

[storybookknight]

So nobody here has one? I've really been looking forward to some firsthand accounts...

[Thrivol]

So nobody here has one? I've really been looking forward to some firsthand accounts...

I have used one (my father owns it). It is AMAZING. Very easy to use. There are a few features the iPhone is lacking, but those will probably be added in an update. I think the iPhone is worth the $500, but that is just me.

[Tom_Violence]

What interests me is that for some reason a lot of people seem to think that is the first phone in the history of the world to cost a lot of money.

http://www.powerupmobile.com/product--214.htm

A 2 second search can reveal many other products at similar prices. Its not that amazing.

[Pendragonx]

What interests me is that for some reason a lot of people seem to think that is the first phone in the history of the world to cost a lot of money.

http://www.powerupmobile.com/product--214.htm

A 2 second search can reveal many other products at similar prices. Its not that amazing.

I can't see myself ever paying that much for a phone. I'm also very uninterested in buying anything from Apple, but that's another thread entirely, so I'll try to keep on topic here. The early reviews I read were mostly from admitted Apple fans, so I will take them with a grain of salt. The one feature that I think I will certainly not like in this type of phone would be the lack of tacticle buttons of any sort (though not being able to IM anyone would also be annoying as well).

Edit: Forgot to mention the non-replacable battery. That right there is a deal-breaker if nothing else.

[Tom_Violence]

I can't see myself ever paying that much for a phone. I'm also very uninterested in buying anything from Apple, but that's another thread entirely, so I'll try to keep on topic here. The early reviews I read were mostly from admitted Apple fans, so I will take them with a grain of salt. The one feature that I think I will certainly not like in this type of phone would be the lack of tacticle buttons of any sort (though not being able to IM anyone would also be annoying as well).

Edit: Forgot to mention the non-replacable battery. That right there is a deal-breaker if nothing else.

Hehe, I'm sure anyone that's had trouble with an iPod 'getting stuck' and having to wait until the battery runs dead in order to reset it will sympathise there. I mean, you can't even turn the damn things off! And aren't phones with those flashy touchscreens notorious for breaking anyway?

[Sye216]

I must say this: iPhone will do for phones what iPod did for pods.
You got that from a show on comedy central! I watched it and laughed. [/off-topic]

I don't really want something that's as expensive or even more so then a full-sized video game platform. *coughPS3cough* Honestly! Who wants to pay that much for a friggin phone? The price is ridiculous, no matter how "good" it is!!!!

[Argent]

The iPhone, if not a technological marvel, is certainly proof of Apple's marketing savvy. Is it a neat idea? Yes. Is the interface forward-looking and will it be a model for future phones? Most likely. Is it lacking features that are already in place on less-expensive phones in common use? Yes. So right now, the iPhone is a little ahead of itself (so that it can grab market share for Apple while new advancements come on-line), but it shows solid marketing know-how -- grab market share while you can, charge a premium to the elitists and the early adopters (which is what every technology does; it's not a phenomenon unique to Apple) and then bring more functionality and drop the price within the next year or two. Pretty standard tactics for new tech.

I'll wait till the hubbub dies down and wait a few model years for either: 1) the iPhone to catch up (and hopefully surpass) current phone tech; or, 2) other cellphone manufacturers to ape Apple's ideas and market similar phones.

[AngelAndrius]

Haha im being elitist?

If I am than so are you. You claim that having the phone and flashing it will get me mugged, that overpaying is a waste of money, and that Mac doesn't have the tech to keep up with the hype.

Mugged? Well maybe, but not yet. All I know is that my phone generates a lot of interest and I have more than one new number to add since getting it. :smallbiggrin:

That alone was worth the cost. The price is high, but that's part of the prestige in owning one. 600$ for a phone might seem ridiculous if you look at all the things you could buy besides it, but if it was a gift (like mine) then the price issue kind of disappears. The point is, if you shy at the price and its a heavy hit to your finances, don't buy the thing. But if not, well then go for it. If the cash isn't a big deal, why not go for the prestige? Who pays attention to the penny-pinching millionaires? It's the flamboyant and extreme that speaks in modern culture today.

And as for the cool people thing, I'm sorry to anyone who took offense right away, didn't mean it, honest. I was just poking fun at the snobbish MacHate vibe I was getting before I posted.

