Survey - How many plan on switching to a Mac in the next 18 months

gizzymo

Hi All,

Quick Poll,

How many of you plan to switch to a mac in the next 18 months??

Pete

IceHawk

Not I. Why the poll?

I'm fairly sure saying what I really think about macs will get me banned. I will say this... They look great, but that's the only reason I would buy one. I run too many programs on my PC to be constantly wondering about compatibility

CyberGhost

Steve, Billy beat you fair and well not so square but he still won, forget it and stop going forum by forum trying to turn people onto Macs

gizzymo

Sorry to dissapoint, I'm not trying to get anyone to move platform( Hence my lack of revealing my opinion in my initial post) , and I'm not steve whoever he is. I am just trying to get an idea of where the irish market is going in these days of apple craze and pc spyware etc.

Endurance Man

Why would we :rolleyes: , harldy any games can be played on macs, they are hugely overpriced, very hard to upgrade if at all, only plus side is they look good.
Macs are made for video editing and graphic design.

dalk

Macs are made for video editing and graphic design.

...and pro audio. Logic Audio is OSX only these days :mad:

these days of apple craze

Craze for iPods, yes. Not so sure there's a craze for the rest of their product line. Better market awareness and renewed interest - 'oh they make computers aswell?'. It looks like their market share might be heading towards 5%, up from just below 4%...


On the other hand I wouldn't mind seeing OSX being released for x86 precessors

As unlikely as that is

Gilgamesh

not switching to mac but just bought a Mac Mini for downloading and stuff.
was getting to expensive to keep my big rig running 24x7, and with their cute 63 Watts of power consumption (less than my Pentium D Processor alone) I will have the money in very soon.

plus, when the stuff is downloaded, I use the firewire connector to transfer the data to my main machine

But would never completely go to Mac allthough it was scary fast to setup

DemonOfTheFall

ummm... dalk, OSX is being ported to x86 and it's very nearly finished. I'm sure if one were so inclined it could be found on the internet somewhere. Legally to download/use it you would have to be a licensed developer of course.

When it's eventually released it will be on Macs running with standard PC components, but with a TPM chip on the motherboard, which OSX checks for before it runs. They claim the final release will be much harder to crack than the current one, and I'm sure it will be. However, theres nothing surer than the fact that it will be cracked with enough haxorz working on it.

Mac daddy

nope sticking with suse and xp on the laptop.

dubdvd

i wouldnt mind one of the mac mini,s myself mainly for a second rig its nice on the eye plus its not bad from what ive read for the likes of an internet system for the sitting room...price is good compared to the likes of a shuttle
but as said above i,d still have to use a windows run system as my main rig ,im not sure about OSX ive never used it ??...but it cant be any harder than some of the linux distros ive used ..???Which btw are great ..

art

Use a WinXP PC at home for gaming mostly but got access to a Mac Laptop (not for keeps) during the summer and now seriously thinking of getting myself a PowerBook soon - best bit of kit I've ever used (btw I work as a Systems Analyst), the Mac OS is presently absolutely brilliant, easily the best available OS. The only drawback is the lack of major "label" software in general - especially games (though its not as bad as it used to be).

Basically I'm waiting to see how the whole switch to Intel works but I may give in to the urge over Christmas and splash the bonus on one

SouperComputer

I use Windows, Linux and Mac regularly. Mac being generally my favourite as its the least hassle and has the darwin kernel for when you feel like going hardcore.

Im not sure if the arguement that Macs are expensive if a true one. It depends on the user. Sure for most boardsies who are savvy in the ways of spyware/malware and viruses then it could be considered more expensive.

For those who are not as tech-savvy, the mac is a more cost-effective solution IMO. Espcially if you consider the Mac Mini, just think of how much it costs to get someone out ot your home to remove parasites from a PC. OS X has great help, out of the box and is dead handy to get started with.

Of course you can then talk about specs and performance, but most people (rightly) dont give a to$$. Specs are talked about too much IMO.....

