[rocostonik]

I did do something stupid on a PC, I tried to edit some music on it.

[sfoalex]

rocostonik wrote:I did do something stupid on a PC, I tried to edit some music on it.
And yet I've been able to make thousands of edits in Media Composer, export tracks to ProTools, bring em back into Media Composer, compress the whole thing using a 2-pass CinemaCraft Encoder, bring that all into AvidDVD, not to mention effects creation and editing in Boris RED, various filters and AniMatte for weeks and months at a time. In addition, wrote a book, did the artwork for over 450 illustrations in that book, give that to my editor, get back PDFs of each chapter, perform markups for the Quark layout over a 9 month period of time, and not see a single blue-screen. And that's just a small part of my past. I've worked on easily over hundreds of DVDs over the last three years. No problem. Designed I can't remember how many specialty cases for various packaging jobs all in Illustrator and Photoshop, no problems. My PC must be blessed or something. And I guess all the PCs I have built and bought for the last 17 years are also blessed. Because aside from GPF errors in Windows 3.1, I have not had any real problems I can think of, period. Not even so much as a virus, and all I use is NOD32, and the built in Windows Defender. Just a simple $34 a year app is all that stands between me at the evil world.
I can understand all those folks who don't know better downloading junk from peer to peer sites getting their PCs into trouble. No one can help you if you're too stupid not to install everything you get your bored to death hands on.
On the other hand, if you are truly a long time Mac user, and you have used them not just in their OSX era, but go back to the days of System 6, 7, 8 and 9, then you'll understand when I say that the worst experience I have had on computers in squarely in the Mac side of the fence. PRAM that needs to be reset. Prior to OSX, having to find the best way to manage the memory for each app so Photoshop wouldn't die or be extremely slow. Having to buy better ram than Apple provides else your Mac would freeze very often, why do you think RAMJET exists for Mac users? Most of us long time users know better than to use any old ram in a Mac. Where as in a PC, slap anything in it and it works.

The Dual G5 1.8GHz at my office is half way to lemonville. Stick two SATA drives in it, it goes bezerk. Leave just one, and it's fine. And like many Mac users in the know, I had to debate with my employer that memory quality was a big deal. He bought cheap ram and it drove me nuts with panics. So I went out of pocket to put RAMJET memory it. The crashes magically stopped. Point is, I'm not some PC user who has no experience with Apple's products. You can feed me all the bull you like. I consulted with quite a few advertising agencies as a consultant, and I always vastly improved their Mac reliability. Macs not only cost more. You have to pay attention to the hardware you put inside them. In particular, the memory. You have to treat them with kid gloves or they flake on you.

Now on the other side of that, I've been building my own PCs since the 286 10 MHz, and all the while I have done things much more easily. Need a hard drive back in the day, buy a used MFM RLL controller and a used Seagate ST-251 and you're in business. Get an MGA card, and you're off. Want color, get a CGA card, throw out the MGA card. Want EGA and then VGA later on, easy. Get an Orchid ProDesigner. On the old Macs, I bought a IMS Twin Turbo and it was hell. And the card was $499. An Orchid ProDesigner, $239, twice the memory.

As far back as I can remember, the PC has always been so very easy. Buy whatever you want, throw it together, install Windows, load your drivers, and presto, you have a machine purpose built for what ever you want. You have the install discs, drivers, etc. So you need to fix it, hey you got all the software that went into it. Easy as pie.

I still remember when the Monster 3DFX boards first came out. Quake was using OpenGL. I had a Matrox card. I wanted that killer new rendering. All I had to do was buy the Monster board, plug it in, connect the Matrox to the Monster, and the Monster to my VGA monitor. Load a driver, and I had OpenGL rendering on the card and it was truly beautiful. On the Mac side in that time. Nothing. Macs had zippo. Slow 2D and it still costs a lot more.

Never have I seen Apple give you more than any ol PC will give you. And all the while, folks like you chime in with "It just works". Well my friend, my PC just works better.

Alex Alexzander

[rocostonik]

we can do that do. I don't know why every perfessional setting from Robert Lang studio to the art instituite i've seen nothing but a mac under the desk. Why is that?

[rocostonik]

So obviously they have some kinda pro use. Just as much as a windows machine.

[sfoalex]

And every ad agency I have worked for I have also seen nothing but Macs for the creative staff and nothing but PCs for everyone else. And the why of it is simple as I still have my copy of Photoshop 2.5, which was black and white by the way. In the very start, Apple was first with Aldus PageMaker. In high school, I worked for 2 years in lithography and commercial art. If you wanted to do page layout, you had to do a full mechanical. That means you do the photography. You develop the image. You do the masking and paste up. You use an IBM to print each line of text one at a time to film. You set everything manually. And it took forever. PageMaker comes out, and it's now a hundred times easier. You think I didn't use PageMaker when it was made available? Of course I did, and I loved it. I loved it when Quark was first to do full color separation. Much of the art community is too in love with Apple to ever give the PC a shot. But I have to say, the numbers sure do not agree with your experience or mine, because Adobe has stated many times that Photoshop is sold for the PC more than it is for the Mac. Adobe dropped Mac support entirely for FrameMaker I think back in version 5.5 if you remember, leaving it Windows only to this day. Quark is on record for saying something like 51% to 49% PC to Mac ratio on it's existing customer base now. The PC market continues to slowly erode the Mac away.