Oh and lastly Competitive Devices??? like the aforementioned Blackberry??? Hahahahahaha no, sorry, not yet. My father has a Blackberry, and it's nice, but nowhere as smooth as my iPhone. The BB sucks as a phone, you can't hear anything worth crap, and it takes 50000 clicks just to get anywhere with the thing.

Those umwilling to use more intricate and sophisticated devices? Please. I'd like to get to my phone pics (insert x feature) sometime this year thanks. Efficiency my friend, efficiency.

[Beleriphon]

Those umwilling to use more intricate and sophisticated devices? Please. I'd like to get to my phone pics (insert x feature) sometime this year thanks. Efficiency my friend, efficiency.

I'm firmly of the opinion, this coming a guy that doesn't own a cell phone, that if you can't take the extra 20 seconds to get to some pictures on your phone then you really need to slow down the efficiency cycle. It takes longer to cycle through the pictures on my digitcal camera, and it only has a photo function, so efficiency on phones is hardly an issue.

Add to the fact that quite frankly, for me at any rate, if you call me at home and I'm not there then I obviously didn't want to talk to you since I didn't invite to where ever I've gone.

The iPhone is kind of neat, sure, but I don't think it really does anything new. All it does from everything I've seen is wrap old functions in a pretty new package.

[Pendragonx]

Haha im being elitist?

[snip]

And as for the cool people thing, I'm sorry to anyone who took offense right away, didn't mean it, honest. I was just poking fun at the snobbish MacHate vibe I was getting before I posted.

Understood. The problem with that is, however, you end up perpetuating a behaviour pattern that gets associated with all-things-Apple. And then somewhat of backlash ensues, and the cycle repeats.



Oh and lastly Competitive Devices??? like the aforementioned Blackberry??? Hahahahahaha no, sorry, not yet. My father has a Blackberry, and it's nice, but nowhere as smooth as my iPhone. The BB sucks as a phone, you can't hear anything worth crap, and it takes 50000 clicks just to get anywhere with the thing.

I think they might have meant devices such as this one here (http://www.helio.com/page?p=devices_ocean_static) ...

[LCR]

I've found another review of the iPhone. While it is quite favourable, it doesn't recommend the iPhone as a phone per se ...

http://www.slate.com/id/2169620/nav/tap3/

[FdL]

Spam-scam says I won an iPhone.
Boy would I sell that in a heartbeat.

[Jacob_Gallagher]

A. Law of diminishing returns- this $500 phone is not twice as good as a $250 PSP.

B. I hate the company, because they feel the only way to sell their computer is to attempt (and fail) to bash Microsoft's stuff.

Yeah, Macs have few viruses. Maybe because... I dunno... nobody fricking uses them?!?

Yeah, Windows is hard to upgrade- you gotta pull the parts out and all... with a Mac, you just throw it out, and buy a new one.

This website sums it up pretty well:
http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=macs_cant

[Hushdawg]

Hehe, I'm sure anyone that's had trouble with an iPod 'getting stuck' and having to wait until the battery runs dead in order to reset it will sympathise there. I mean, you can't even turn the damn things off! And aren't phones with those flashy touchscreens notorious for breaking anyway?

OH! Pish Tosh! You must be thinking of something else!

Mac products NEVER lock up, crash or fail!



/sarchasm

[Hushdawg]

Yeah, Macs have few viruses. Maybe because... I dunno... nobody fricking uses them?!?

Yeah, Windows is hard to upgrade- you gotta pull the parts out and all... with a Mac, you just throw it out, and buy a new one.


The entire design and graphics industry alone is founded on Mac. So yeah, a lot of people use them and almost all of the nice pretty stuff that you enjoy on your PC, TV, Movie screen and in print was generated with MAC software.

As for "throwing it out and buying a new one" you have obviously never used a MAC in any way. They are even easier to upgrade than PCs because the plug and play actually works.

I use a PC because of the versatility I need with my job; but my next brand new home computer will be a Mac.

Try being a little more objective next time.

Both Macs and Windows-based PCs have plusses and minuses, if Mac was really that bad then it wouldn't still be around. I do agree, however, that Mac over-hypes themselves whereas PCs don't. But then again, PCs have the rabid brainwashed masses to do all the hyping for them.

[Ranis]

I do agree, however, that Mac over-hypes themselves whereas PCs don't. But then again, PCs have the rabid brainwashed masses to do all the hyping for them.