A computer is a tool to do a job. Mac tends to do it with the least of downtime and hassle for non-techies in my experience. Xp is great, after you install all the extra software needed to stay "Safe", educate the user on safe browsing and regular scanning. After this they have to actually implement it!

Many will say that if macs gain a bigger market share we will see a lot more security issues, of course there is an element of truth in this, but i dont think it will ever get to windows proportions. Even for the end user to get root access on OS X is a bit of hassle (administrator is not root in OS X for those not too familiar)

Generally macs tend to have a longer life span for some resaon, I know of many macs that are still in full use in eveything from recoding studios and home users that date to before 1997. I think part of this is that the OS (even 9.x) tends to stay "clean" for longer.

Also, a quick chat with steve jobs will reveal that Macs predominantly are about the educational sector, not design as is commonly percived (open to correction on this one!)

Why would we , harldy any games can be played on macs, they are hugely overpriced, very hard to upgrade if at all, only plus side is they look good.

Actually quite a few games can be gotten on Mac, have a look on versiontracker.com.

Hard to upgrade? Questionable I have a G3 350Mhz beside me dated 1999, here are it's stats:

* 4 RAM slots, Currently 768Mb Ram installed (Originally 64), I have found Macs to take prettymuch any RAM you throw at them, within resaon.
* Space for 5-6 UDMA HD's, currently 1x 36Gb SCSI, 1x 6GB ATA (Original HD) & 1x 60GB Western Digital
* 2x USB, 2x Firewire ports
* 3x 64Bit PCI 2x 32Bit PCI
* Plextor 716A DVD burner (Thank you patch'n'burn!)
* 802.11b WiFi

It runs OS X tiger without a hitch, even with less RAM

Indeed, you could argue that the Mac Mini does not have a fantastic upgrade path, but what PC's in that price bracket do? In fact I would say the 3d graphics in the Mini would better most PC's in its price range.

Windows, Mac and Linux, they are all great depending on who you are and what you want to get from your "tool". For anyone, a Mac is certainly worth trying. Im trying not to fly a flag for Apple here but they do have some good qualities other than good cosmetic design. Although people's presumptions and lack of knowlege about mac is good for business, so maybe I shouldn't be too complimentary of them!

my 2c

[random pimpage] I hope to have some el cheapo mac for sale soon (€80-€150) for those who want to experiment on the dark side! [/random pimpage]

[edit] wow, that was a long post! [/edit]

JohnK

gizzymo wrote:

Hi All,

Quick Poll,

How many of you plan to switch to a mac in the next 18 months??

Pete

not going to happen

art

SouperComputer wrote:

... Hard to upgrade? Questionable I have a G3 350Mhz beside me dated 1999, here are it's stats:

4 RAM slots, Currently 768Mb Ram installed (Originally 64), I have found Macs to take prettymuch any RAM you throw at them, within resaon.
Space for 5-6 UDMA HD's, currently 1x 36Gb SCSI, 1x 6GB ATA (Original HD) & 1x 60GB Western Digital
2x USB, 2x Firewire ports
3x 64Bit PCI 2x 32Bit PCI
Plextor 716A DVD burner (Thank you patch'n'burn!)

It runs OS X tiger without a hitch, even with less RAM

Indeed, you could argue that the Mac Mini does not have a fantastic upgrade path, but what PC's in that price bracket do? In fact I would say the 3d graphics in the Mini would better most PC's in its price range.

I think some people confuse the "i-Whatever" range of Macs with the higher specced machines - Apple has always had the entry level, user-friendly range which simply were designed to sit and do a straightforward job. The Imac or the earlier "performa" range were for people's living rooms really and were not designed as WorkStations. Opposed to that were the higher range that were always perfectly upgradeable, just as much as any PC really.

Its true what you say about ther longevity of Macs - I know of at least three people that still use Mac Classics (from about 1988 I'd guess?) to write articles and such. I put a heavily stripped down System7 on one such machine about a year ago and it still looked good.

