I highly doubt apple will ever license out OS X. They simply love making the hardware along side the software. And they strive for perfection, licensing out OS X will make things like compatibility and drivers a big part of OS X, and I apple will never do that. I'm not a fanboy, but I sincerely believe as long as Steve Jobs is alive Mac OS X will not be licensed out (although steve may not be alive for much longer...)
Mrbit as with all your videos, theories and analysis, I have thoroughly enjoyed this series,, despite the fact I have to sometimes watch your videos more than once to grasp your concepts. This however is not your fault but my lack of intelligence, never the less I am still undecided about the debate of releasing OS X. After viewing your videos, Gareth, Eric and a few windows users on the subject I thought I would be more decisive but this is still not the case. Excellent video mate.
Not to sound harsh, but if you don't want to buy a Mac to get the OS than Apple does not need you as a customer. The PC mentality is: I want to have access to everything for free and make what I want myself. To Apple mentality is more like: go ahead and keep it under tight control, I don't care as long as it works the way it should.
Trying to ask Apple to set OS X free is like asking BMW to put their motors in ford escorts and kias. If you want OS that bad, GET A MAC !
BMW actually does sell their engines to other manufacturers. :) Wiesmann, Carbon Motors, etc. Comparing Apple to BMW just shows how much of an idiot you are.
However, since people can already run OS X on their PCs without issues (have to select the hardware carefully though) I don't see where any of this is going.
NO, It's because there is written drivers, if OSX was set free, there would be more drivers. Why do you think Apple's INTERNAL hardware is so special? Mac's look good, but I can build a PC that would be faster than any iMac available today.
Sorry I haven't piped in on this in a while, but you always raise good points with reasonable facts.
Historically, however, Apple maintains their identity by keeping OSX locked. I mean, to infer that because Apple went with Intel doesn't say to me that we will find it soon on Dells and Toshibas. That's just like saying back with OS 7, 8, & 9 (of which I used to work on) was on the IBM processor, well, that didn't mean you would see those versions on IBM Thinkpads. Right? That's just my take.
now you're talking bigtime. :) btw, after the Intel switch i was thinking the same thing. maybe not exactly licensing out OSX, but something similar. like allowing 'macs' to be custom-built as long as some parameters are met (using OF/Efi capable mainboards, supported video cards (ATi/nVidia) - think of it as a 'supported by Apple' sticker on products of some companies they have contracted with), and seeding out 'driver' (.kext) updates through software update to maintain Apple's key position.
Thank you for a very interesting series Mrbit. I totally agree with what you are saying. I also feel Apple need to get away from this Niche market philosophy, As you mentioned in one of your videos there is nothing more irritating than your are a cheap PC windows user attitude. I know Apple themselves have never said this but they do seem to encourage this and in the present economic climate it might come to haunt them. Once again thank you for a great series of vids.
When they released NeXTSTEP 3.0, NeXT was already pretty much done for in the hardware arena.
Blame Skulley-Led Apple for that. They sued NeXT and won a judgement that disallowed NeXT from selling anything without Apple's approval beforehand. Basically, they weren't allowed to compete.
Had NeXT computers actually been able to SELL a decent amount of computers, they would have kept it locked into their hardware.
the lawsuit shut down some aspects but not most, there was simply not as much money in it. Jobs knew it and moved to go 486 after they switched, nonetheless the model of software for general purpose computing won out, the whole point of Jobs statement.
There wasn't because they were not allowed to compete. All they were allowed to do is make expensive workstations.
"Jobs knew it and moved to go 486 after they switched"
You know, if someone is not allowed to make a living with their skill and their family is starving, Ronald Mcdonald starts looking very sexy. I'm just sayin'
Jobs saw that he wasn't able to sell enough hardware, thanks to Apple's restrictions on his company. Opening up NeXTSTEP didn't exactly open up doors for NeXT as a company either.
Even in a recession, Apple is VERY FAR from that dire marketing position.
The insider lawsuit was dismissed and the price tag on the hardware did more to hurt sales than anything especially when competing in the higher education camp which was the intention but yes were barred from it, but to me the non-mac world had larger market share and thus the price tag was too high, had Apple not acquired it, i would say Next would be vary viable.