Well, I dunno about the ad campaigns you've been seeing, but the main thing that instantly shuts me off from ever thinking about considering owning a MAC is the simple fact that their ad campaign is bashing PC's. Any product that has to make fun of their competitor to sell, I really don't need to be wasting money on.

EDIT: And when was the last time you saw a Windows commercial? They don't need to advertise anymore. Nor do they need to bash on MAC's to sell PC's. That's because they don't need to convince people their product is superior-it just is.

[Hushdawg]

Well, I dunno about the ad campaigns you've been seeing, but the main thing that instantly shuts me off from ever thinking about considering owning a MAC is the simple fact that their ad campaign is bashing PC's. Any product that has to make fun of their competitor to sell, I really don't need to be wasting money on.

EDIT: And when was the last time you saw a Windows commercial? They don't need to advertise anymore. Nor do they need to bash on MAC's to sell PC's. That's because they don't need to convince people their product is superior-it just is.

Oh I wholeheartedly agree with MAC's ad strategy. One of my closest friends is a high-profile graphic designer and is a die-hard MAC user. Even she will tell you that those ads are stupid and she will be the FIRST to tell you that: YES Macs *CAN* get viruses (it's just harder for the typical virus codes to exploit anything on a MAC) and yes MACs DO lock up and have problems. The reason that one uses a MAC is very simple: Superior graphics processing.
That's it. PCs have a lot of strengths for a lot of different areas and while MACs have the "general use" category all shored up just as well as a "general use" PC the big advantage for people in design, photography, imaging, etc is the overwhelming superiority of MACs graphics.

PCs will give much more raw power for the dollar and will run higher powered applications in everything except graphics. MAC should just be happy with that major advantage and the inherent advantage they have over viruses.

Microsoft does advertise; the Vista ads were annoying as hell. You are correct though in that Microsoft does not have to advertise as much as others on TV or radio; but print ads and internet ads are all over the place.

Bill Gates did a brilliant thing by creating the package system concept and providing the OS so cheaply to computer manufacturers. In the 1980s one would have multiple OSs to use depending on the brand of computer, sometime around 1990 though Bill Gates took Windows 3.1 and practically gave it to every computer manufacturer "to unify the market and help the consumer" was the big tagline in the magazines. What he did was perhaps the most brilliant stroke of marketing genious in the history of computing.
So this is where Apple/MAC began to slide off the scope since they were the only manufacturer to refuse the integration of Windows. Why? Very simple, Steve Jobs was still pissed off at Gates for having practically stolen the GUI system from the early MAC software.
It isn't that Windows is superior to MAC OS; it is simply that the heavy proliferation of Windows has made it seem that way. MAC OS is actually more adaptable and customizable than Windows ever has been. Only with the features in Windows Vista has Microsoft been able to catch up.

Nowdays Microsoft has full integration with the MAC OS and anything that can be done on a PC can also be done on a MAC and vice-versa.
The question is quality of use and as I said before it boils down to the individual application.
PC = Raw power
MAC = Graphics superiority

[Jacob_Gallagher]

The entire design and graphics industry alone is founded on Mac. So yeah, a lot of people use them and almost all of the nice pretty stuff that you enjoy on your PC, TV, Movie screen and in print was generated with MAC software.

As for "throwing it out and buying a new one" you have obviously never used a MAC in any way. They are even easier to upgrade than PCs because the plug and play actually works.

I use a PC because of the versatility I need with my job; but my next brand new home computer will be a Mac.

Try being a little more objective next time.

Few enough people use Macs for internet-based applications that there arefew viruses.

Increasingly, Mac software can be configured to run on Windows. This makes the Mac's graphics advantages much less useful.

And I'm not talking about adding something like speakers- I mean upgrading my motherboard, RAM, graphics, et cetera. Because, compared to Windows, there are so few hardware pieces that are compatible, you cannot upgrade reliably. Oh, and plug-and-play almost always works on Windows.


The reason that one uses a MAC is very simple: Superior graphics processing.
That's it. PCs have a lot of strengths for a lot of different areas and while MACs have the "general use" category all shored up just as well as a "general use" PC the big advantage for people in design, photography, imaging, etc is the overwhelming superiority of MACs graphics.