As I said, I myself do not see the need to use a Mac to create with Quark, Illustrator, or Photoshop. There is little difference between the two. With Quark, all that comes to mind is the Edit Original feature the Mac has that the PC lacks. In Photoshop, I see no difference at all. Same with Illustrator. Flash is better on the PC. And we have Cold Fusion, etc which the Mac completely lacks.

I've only worked for 3 ad companies as a consultant, and all were in the medical field. But the numbers more than suggest that the PC side is a very healthy business for Adobe. Certainly they are record as saying their video is 70 / 30 split in favor of the PC.

In any case, you'd be hard pressed to give me a real reason why any of these creative apps should be better on the Mac. And I can easily make a case why they should be used on the PC. More people use the PC and see the art on the PC, and the Mac Gamma is much lighter. Don't lie and tell me you don't check your art on windows with IE to make sure it works in the real world, because all Mac users do this. I had to, and I have yet to meet one that doesn't. It's pretty stupid. Just develop the art and web interface on a PC in the first place and you'll have less work to do.

Who gets 64 bit Photoshop first, Mac or PC? LOL. Last episode or maybe one before that, Alex Lindsey said he knew of a person who creates extremely large photoshop files, and as a result, that person switched to a PC because it can handle extremely large files where according to him, the Mac failed in the extremes he mentioned. I've had to deal with a few poster size images and was so blown away how slow the G5 was to handle them. Honestly, how you guys put up with the Mac is beyond me. You get less computer and pay more for it, and you're proud of it.

Alex Alexzander

[saintlouisranger]

Earth calling RACinWNY.
Lack of software, indeed! Let's see every Intel based Macintosh can run; OS X, Vista, XP, Windows 98, and darn near any of the older flavors of Windows, UNIX and LINIX. Every Mac comes with the "ultimate" version of OS X. No, five fruity flavors like Vista.
Every Mac comes with iLife: iTunes, iPhoto, iMovie, iDVD, Garage Band, Safari, Time Machine and the delightful integration between the parts makes this a feast for the mind.
Mac users, for the most part, don't have to put up with the Virus, Spyware, Malware, Adware and all of that nasty stuff.
I sell both Windows Boxes and Macs - Not a day goes by that I don't hear some Vista or Windows Virus horror story.
Yes, Virginia, Microsoft makes a version of Office for the Mac. Microsoft sees a market or they would not continue to pursue it. I have been using iWork Apples office suite and I like it a lot.
Windows laptops are a memory hungry - Vista wants almost a GB to its self, almost every Windows program is very memory intensive. And if you go to the 64 bit version of Vista to get that extra RAM, all of sudden some of your programs don't work any more.
No Windows box can come close to the hardware of the software on any Intel Mac.
Please, quit with the Macs cost too much. Sony anything cost too much, BMWs cost too much, Porsches cost too much - Product of quality always demand a higher price.
Low cost PCs use older technology, run slower and many of them are built with the "lowest bid wins the contract for components." Would you buy a car that was a built on lowest bid. Didn't think so...

[saintlouisranger]

Earth calling Alex Alexzander.
Clue, the G5 hasn't been in production since 2005. If I was taking pot shots at a 4/5 year old PC you'd be up in arms.
A modern Mac Pro system can have up to Two 3.2GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon processors, can have up to 32 GB of RAM and does a Photoshop render faster than almost any thing...

[sfoalex]

The second you run Windows on that Mac, you just bought into Windows itself. Microsoft doesn't make hardware. They simply sell Windows licenses, among others. Success for Windows is anyone who runs Windows on anything. The fact that you run Windows on the Mac is an act of simply joining the ranks of other windows users. You run Windows on a Mac, great. That admission to exactly what I am saying. Obviously something lacked on OSX and you or perhaps others needed Windows after all. See how popular Boot Camp is? See how popular virtual Windows is on the Mac? More admission that OSX lacks. I'm not running OSX on my PC. And I could if I wanted to. It's not hard, and if you think it is, you need to get out more.

Spare me the BMW bull. MY PC has exactly the same hardware your Mac has. So your so-called BMW has the same Honda engine my so-called PC has. Not really a BMW. It's nothing as special as that. You just can't deal with the reality that the Mac is as common as any $599 PC laptop. Until you buy a real operating system for it, it's just pretty darn limiting.

You need to tell yourself you paid twice as much for some reason other than you've been dupped by baby-music marketing, you do that. I live in the real world, as do 200 million others. Given that the PC Windows community is 21 times the size of the Mac community I'd expect you will see more people with problems on the PC. Eveyrone using a PC. I don't see anyone getting a virus or complaining about their Commodore 64 either. For the same reason. No one uses them.

Alex Alexzander

[sfoalex]

Uh, yeah, I know all about the the processors used on the Macs, both current and past. Perhaps if you read all the posts, and not just the last one, you'd realize how silly your statement it. Do your homework before you comment.