Actually they settled out of court, I believe. They sued Steve Jobs because he started his own company. They were afraid that he would use knowledge that he acquired at Apple to give himself an edge.
"had Apple not acquired it, i would say Next would be vary viable."
Had Apple not cause problems for NeXT to begin with, NeXT would be more viable.
Great series! I just finished watching all four parts and I have to agree with you. The market share for OS X would skyrocket if it were licensed to OEM's and I think hardware sales would increase as well with more people exposed to the software who are willing to try the accompanying hardware.
Great videos!:) but oh man...your intro sound freaks me out..it's so loud and then your voice is so much more quiet:( just keep that in mind but seriously, great videos!:D keep them coming:)
I've been thinking that Apple were to release OS X once Snow Leopard comes out - but what you said makes me believe even more that Mac will soon be free.
Great video series, I gave you 1 star on all of them. Not really :P
Totally agree with your videos Mrbit. MS has had most of the market for too long. Its time for some serious competition then we will see a ten fold increase in OS innovation.
ok, ill debate more on this wen im done uni.lol. but lets say osx was free, i would STILL GET apple laptops, WITHOUT a DOUBT. im loyal to there laptops, but desktops, thats a different story, i mean i may still be loyal to the mac pro, but in terms of imacs, not really, because i could run a system with osx with so much more hardware, id love to stick in creative soundblaster cards or ageia physx cards, so ye, i can see the benefits,..
Yes, with me there is no argument. If OS10 was available to the PC, Apple would not lose hardware sales. You are correct, their Macbooks, and MB Pros, are the top of the line, and would always sell.
"You are correct, their Macbooks, and MB Pros, are the top of the line, and would always sell."
Just like I mentioned a second ago. Look at the Performa Line. and how it cannibalized Powermac sales. We don't even have to get into the cannibalization that the clones did in the 90's.
but i cannot agree, the demand was so hgih for macs during the clone period that logistics could not supply the demand which lead to several hundred million in backlog and so forth. The clone arguments come from the more elitist realm, the evangelists they miss the point on why Apple failed and what happened from 94 to 97
Set OS X free? Well it is free! It's available to every man, go buy a Mac. When I say every man, I mean a house is available to every man, but if you don't have the money you can't have one. The reason why Mr Bit want's it is because he want's more money! He want's his Software to do better and it not be locked in to certain hardware if he only does the program on Mac OS X. He would also like to play with his computer's, Mac OS X is not for playing!
I could tell that you're 15 before i looked at your profile... your comment was among the most idiotic i've ever seen on youtube. Good job * sarcasm *
the reason why people don't want to buy mac's is because of the lack of choice and price. if apple wanted everyone to be happy just bring back the mid-tower (performa) and make it a little less than the imac. everyone is happy with their customizing habits, and then just pray that devs will make drivers for the mac.
"if apple wanted everyone to be happy just bring back the mid-tower (performa)"
NOOOOOOOOOOOOooooooooooo
That is horrible. The performa was Apple's worst line of Apple computer, bar none. It not only cannibalized the FAR BETTER Powermac Sales, but it also gave Apple a very bad name...
IF Apple want's to introduce a Mid-Tower-like computer, they should kill the mini and bring back the Cube. It had a upgradable videocard, a Processor and an ok amount of RAM. But was pricey.
will if the cube had quad core support, and upgradable pci express slot 16x than yeah bring back the cube. I just don't like apples sub standard video cards.gpu acceleration in photoshop is cool.
I suspect that Apple will have Quad support in their iMac and Macbook Pro lines once decent quad mobility processors hit. So yeah, that's possible.
"upgradable pci express slot 16x"
Original had a PCI slot, which is rather bulky. So yeah, that is possible too. Of course, they'd have to kill the Mini and it might compete with the iMac. Also, you'd still only be able to use OSX compatible cards...
"I just don't like apples sub standard video cards."
Their cards are just fine. Plus Apple's focus is in areas like ease of use, portability, economy of space. You know, efficient design.