Only the software. Mac software is configured towards graphics ability, but those applications can run on Windows. So you get the best of both worlds by owning a PC- Mac software, Windows hardware- but you can't do that with a Mac.

Oh, and what constantly pisses me off is how Mac supposedly appeals to the fun guy, whereas Windows is for the businessman. Tell me: Which one has a huge selection of video games?

One more thing: I hate how they try to sell a way of life. To use Quicktime, you need Itunes. To get the most out of an Ipod, you need a Mac. Microsoft does not require you to buy a Windows computer to use your Xbox 360.

Lastly, there's a very good reason why Macs don't crash as much as Windows- the operating system is clocked to run at lower speeds, because it doesn't need that power for things like videogames, which it does not have. If a Mac were to be set to run at the same hardware levels as Windows, you'd see a lot more crashes.

And if it 'just works', then why does Mac Fix It.com (http://www.macfixit.com/) exist?

[Tobaselly]

can't remember where, but I've read an article somewhere that said the company actually making the i-phone will make a very similar and unbranded one and sell it for a percentage of the price of I-phone.

that's chinese companies for you :smallbiggrin:

it's the LG KE850... the erm "Prada phone" I believe it came out in March too.

[13_CBS]

A word to the wise: Apple products SUCK when they first come out, or at least are replaced by superior versions merely months later. IT happened with my computer, at least.

[Vaynor]

I just want to say I'm posting this from an iPhone. It's a lot harder but once you get used to the keypad it's not too difficult. I'm also listening to music, and I just finished calling my aunt. Yay iPhone!

[Hushdawg]

Few enough people use Macs for internet-based applications that there arefew viruses.


Totally disagree with you here. Entire graphic arts companies are fully online and operating with MAC. The MAC OS is specifically designed to make it near impervious to viruses.



Increasingly, Mac software can be configured to run on Windows. This makes the Mac's graphics advantages much less useful.


Having used the same applications on both MAC and PC I can unilatirally disagree with this statement. The MAC operation is far superior in Photoshop, InDesign, Quark and various other graphics intensive programs.



And I'm not talking about adding something like speakers- I mean upgrading my motherboard, RAM, graphics, et cetera. Because, compared to Windows, there are so few hardware pieces that are compatible, you cannot upgrade reliably. Oh, and plug-and-play almost always works on Windows.


Plug and play with Windows has been nicknamed "Plug and pray" it doesn't always work and there are frequent problems with the USB ports having to be uninstalled and re-installed when one port gets overloaded. These problems simply don't exist on a MAC... though it does have its own problems.

MAC computers are fully upgradable. Any MAC can have ram, hard drives, processors, etc upgraded. Not all of the laptops are user accessible though, but the MAC store will install any hardware purchased there for free.



Only the software. Mac software is configured towards graphics ability, but those applications can run on Windows. So you get the best of both worlds by owning a PC- Mac software, Windows hardware- but you can't do that with a Mac.


Again. comparing the exact same programs with the same tiered machines I personally get better performance out of any Adobe product or other graphics programs with a MAC than with a PC. It does work on a PC and you can do everything with a PC but the MAC gets it done faster and easier. Promise.



Oh, and what constantly pisses me off is how Mac supposedly appeals to the fun guy, whereas Windows is for the businessman. Tell me: Which one has a huge selection of video games?


I agree, they are trying to break out of the existing customer base and expand and they are using the wrong marketing to do so.
BTW, MAC has a built-in Windows emulator that runs 90% of the Windows programs from the last 10 years with no problems.



One more thing: I hate how they try to sell a way of life. To use Quicktime, you need Itunes. To get the most out of an Ipod, you need a Mac. Microsoft does not require you to buy a Windows computer to use your Xbox 360.


Totally agree.



Lastly, there's a very good reason why Macs don't crash as much as Windows- the operating system is clocked to run at lower speeds, because it doesn't need that power for things like videogames, which it does not have. If a Mac were to be set to run at the same hardware levels as Windows, you'd see a lot more crashes.


No. Mac processors have a higher front-side bus than PCs. That's why they don't crash as often.



And if it 'just works', then why does Mac Fix It.com (http://www.macfixit.com/) exist?

Toally agree. MACs are not without their own sets of problems. Just because they are different from those a PC has does not make them superior machines.

[Tom_Violence]

OH! Pish Tosh! You must be thinking of something else!

Mac products NEVER lock up, crash or fail!



