Mac haters are a weird breed to me. I have a Mac Mini, a Mac Pro Desktop (I'm on that now), a Macbook Pro Laptop, and several other Apple computers. I've had zero downtime with any of these machines, and I've been using Apple products since 2005.

I'll give you a customer support example: last week, I wanted to see if some odd software hiccups were caused by the type of video card I have (two Nvidia 9800 cards because the machine is from 2009). I inquired to Apple if they thought it was the cause of the weirdness I was seeing, and they sent me a free $300 card just to make sure that wasn't the issue. Here's the punchline .. this computer was NEVER under warranty, since I bought it via the developer program. Four years later, I get a free video card. Fanatical support, without an exception, in my experience.

Those who hate on Macs usually haven't owned one, and although it's cliche to say they couldn't afford one, it's also a truism in some cases. I've considered building a Hackintosh, but the build quality would be inferior to just spending $3k-$5k and buying a Mac Pro Desktop. If you've ever swapped a part inside of one, you'll know what I'm talking about. I'm all for saving money, but saying that a "fake" Mac is just as good as a real one is somewhat of a straw-man argument. A computer isn't just about the hardware it's made of.

Understandable, I hear Mac Pro's are best for editing and rendering video.

I've had an iMac since 2008. It's older, but with a periodic OS re-install and RAM upgrade, it still runs flawlessly. when the time comes I'll probably purchase a PC, though.

Hate to break it to you but you're talking about software differences, not hardware. I'd have to pull it up, but I did a post a while back covering this very topic.. and at the end of the day, you get the same cheapest bidder hardware that PCs have. The *only* difference are a few bios additions (EFI), and a different firmware on the video cards.

Th mac pro consists of...

Motherboards: manufactured by Foxxconn.. a PC motherboard manufacturer.

CPU - Made by intel. The exact same Xeon processors I use in my home workstation and servers.

Memory - Made by whoever was cheapest at the time... Samsung, Micron, et al. Nothing special

HDD's - the same platter or ssd disks you get in any other PC
video cards - I think they're using AMD cards now. The ONLY difference between a PC GPU and a mac GPU is the firmware

The only thing really "custom" or "proprietary" is the chassis when it comes to hardware.

As far as software goes.. comparing Windows to Linux to OS X (unix) has been an ageless debate.

OS X derives from unix and therefore, by default, has less stability issues and vulnerabilities than Windows.

Not to mention... Apple only manufactures a select amount of hardware that is generally guaranteed to work with their software. There are no drivers to download, install and maintain. Like linux, OS X (unix) beats Windows in this regard.

On the other hand, Windows is NOT developed for a specific limited range of hardware. It is developed for a nearly endless range of hardware, from countless manufacturers, and in countless different configurations. This is where Windows shines the most... because whether your budget only allows for a $300 system or a $3,000+ system, chances are it'll run Windows just fine... The only drawback is installing drivers.

And then there is Linux. Which, in my opinion, has the best of both worlds. It's highly compatible with near countless hardware, manufacturers and configurations; usually requires no driver installs; and basically just works. The problem with Linux comes in the form of rather limited software availability. Sure, you can find open source alternatives for most things.. but let's be real, in most cases, nothing beats the real thing. The 1 true thing in my direct opinion that is holding Linux back though is Direct X. While OpenGL has been around far longer, Direct X remains the "king" when it comes to gaming. The day that changes though is the day Linux really picks up.

Quite a lot apparently.. else the "hackintosh" community wouldn't be so active heh...

That's not entirely true. Let me snap you a quick picture of the video card that just came in the mail.

I'm going to call BS on Apple sending you a free $300 video card... sorry, but Apple didn't build the company they did by sending free hardware. And chances are, your 2009 machine running 2 9800's is still running 10.5, maybe 10.6.. and therefore isn't compatible with newer GPU since Apple doesn't retroactively update their drivers for newer hardware to work in older software.

Now, if you managed to get past the lion upgrade issues with an old 2009 machine, got it running without flaws; then perhaps the gpu would work... but I cannot see any scenario on this side of hell where Apple would send you free hardware.


As to the rest.. do your research. Aside from a few minor things like EFI Bios and it's own firmware on GPUs, there is very little difference between your average PC hardware and your average Mac hardware... the only difference is the cost.

This isn't your average video card:

http://twitpic.com/show/thumb/btl97i.jpg

Even the ports are specific to the Mac, for my monitors. The "mass market" version of this card, the NVidia 9800 GT, is not the same spec.

Before you bother wasting time with that...