My Macbook has a 9400m. I have NO complaints. It is lightweight, sterdy, has very good batterylife, doesn't get too hot, etc. Tho, In hindsight, I could have gotten a refurbished MBP, which would have been better.
My iMac has a X1600, I have NO complaints. I got it in 2006 right after the Intel Mac release.
I want something stronger than the 9400m I want something in between the 9600m gt and 9400m. the mac mini's they do run very hot , and macbook pro's also run relatively hotter than average laptops. do you have the 2.4 GHZ macbook? I like to do a comparison with my laptop. I want to see if the hype in speed is true.
I meant real world benchmarks like photoshop or premiere, or if you want to use final cut its fine. I know I got higher scores in geek bench, but the real applications are what matters.
if you had premiere, just download a 1080P film like a blender movie and convert it to another format.
for photoshop I guess testing of filters on large high res files. I could post a video or you could and we can post results. and keep it civil. if you can find any cross platform app its fine. comparison of speed is the only way to really know if I can justify a purchase of a mac.
"comparison of speed is the only way to really know if I can justify a purchase of a mac."
Why would you need to do that?
If you're happy with your hardware, then be happy with that. Just don't run down MY hardware in the process. Not saying you have...Just pointing out my position on the subject.
I'm not one of those evangelical Mac Users that has to have everyone using Macs to be happy. I use what makes me happy and that's all I need to be satisfied.
i will support you on this, video cards are nvidia and Amd, what is the issue, why compare DX models and or shaders to a completely different API, another Windows projection.
"i will support you on this, video cards are nvidia and Amd, what is the issue, why compare DX models and or shaders to a completely different API, another Windows projection."
they could re-attempt the cube, but at this point i no longer believe that the other desktops really only two which is the imac and mini, they are too unique but perhaps not a tower but a new design. Many analysts have said the same as desktops have been losing and losing for Apple while Laptops have been booming. Laptops have lower profit margin as well. It reminds me of the old WSJ article on the profit margins of the ipod when it became the larger side of revenue.
I have a mac mate and i am perfectly happy with it... in fact i'm so happy as i was back in the days when i got my first computer. Switched to mac and OSX as my primary hardware setup and as my primary operating system. But what does that have to do with me not being able to load OSX on my other hardware? I mean would it be that bad if i was able to load OSX on my other machines, which are now windows based? Neither thomas nor you are right on that mate... just my opinion
@thomashome05 - The reason why Mr Bit want's it is because he want's more money! He want's his Software to do better and it not be locked in to certain hardware if he only does the program on Mac OS X.
Mrbit10 is a Windows Programmer, he makes a majority of his money off of Windows. I'm sure he does every once in a while program for OSX, however a majority of the time it's Windows.
Is the Iphone free? Why do I HAVE to use AT&T when there service sucks in my area. You just go ahead and be a follower. I want the IPhone on MY network, just like I want OSX on MY computer.
Owning a TV station is free, you are free to go make one for yourself,
If OS X is ever set free I'll just build a decent machine and install Windows 7 and Ubuntu on it. Why? Because it will mean that Apple is trying to play the market share game against Microsoft and their product quality will suffer. OS X would also have a large % of the same problems Windows does after a while.
Macs are what they are because of the OS paired with the hardware for a "custom" user experience. Their quality control is a gold standard. Without this, just build a PC.
The real problem is Microsoft could probably swat Mac Osx like a Fly, if it was set free. Either they would cut the prices of licenses or they would refuse to do business with oems. Knowing microsoft they can go to the worst situation and then win its customers back with its next release. it seems apple was always too late in the game.
WHAT? If OS10 was available to the PC, then you would use Windows 7? I don't get that statement at all. Don't tell me you are like emeek and hate google and Adobe, and every company that has many users.
No, I'm not like emeek. I use windows daily both in my work and personal life. I like XP and Windows 7. I have nothing against google or adobe.
The statement I made reflects my feelings that quality would suffer greatly with OS X as they try to make the OS work with many millions of possible configurations. Also the more popular it got the more hackers and virus makers would peck away at it.
Apple is the success it is because its not playing the same game as Microsoft.
it would not be the millions of combinations and cannot be by design, and by the bit structure. It would only grow as it got larger and more contributed.