/sarchasm

Hats off to you my man. For re-introducing the term 'pish tosh' into my vocabulary, and using the term 'sarchasm' to denote sarcasm so enormous that it could actually split the surface of the Earth. I shall be using both of these things very soon, thank you. :smallsmile:

[Hushdawg]

Heh, no problemo... I actually intended to italicize the "chasm" part of "sarchasm" to emphasize that it wasn't a typo.

Glad you caught the meaning nonetheless.

[valadil]

Hehe, I'm sure anyone that's had trouble with an iPod 'getting stuck' and having to wait until the battery runs dead in order to reset it will sympathise there. I mean, you can't even turn the damn things off! And aren't phones with those flashy touchscreens notorious for breaking anyway?

Press menu and select simultaneously and hold for 10 seconds to do a hard reset. No more draining the battery.

Back on topic, it's not so much that the iPhone has new features, but it makes the features more easily accessible. For most of us savvy internet users (and anyone who can navigate a forum has to have some amount of tech intelligence), we don't need things to be nice and easy. But a lot of people do benefit from usability. Until recently my mother carried a notepad full of phone numbers in her purse in case she needed to call someone on her cell. Putting a number in her phone was beyond her. Typing out the name was even worse. I think I've shown her how to use her address book now, but there are still tons of features she'll never touch. With an iPhone she's a lot more likely to find those features and be able to use them.

If apple has done things correctly (and I don't know if they have as I haven't used an iPhone), it will be easy for someone like my mom to use, without getting in my way. Apple is great at intuitive design, not condescending design. Nobody wants a phone that makes you feel like an idiot.

I'm very tempted to reply to some of the mac hate out here, but it's probably better for my blood pressure if I don't. A lot of comments sound out of date. I'll bet a lot of mac critics haven't used one regularly recently. I honestly believe that macs are better than windows for every single purpose, aside from gaming. And I've done tech support / hardware repair work for a good 4 years, so I think I've seen it all and I know what I'm talking about. Here's something to consider. We've all heard of people switching to mac and loving it. How many people switch to windows? It only gets used because its the default. If you're coming from any other platform, windows is going to be a disappointment.

[Lenlalron]

Apple combined a 'no-hassle, no work' user-friendliness, a brilliant marketting approach, and pervasive, clever advertising into their business strategy.

Hate it or not, it's brilliant. Apple is the 'mass market' computer. They appeal to the common person. They're easy *and* hip (to the consumer). They have that brand equity, and it's going to be amazingly hard to lose it.

Is the PC better than the Mac? It doesn't matter! When you buy a computer, what's your level of familiarity?

If you're new to computers, or don't know a whole lot, then it will be a scary experience. That's where Apple wins. They literally hold your hand and walk you through to your new computer. Apple isn't selling a computer- they sell an experience. They are brilliant.

If you're more used to computers, then a PC might more appeal to you. Or building your own PC. You know computers aren't scary, and that you can deal with it. Maybe you do want a Mac (Macs have superior capabilities in some areas, mainly graphic design). Who knows? You can handle it.



The question remains, then: How many of type A are there? How many of type B? We're all mostly type B people here, I'd imagine. However, for every one of us, there's probably 232352524 type A people, people who aren't tech savvy. And apple has swooped up on them.

Apple is now bashing PCs. This is a smart move, too. They need to make sure the PC is always a scary, ugly monster, and that Apple is the shining knight for you.

Hate it or not, Apple is outmanuvering the stuffing out of Microsoft. It doesn't matter if your product is superior: it's how you sell it, that matters.

PS: For the record, I've never owned an Apple product in my life, by intention. My mom bought me a monitor from them, once, but I'm not biased toward them. Just calling it as I see it.

[FdL]

Apple combined a 'no-hassle, no work' user-friendliness, a brilliant marketting approach, and pervasive, clever advertising into their business strategy.


Ok, up to here I could agree with you.



Hate it or not, it's brilliant. Apple is the 'mass market' computer. They appeal to the common person. They're easy *and* hip (to the consumer). They have that brand equity, and it's going to be amazingly hard to lose it.


I don't think that's the case at all. They may have better design and simpler user interface, but I don't think they're a more "common person" computer than a PC:

- They are more expensive than PCs.
- I think a higher percentage of people has been exposed to a PC with Windows and that's what they think about when they think about computers.