Gandalf23

I votes "no chance"... I am getting a mac in the next few months but as an additional computer... I'm not giving up my pc yet.

exiot

Plan on getting a Powerbook next summer as I prefer OSX to Windows.. Great for college as well.

KdjaCL

No chance ever.
Waiting for a game is long enough without the added "will it ever get released on mac" bonus wait.

Currently im playing Pes5, Fear and Bf2 and more to come soon but any of them out on mac or even coming out?


kdjac

Wertz

SouperComputer wrote:

[edit] wow, that was a long post! [/edit]

So all that said, assuming you wanted to game on that mac or a later one...are they PCI only?
Mac was the first comp I ever used back at school in art class oddly enough...never so much as looked at one since. If I recall right it was an intuitive machine to use way back then to a complete n00b (or at least that's what I found...there was some kind of Paint program on it and even though the display was black and white you could actually do some neat things with it...

TimTim

I borrowed my bosses mac mini for a while along with tiger and I have to say its very pretty and lovely to look at it and I did manage to do a fair chunk of my work on it, I always seemed to be switching back to the windows box.

Its very nice to short in short term but if I had to use it long term I would suffer and plus there is no decent irc client for osx imo. Colloquy came close but it doesn't beat mIRC.

Nice addition to the living room I would think.

SolarNexus

I have considered, not switching but rather 'including' a mac computer for these reasons:

1) as a student in all things computer science (programming, architecture, etc) I would like to get an indepth look at the Mac market, primarily through use of the mac itself.

2) as a programmer, it would help my CV/portfolio if I could say that I have experience with both developing for and using a mac

3) I like to dabble in this and that, including audio, video and graphics creation - macs are build from the ground up for these purposes (supposedly -sorta)

I semi-seriously considered getting one of them mac-minis. I got sidetracked by my latest "gotta build a working PC first, dummy" idea.

rainbow kirby

Already switched... have a 12" iBook which I love.

SouperComputer

So all that said, assuming you wanted to game on that mac or a later one...are they PCI only?

The G3 is yes, wonder if there are any 64bit graphics cards about. Plays GL quake well enough! ATM it has it's original 32MB Rage card.

The G4 beside it, has AGP tho. The particular one I have is dated 2000, but they (g4's) were also available in 1999.

Stephen

I'd never switch, as in replace my PC with a mac, but I might get a mini at some stage as an additional machine, as I quite like OS X. My gaming habit makes being mac-exclusive a total no-no.

Edit: Also, AGP is old hat these days! Do new ones (besides the minis) have PCI-Express?

SolarNexus

Stephen wrote:

I'd never switch, as in replace my PC with a mac, but I might get a mini at some stage as an additional machine, as I quite like OS X. My gaming habit makes being mac-exclusive a total no-no.

Edit: Also, AGP is old hat these days! Do new ones (besides the minis) have PCI-Express?

yup, the power macs (and maybe others) have pci-e

SouperComputer

Edit: Also, AGP is old hat these days! Do new ones (besides the minis) have PCI-Express?

indeed, as are the machines it shipped with in most cases! That said, im not sure if AGP is a bottleneck for graphics..........YET

As mentioned by SolarNexus, G5's have been shipping with PCI-E since 2003

Cake Fiend

What an odd poll. Where did you get the idea that someone who's used to PCs would suddenly change to a Mac??

I can do anything on a PC that I could on a Mac, probably for much cheaper and with more widely available support (web forums, etc). Plus it's far easier to find PC parts to scavenge.

aidan_walsh

Sico wrote:

Where did you get the idea that someone who's used to PCs would suddenly change to a Mac??

iPod halo effect?

halenger

Not switch per se (I use Windows and linux also) but I got my Powerbook last Wednesday. Best computer purchase I've ever made. Definately has me considering going Powermac in the future. I really enjoy it. Fabulous GUI on top of unix. Match made in heaven.