Would be nice, for osx to be free, but wouldn't some software have to be rewritten to work better on all of the hardware. Avid is picky with hardware, at least on windows, would that make Final cut pro worse because it may be picky with hardware?
And they had internal builds of OS X for X86 from the start.
fleskebille 2 years ago
when jobs drops dead they will probably do it
tenshitaiakuma 2 years ago
I highly doubt apple will ever license out OS X. They simply love making the hardware along side the software. And they strive for perfection, licensing out OS X will make things like compatibility and drivers a big part of OS X, and I apple will never do that. I'm not a fanboy, but I sincerely believe as long as Steve Jobs is alive Mac OS X will not be licensed out (although steve may not be alive for much longer...)
yiyopr1 2 years ago
Apple will not ever, ever, i'll repeat.. EVER license out OS X. So any discussion about it is rather pointless.
Mac FTW.
cockyjeremy 2 years ago
saying that is pointless. it's just fanboy garbage. i love macs, but i hate that sort of attitude people like you have about it.
lmull3 2 years ago
Attitude? There's no attitude to it.. it's a fact. Apple won't ever license it out. Period.
cockyjeremy 2 years ago
Mrbit as with all your videos, theories and analysis, I have thoroughly enjoyed this series,, despite the fact I have to sometimes watch your videos more than once to grasp your concepts. This however is not your fault but my lack of intelligence, never the less I am still undecided about the debate of releasing OS X. After viewing your videos, Gareth, Eric and a few windows users on the subject I thought I would be more decisive but this is still not the case. Excellent video mate.
iharrison30 2 years ago
thanks very much, glad to see you are back!
mrbit10 2 years ago
Not to sound harsh, but if you don't want to buy a Mac to get the OS than Apple does not need you as a customer. The PC mentality is: I want to have access to everything for free and make what I want myself. To Apple mentality is more like: go ahead and keep it under tight control, I don't care as long as it works the way it should.
Trying to ask Apple to set OS X free is like asking BMW to put their motors in ford escorts and kias. If you want OS that bad, GET A MAC !
dragonballjiujitsu 2 years ago
BMW actually does sell their engines to other manufacturers. :) Wiesmann, Carbon Motors, etc. Comparing Apple to BMW just shows how much of an idiot you are.
However, since people can already run OS X on their PCs without issues (have to select the hardware carefully though) I don't see where any of this is going.
thebsdguy 2 years ago
People can already run OS X on a PC but the have to use only certain hardware thereby making it useless.
By the way I compare BMW to Apple because they are both high quality products.
I think the insult was uncalled for.
dragonballjiujitsu 2 years ago
And in this case the hardware would have to be certified anyway.
BMWs are high quality products? You've never owned one, then :)
thebsdguy 2 years ago
NO, It's because there is written drivers, if OSX was set free, there would be more drivers. Why do you think Apple's INTERNAL hardware is so special? Mac's look good, but I can build a PC that would be faster than any iMac available today.
oOJackofallmasters 2 years ago
did you know that royals royce sold their engine to other countries to install on their own jets. Why?
To make money, you're argument is mute
oOJackofallmasters 2 years ago
Sorry I haven't piped in on this in a while, but you always raise good points with reasonable facts.
Historically, however, Apple maintains their identity by keeping OSX locked. I mean, to infer that because Apple went with Intel doesn't say to me that we will find it soon on Dells and Toshibas. That's just like saying back with OS 7, 8, & 9 (of which I used to work on) was on the IBM processor, well, that didn't mean you would see those versions on IBM Thinkpads. Right? That's just my take.
droadtrip 2 years ago
now you're talking bigtime. :) btw, after the Intel switch i was thinking the same thing. maybe not exactly licensing out OSX, but something similar. like allowing 'macs' to be custom-built as long as some parameters are met (using OF/Efi capable mainboards, supported video cards (ATi/nVidia) - think of it as a 'supported by Apple' sticker on products of some companies they have contracted with), and seeding out 'driver' (.kext) updates through software update to maintain Apple's key position.
bamdadkhan 2 years ago
When will the day come that I will disagree with you, MrBit? Hopefully soon, because this is too satisfying a feeling to keep.