Alex Alexzander

[RACinWNY]

Well, as I said in my second post on this now incredibly off topic thread, this has deteriorated, rather predictably, into an Apple Fanboi vs. PC user/WIndows user diatrabe. BOOOORING! NOWHERE do I see anything in the last posts relating to the actual topic at hand! But I'll go on and join the off topic gang for one post. :)


As for a Mac computer doing everything a computer purchased from anywhere BUT Apple and running Windows XP; BS, BS and more BS. Sure, if all I wanted to do with my computers was email, web browsing, image manipulation and Office (which I don't use anymore in favor of openoffice from openoffice.org) and, gawd forbid, iTunes, and work with audio in general, a Mac would be fine. In fact, in some areas such as image manipulation and video use, and audio work, it might be the better choice. As a long time amateur photographer though I've never needed more than a Windows based machine myself. CS3 runs quite well on my desktop and even my huge laptop. As for iTunes, that program and the service blows. Totally. I do not even have that piece of crapware on any of my computers. My iPod works fine without it. Red Chair's software, which I've been using some years...even before I got my iPod I used it w/my Rio Karma, does all I want.



What a Mac OS computer won't run are many apps that I use for various and some might say esoteric uses. NONE of the Amateur Radio software I run works on the Mac OS. And many of the games I play aren't available for the Mac OS. Those two things right there kill the idea of a Mac OS machine for me. I could go on but I won't as I highly doubt any of the Mac boys here will even be able to soak any of my words in because they're so blinded by their fanaticism over their beloved Apple products. As for running Windows, any flavor, on Mac hardware, why???? I can build a desktop to my specs and needs for a HELL of a lot less. It will do all I want and then some. I've been doing this for 18 years. The only desktop I have purchased in that time was a Mac and I sold it a year later because it sat idle more than anything and a friend wanted it for his nephew, a budding web designer who had his Mac blow up in his face. As for portables, again, why??? I agreed earlier that the Mac portables are fine machines, the Air intrigued me greatly, but the price on the darn thing vs. what I was getting simply stunk and still does.



As for netbooks..you remember those don't you...that's what this thread WAS all about, it's been an interesting long weekend for me regarding them. About a day after this post on PC World's site I read one elsewhere about a statement Intel issued re: the Atom cpu and how "netbooks aren't meant for more than an hour's worth of viewing time" (interestingly enough, I've been using mine for 3 hours steady so far today w/o problems or eye strain and I'm an older lady). It gave me pause for thought. I have a feeling that Intel sees that the economic times are so tough that that is what might just kill the netbook scene completely. When you can buy, especially over this long and wild shopping weekend and now Monday, a conventional laptop with a dual core proc and an optical drive, both which the netbooks out there right now do NOT have, for just a bit more ( I just saw one for $100 more than I paid for my AAO... meaning it was $499) well, I can see where those without any portable computer or those wanting a cheap computer for their kid would go for that over a netbook.

I also think Intel may be backpeddling a bit too because their Atom cpu is a huge hit in this market and I'm wondering if they're having troubles making it worth their while to continue fabrication? On the other hand, within the group of those that truly "GET" the netbook idea and actually USE one, and of course in today's world we must always add, can afford one, there is great hope that the netbook scene doesn't collapse OR morph into something else or meld into the laptop world. Even Acer announced, since this thread started, that the revised version of the AAO will have a 10" screen. I question that because the 8.9" is fabulously crisp and the battery life is awesome. The 10" most likely will kill some of that battery life and until I see it I have no idea the quality of it, but I believe they're caving a bit to the twists the market could be taking due to the economic times and the fact that many folks don't GET the netbook idea. Talk to anyone who has a netbook and you'll hear wonderful love for it coming from them. But it is NOT for everyone nor is it meant to be. As for the fabrication issues within Intel, and the fact that AMD pulled out of the netbook cpu market, it's a known fact that the semi-conductor industry is struggling terribly right now (the hubby consults on the side in that industry.....on the side because he got out of it mainstream some years back due to the violate nature of that market/industry). And AMD is having troubles across the board so I wasn't the least bit surprised to hear that announcement from them.



But as a "believer", I ordered another Acer Aspire One (AAO) like mine yesterday for the hubby. He's ditching his 4+ year old Dell laptop, which I described in an earlier post, for the netbook. After using mine on Saturday during a brainstorming session and then a meeting he was hooked... line and sinker! So it's his Christmas gift but for us it is also a business expense so we can justify it. Plus we've a roof over our heads, food in our pantry, some savings and are able to give to our choice of charity so we're in a much better spot than so many out there today. Since most all of what he'll do with his AAO is email, web browsing, IM, Office (in the open office flavor these days) and some simple photo transfer he most certainly could have used a Mac netbook, if there was one. But would we have gotten one with a 160GB HD, 1GB ram and a 6 cell Li-on battery for $399 USD, free shipping and no sales tax? Oh, and 3 USB ports :) I highly doubt it. As to why he isn't keeping on with the Dell he has: he LOVED being able to put the AAO, in it's neoprene sleeve, into his bag and not even THINK about carrying along the AC stuff, being able to easily use it on his lap while at the one session which was held at a coffee shop, not needing a lot of room on the very crowded table at the meeting, and generally enjoying not lugging around a separate case. Since he does travel at times still he marks the light weight and small size as a huge plus.