Snowball

Endurance Man wrote:

Macs are made for video editing and graphic design.

people buy Mac for their reliability, Preformance and suppose their looks 2. but mainly their preformance and reliability

Personally if I could play as many games on Mac and I could on PC I would change in a heart beat. Well, also if all the networking industry would also change. When your networking you have to know your pc stuff

Snowball

SouperComputer wrote:

For those who are not as tech-savvy, the mac is a more cost-effective solution IMO. Espcially if you consider the Mac Mini, just think of how much it costs to get someone out ot your home to remove parasites from a PC. OS X has great help, out of the box and is dead handy to get started with.[/edit]

Totally right and one of the best things MAC have done (company strategy wise, except Ipod) in a long time.

SouperComputer wrote:

Mac tends to do it with the least of downtime and hassle for non-techies in my experience. Xp is great, after you install all the extra software needed to stay "Safe", educate the user on safe browsing and regular scanning. After this they have to actually implement it![/edit]

Completely true in my experience.

SouperComputer wrote:

Generally macs tend to have a longer life span for some resaon, I know of many macs that are still in full use in eveything from recoding studios and home users that date to before 1997. I think part of this is that the OS (even 9.x) tends to stay "clean" for longer.[/edit]

Probably because MAC build for MAC and everything is specifically for one type of hardware. None of this compatibility crap. And their stuff is built to last

_CreeD_

When/If the Mac reaches a point where a lack of software is no longer an issue (games or otherwise) then it won't have the vaunted reliability and ease of use it can rightly claim now. It's been proved the OS itself is no more secure than Windows when placed in correct context (user/potential threat base vs. core vulnerabilities). The lack of software and userbase protects it from malware and bloating configs more than the inherent architecture.
Also the professional audio angle (I wont comment on Graphic production as I don't really have a clue on that side) is a bit misleading. PC's are way more popular these days, with more choice in audio tools/plugins/compatible hardware etc. The image of the Mac as the Pro's choice is really down to the first migration of 'old school' engineers and composers to the digital age and their need to not waste time learning about the system they need to use, just jump right in - and as has been pointed out many times this is one of the Mac's strengths. But ask anyone, who is not just naturally a technophobe, who has used both and the PC will be the DAW of choice for the majority.
My rambling $.02 version of , No I wont be getting a Mac....:)

dalk

DemonOfTheFall wrote:

ummm... dalk, OSX is being ported to x86 and it's very nearly finished.

ummm... I know.

What i should have said of course was that "I wouldn't mind seeing OSX being released for x86 precessor PC's that arent built by Apple"



And by 'released' i mean, you can buy it in a shop. Not hack it to work on non-apple hardware...

jor el

I'd consider getting a Mac if something came up that I absolutely needed and it was only available on Mac. That's never happened though, and I don't see it happening any time soon, so no I won't be changing. If I did get a Mac, I'd keep my PC aswell, I wouldn't change one for the other.

tba

dalk wrote:

ummm... I know.

What i should have said of course was that "I wouldn't mind seeing OSX being released for x86 precessor PC's that arent built by Apple"



And by 'released' i mean, you can buy it in a shop. Not hack it to work on non-apple hardware...

its crazy, apple could grab a huge share of the market, in paticular the educational, office, basic home user market, if they released a x86 64 bit OS (I would call it OSX86). Am I right in saying Apple and microsoft have a deal in this regard, remember reading that somewhere.

Prior Of Taize

dalk wrote:

On the other hand I wouldn't mind seeing OSX being released for x86 precessors

As unlikely as that is

i cant tell if your being sarcastic or not...just so you know the mac os for x86 has been in development for the last 10 years.

tba

Is it gonna be called OSX86?

wakka wakka :v:...

halenger

tba wrote:

its crazy, apple could grab a huge share of the market, in paticular the educational, office, basic home user market, if they released a x86 64 bit OS (I would call it OSX86). Am I right in saying Apple and microsoft have a deal in this regard, remember reading that somewhere.

There is no deal that I'm aware of. I was reading about this recently as people have started to speculate that Mac Clones may be set to return. Yes, I did say return. For a few years there were Mac Clones. When Steve Jobs returned to Apple it was one of the first things he shut down.