Physhi 2 years ago
Thank you for a very interesting series Mrbit. I totally agree with what you are saying. I also feel Apple need to get away from this Niche market philosophy, As you mentioned in one of your videos there is nothing more irritating than your are a cheap PC windows user attitude. I know Apple themselves have never said this but they do seem to encourage this and in the present economic climate it might come to haunt them. Once again thank you for a great series of vids.
douguk47 2 years ago
When they released NeXTSTEP 3.0, NeXT was already pretty much done for in the hardware arena.
Blame Skulley-Led Apple for that. They sued NeXT and won a judgement that disallowed NeXT from selling anything without Apple's approval beforehand. Basically, they weren't allowed to compete.
Had NeXT computers actually been able to SELL a decent amount of computers, they would have kept it locked into their hardware.
sc0pl355 2 years ago
the lawsuit shut down some aspects but not most, there was simply not as much money in it. Jobs knew it and moved to go 486 after they switched, nonetheless the model of software for general purpose computing won out, the whole point of Jobs statement.
mrbit10 2 years ago
"there was simply not as much money in it."
There wasn't because they were not allowed to compete. All they were allowed to do is make expensive workstations.
"Jobs knew it and moved to go 486 after they switched"
You know, if someone is not allowed to make a living with their skill and their family is starving, Ronald Mcdonald starts looking very sexy. I'm just sayin'
sc0pl355 2 years ago
i mean in hardware vs software, Jobs saw the light is what i mean.
mrbit10 2 years ago
Jobs saw that he wasn't able to sell enough hardware, thanks to Apple's restrictions on his company. Opening up NeXTSTEP didn't exactly open up doors for NeXT as a company either.
Even in a recession, Apple is VERY FAR from that dire marketing position.
sc0pl355 2 years ago
The insider lawsuit was dismissed and the price tag on the hardware did more to hurt sales than anything especially when competing in the higher education camp which was the intention but yes were barred from it, but to me the non-mac world had larger market share and thus the price tag was too high, had Apple not acquired it, i would say Next would be vary viable.
mrbit10 2 years ago
Perot pulled his money but there were many in the can, it is speculative but at the time of NT open and nextstep could have played a big part.
mrbit10 2 years ago
Brilliant, Just brilliant thanks so much for your videos they are amazing.
xxxxDre4mxxxx 2 years ago
"The insider lawsuit was dismissed"
Actually they settled out of court, I believe. They sued Steve Jobs because he started his own company. They were afraid that he would use knowledge that he acquired at Apple to give himself an edge.
"had Apple not acquired it, i would say Next would be vary viable."
Had Apple not cause problems for NeXT to begin with, NeXT would be more viable.
sc0pl355 2 years ago
I prefer Windows over Mac, but I'm happy for the Mac users...good for them ;)
Renuzitus 2 years ago
Great series! I just finished watching all four parts and I have to agree with you. The market share for OS X would skyrocket if it were licensed to OEM's and I think hardware sales would increase as well with more people exposed to the software who are willing to try the accompanying hardware.
therevivedone 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The three men that change the world
Google: Al Gore Jeff Fisher World Peace Forever
Google: Tom Heneghan
Tell everyone World-wide
GoreFisherPeaceMakers@gmail com
The three men that change the world
Google: Al Gore Jeff Fisher World Peace Forever
Google: Tom Heneghan
Tell everyone World-wide
GoreFisherPeaceMakers@gmail com
GodLovesJeffFisher 2 years ago
MrBit,
Great series again, some more great info, and I thank you. This was awesome.
ThingsontheWeb 2 years ago
Hey mate you put a lot of working into these, great job, you know my feelings on the point.
garethhallnz 2 years ago
Great videos!:) but oh man...your intro sound freaks me out..it's so loud and then your voice is so much more quiet:( just keep that in mind but seriously, great videos!:D keep them coming:)
master1140 2 years ago
I've been thinking that Apple were to release OS X once Snow Leopard comes out - but what you said makes me believe even more that Mac will soon be free.