One last note and then I must go pick up my cat at the vet's. He didn't need surgery after all, YAY! Although I know that so many people feel that what they would do with a netbook they could do on their mobile device such as an iPhone. Just try sitting in a meeting, going to a customer, brainstorming with collegues and clients and using one of those. I don't think so!!! Plus my hubby's hands ARE bigger than mine and although he surprisingly has no troubles with the AAO's keyboard he can barely send a text message on his full keyboard mobile device (no, not an iPhone.... IMO they're not ready for prime time yet) and his eyes are 53 years old and unlike my 51 year old eyes, he MUST wear glasses to see something that small. The AAO he seems to do fine with and I noticed he did quickly get the hang of zooming in on a few websites where he needed to.



OK, go back to your never-ending Mac vs. PC arguments. You got Ms. Verbosity to jump in only because I was waiting on the call from the vet's office and I couldn't resist. But I'll have to kill notificiation on this thread soon if it continues to be a Mac vs. PC BS session rather than any real discussion re: netbooks and what Apple can do within that market IF they choose to enter it, and even if they WILL choose to enter it.

[TechieXP]

Actually Apple can ake a not so piece of juk pc that cost under $500...what you get is teh iphone...lol...in fact it is most noted for its PC/MAC capabilities. Seeing that Apple has only one device to talk about in 3 flavor, aka iPOD - iTOUCH and iPHONE - they would never consider trying to put a stripped down version of Mac OSX onto anything other then what they have now...even macs 13inch screen laptops caost more than many 15inch pc based ones. And i never saw teh benefit in the Netbook as was mentioned you can get a nicely powered laptop starting at 499.99 from Dell and others. And Sony makes a palm sized full functioning pc which you can get now for about 699 if you look around. I see teh netbook as a pc for older ppl on a limited income and who may have trouble learning so many pc capabilities or simply can't lift a full laptop bec of their age. I don't see them benefiting anyone other than a child who may be to young for a full pc and parents wat to introduce them to computers with spending a lot of money. you can do quite a bit more than a gaming console.

[TechieXP]

BTW RAC...any thread on any PC related brings Mac fanboys out of their dark latened jungled of fruit trees. Where the forbidden fruit is teh only choice per Steveo Jobo. It amazing we pc users don't have these discussions amonst ourselvesl...only when a Mac-Loser is putting in the apple-bites.

[RACinWNY]

TechieXP: After re-reading your message and trying to get what you're really saying my only response is that I think that you, like so many others, just do NOT get the netbook concept. It's NOT a replacement for a main computer, for ANYONE. Even us "old ppl" at this house get it and hey, we can even lift our other laptops, even my big 17" widescreen, dual hard drive, mega laptop and a half .. as I call it, I've dragged around the country and overseas. What makes a netbook so attractive is not that it's limited in function but that it is stripped of what we do NOT need in a grab and go computer but it's still a computer, not an iPhone or that ilk nor is it my trusty and loved Palm offering.


I'd NEVER give a netbook to my 90 year old Dad. No way. He has a very nice Dell laptop with a 15" screen and loves it, along with his very nice Dell desktop. He can easily see the laptop screen and easily load any software on it via the optical drive that is built right in. And guess what, he can even lift it! :) Nor would I give a netbook to a child just learning about computers. First of all I have a problem with a child having a computer that isn't somewhat nailed down to a spot where an adult can be aware of what they're doing on it, especially one connected to the internet. Secondly, I'd prefer a child to learn ALL the aspects of a computer and that includes an optical drive and its uses. It's not too early to teach them proper handling of CD/DVDs nor that programs often have to be loaded into the computer from that media. As a secondary computer for an older child who just wants something to email, IM, web browse and do up a document on, a netbook would be fine. But honestly, for $100 more than my AAO cost, as I've said and as you said, you can get a darn nice laptop WITH an optical drive. In fact, over the weekend I saw them for as low as $399. I am sure most kids want an optical drive even on a computer that isn't their main gaming computer, if they still game on a computer or CAN game on their own or the family desktop computer. I do know a lot of college kids though who adore their netbooks as their portable solution. Back in their dorm or apartment or at home they've a good desktop or desktop replacement laptop but on the go they love, love, love their netbook. I know many PREFER the slower but quite durable SSD that you can get in them simply because they KNOW they'll have that netbook bouncing around in a bag with heavy textbooks and gawd knows what else. Really, the netbook solution isn't one of price. A netbook is not something you'd get if you were on a limited income. No, in fact the whole jist of my comments, if you read them (and I'd not blame you if you didn't because I'm long winded) is that the netbook market may go poof because of the fact that it's more of a luxury item than a MUST HAVE or NEED item and in the world's economy today luxury items are quickly falling by the wayside. I'd advise someone on a limited income to get one of the super low priced 15" laptops I saw advertised this past weekend.



