Mac to go below $500?

[Giancarlo]

You religious types... you are almost borderline cult like. But whatever.. moving along... ming warned me before not to get emotionally engaged with people here.

[Mr. Nice Guy]

Ming told you right.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Mr. Nice Guy
You know one thing about the Mac: If it does crash, 99% of the time it's just an application (usually just third-party apps) that crashes and not the whole operating system.

Doesn't matter. The end result is the same, people using Macs have problems. I can't remember the last time this WinXP box crashed.

[Mr. Nice Guy]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


Doesn't matter. The end result is the same, people using Macs have problems. I can't remember the last time this WinXP box crashed.

Here we have another Mac basher spreading lies.

[Giancarlo]

It gets to a point when enough people get up and say bad things about Macs.. it has growing validity to it. Sorry MNG.. you are one of the many reasons people avoid Macs.

[Gatekeeper]

**shrug** Based soley on my experience, I'd recommend a Macintosh system to a prospective buyer.

I've owned such systems since the mid-1990s and not once have I had to ship them in for repairs. Not once have I had a Macintosh go down because of an error in the OS. Once in a blue moon, a third-party app fritzes things up, but quitting out of the app and relaunching usually solves that problem. If that's not enough, rebuilding the desktop and doing some preventative maintenance keeps the error from returning. Once or twice I've had to reinstall software due to glitches, but that's because *I* screwed things up, not because of bad programming on Apple's or the third party vendor's part.

For me — and I emphasize ME — the Macintosh has been a solid, dependable computer system. As the CNET article states, Macs are often considered to be *premium* systems so, as such, I expect quality and have received it. If Apple can come out with a lower-priced "intro" system that people can buy for three-figure checks instead of four-figure checks, more power to them. I doubt I'd be interested in such a system, as I have my eyes on a G5 down the road, but that's just me. Then again, I also appear to be among the few who don't own an iPod, either.

This thread is disappointing, although I can't legitimately claim to be surprised. To me, computing is about more than having the fastest machine or the biggest game library. It's also about reliability and, frankly, the Macintosh has come through time and time again. Folks can say the same about their PCs as well, which leads me to believe that one's experiences with computers — PCs, Macs and so on — rest entirely upon their personal experiences with them. A bad first-time experience with PCs can turn a person off just as quickly it can with a Macintosh. I've had neither, but have simply decided that, at home and work, a Macintosh environment works best for my life.

But, hey, I'm just one person in a minority. And, as we know, the majority is *always* right, be it in politics, religion or computers.

Gatekeeper

[Q Classic]

Troll.

Typical Mac Basher rhetoric and you know it ain't true.

MNG, most of the **** you posted is Typical PC Basher rhetoric which isn't true.

===

Gatekeeper, as far as your experiences, more power to you. I'll admit that I'm not your regular computer user, and thus I've never had trouble running, installing, using, operating, doing whatever day-to-day tasks and what not on a rock-solid, stable, up-to-date Windows XP system. It's as solid for me as Macs are for you.

Since I don't orgasm over MacStyle like so many others (I'm not including you, gate; it's just something I've noticed. So many more people these days are saying that Apple products are sexier as a fashion statement. Which, incidentally, offends me greatly, because I don't think technology should be abused like that.)... I can't justify purchasing a Mac computer at all at the price point.

Quite frankly, the only kind of Mac I would buy is a PowerMac G5, and I don't wish to pay the premium. This sub-$500 box is as worthless to me as an ipod mini or an imac. Ugly (not too big a fan of MacStyle), pointless, crapware, and expensive.

===

Ari: Alphas all the way! And QNX, too!

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Zopperoni
But are you still a niche player then? This piece of pricing tactics just undermines the differentiation strategy of Apple.

I don't think the "niche" really wants that much to feel different, even though our Mac-Zealots could let us think otherwise

The way I see it, Mac is mainstream among the creative people (artists, journalists etc.) and has a significant share in Japan. In pretty much every other aspect of society, Mac is nothing like mainstream.
Those who use Mac because they got used to it at work (journalists, graphists...) will continue to do so, because the reason they go Mac is not to feel 1337. The few Mac-Zealots will defend their Godlike brand like they always do anyway. So, I don't think such a policy of 'spreading the word' will repell the niche customers.

[Adrian Hon]

I've had much the same experiences as Gatekeeper, and came to Macs having used Windows PCs for many years. Again, speaking for myself, I've found using OS X to be a smoother experience than XP.

As for speed, I don't think there's much doubt that you can always buy a faster PC than a Mac, dollar for dollar (although the gap is narrowing). However, processor speeds are such that if you aren't going to play games or do things like video editing or graphics work, even the low end Macs are perfectly fine for simple stuff like web browsing, Office, photos, music, email, etc. I use an iBook G4 800mhz with 640MB RAM - you can't actually buy an iBook this slow anymore, but I haven't had any issues with speed for the tasks I mentioned above, plus light Illustrator and Freehand work - and this is compared to a 2.8ghz Pentium 4 I also use at work.

(BTW I won't comment on things like viruses, crashing and ease of use since these reports are subjective and it's impossible to get people to agree on them).

Considering that the new iMac is supposed to have a 1.25ghz processor and will probably run OS 10.4, I doubt that its target market (budget home/office users) will experience any problems with speed either. Still, we'll just have to wait and see how its sales figures perform.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
This theory fails miserably, though, if you look at the real world. Many, maybe even most eductational computers (at least through high school) are Macs. Few or no people go through school without exposure to Macs. Most hate them, and we don't see people rushing to buy a Mac as soon as they leave school.

People at school are often keen to play computer games, which are almost non-existant on Mac (and even the girls, who are less interested in games than boys, generally turn to boys when it comes to knowing which computer to buy).

Mac has almost no chance to find customers among the high-school people, because of its extreme lack of games. However, Mac could look for customers among slightly older "hip" or "artsy" people, which are too old already for games, but young enough to care for fashion. This is the niche Apple seems to have been exploring recently, but that niche is quite sucky.

Mac's greatest advantage is the simplicity of the product. For hardware and for software alike, Macs are made to be easy of use, which is made possible by the Mac strategy of making all aspects of the computer. Old people (especially retirees) could appreciate Mac's effort to make their computers fool-compatible.

Should Mac offer an affordable box, it could score some points among the old, who'll gladly pay 100$ more for something that works right out of the box, and where you don't have to plug anything but the power plug

[Imran Siddiqui]

Ya know... Fez's attacks almost make me want to by a Mac. ALMOST .

[Adrian Hon]

I'm not entirely convinced that the Mac's lack of games completely scuppers it in the high school market. I've noticed that a lot of teenagers and twenty-somethings I know tend to do most if not all of their gaming on consoles these days, and the growth of the console market relative to PC games reflects that. Of course people still play games on PCs, but with cheap, good consoles I think the Mac's lack of games is not the deal breaker it once was.

That's not exactly a compelling reason to get a Mac though; if Apple want to break through into that market they'll have to actively market their computers to that demographic, perhaps on ease of use and so on. Depending on whether people like the new iMac, word of mouth will do the rest.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
Yeah, Fez vs. MNG is just... hard to believe.

I've finally read it.

It's... surreal

[chequita guevara]

I've used both machines extensively. Mac was better for a long time. WinXP is the best gui I've yet used. Windows has finally surpassed its teacher. And the hardware's faster and cheaper. I see no reason to get a Mac, even for graphic work.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Now you've done it che... all the Mac-addicts are going to be coming after you .