tomreedtoon wrote:

And for the price of upgrading it with a third-party processor system, which will be buggy and will probably crash and burn anyway, I could buy a very fast Windows machine - already built. (I wouldn't even do that; I'd buy the parts and upgrade an old throwaway computer.)...It can't be upgraded, unless I go to people with mysterious "processor upgrades" that look like a component from a nuclear weapon in a movie, all heat sinks and stray wires. Apple does not approve of those and they are only made by one guy, and software compatibility is iffy. That's as bad as buying a new Mac at retail.

Upgrades for your 8 year-old "Sawtooth" G4 are actually pretty common, sort-of cheap and very reliable. They're made by reputable companies with reputable (IBM and Motorola) chips. I have a 7-year old G4 Cube with a 1.2GHz processor that runs 24/7 without a hiccup, as my primary web and mail server for the last 5 years. Currently, the Mac Pro's and Mac Mini's offer an upgradable processor -- the same white-box Intel chips that you can find on the cheap at the DIY sites.

But I maintain a $1000 laptop costs too much. A $500 laptop costs too much. When Jobs releases a new functional laptop for $250, let me know....Meanwhile, for that $250 (which is what a laptop SHOULD cost) I can still put together a functional, fast PC from a used, discarded case, working power supply and hard drive. Kinda heavy to carry around, but at least I can still afford my daily bowl of gruel.

You might want to let the OLPC folks know that their low-cost $200 laptop is too expensive in your humble opinion. And you must be some sort of computer god to be able to put together a functional laptop out of used and kitbashed components.

The person buying a new Mac today will be crying five years from now when the latest Apple software won't run on it.

Except it likely will run on it -- 6-7 year old Macs are supported by 10.5. Show me a PC that lasts 5 years, let alone a 2005 or earlier model that will run Vista.

Pinwiz wrote:

I like my computer to be a gaming rig, and Macs and games don't mix. I know this is becoming less and less true but until the conventional wisdom changes I'll be standing by that statement. If the market share improves and all of the games that I want to play will be simultaneously released for the Mac, I'll consider switching.

Conventional wisdom (or at least popular opinion) also holds that Iraq financed 9/11 -- it doesn't make it any more true than what you said. EA's recent releases were simultaneous on the Mac and PC; ID has promised same-day releases of their upcoming titles -- hell Carmack announced them at an Apple event.

Bite me, PC vs. Mac commercials.

Advertising (especially wildly successful advertising) is a very superficial reason to like or dislike a product.

I have nightmares of the old early-90s default Mac Font. It's not their fault, it just bugs me.

Let me guess, you prefer Comic Sans or Helve--- er, Arial? I can't tell whether you're talking about Chicago or Charcoal (menu fonts), or Gil Sans -- but a lot of usability studies went into those font choices for the GUI.

I'm not paying for one just now. I can't afford another computer. Someone want to give a recent model to me for free?

Ah, so all the "I can buy and build my own machine" rant was just a foil -- the fact is that you're broke or just want a handout. Bash the platform, claim superiority over the user base, then ask for a $1,000-3,000 gift.

--

The point is, computers are tools -- use whichever hardware/software gets the job that you need done, done in the most efficient manner. For me, it doesn't matter whether that a DIY Athalon box running XP that crunches data from my race car's acquisition hardware (which was, incidentally replaced by a Mac Pro with Bootcamp), a Solaris box, an SG Onxy cube a Mac Mini that's serving as my TiFaux media center or the aforementioned G4 Cube that runs 10.4 Server (soon to be 10.5) and has been rock-solid for years.

That said, I'm glad to see that one of the most innovative and interface-focused electronic companies on the planet is financially healthy. It almost makes me wonder how much more successful giants like Microsoft and Sony would be if they'd adopt similar philosophies.

From the linked article:

"That's unacceptable. 'Out of stock'? That's like saying, 'We're out of ammo.' That's like saying 'The Marines are going to close tomorrow.' It just seems a bit weird," DeLaRosa said. "There have been a lot of guys wounded, but not to the point that we're out of medals." (Emphasis added.)

Ironically, police departments from all over the U.S. are now curtailing firearms training due to a shortage of ammunition -- a shortage created by the prodigious rate at which ammunition is being used in Iraq (and Afghanistan).

I wouldn't be shocked if we started hearing about ammunition shortages amongst reserve units soon -- perhaps the Army will begin to tout the "effectiveness" of the bayonet charge against entrenched insurgents...

...This is just more evidence of how badly Bush has broken the U.S. military (and how the military rushed to embrace the engine of its own destruction). Be thankful that this country faces no serious national security threats for the foreseeable future.

I spent 9 of the last 10 years as a national security and counter-terrorism analyst (and the last five years banging my head against my desk out of frustration).