At least here in my country, I don't know if in USA or anywhere else everyone buys a Mac or two for their grandma so she can videoconference with her friends :p
And really, it's that way, I've actually never touched a Mac in my entire life, and I work with computers, and also a little in the area of graphic design. (I think I once saw a Mac or two in a high profile design studio).

I tend to think Macs are oriented either to the specialized user or to those who care maybe too much about the visual aspect of their computers. And both with a lot of money to spare.

[Lenlalron]

At least in America, it seems the prevailing idea is that Apple is the 'easier' product.

And, in America, it is easy to see that people will trade money for time, on an extrordinary scale. Just look at how pervasive fast food is, even though it's unhealthy and extremely expensive. Apple followed this same idea: Make the user think that he won't have to waste time on doing all those scary "PC" things, and that big brother Apple will do all the work for him or her.

It doesn't matter that they're more expensive (I don't actually know, offhand)- if you can remove all the effort and work from it, people will throw money at you. ;)

(Note: I think Macs are better for graphic design. That's off of hearsay. I do know that Macs are better for video editing, from experience and user comments, since I have two friends who basically do full-on video-editting)

[valadil]

Macbooks are $1100 and Mac Minis $600. In the grand scheme of things that isn't particularly expensive. Yes, you can get more bang for your buck putting those $600 towards newegg and assembling the machine yourself, but most people can't do that, especially not with a laptop. And paying just over a grand for a laptop is perfectly reasonable.

[LCR]

I have a Microsoft PC and an Apple Macbook.
I like both for what they are. My laptop is easy to carry, the batteries last long and OSX is easy to use. The PC is customizable, I can play games on it (which I don't do as much as I used to), so I don't use it as much as my Macbook (now).
I would also like to add that, yes, programs do crash on OSX. Safari frequently manages to freeze and crash.
But it's also right that OSX is much easier to use but only so if you've never used Windows. If you're already familiar with Windows, it's kind of weird.
I don't do graphic design, so I have no idea whether it's any good for this (I suppose so, since all those fancy designers use Mac. Maybe they just like the design, like I do).

[Erloas]

At least in America, it seems the prevailing idea is that Apple is the 'easier' product.

And, in America, it is easy to see that people will trade money for time, on an extrordinary scale. Just look at how pervasive fast food is, even though it's unhealthy and extremely expensive. Apple followed this same idea: Make the user think that he won't have to waste time on doing all those scary "PC" things, and that big brother Apple will do all the work for him or her.

It doesn't matter that they're more expensive (I don't actually know, offhand)- if you can remove all the effort and work from it, people will throw money at you. ;)

(Note: I think Macs are better for graphic design. That's off of hearsay. I do know that Macs are better for video editing, from experience and user comments, since I have two friends who basically do full-on video-editting)

As for the first part, it does depend a lot on where someone is from. In the case "design" and "fashion" and being "hip," the ideas are very important in some parts of the country and not at all in other parts. I don't know anyone where I was growing up that had anything that was "designer" or any of that sort of thing. It also wasn't in a poor community, I think the average annual income was about 50K a year compared to the 30kish a year national average. So its not just about how much money someone has, it also has to do a lot with culture.
Not suprisingly the people that I do know that own Macs are from California and New Jersey, which are highly populated areas that are usually placing that are considered to have "culture."




As for the second part, Macs don't really have an advantage in video and graphic design in terms of hardware or OS, it is in terms of the programs that are written for each. This is a very political set of decisions though. Mac lost a lot of their graphic design superiority when Adobe decided to start producing its products completely on both systems. There was a while when it was Mac only, then Mac first and ported to Windows so it had weird quirks and now it is being designed for both at the same time.
Mac still has a lot of innertia in the field though and that is much harder to change.
Not sure if it is still the case but Steve Jobs owned, or at least had a lot of say in... Pixar or Disney or one of the major animation studios, and of course he said they will be using Apple products and so they did. So anyone wanting to get into movie animation had to learn the Apple programs to do it.

My brother went to school for video editing and most of the students there prefered to use the Windows based systems and the main time they used Macs were because there were certain applications that the school only had on the Mac, they were available on the PC as well but the school didn't have them. My brother said that some of the professors claimed the Windows versions of some of the programs wouldn't do certain things that the Mac version would, and in every case my brother found that the Windows version did, just not exactly the same way as the Mac version and the teachers never bothered to learn the other way.