Selling OS-X for the PC market has a bad affect on Mac system sales. That is why they are not eager to bring it back. It was losing them significant amounts of money.

Here's the story for any who are interested:

http://www.silicon.com/silicon/software/os/0,39024651,39153944,00.htm

Prior Of Taize

Snowball wrote:

people buy Mac for their reliability, Preformance and suppose their looks 2. but mainly their preformance and reliability

first off every apple product advertised in the last 10 years has never shown it working...it has always been about the looks...i mean look at the nano ad...or the imac ad (Jeff Goldblum)....nothing on the screen...but lots of close up shots of the white+silver or whatever. This shows that apple dont really give a **** about any of that performance and reliability. they just want people to buy white+silver boxes with cables.

also having had many a conversation with a friend in apple tech support i can honestly say that the majority of calls are from people who havent got a clue why they have a mac....for example a guy spending €5,000 on a powermac and telling him (honestly) that he only uses it for basic microsoft office type use. fair enough thats one isolated incident but the fact of it is apple created this "image" image and never really tried to plug software which results in the only knowledge of their software being word-of-mouth (which generally comes from apple zealots who hate windows simply because they use macs). this resulted in people buying them for legit reasons (eg powermac for video editing etc) and people buying them because they are shiny and white...macs have their uses i will totally agree. but there is soooo much they cant do. and the simple thing is windows can do more than a mac can. and therefore people will use windows instead for the sheer variety if nothing else.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

also i have to agree that the reason macs are so secure and reliable IS because you cant actually do much with them which seriously reduces "malware" as someone stated earlier.

Its simple economics that the more people that use something the more things can go wrong with it...hence why windows has the whole (perhaps deserved, perhaps not) image of being f*cking **** and macs have this whole image of being infallible.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

If i wanted a truly solid, expensive, and designer machine that probably wont crash i would buy a mac. But the simple truth is i like to be able to do more than check my email, rip dvd's and edit media. so no i wont be buying a mac.


:v: :v: :v:

art

_CreeD_ wrote:

[ It's been proved the OS itself is no more secure than Windows when placed in correct context (user/potential threat base vs. core vulnerabilities). The lack of software and userbase protects it from malware and bloating configs more than the inherent architecture.-

That's completely and utterly untrue. The Mac is more secure because it is built on a secure UNIX platform, it has nothing to do with user base etc. Where was this "proved"? Can you link?

I hate this speculative nonsense from people,. what's the point in peddling complete untruths about a platform. Who benefits in the end? The user? NO.

art

Prior Of Taize wrote:

... also i have to agree that the reason macs are so secure and reliable IS because you cant actually do much with them which seriously reduces "malware" as someone stated earlier.

Its simple economics that the more people that use something the more things can go wrong with it...hence why windows has the whole (perhaps deserved, perhaps not) image of being f*cking **** and macs have this whole image of being infallible...

As above, more nonsense

"you can't actually do much with them" :rolleyes: What exactly are you thinking of there that you cannot do? Do you even know?

timeout

I've voted against.Happy with my pc and dual boot windows XP and Linux. When the os gets ported, i'd propably get it and run it but i'm pretty set in my ways at present.

tba

It appears that MAC users sing praises of the machines and PC users say they cant do what their PC can do.

It looks a bit fanboy here folks, soon the disscussion will decend into

"OSX? More like GAYSX!" and "Bill gates is the devil Steve Jobs invented electricity!"

And nobody wants that.

I only ever used Macintosh computers in work so my tinkering was limited, I did find it a very different system from IBM's. Although the basic principals are the same, the names and actions required are very much different. I remember for example spending about an hour establishing how exactly you eject a CD.

I agree Apple is easier on the eyes, more user friendly, but windows allows for more flexibility and hence more problems, Unix takes this another level further yet again.

Its obvious that if an Apple solves your needs go for it, if you want a machine to fiddle the wires out of, and play the latest games grab an x86 with windows xp.

Then if you feel up to it at a later stage you can always get a unix distro for your hardware.

ps: do mac sell their cases seperately?