Great video series, I gave you 1 star on all of them. Not really :P
christheferal 2 years ago
Totally agree with your videos Mrbit. MS has had most of the market for too long. Its time for some serious competition then we will see a ten fold increase in OS innovation.
big46uk 2 years ago
ok, ill debate more on this wen im done uni.lol. but lets say osx was free, i would STILL GET apple laptops, WITHOUT a DOUBT. im loyal to there laptops, but desktops, thats a different story, i mean i may still be loyal to the mac pro, but in terms of imacs, not really, because i could run a system with osx with so much more hardware, id love to stick in creative soundblaster cards or ageia physx cards, so ye, i can see the benefits,..
DRBUK 2 years ago
DRBUK,
Yes, with me there is no argument. If OS10 was available to the PC, Apple would not lose hardware sales. You are correct, their Macbooks, and MB Pros, are the top of the line, and would always sell.
ThingsontheWeb 2 years ago
"You are correct, their Macbooks, and MB Pros, are the top of the line, and would always sell."
Just like I mentioned a second ago. Look at the Performa Line. and how it cannibalized Powermac sales. We don't even have to get into the cannibalization that the clones did in the 90's.
Powermacs = high quality
Performas = no quality
Which did Apple sell more of?
sc0pl355 2 years ago
but i cannot agree, the demand was so hgih for macs during the clone period that logistics could not supply the demand which lead to several hundred million in backlog and so forth. The clone arguments come from the more elitist realm, the evangelists they miss the point on why Apple failed and what happened from 94 to 97
mrbit10 2 years ago
Set OS X free? Well it is free! It's available to every man, go buy a Mac. When I say every man, I mean a house is available to every man, but if you don't have the money you can't have one. The reason why Mr Bit want's it is because he want's more money! He want's his Software to do better and it not be locked in to certain hardware if he only does the program on Mac OS X. He would also like to play with his computer's, Mac OS X is not for playing!
thomashome05 2 years ago
ahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahhahahahahahahhahahahahahahhaha
BIG BIG BIG FACEPALM DUDE
JehxOne 2 years ago
@ thomashome05
I could tell that you're 15 before i looked at your profile... your comment was among the most idiotic i've ever seen on youtube. Good job * sarcasm *
azaas 2 years ago
Actually thomashome05 makes a lot more sense than most of the people who are leaving comments on here.
If you want OS X get a Mac, its really that easy. If you say you want OS X but you want it free you only want to put it on a PC.
thomashome05 is correct when he says people who wanna do this want to play with their computers.
dragonballjiujitsu 2 years ago
play with their computers?
the reason why people don't want to buy mac's is because of the lack of choice and price. if apple wanted everyone to be happy just bring back the mid-tower (performa) and make it a little less than the imac. everyone is happy with their customizing habits, and then just pray that devs will make drivers for the mac.
ASCII808 2 years ago
"if apple wanted everyone to be happy just bring back the mid-tower (performa)"
NOOOOOOOOOOOOooooooooooo
That is horrible. The performa was Apple's worst line of Apple computer, bar none. It not only cannibalized the FAR BETTER Powermac Sales, but it also gave Apple a very bad name...
IF Apple want's to introduce a Mid-Tower-like computer, they should kill the mini and bring back the Cube. It had a upgradable videocard, a Processor and an ok amount of RAM. But was pricey.
sc0pl355 2 years ago
will if the cube had quad core support, and upgradable pci express slot 16x than yeah bring back the cube. I just don't like apples sub standard video cards.gpu acceleration in photoshop is cool.
ASCII808 2 years ago
"will if the cube had quad core support"
I suspect that Apple will have Quad support in their iMac and Macbook Pro lines once decent quad mobility processors hit. So yeah, that's possible.
"upgradable pci express slot 16x"
Original had a PCI slot, which is rather bulky. So yeah, that is possible too. Of course, they'd have to kill the Mini and it might compete with the iMac. Also, you'd still only be able to use OSX compatible cards...
sc0pl355 2 years ago
"I just don't like apples sub standard video cards."