There is also one major video editing program that is staying Mac only, and it is only because they want to, not because Mac is actually better suited for the task. Because as is clearly the case now, both OSs are running on the same hardware and it is the hardware power that determines the rendering times. This is the program that the aformentioned studio uses on Mac, so to learn the program and try to get a job there requires the use of a Mac.

It is also not going to change soon because the people that are heading these companies have been using this one program and Mac for 10-15-20 years and even if something better does come along they are going to avoid change. These people also drive the industry and schooling to keep training people on the same systems.

It is all political inertia.

As a side to that, most of the people that my brother has worked with that do video editing and design on a smaller scale tend to use PCs because they don't have the money for the high end workstations the major companies work with. The Mac exclusive high end video development software is also incrediable expensive. Although there is also pretty much equally as expensive and powerful tools for the PC, but the PC also has the advantage of more choices at the lower end of the video editing and design software which many smaller companies use. Mac has some low end software for the same purposes and similar costs, but the choices are fewer.
But it is the high profile companies that drive the image of the industry and they use Mac because they've always used Mac.

As a side note to that, my brother does a lot of video editing on his own and has even done a number of small projects for other people, and has used both Macs and PCs for doing video editing and design in school and in a few jobs and he has never even considered buying a Mac for his personal computer.
Though I know there are a lot of people that probably say the opposite.

[Pendragonx]

Apple is now bashing PCs. This is a smart move, too. They need to make sure the PC is always a scary, ugly monster, and that Apple is the shining knight for you.

I'm not sure I'd agree this is a smart move. I find their PC-bashing marketing rather obnoxious. If anything it just seems to reinforce the idea that Mac-users have an 'attitude'. So in essence, their marketing backfired - instead of making it more appealing to have a Mac, it's less appealing. I don't think I'm alone in this belief either.



Hate it or not, Apple is outmanuvering the stuffing out of Microsoft. It doesn't matter if your product is superior: it's how you sell it, that matters.


how do you classify 'outmanuvering'?

[FdL]

At least in America, it seems the prevailing idea is that Apple is the 'easier' product.


Sorry, I know it's often misused, but when you refer to your country you should use "United States of America". "America" is the big continent, and I live in it too.



And, in America, it is easy to see that people will trade money for time, on an extrordinary scale. Just look at how pervasive fast food is, even though it's unhealthy and extremely expensive. Apple followed this same idea: Make the user think that he won't have to waste time on doing all those scary "PC" things, and that big brother Apple will do all the work for him or her.


Ok, I understand. But you do notice that the fast food comparison implies that masses of consumers are led by aggressive marketing campaigns to buy a product that is not good.

It doesn't help your side of the argument a lot, I think ;)

Also the last part of the paragraph brings another side to this, that of underestimating target users/buyers.



(Note: I think Macs are better for graphic design. That's off of hearsay. I do know that Macs are better for video editing, from experience and user comments, since I have two friends who basically do full-on video-editting)

Yeah, so I've heard, but then there's a poster further down that explains this better. And I agree with him:


As for the first part, it does depend a lot on where someone is from. In the case "design" and "fashion" and being "hip," the ideas are very important in some parts of the country and not at all in other parts.

Definitely, Macs are associated with a particular target user with more purchasing power and also (closely related to this, but as you say, as a cultural thing) who values design and brand names as symbols of social status. That is, it's not just a generic computer, which would work as fine, it's a Mac, which is cool, fashionable and a major "exclusive" brand. PCs are as generic as their name implies. Which is positive in my book. Everyone should be able to afford a computer, not just rich elitists.



As for the second part, Macs don't really have an advantage in video and graphic design in terms of hardware or OS, it is in terms of the programs that are written for each.

Yup. Today we're no longer talking of exclusive point & click interface or exclusive "fancy" design applications like in the 80s. Today they are equal, thanks to Windows, and it's all really a matter of marketing. That's why Apple had to become that aggressive/exclusivist.



It is all political inertia.




As a side to that, most of the people that my brother has worked with that do video editing and design on a smaller scale tend to use PCs because they don't have the money for the high end workstations the major companies work with. The Mac exclusive high end video development software is also incrediable expensive. Although there is also pretty much equally as expensive and powerful tools for the PC, but the PC also has the advantage of more choices at the lower end of the video editing and design software which many smaller companies use.