Heinrich

tba wrote:

I remember for example spending about an hour establishing how exactly you eject a CD.

Top right hand key on keyboard! :v:

tba

where were you three months ago!?!

SouperComputer

I remember for example spending about an hour establishing how exactly you eject a CD.

There are many ways to skin a cat, also RTFM thats what I did when I first used X:

F12 if using a windows keyboard
Highlight the drive: Apple & E or windows + E on a 'doze keyboard.
Drag cdrom icon to trash
Highlight the drive and select Eject from the file menu

Thats all i can think of now, but there may be other ways.

It's been proved the OS itself is no more secure than Windows when placed in correct context (user/potential threat base vs. core vulnerabilities)

id be interested to hear more about this, do you have any links?

art

tba wrote:

It appears that MAC users sing praises of the machines and PC users say they cant do what their PC can do.? It looks a bit fanboy here folks ...

But the pro Mac stuff here has been a bit more substantiated than "you can't do stuff on a Mac" , or "Macs are proven insecure", where upon the poster legs it off over the horizon never to back up the lame claim.

I can't think of anything a PC does that a Mac can't do, though I can think of stuff a Mac does better than the average PC. I'd be curious to know what exactly a Mac can't do before I do go buy one but so far no-one has explained that in any detail. If the anti-Mac posters would back up their claims a little instead of making just dismissive sneering gestures, and the odd occasional downright lie, the argument would avoid fan-boy nonsense.

Prior Of Taize

tba wrote:

ps: do mac sell their cases seperately?

no f*cking way. which is unfortunate because the powermac cases have awesome cooling.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Ok i will try to back up what i was saying about mac's not being able to do stuff my windows system can. I will say firstly though that I am really talking about doing things i want them to do or things my pc can currently do. So forgive me for saying that macs cant do much.

First off theres obviously games which can only run on a mac using a VM if they are not available on that platform. obviously the very popular games will run (MOH:AA, Doom3, WoW etc) but tbh i dont play many of these games.

Secondly there is dual booting. I like to run linux because i find that coding and compiling works better in it. And i like windows because it plays the games i like (sorry for repeat point but its a fact). im not saying a mac is bad for coding (frankly i have no idea) but i do like being able to run a totally different environment and then be able to switch over no problem to another environment (without using virtual machines which dont give 100% performance).

Thirdly you cant mod, build or in fact do much physically to a mac (afaik, though im sure there are lots of people who do it anyway).
I love the idea that i put my pc together myself andknowing that everything in it was chosen by me.

Fourthly there is Windows Vista which despite its crap name is in fact awesome as i recently discovered.

SouperComputer

Interesting points POT.

VM wont run games though, even on the beefiest of machines. Maybe Doom or quake 1, but its designed for office-type use, bit like bochs.

Some people do mod alright, but no you dont have the same ability to mess with the hardware. That is part of Apples closed conecpt I guess. Which for me makes modding and generally arsing around more interesting. You really have to spend a lot more time than you would on a PC as the parts are more scarce. Ive seen G4 motherboards in PC cases, and other oddities.

Overclocking can be done, most of the desktops I have had over the years have overclocked okay. The g3 I have is a 350@400 with a standard heatsink and no fan! Its good for more but I couldnt be arsed messing with it.

Bear in mind you can get Linux (including an ubuntu live cd, Knoppix styley) and BeOS for Mac if you wish to go that way.

art

Prior Of Taize wrote:

Ok i will try to back up what i was saying about mac's not being able to do stuff my windows system can. I will say firstly though that I am really talking about doing things i want them to do or things my pc can currently do. So forgive me for saying that macs cant do much.

First off theres obviously games which can only run on a mac using a VM if they are not available on that platform. obviously the very popular games will run (MOH:AA, Doom3, WoW etc) but tbh i dont play many of these games.

Secondly there is dual booting. I like to run linux because i find that coding and compiling works better in it. And i like windows because it plays the games i like (sorry for repeat point but its a fact). im not saying a mac is bad for coding (frankly i have no idea) but i do like being able to run a totally different environment and then be able to switch over no problem to another environment (without using virtual machines which dont give 100% performance).