As for the Mac vs. PC arguments, if you wish to actually call them that anymore, I've heard them since the day they started. They rear their ugly head in too many places and always will. It's very much like another argument that IMO isn't an argument anymore, in a hobby of mine. There's no real reason to debate it, there's no real reason to waste time participating in it or even read it! But we do, we do. Why I don't know, but many of us, even myself, succumb at times to it :)

[butlerwm]

Hey RACinWNY: You're probably a little older than me, but I share most of your sentiments. I've also disliked each "new" OS incarnation that changed the things I knew and with which I was familiar. I began using computers in '83. In that time I've owned and used Commodores, Apple IIs (including IIc and IIgs), KayPro, IBM PC-XT (text only), original MacBooks, iBooks (the toilet set looking one), Dells, Acers, HPs, NECs, Compaqs (even a lunch-box style original with dual-floppy and no HDD), Mac G3s and G4s, and more home-built customs than I care to count. My mother was a mainframe programmer for IBM, NCR, TRW (aka STL), and Hughes during the 50s and 60s. Additionally, I spent the last 18 years as a computer tech (privately and employed by our school district). Presently I own an HP laptop (running Vista and XP), a Mac Mini (running OS X Leopard and XP), and a Mac Blue and White G4 (running OS X Tiger).
What I'd like to see in the NetBook market is something akin to the UMPCs in design but with the NetBook pricing. A device with a 7" or 8" touch screen would negate the need to use touchpads; I can use them but they are not as useful as a mouse and tend to be abrasive over long periods of time. I tend to spend 10 to 12 hours at the computer on a daily basis. Rubbing my finger across a metal surface for that long isn't something I'd recommend. A pad-like computer, small and light enough to hold in our hands or lap, that mimic a notepad for writing and has the touch functions for use with other applications. The iPhone and iPod Touch have shown the interface without scroll buttons and bars is a viable interface. UMPCs have been around for three or four years but have yet to find a market segment to propel them to the fore. It seems the NetBook people would have similar use for the devices.
Personally, I don't care who makes it or what OS it runs. Just so long as it does what it's supposed to do, is stable, and doesn't cost an arm and a leg (typical UMPC prices range from $900 to $1700). With the advent of SSDs in NetBooks and other devices (IBMs producing them for installation in servers), lower pricing for memory (2 and 3 GB for under $100 on the consumer side), and low power CPUs like Intel's Atom, there's no reason we shouldn't have these devices other than the hardware makers don't know how to market them effectively.
Here's a hint: Give them a battery life of 8 hours or more and you can sell all you want to school districts to replace text books. Convince the text book makers that it's criminal to charge the same price for ebook versions as the print versions of their products (and that they can do it and keep their profit margins because they eliminate printing and shipping costs). Do those things and you have a built-in market of tens of millions of users. We should have reached this point years ago but the elements seem unable to come together in a way to make the transition.
If Apple (or any other hardware and OS maker) wants to "save" the netbook, that's the way to move. If not it will most likely end up as just another bump in the history of computers.
Be well...

[TechieXP]

Well i was saying what you were saying but maybe not in the same use of terms. I didn't mean old in a bad way, i was meaning just what you said. Much simpler to use and easier to carry. Even though a laptop weights 3 -7 lbs they can be a paid being so large in size if need nothing more then email and web surfing.



As far as the fans who like to turn every pc discussion into a mac related one and why we get involve. The sad reality is, mac fans can't get over teh fact Windows is simply better which is why it was accepted in teh first place. It provide more prouctivity tool and at a lesser price than macs. and even in this 21st century Apple still hasn't grasp the idea. Is PC and Macs were cars, PC would be what you get from GM...lots of choice and a price tag that can fit the budget of teh majority. And mac would be a porche. Not every will have one, and you have only a impractcal toy that everyone can stare at. It was onl when Apple switch to x86 and fixed it so Windows could run on mac did it even matter. But what is teh beneit of 2 OS's? Windows does everything mac can and many things it can't. the price of ownership is through teh roof as no one can fix them or is authorized too other than Apple. Apple is teh only company i know who think a laptop that cost $2700 doesn't need a built-in cdrom....

I tool like the other commentor have been around since teh 80's to watch the road of PC vs Mac. Being born in 69, my first computer was also the origonal Apple ][ teh E and ][GS. I had a Commodore 64 and an Amiga as well. We all know that Windows is whetre it is not just because of how MS uses it had, its bec IBM licensed out teh PC design to othert OEM's and Apple didn't and Windows just simply cloned with the PC. It could have been Apple if they were smart. Being different and thinking different doesn't mean so boringly excentric that no one wants you except a select few. I think we get involve simply because we feel we need to defend our product. In fact the market has already dictated what is better. If Mac was better developers would leap over providing they would get teh same consumer support. They don't bec they simply know they won't. The mac simply provides no benefit bec Windows already does what mac does. End of argument. There is more to life than looks as form and function will aways when. Much like brains vs braun. Bill Gates is probably the most commonly known nerd, and Steve may be brawny -

I simply didn't like the Netbook personally bec I am not a Linux fan, and for me it isn't a pc I want to run WIndows on either. However when I was a delivery person before it would make a fine tool that is easy to tote around and make it easy and cool to keep in contact when not busy...

And again Mac fans, the price is unbeatable.