Their cards are just fine. Plus Apple's focus is in areas like ease of use, portability, economy of space. You know, efficient design.
My Macbook has a 9400m. I have NO complaints. It is lightweight, sterdy, has very good batterylife, doesn't get too hot, etc. Tho, In hindsight, I could have gotten a refurbished MBP, which would have been better.
My iMac has a X1600, I have NO complaints. I got it in 2006 right after the Intel Mac release.
sc0pl355 2 years ago
I mean sturdy, not sterdy
sc0pl355 2 years ago
I want something stronger than the 9400m I want something in between the 9600m gt and 9400m. the mac mini's they do run very hot , and macbook pro's also run relatively hotter than average laptops. do you have the 2.4 GHZ macbook? I like to do a comparison with my laptop. I want to see if the hype in speed is true.
ASCII808 2 years ago
"I want something in between the 9600m gt and 9400m."
-It would be too close to the 9600m. Thus defeating the purpose of buying a Macbook Pro.
"do you have the 2.4 GHZ macbook"
-Yup
"I want to see if the hype in speed is true."
-I don't know what that means.
"the mac mini's they do run very hot"
-Look at how small they are.
"macbook pro's also run relatively hotter than average laptops."
-Look at how thin they are.
sc0pl355 2 years ago
Do you have cs4?
ASCII808 2 years ago
"Do you have cs4?"
Yes, of course. ^^
sc0pl355 2 years ago
you want to do a bench comparison?
ASCII808 2 years ago
"you want to do a bench comparison?"
I think you scored higher than me on Geekbench, remember?
sc0pl355 2 years ago
I meant real world benchmarks like photoshop or premiere, or if you want to use final cut its fine. I know I got higher scores in geek bench, but the real applications are what matters.
ASCII808 2 years ago
"I meant real world benchmarks like photoshop or premiere"
Well, I have photoshop cs4. I don't have final cut on this machine. It is on my iMac and is a old version. I haven't used Adobe premiere in years.
What did you have in mind?
sc0pl355 2 years ago
if you had premiere, just download a 1080P film like a blender movie and convert it to another format.
for photoshop I guess testing of filters on large high res files. I could post a video or you could and we can post results. and keep it civil. if you can find any cross platform app its fine. comparison of speed is the only way to really know if I can justify a purchase of a mac.
ASCII808 2 years ago
What hi-res image did you have in mind?
"comparison of speed is the only way to really know if I can justify a purchase of a mac."
Why would you need to do that?
If you're happy with your hardware, then be happy with that. Just don't run down MY hardware in the process. Not saying you have...Just pointing out my position on the subject.
I'm not one of those evangelical Mac Users that has to have everyone using Macs to be happy. I use what makes me happy and that's all I need to be satisfied.
sc0pl355 2 years ago
I am not going to run down your hardware, its a nice laptop, I just wanted to know which one was faster.
ASCII808 2 years ago
"I am not going to run down your hardware, its a nice laptop"
Thanks, I know that. You seem like a cool dude.
I was speaking more in general terms than specifically toward you.
Like, the only thing that gets my dander up is when people want to insult mac users or macs because they personally don't like the hardware.
If really I don't like something, I vote with my dollars.
sc0pl355 2 years ago
i will support you on this, video cards are nvidia and Amd, what is the issue, why compare DX models and or shaders to a completely different API, another Windows projection.
mrbit10 2 years ago
"i will support you on this, video cards are nvidia and Amd, what is the issue, why compare DX models and or shaders to a completely different API, another Windows projection."
Yes, very concise.
sc0pl355 2 years ago
they could re-attempt the cube, but at this point i no longer believe that the other desktops really only two which is the imac and mini, they are too unique but perhaps not a tower but a new design. Many analysts have said the same as desktops have been losing and losing for Apple while Laptops have been booming. Laptops have lower profit margin as well. It reminds me of the old WSJ article on the profit margins of the ipod when it became the larger side of revenue.
mrbit10 2 years ago
I'm thinking a cube-like machine or something modular. Like a stackable Mini.
I like the iMac line. the Core Duo iMac was the second All-In-One Mac I ever bought. As far as I'm concerned, it is great.
