Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Like 0

PC or Mac?

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

eonisuk
eonisuk  7108 forum posts England
5 Feb 2009 - 10:24 AM


Quote: One born every minute

i always got told not to knock anything until you have tried it

eon

Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links 
5 Feb 2009 - 10:24 AM

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

joolsb
joolsb  927115 forum posts Switzerland38 Constructive Critique Points
5 Feb 2009 - 11:45 AM


Quote: bit like Betamax

Actually, Betamax was a massive success for Sony. It was re-branded and sold as a broadcast-quality format and became the industry standard.

mdpontin
mdpontin  106016 forum posts Scotland
5 Feb 2009 - 11:56 AM

It's quite amusing watching the slow, inexorable spread of Mac owners in the (tech) company I work for. Amusingly, it's often the most technically knowledgeable people, often starting out fiercely antipathetic to Macs, who end up buying them. Smile

joolsb
joolsb  927115 forum posts Switzerland38 Constructive Critique Points
5 Feb 2009 - 12:10 PM


Quote: Bet that really helped people who'd bought a Betamax VCR?

Like those who went for HD-DVD instead of Blu-Ray? Early adopters often end up paying the price. Goes with the territory.

Betacam was rebranded and further-developed Betamax. Of course it could never be identical to the domestic system, broadcast requirements being a lot more stringent. Twist it how you like, Sony still managed to make a success out of their failure with Betamax.

strawman
strawman  1022004 forum posts United Kingdom16 Constructive Critique Points
5 Feb 2009 - 12:38 PM

I am told the 747 was initially a failure, it was designed for a military contract, and lost.

As for technical areas buying Mac, where I work there are ex Mac users, none the other way. Its only an OS and hardware, the applications are more interesting, and as Windows has stabilised from 2000 onwards, they have one by one drifted from Apple.

To my knowledge it was the less technical aware that bought Mac as that should be its advantage. I must have a look at the apple buying demographics again.

Quote: Apple's customers are like no others a rich blend of the most sociologically elite with those seeking elegant, simple computing. Apple's panache has enabled them to maintain some of the highest margins in the industry, while also sustaining a brand loyalty level which is the envy of
many.
In addition to singular demographics, Apple's users have a unique profile in the ways they use their personal computers. Unlike users of Intel/Windows computers, a significant portion of Apple's users are active, exploratory, avant-garde and early adopters.

I think this is a better description. So for Apple it is essential they are trying to push new features and making their products look more elegant, the technical content or actual performance need not be that high, just the perception needs to be.

Last Modified By strawman at 5 Feb 2009 - 12:45 PM
strawman
strawman  1022004 forum posts United Kingdom16 Constructive Critique Points
5 Feb 2009 - 12:47 PM

P.S enjoy your new MAC, it will no doubt be good just don't sign up for the "religion" Smile

Apple have forged a good market, and I have to congratulate their product placement and marketing people for doing a good job and stretching out far more profit from their customers than the others. So as a business concern I have to congratulate them, but worry about how they cope with life without Jobb's.

Their niche is one where style is a key priority, even more than functionality. In a way it has aspects of a fashion good, just recognise that and the profit margin as a consumer.

If you want stylish then it is there, so it depends on your values on style V's price etc. Its not bad or wrong, just different.

Last Modified By strawman at 5 Feb 2009 - 12:53 PM
joolsb
joolsb  927115 forum posts Switzerland38 Constructive Critique Points
5 Feb 2009 - 1:02 PM


Quote: You're right, I know loads of Betamax owners who saw it as an opportunity to forget about hiring movies and instead set up a TV production company to make their own.

Good grief. This is pathetic. Even for you, Chris.

strawman
strawman  1022004 forum posts United Kingdom16 Constructive Critique Points
5 Feb 2009 - 1:03 PM

Oh and further P.S there is nothing wrong on buying for style as long as you recognise it. I had an Alfa once, and to be honest an equivalent Ford Mondeo is technically a better car, but there was something about the sounds, the controls, even watching the car slide into view on the mirrored windows at a car park I go to frequently.

But I would never try and say the Alfa was better, just different, and I guess that is my point, a computer is a work thing a tool, so focus is on price and performance, looks, pha .......... I could never have justified the Alfa on price or performance, but I still miss it. I even sat in a 2nd hand one the other day and it brought back happy memories, plus a pain in the left ankle as I remember the seating position you "adapt" to. The Mondeo I drove off in was never more accomplished, or boring Wink And the Skoda the same but more so. Probably the best car I have ever owned, but a bit clinical, if good value.

Now to others that will not be true, so the debate will rage.

Enjoy your toys Smile Wink

And the enjoyment is in the banter, the debate is pointless as neither side will see the others point, buy what you can afford and does your job.

Last Modified By strawman at 5 Feb 2009 - 1:07 PM Helpful Post! This post was flagged as helpful
mdpontin
mdpontin  106016 forum posts Scotland
5 Feb 2009 - 1:25 PM


Quote: To my knowledge it was the less technical aware that bought Mac as that should be its advantage.