[Fanfoot]

Jeez, another useless Apple vs. Windows discussion. Could somebody delete all this crap please?
Anyway, to the original point, personally I would love to see Apple produce a "netbook", even if its at a $599-$699 price point. I assume they would push netbooks in general to be thinner, lighter, and be made of better materials. I think there might even be a market for a "premium" netbook category (smaller though), but the ASUS Eee PC S101 is JUST thinner, which isn't enough.
Without the constraints Microsoft has forced on the netbook segment, Apple could innovate a little. Make the screen bigger by narrowing the bezel. Make the keyboard almost full sized with no compromises. Offer 802.11n. Offer WWAN out of the box. Make it out of carbon fiber or aluminum. Texture the surface so it doesn't get fingerprints all over it. Use a fast SSD drive that costs a little more for better performance. Make it really thin and light. Use the displayport instead of VGA and sell HDMI and VGA dongles. Make the screen resolution higher than 800x600 (esp. the 600 part--too much scrolling!).
There's certainly room in this space Apple, come on in!

[RACinWNY]

Fanfoot: IF Apple could come into the netbook market with their hardware savvy AND at a competitive price (I feel that would be the challenge for them) I'd love to see what they can come up with. For what I do with my netbook the Mac OS would be fine I think. Like I said earlier, the reason I finally opted for XP over Linux was because of the hassles Linux, whatever the flavor (some are certainly more friendly than others), I couldn't bring myself to go that route OS-wise with something that I truly wanted to grab and go with right out of the box and onward.



As for the idea to make the bezel smaller and thus the screen bigger, I'd LOVE that as much as I'd love the 8 hours of battery life. But at this point with battery tech being what it is I don't think we'll see that. In the future, I sure hope so, but it isn't happening now IMO. I get 6-6.5 hours on a full charge on my AAO and part of that is because of the8.9" screen, which by the way is 1024x600 so I don't find myself side scrolling all that often plus I can zoom in and out via the touchpad if needed. I almost went with the MSI Wind, it has a 10" screen, but my priority in a netbook was better battery life over screen size. Boy, the day battery tech breaks some of the current barriers is the day we all see some fabulous advances in MANY fields!



As for the material the netbooks is made of, since mine is white it doesn't show fingerprints. My huge laptop is glossy black and a magnet so I knew better this time around! However, the hubby saw a friend's sapphire blue AAO and that's the color I ordered him yesterday. He won't care if it looks like heck anyway :) A lighter material, no matter if it smudges or not, would be great. Thinner, I could go for that too. 802.11n, yup, would have been nice but it's really going slow in take off it seems. As for WWAN, well, I can mod mine for 3G, the spot is there for it as Acer will be releasing this model WITH it before year's end. Other netbooks are showing up with it also. For me, right now, it wasn't a need so if I want it later I will either have the hubby, who can surface mount an ant, do the mod or do what a friend is doing, use a USB dongle. If it was important to me I might have waited with my order. Faster SSD, sure, everyone I think would like that but that would REALLY drive the cost up.



But honestly, in today's economic climate COULD a luxury netbook really fly? Apple or otherwise? I'm sure there would be people out there that would buy it but would it be ENOUGH? That seems to be the whole discussion recently surrounding the netbook scene. As they are they seem to many people, especially those that don't "get" the idea of a netbook, to be useless, a waste of money when you can get a better laptop for the same or a bit more $$, too small, too limited, and on and on and on. Too many people, it seems to me, see the netbook as a laptop replacement for EVERYONE and even as a primary computer for some!!!

I'm also wondering if in the US we'll see, especially if the netbook market feels the economic pinch more than expected, bundling with wireless packages such as is offered in some European countries. Heck, in the end it might be the ONLY way for the netbook scene to survive. But will Apple be able or even WANT to play in that sandbox? Seems to me that it might be walking into the box that the iPhone is already in.

[RACinWNY]

butlerwm: I'm 51 years old, was born in 1957, the biggest year for boomers to be born. :) I got my first computer at home in 1983, a TI994a, after spending at least a year at a friend's mooching time off his computer and modem too. I picked up a Commodore 64, later a 128D. I also got a modem when I got the 64 and life changed dramatically. In between all that I picked up all kinds of systems; a Trash80 Model 1, a Model 4, Model 100 (I got rid of all of those and a ton of other older computers early last year, except for all the Model 100 stuff, which I have a couple BOXES of, and a NEC 8086 laptop that somehow stuck around), had an Apple IIe but never liked it much, picked up a Mac along the way that I never used, BOUGHT an iMac that ditto, I never used and sold, and so on. Even after I moved into the Intel and DOS world I played around with a lot of old and now seemingly oddball computers. Well, some of them were oddball back then too! I did the BBS thing, calling them and running them (even on my Model 4), the CompuServe and Genie and many other defunct services, the FidoNet thing on my last incarnation of BBS before I threw it all in for the then brand new world wide web in '94. I also got into Usenet groups in '85 and fumbled my way around Unix for years, hating every moment of it. I'm not a programmer, other than some BASIC I did in the early 80s, nor do I play one on TV. Computers for the most part have been a hobby, a passion, a lifestyle in some ways and above all else, a tool. I build my own desktops and have for a very long time, mostly because I LIKE it. I'm a geek and always have been. One of my other hobbies is Amateur (Ham) Radio, which I don't remember life without since my Dad and brother were into it when I was very small. I've spent countless hours learning from others like myself and teaching and helping those that wanted to learn more. I loved every minute of it all too.