I do think that they can potentially make even more profit with a Cube tho. It is interesting to note that the Cube was never officially discontinued.
sc0pl355 2 years ago
@ Dragonballjiujitsu
I have a mac mate and i am perfectly happy with it... in fact i'm so happy as i was back in the days when i got my first computer. Switched to mac and OSX as my primary hardware setup and as my primary operating system. But what does that have to do with me not being able to load OSX on my other hardware? I mean would it be that bad if i was able to load OSX on my other machines, which are now windows based? Neither thomas nor you are right on that mate... just my opinion
azaas 2 years ago
So OSX would be more attractive to developers ...so how is this a problem again?
unknown0figure 2 years ago
@thomashome05 - The reason why Mr Bit want's it is because he want's more money! He want's his Software to do better and it not be locked in to certain hardware if he only does the program on Mac OS X.
Mrbit10 is a Windows Programmer, he makes a majority of his money off of Windows. I'm sure he does every once in a while program for OSX, however a majority of the time it's Windows.
blacksteel25 2 years ago
Is the Iphone free? Why do I HAVE to use AT&T when there service sucks in my area. You just go ahead and be a follower. I want the IPhone on MY network, just like I want OSX on MY computer.
Owning a TV station is free, you are free to go make one for yourself,
good luck!
oOJackofallmasters 2 years ago
You don't have to use ATT just don't buy and iPhone, you cannot do everything. God I want a Flying Car for under $1000.
thomashome05 2 years ago
I don't have to use AT&T to use an IPhone?
We know you thomas, I have one thing to ask.
"the Iphone is only available, on what network?
Please list all networks in Alphabetical order, so it's easier to sort out all the uses for an IPhone, on a Network OTHER THAN AT&T
oOJackofallmasters 2 years ago
Google Android
oOJackofallmasters 2 years ago
AT&T offered more money to apple
tenshitaiakuma 2 years ago
If OS X is ever set free I'll just build a decent machine and install Windows 7 and Ubuntu on it. Why? Because it will mean that Apple is trying to play the market share game against Microsoft and their product quality will suffer. OS X would also have a large % of the same problems Windows does after a while.
Macs are what they are because of the OS paired with the hardware for a "custom" user experience. Their quality control is a gold standard. Without this, just build a PC.
dragonballjiujitsu 2 years ago
Why do you think OSX would have the same types of problems Windows has, it is based on an entirely different type of system.
Isn't Apple already promoting that they are gaining Market Share ?
Market share versus quality is a myth in any case.
Even if it is set free , no doubt you could still buy a Mac with OSX with all the quality control you like. This would give more choice not less.
The real market place that OSX being free could benefit from is the Enterprise.
gr1moire2112 2 years ago
The real problem is Microsoft could probably swat Mac Osx like a Fly, if it was set free. Either they would cut the prices of licenses or they would refuse to do business with oems. Knowing microsoft they can go to the worst situation and then win its customers back with its next release. it seems apple was always too late in the game.
ASCII808 2 years ago
WHAT? If OS10 was available to the PC, then you would use Windows 7? I don't get that statement at all. Don't tell me you are like emeek and hate google and Adobe, and every company that has many users.
ThingsontheWeb 2 years ago
@ThingsontheWeb
No, I'm not like emeek. I use windows daily both in my work and personal life. I like XP and Windows 7. I have nothing against google or adobe.
The statement I made reflects my feelings that quality would suffer greatly with OS X as they try to make the OS work with many millions of possible configurations. Also the more popular it got the more hackers and virus makers would peck away at it.
Apple is the success it is because its not playing the same game as Microsoft.
dragonballjiujitsu 2 years ago
it would not be the millions of combinations and cannot be by design, and by the bit structure. It would only grow as it got larger and more contributed.
mrbit10 2 years ago
Would be nice, for osx to be free, but wouldn't some software have to be rewritten to work better on all of the hardware. Avid is picky with hardware, at least on windows, would that make Final cut pro worse because it may be picky with hardware?
ASCII808 2 years ago
Great series of videos. I agree with the points raised, others might not like it but time will tell.
gr1moire2112 2 years ago