This is a big point. Choices, ranges in specifications and prices. Diversity. This is why PCs are more popular and more widely used. You can't argue with that.


Oh, and BTW, aggresive marketing campaigns that explicitly bash the opposition are always a strategy that the smallest company resorts to. Think of a cornered animal. Microsoft, Intel, whoever, don't need to be that overly aggressive in their campaigns because they already are aggresive where it matters. Like it or not.

[Tom_Violence]

Whoa whoa whoa... Apple still make computers?

:amused:

[Erloas]

One other thing about the "Mac graphic advantage" is that, despite what is implied, no one is doing high end graphic design and video editing on their iMac or MacBook or MacBook Pro.
The graphic advantage as is seen in "the industry" is using workstations that run from $3000-$10000 each running software that individual licenses run in the $1000+ range (that is to use it on other computers after the initial purchase). This is the pretty much exclusive area of dedicated companies and not something the individual will see.

The "average" user doing video editing and graphics is using something like the Adobe suite, which still runs in the range of a couple hundred dollars, and is really more of an advanced user and not the sort of thing casual users will use. (that is of course if you get the software legally) But like I said before, the full Adobe suite is available and equally as functional on the PC as it is on the Mac.
The low end software for doing video and graphics is very hit or miss on either system and it usually comes down to how much you are willing to pay for the program to do it and not what OS you want to run it on.



As for the iPhone, I have yet to see anyone with one. And besides forums, I have yet to meet anyone in real life that is the least bit interested in one. The only "real" (as in not anonymous person on the net) person I've had even mention the iPhone was when my dad (of all people) called me to ask me what I thought of it because he invested in some small cheap company that has something to do with the video playing rights used on the iPhone.

[talsine]

I think that the iPhone is a book starting point, but its not done yet. Like someone mentioned before, the first generation of products ( i won't narrow it down to just Mac, but to any first gen product) tends to be buggy and have issues. Like having a camera, but no way to send pictures via SMS, amongest other things. My biggest issue though, is that in order to have one, not only do i have to get an AT&T contract (two years, nothing less), i can't bring my old SIM with me, so i'd have to reenter all of my information. This is not a selling point. Apple, open up your hardware and software and be flexible. You would've sold twice as many units just buy allowing any AT&T customer to have one w/o signing an exclusive deal, let alone how much they would've stood to make if they released a t-mobile version as well.

note: i mention t-mobile specificaly because i know they also use SIM cards, and they're the service i currently use. I <3 my SK3

[Erloas]

I think that the iPhone is a book starting point, but its not done yet. Like someone mentioned before, the first generation of products ( i won't narrow it down to just Mac, but to any first gen product) tends to be buggy and have issues. Like having a camera, but no way to send pictures via SMS, amongest other things. My biggest issue though, is that in order to have one, not only do i have to get an AT&T contract (two years, nothing less), i can't bring my old SIM with me, so i'd have to reenter all of my information. This is not a selling point. Apple, open up your hardware and software and be flexible. You would've sold twice as many units just buy allowing any AT&T customer to have one w/o signing an exclusive deal, let alone how much they would've stood to make if they released a t-mobile version as well.

note: i mention t-mobile specificaly because i know they also use SIM cards, and they're the service i currently use. I <3 my SK3


Of course this has always been Mac's biggest issue. They think they can and should do everything themselves and don't want to let anyone else in on what they are doing. The fact that IBM openned up their hardware design for the PC is what shot it into the main stream and 20 years later Mac is still trying to get something build up there. Most computer enthusiests won't even consider OSX, not because of the shortcomings of the OS but simply because they lock it down to their own select pieces of hardware and refuse to give people the flexability they want.
They finally acknowledged some of the problem by switching to Intel and Nvidia technology in their systems. They wouldn't be a bad company if they could learn better from their mistakes and not keep remaking them. They also seem to have a hard time learning from other people too. Its not like the biggest complaints they are getting now with the iPhone haven't been had and fixed by other companies before this.
They even went and pretty much duplicated the very same situations with the iPhone that got them sued several times with the iPod and seems to be one of the major complaints of both, the non changable battery.

[Tom_Violence]

Oh, and as to who said "who goes back to Windows?", I bought a Mac once. It broke. Then my girlfriend's caught on fire. Oddly enough, we've not gone back.