I hate touchpads too. However, as I've said, rather than drag around my mini mouse and USB dongle I decided that with the netbook I'd at least give it a try. And lo and behold I like it! I have been using this netbook for up to 8 hours at a time too and it's not been an issue. VERY surprising for me. Some years back I had some problems that made using a mouse physically difficult and I just couldn't switch hands with it. I bought, for some ungodly price, a touchpad that hooked into the RS232 port, for my desktop. It was quite a new thing at the time. My laptop at the time, a great Toshiba that's still kicking around in the Ham shack, didn't even have a touchpad. It could be used with your finger OR with a stylus it came with. I hated it. With or without the stylus. It worked fine, in fact the hubby took it over when I tossed it aside in frustration. But today I'm using a touchpad on a little computer, go figure! But a touchscreen in a netbook would be QUITE cool, IMO, but if the netbook IDEA itself dies I don't think we'll see it. At least not in this go round of little computers.



Like I said in my last post, I'd LOVE a 8 hour battery life. Or better! Someday, someday. I also love the idea of text books on the netbook. I am a huge fan of the ebook idea and was one of the first people to buy a device, almost 10 years ago now, called a Rocket eBook made originally by NuvoMedia and sold by them and Franklin. They sold out to a company owned by RCA and that pretty much killed it. But I ran a listserv (REBA) for quite awhile for readers and authors alike and we all loved our REBs. We still use both of ours, believe it or not, and love the idea. We used to travel a LOT and that device was a godsend!! But it wasn't quite "there" yet and I don't think that the Sony reader nor the Kindle is either. Not yet. But on that Rocket eBook I can put more titles than I could read in even one very long vacation (I'm a big reader too) and the battery life is incredible, especially for something that old! We did expand the memory from the stock size, it was an option they offered not too long after it came out and we got it done. There was a lot of talk then on my list about putting text books on it but for so many, many reasons it just didn't happen. I picked up on on ebay for my then Jr. High School aged nephew and he did read quite a bit on it, especially the stuff that is in the public domain that he needed to read for high school. He's finishing up college now and I bet he wishes he could have his textbooks on something like that. Heck, one of the first things I thought about when I started reading about the Asus Eee PC was using it as a text reader. I tried reading on my Palm, every one I had, UGH UGH UGH. I tried reading on my Nintendo DS, UGH UGH UGH. Too small. This AAO would be a great size though, especially if it didn't need a keyboard and was completely navigated using a touch screen. Now THERE would be a device I'd really love as would millions of students of all ages! Hey, maybe THERE Apple could hit the mark in the netbook world! Heck, maybe that would be how Apple would SAVE the netbook!

[butlerwm]

RACinWNY wrote: I'm 51 years old, was born in 1957... a Commodore 64, later a 128D... Trash80
Like I said in my last post, I'd LOVE a 8 hour battery life.
RACinWYN: Oops... I guess I figured wrong. I was going on the age you gave for your dad. But it looks like I have you by a year. I acquired my first computer because it was the same price as a new IBM Selectric but editing manuscripts is a whole lot easier on a computer than a typewriter. Interestingly, my interest in electronics was from my Junior High School HAM radio teacher. It was part and parcel of the Electric Shop class. It was there that I etched my first circuit board and built my first AM radio from scratch. I've pretty much been a tech junky ever since and built my first stereo amp in high school. I imagine I'd have done computers back then, but there just weren't any in the school shop classes at that time. It's interesting that they call them "vocational" classes now. I actually taught a computer maintenance class at the high school here for a couple of years. I still enjoy popping the top on a case and wandering around inside.
There actually have been some recent advances in battery technology in the past few months. I'm hopeful the eight-hour plus battery won't be long in coming. I want to say it was Sony who made an announcement recently, but that's a guess. And ebook readers should have come into their own long ago. However, in the publishing industry (both consumer and educational) they worry about unlicensed copying--imagine that. As such, text book publishers offer absolutely no cost savings on electronic versions of their products. That's unfortunate because what a district pays each year for text books could easily go to the purchase of a UMPC (Ultra Mobile PC) or netbook for every student. Districts could then simply buy a license based on student population and be responsible for reproduction of the volumes on their respective computers.
You're also correct about the reading platform. PDAs just don't cut it. I've owned four (two Palms, a Casio, and an HP) and even in landscape mode the screen just isn't any good for reading a book-length work. I do all of my ebook reading on my laptop (the HP) and I have a preference for the Mobi and Microsoft readers. The offer a full-screen mode that most resembles a real book. Since I've never been one who like reading in bed or in an "easy" chair, sitting at a desk or table is just fine for me. I realize most people tend to like holding the book up in their hands as the read and flip through the pages. As such, laptops don't really fit the model. I know a number of authors who'd like to see ebooks take off. It would help to loose the strangle hold the publishing industry has on the market. But I think we're a long way from seeing that happen. Avid readers still prefer the feel of a tangible book with real pages made from paper. And of course, it's a little hard to show off your collection of ebooks on a book shelf.
Back to the original topic... as I mentioned previously, I wouldn't care who made the product, as long as it has the right form-factor, the right price, and enough horse power to do what it was meant to do, I'm game. I do believe schools and colleges are the market to shoot for. If the hardware industry and the text book publishing industry could get together and decide on a model for a light weight computer with SSD storage, enough memory and processing power to serve as a word processing, spreadsheet, presentation, and ebook platform--add web connectivity either through WiFi or cellular functions, and enough connectors to plug into external storage (either HDD or optical, USB or Firewire), keep the cost in the $500 dollar range, give us 8 hours of battery life (so you can get through an entire school day without a recharge), and they'd have the perfect device to supplant the text book, notebook, scientific calculator, and presentation display device. It would sell because the market is already there and already able to afford the product.
Oh well... it's probably just wishful thinking.

