On 15 Sep 2008, at 21:15, Robert Cummings wrote:
So the question is, can I get a comparable Mac system at the same
price
point?
I've not gotten involved in this discussion so far because I've had it
so many times with so many different people I've realised it's just
not worth it any more. However I just wanted to say that it's not
possible to compare the pure numbers of Apple and other PCs and come
out with a meaningful answer. There's so much more to what makes a
computer responsive and usable than the pure numbers and if you can't
see that then I wish you all the best with your choice.
I recently spent nearly £2500 on a Mac Pro and I'm fully aware that I
could have matched the raw specs with a non-Apple machine for just
over £1k less, but that's not the point. I would have spent less to
get less. I've been using Macs for a little over 6 years and I've not
looked back. In fact I've made career choices that allowed me to
choose OSX for my desktop (those choices turned out to be great in
other ways but that's another story).
The OS is based on FreeBSD which makes it ideal for developing PHP for
deployment on BSD/Linux servers. Security is much less of an issue.
The "everything just works" saying is not just marketing hype, it's
actually true, but in return for that you pay a bit more. And when
something does go wrong I've found their support to be second to none,
especially when you pay for the add-on AppleCare package - the only
extended warranty in the industry that's worth what they charge for
it. My MacBook Pro is currently with them being repaired. No hassle,
no fuss, and free of charge even though it's 10 days past its warranty
expiration date.
If you're the type of user who loves the numbers game then a Mac is
not for you. If you're the type of user that wants to be productive
and encounter less stress day-to-day then I'd strongly recommend a
Mac. But at the end of the day everyone makes their own choice and
most people in the world look at the numbers and don't see value
beyond that.
As for Microsoft (will people please stop screwing with their name,
it's impolite), they've certainly made some bad choices over the years
and Windows has suffered for it. Just as NT was a massive improvement
on its predecessors, XP was also a massive improvement on NT.
Unfortunately they seem to have lost sight of their primary goals when
they planned Vista. They started sacrificing stability for fluff just
as the world thought they had woken up to what people needed rather
than what their marketing department could convince them they wanted.
OSX is not perfect, neither is Windows, and Linux has a long way to go
both technically and PR-wise before it can possible compete with
either of them. My advice is to give each a decent try (by which I
don't mean a couple of hours/days). Give yourself time to get used to
what they do differently, don't let yourself snap back because it's
unfamiliar. You might find out what all the fuss is about. And if you
don't? Well, at least you tried and you can properly justify your
choice rather than regurgitating the opinions of others.
That's all I wanted to say, back to your regularly scheduled
argument^Wdiscussion.
Oh, and I saw this and thought of you lot: http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p315/vince1956/logo.gif
;)
-Stut
--
http://stut.net/
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
