Mac OSX Hacked for $10k

[bigred]

the thing that so many people overlook is the OS X's unix base. MOST of your linux command prompt works with OS X in the command prompt... heck my SLI and CF drivers are LINUX ones. they work with OS X with a little work. that tells me with a little unix knowledge that OS X is no problem to get around.

 

 

 

of course the majority of folks out there look at OS X like living ghost does... without a flaming clue what it really IS.

 

 

 

BTW Kash, nice job pointing out his flaws in the pricing world... a nice kick to the nuts to the anti mac folks.

 

 

 

 

as far as my use of OS X... I have no fear since it all sits behind hardware firewalls anyhow.

[LivingGhost]

"Dell's nVidia 7950GTX vs Apple's ATI X1600"

 

The 7950GTX completely floors the x1600...That's not a legit comparison.

[bigred]

 

 

 

is it worth $800? is the extra heat, weight and noise worth it? are you really going to game that much on a laptop to justify it at all?

 

 

 

seriously this is a laptop with a 17" screen... it's not like a desktop capable of outrageous resolutions on 30" screens.

[Kash]

"Dell's nVidia 7950GTX vs Apple's ATI X1600"

 

The 7950GTX completely floors the x1600...That's not a legit comparison.

 

You apparently have a problem reading. I acknowledged that there is a difference. But as BigRed stated, is it worth $800?

 

Plus, I wouldn't use a laptop for gaming. That's what my desktop is for <_<

[LivingGhost]

I'm not talking about the usefulness, I'm just saying you cannot compare them, as one has a mid-level video card, and one has a "high-end" video card.

[Kash]

I'm not talking about the usefulness, I'm just saying you cannot compare them, as one has a mid-level video card, and one has a "high-end" video card.

 

Yes, you CAN compare them because those two models are "equivalent". I took Apple's biggest laptop and pitted it against Dell's equivalent, which in this case, turned out to be the XPS M1710. If the Dell model had the option of choosing a mid-level card, don't you think I would have selected that option to minimize as many variables as possible?

 

Now, if they were priced the same or even a hundred bucks within each other, then I would agree that it's either not a fair comparison because of the video card disparity, or that the Dell is just the better deal. BUT, since the Dell is $800 more when the ONLY difference is the video card, then it's quite clear that Apple is the better value as the 7950 is NOT worth the $800 premium.

 

Anyway, the point is moot as you won't accept logical reasoning. You've already made up your mind (thankfully for you, this country gives you the opportunity to form your own opinions. Your opinion is wrong mind you, but that's your right) and no amount of cold hard facts will sway your opinion. I would probably make more headway convincing a cat that it was a dog and then teaching it to bark.

[LivingGhost]

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/opinion

 

Opinions cannot be wrong or right.

 

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/fact

 

What you're calling an opinion seems to be a fact.

 

Thanks for being condescending, by the way, it really makes this community seem open and accepting.

 

I don't care enough to go to another company and compare laptops, but since you're so hellbent on proving me wrong, you could at least do that.

[Kash]

Very clever, resorting to semantics to try and disprove my argument. You're a smart man indeed. <_<

 

But, just to entertain you, let's take a look at other companies, shall we?

 

Same 17" Macbook Pro with 2.33GHz processor, 160GB hard drive, 2GB RAM, etc: $2799

 

Sony VGN-AR370 (same specs as Macbook Pro): $3470

 

Toshiba P100-S9772 (only difference is the 7900 video card): $2899

 

Now, I was going to compare a HP laptop, but unfortunately, they only offer AMD based processors, so it can't be a fair comparison. So I picked the fastest processor available, the Turion TL-64 (2.2GHz), a far cry from a Core2Duo running at 2.33GHz. The rest of the specs were as close as I could get them to the Macbook Pro. The final price came out to $2037.98. So I will concede that an HP laptop is significantly cheaper than a Macbook Pro. Of course, I could try and justify the difference as you tried to do earlier, but I'm man enough to admit that a better processor and build quality may not be worth the $761 for many people (that is mainly why $399 computers sell so well).

 

The point of my argument isn't to show that other computers are more expensive than Apple. No, if you go back a page, I was simply trying to refute your, and consequently all others ignorant of Macs, that an Apple computer is NOT significantly overpriced in comparison to its PC counterparts. They are priced well within the norms of the market segment, not above it.

 

I'm interested in seeing what sort of "argument" you make now.

[Ghost2520]

Why is it that everytime a single, teensy tiny exploit is found for OS X the world makes a huge deal about it? You all realize it proves nothing? Besides, it'll be fixed within the next month and it'll take another year before someone finds an exploit again. Like Kash (I think) said, this should make people think the oppositte because it was only hacked once restrictions were loosened. And you realize that half of macs security comes because the fact that it is Unix based? (or should I say, same os that the government uses) Apples move to unix only made it 10x more secure because it's not compatible with old os9 apps... that's part of the problem with windows, microsoft trades security for backwards compatibility with win32 apps.

[Melchiah]

can't say i have ever had a prob with OSX runs like a champ fast enough for what i do with it i use it for school and surfing web (no popups) i have windows on my pc for gaming purposes but i always have problems with it after a while my only gripe is that more things are not made for mac os

[nan0click]

The reason why OSX and Linux are "more secure" is because no one really bothers exploiting them, the user base is too insignificant.

 

And that's not a slam on Macs, I loved my friends Macbook and if I get a laptop one day, that's my first choice. Not a slam on Linux, I'm man enough to admit I'm not willing to put the time and effort to learn an OS that the only use I personally would have for it is bragging rights. And what, I brag and my friends look at me funny and ask me what the hell is Linux.

[Kash]

The reason why OSX and Linux are "more secure" is because no one really bothers exploiting them, the user base is too insignificant.

 

Grr, when will this rumor die?

 

Macs are becoming more prolific everyday. Apple sold 1.5 MILLION Macs in the last quarter alone and has taken a significant chunk out of the desktop computer market. Yes, overall Apple doesn't have that much market share, but it does take up a good portion of the personal computer market. Linux has been gaining ground the past couple of months, especially after how ridiculous Vista was priced at. So there goes the whole "insignificant user base" argument.

 

Next, the majority of virus authors and hackers do what they do for notoriety. They want the fame that goes with bringing down several hundred thousand or millions of computers and causing millions in dollars in damage. So what sort of attention-whore wouldn't want to be the guy who created the first mass-scale Mac/Linux virus? Think about what sort of notoriety that would bring you. You were the FIRST man who brought down the Unix-based OS X on a never before seen scale. If that's not an incentive to rise above the rest, I don't know what is.

 

Finally, you're ignoring the fact that OS X is based on Unix. It is a well established fact that both Unix and Linux are far more secure, out of the box, than Windows. Sure, you can secure Windows to the point that you're just as secure as a Mac or Linux box, but the fact of the matter is that the vast majority of users out there DON'T. They buy a computer from Dell, plug everything in, fire it up, and use it without doing anything to make it a secure machine. These are the sort of people who comprise the majority of Windows users, and that is why spyware and viruses are so widespread. You don't see this problem on OS X or Linux because those operating systems are more fool-proof.

 

So please, let's drop this whole "smaller user base" rumor and stick with the facts. Thank you.