[sfoalex]

My NetBook is the HP2133 which is also an 8.9" screen, but the screen res is 1280x768. You'll notice since you read that other article on that other site that I also posted in that article comments pretty much from the start. For those that claim NetBooks are not full featured, you haven't touched the HP2133 I guess.
* 8.9" screen 1280x768
* 2GB RAM
* 250GB HD
* Express Card 54/34mm slot
* 9 in 1 SD card reader
* 2 USB
* VGA out
* Audio / Video out
* Keyboard is 92% full sized keys.
* Outer shell is anodized aluminum
* Uses either a 6 cell or a 3 cell battery. I have both. 2.6 lbs or 2.8 lbs depending on battery.
Those specs very closely resemble the specs of any laptop sold today except in two areas. The screen is small, and the CPU is a VIA which consumes a single watt of power, which makes these NetBooks last forever on battery. And I so completely agree with RACinWNY when she says you can get used to them easily. I use mine for days at a time. Seriously. She, or someone else mentioned table sizes being an issue and I also agree. 15.4 and even 13.3" laptops are difficult to use on any surfaces. Restaurants, airline seatback tray tables, your lap, etc are not always the best of locations. The smaller the foot print the better off you are. You might look silly with a laptop at the breakfast table in a hotel lobby, but if you need to open up the world of information you'll be thanking yourself that the little gem you chose fits on the table with your eggs, coffee, and bread.

Someone else remarked about materials used. Mine is anodized aluminum. The keys have a gloss coat over the printed letters to make them not only smooth but very resistant to chipping or damage. The HP is the higher end of NetBook. $699 will buy you a 2GB RAM / 120 GB Hard drive model with 6 cell battery. I upgraded mine to 250 GBs and run XP on it.

I just got the January MacWorld 2009 issue, which is a throw back to the #1 issue of MacWorld. When you see the cover, you'll know why. I sold my #1 issue of MacWorld 3 years ago for $200. Anyway, if you turn to page 29 you'll find an article by Peter Cohen "The Case for an Apple NetBook". Even Peter Cohen writes, "Maybe Apple needs to take more of a look around at the rest of the industry, because there are certainly are computers in the $500-and-less category that aren't pieces of junk." And he wrote this in response to Steve Jobs comment "We don't know how to make a $500 computer that's not a piece of junk." The laptop they show in this article is none other than my HP2133.

I also agree with what RACinWNY speculated about Intel and the Atom processor. I found it odd they would say something when in fact the first few batches of Atom processors caught Intel off-guard. They had to catchup on a instant, and surprising customer demand driving backlog as soon as the CPU hit the street.

I'd like to add that the NetBook concept is still very new. I'm on my second one already. The first being that ASUS 701. The industry as a whole is testing the waters by making many different types of NetBooks. They started with 7" screens, worked up to 8.9" and now 10" is on the way. But I agree that too big of a screen drains the battery, and it might increase the foot print. 8.9" in my view is pretty darn perfect. Sure perhaps 1" more, with less dead space all around could be just right. Perhaps if they go LED it would protect the battery life, too. The 7" ASUS with 800 x 480 was too small. I jumped all the way up to 1280, same as my 15.4" and I love it. I just wonder how many of the nay-sayers are folks that either don't need one or don't want one and thus have not tried one at all. I wouldn't want to take meeting notes on an iPhone or any mobile phone. I have owned 2 iPhones, 2 blackberrys, and finally settled on a Moto Q which is a lot like a BlackBerry. It has a small physical keyboard. But when I am taking notes and have to back up and make a correction, or highlight something, I just want to use Word on a PC because I know it well, and I can format the notes as I type them so they are ready to share with everyone right after the meeting. Then I have a clear set of goals to deal with. Everyone gets to see the notes and help fine tune it. They key is small size, WiFi or 3G, and software you know like the back of your hand.

On topic, I don't think the NetBook industry needs Apple. If Apple doesn't want to make profits on a new and emerging market, well... that's their loss. But I have plenty of Mac friends that tell me they'd buy one if Apple released one. There is a clear demand for them on the Windows / Linux side. I don't think Apple wnats to make one because they likely can't see a way to squeeze 33% margins on them. But I remember reading an article about ASUS when they first released the EEEPC. In that article, ASUS claimed Apple asked them to make something like an EEEPC for them. Knowing Apple it will take 2 years to come to life, but I'll bet Apple is working on a NetBook. But rather than commit to a time-table which will cause your customer base to stop and wait for it, it's easier and perhaps even better to say we don't know how to make one. And then start making one so that in a year or two when costs of hardware drops a little they might themselves in a situation where their design cost under $333 to manufacture and thus they can maintain their normal 33% disgusting, I mean Gross margin. Until then, Apple would rather bad-mouth the industry.

Alex Alexzander