Thirdly you cant mod, build or in fact do much physically to a mac (afaik, though im sure there are lots of people who do it anyway).
I love the idea that i put my pc together myself andknowing that everything in it was chosen by me.

Fourthly there is Windows Vista which despite its crap name is in fact awesome as i recently discovered.

Okay, so what you are saying is that there is some games you can't play... but that's hardly the same as saying Macs "can't do games..." or whatever. Its a bit like saying I won't buy a PS2 because it can't play Halo. Fair enough, but the PS2 is still a good game's machine just offers different choices and so on. (Halo was actually originally a Mac only game, funnily enough, before MS bought Bungie)

The thing about Dual booting is that it just isn't necessary - the whole reason for booting into Linux is gone because the Apple is a Unix based platform. And the reason why I got impressed with the Apple's was as a Development Machine - I mostly use Windows and Unix for Development but a contractor working with me used a PowerBook and I clearly saw its advantages then - good tool set, stable OS, never seems to need a re-boot - always on (my Dell laptop and Desktop have to be re-booted about every two weeks) and so on... It offered better compatibility with the target deployment platforms which were all either LInux or Unix, whereas Windows development throws up far more issues when moving across platforms.

Thirdly, you can't mod a Mac... That's a double edged thing. One the one hand, you can change the specs and add stuff etc, a G5 has three empty PCI-e slots for example, on the other hand, the Apples generally offer far less in the way of hardware conflicts because they are quality assured. And to get that, only comes from being the way they are. So its a swings and roundabouts thing. But I'm mostly into their laptops and I'd never mod a Windows laptop anyways... so the Apple laptop is a clear winner on that score, for me.

Fourthly, Vista ... can't see the excitement there. What will it offer in two years time that the Apple OS is not offering right now? Vista is one of the very reasons I'm thinking of switching to Apple actually. Microsoft are so far behind in OS development at the moment (Longhorn had to be re-started afterall) that I expect by the time Vista appears, the Apple OS will have moved further on altogether. And why wait for features that are available now anyhow? Plus, nine versions of Vista? What are MS at with that?

What strikes me is that the best solution at the moment is to get an Apple for computing needs/development/multi-media/browsing etc and then get an XBox 360 for playing games?

DemonOfTheFall

art, I'd hardly say that Macs offer a set of different choices when it comes to what games you can run on them. They run a tiny, limited subset of PC games, only the ones that were uber popular enough to be ported. Has there been any remotely decent Mac only game lately ? If there has been I havent heard of it.

As for halo being mac only before microsoft bought bungie, are you sure ? Not saying you're wrong, just coulda sworn that halo was originally PC/Xbox. Can you even get it for the mac ?

art

DemonOfTheFall wrote:

art, I'd hardly say that Macs offer a set of different choices when it comes to what games you can run on them. They run a tiny, limited subset of PC games, only the ones that were uber popular enough to be ported. Has there been any remotely decent Mac only game lately ? If there has been I havent heard of it.

As for halo being mac only before microsoft bought bungie, are you sure ? Not saying you're wrong, just coulda sworn that halo was originally PC/Xbox. Can you even get it for the mac ?

Yes, Halo is available for the Mac ... Bungie used to do development for Macs only, their main big game before Halo was a game called "Marathon" if I remember correctly, first person shooter set on a space station, very atmospheric with aliens etc... They then began this big new game that was to become Halo. They were working on it for a fair while before MS took over and the game then switched its target platform to become the XBox release title.

There probably isn't any Mac only games really in development now but that wasn't my point - the Sims2, SimCity4, FM2005, Age of Empires series, StarWars BattleFront, X2, WOW, Blank 'n White, Call of Duty, Knights of the Old Republic... Halo(!) and so on are all games available on the platform - it isn't as bad as it's sometimes guessed. But ultimately, I'd certainly agree there's less. Hence why I'm thinking of getting the XBox360 for gameplaying but the PowerBook for serious computing?