That depends on what it is you're looking for in a computer system. Actually the strength of the Macintosh is more that it combines good technical design with (in general) the avoidance of unnecessary complication in the user interface. Techies may not need the simplicity, in which case they can dig deeper if they want to. For those who want a computer that does what they need but doesn't get in the way more than necessary, it's equally a good choice.

I take your point about the vast array of software available for Windows as opposed to the Mac, but there at least two points to make in response to that:

Firstly, the vast majority of users of either Mac OS X or Windows use a small selection of software titles, and what they need will be available on either platform. The fact that billions of titles may be available isn't in itself an advantage for most people.

Secondly, It only becomes an advantage if you need something relatively less common, in which case you may have an easier time finding a Windows version than a Mac version, although you still may well find something that does the job for either system.

It's a bit like the argument that Canon/Nikon are the only camera systems worth considering because they have a vast array of lenses available. Nobody needs thousands of lenses, and pretty much any manufacturer will have the lenses that most people need. If you have more specialised needs, then yes you need to investigate in a bit more detail first. (I realise this isn't a particularly accurate analogy).

There is one exception, i.e. popular software that is far more widely available on Windows than on the Mac: games. This is almost entirely because most games are written to use Microsoft's DirectX, which is only available on Windows (a good way of tying people to the Windows platform). If you're into PC gaming, the Mac is not for you. Or if you still want/need a Mac but also want to play PC games, you'd need to boot into Windows for that.


Quote: Oh and further P.S there is nothing wrong on buying for style as long as you recognise it.

Agreed. However, although I'm sure you didn't mean it that way, it's rather patronising (and inaccurate) to imply that it's a general truth that those who choose a Mac do so on the basis of style, and then try to pretend otherwise.

Last Modified By mdpontin at 5 Feb 2009 - 1:28 PM
strawman
strawman  1022004 forum posts United Kingdom16 Constructive Critique Points
5 Feb 2009 - 1:44 PM

Doug I was just emphasising that for the demographic data I saw, the style and perception factor was a large part for many buyers. I agree that for what you need for photo editing and web browsing etc, both can do it.

Hence my genuine feeling that applications are far more important.

But I also know that through design, cost is added, and performance is sacrificed, in order to achieve a look. Take the iMAC, it is stylish and all in one. But for the same money you could have a base station with a bit more grunt and a bigger monitor and still have the MAC OS etc. And I also know they retail at a higher margin, so from a business perspective I see it as great, the benefit to Apple outweighs the cost penalty.

Now for some how the machine looks is very important, for others less so. It is a value judgement. I just think that the hardware design could give more to the serious photo editor with a bit less style. But is that style a core integral part of the "Apple experience" and I think yes it is.

And remember I happily paid more for the Alfa, but I also recognised that in a way it was paying for style. I just recognised it. I did not think I patronised myself. Did I??? I was just being honest. People buy clothes to be stylish.

sorry I am doing some marketing studies and learning a lot, I had not understood before in terms of technical marketing. Believe it or not this process has been educational :-0)

Last Modified By strawman at 5 Feb 2009 - 1:47 PM
joolsb
joolsb  927115 forum posts Switzerland38 Constructive Critique Points
5 Feb 2009 - 2:11 PM


Quote: But I also know that through design, cost is added, and performance is sacrificed, in order to achieve a look.

I think what you are missing is that with the Mac it is not just a question of style for the sake of it. There is a trend in PCs, now, to make them look 'stylish' with black casing, swoopy plastic shapes, etc., etc. But it just ends up looking naff because it's often little more than a cheap add-on.

Apple gear looks the way it does because a lot of thought goes into the design and the choice of materials. Open the box and as much thought is given to the internals as it is to the shell. Open the average PC and, frankly, it's a bit of a mess.

One of the reasons the iPod is the success it is comes down to a design that both looks aesthetically pleasing and works in a simple and intuitive way.

With Apple products the design element is much more than skin-deep. And that's what PC users (and Apple's competitors) just don't get.

yellowduke
5 Feb 2009 - 2:56 PM

Can you upgrade the components in a Mac? I'm a PC and assemble my own.

joolsb
joolsb  927115 forum posts Switzerland38 Constructive Critique Points
5 Feb 2009 - 3:23 PM

It depends which model you buy. Some are easier to upgrade than others.

If you want to build your own, then I guess a Mac is not for you.

mlewis
mlewis  91475 forum posts United Kingdom
5 Feb 2009 - 4:01 PM


Quote: Can you upgrade the components in a Mac? I'm a PC and assemble my own.

Yes to the Mac Pro. Only the RAM and hard disk can be changed in all the other ones.

yellowduke
5 Feb 2009 - 4:02 PM

I'm not a fan of Macs but was curious about component upgrading. Not being able to do much if anything in that respect would be a non starter for me.

Add a Comment

You must be a member to leave a comment

Username:
Password:
Remember me:
Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.