Nvidia makes what is called a "reference GPU" for each new model they produce. Hadware manufacturers then "design" their own based off of the reference design. Different companies make different changes, most of which are with the cooling. Some companies overclock, some don't. Etc etc. But at the end of the day, they're all the same cards.

And there is no difference when it comes to "Mac" specific GPU's. The only difference is the firmware. So for instance, the 9800 GPU you have or had in your mac... I can take a PC "branded" 9800, flash the mac firmware and run it in a Mac... there are absolutely zero differences in the hardware specs.

Sadly, you're wrong on every count here. Apple sent me the card, completely free.

I run Mountain Lion, 10.8.2. My machine is a dual-processor Quad-Core Xeon (8 cores total) with 12GB of RAM. Even by today's standards, it's a fast machine. My architecture is identical to a Mac Pro you'd buy today, right down to the 6.4 GT/s bus.

There are NO "issues" with upgrading this machine to Mountain Lion, as it's what it ships with today. The machines are identical.

You truly have NO idea what you're talking about here, sorry.

How is it not the same? The only difference is the fan cover.. Ok, and the addition of the display port connector in newer cards (or w/e supposedly awesome connection type they use these days).. I forgot about that one reference design difference... my bad. Doesn't change the simple fact that the underlying hardware is the same.

You're wrong, again. I'm starting to see why you hate Macs: you have no idea about them. It has nothing to do with overclocking, or anything of that nature. The cable isn't a DVI cable, it's a mini display port. You really don't understand the hardware (or, apparently, even the software, from your last post).

Yet, that's not the point, is it? You're creating a straw-man argument. You're saying that just because the specs are the same, it works the same, and is therefore some sort of rip off. In your world, a TV with the same specs that plugs into your cable box ONLY via Coaxial cable is somehow the same as one that uses HDMI.

I'm not going to waste a ton more time with you, unfortunately -- we'll just have to agree to disagree. However, I have a bunch of Macs sitting here, so I'd say that I know a bit more about them.

Funny, I run the same hardware in the workstation I'm on now. And I also installed and ran "hackintosh" completely flawlessly on this system for a long time... aside from the motherboard...

Asus Z8NA-D6C
Dual Intel E5620 cpus
12 GB DDR 1333 ECC Registered Ram
I forget what gpu I was running at the time, but it may have been the one I still run which is an MSI N560GTX-Ti... or it may have been an older 9800. Can't recall anymore.

I spent a LOT of time in the "hackintosh" game. And sometimes I still consider going back, but to be completely honest, I can't stand Finder... even with the "Total Finder" (or w/e it was called) addon...

I've done the research... I spent weeks comparing the true differences. Have you? I doubt it.. all you likely did was read the brochure.

Nothing has really changed in the 3 years since I took the time to sit down and research the shit out of both sides of the fence... well, aside from performance specs.

I had to research this a bit to see just how wrong you were. Even a Mac Pro Desktop from 2006 (the first one to come out) can run 10.7 (Lion) officially, and without any issues. And if you upgrade your GPU and emulate EFI64, you can run 10.8. Everything from early 2008 and up is fully supported by Apple for 10.8.x (Mountain Lion).

My machine, a 2009 Mac Pro, has EFI64 out of the box. It's a 64-bit kernel, just like a 2012 Mac Pro. It's an Intel X58 Chipset, just like a 2012 Mac Pro. Same system bus. Same memory. Same supported operating system: Mac OS X 10.8 "Mountain Lion".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_pro

I know full well the differences between DVI, HDMI and displayport. The actual technical differences. Do you?

By the way, you can buy PC GPU cards with displayport. In case you weren't aware.

Oh, and you are 100% incorrect. I do not hate Mac, or Apple, or any of their products. When I first started researching Mac and contemplated buying a Mac pro, I spent hours and hours each day in the Apple store, comparing different Mac pro configurations to their PC counterparts. And then I dug deeper, and deeper still. All the facts are there should you choose to research them. And the facts are... There is absolutely nothing special about Mac hardware. Nothing whatsoever.

And to be even more clear.. if not for my utter distaste of using Finder, I'd probably still be running my "hackintosh"

Another failed assumption. One of my laptops is a Hackintosh, only because I bought it cheap from a friend, and desired to have OS X for productivity reasons. It's not as stable for me as native OS X, but that's part of why buying a "real" Mac was worth it to me. The day I'm too broke to afford $3k-$5k for a real computer every couple of years is a sad time.

Sadly, while your hardware might be the "same" in your mind, it A) won't hook up to my Cinema Display monitors, and B) would be laughed out of the store if you brought it in for support. I'm not into wasting my own time if something goes wrong -- it's too valuable to me.

It's funny that you're saying you've "done the research" when you don't even know basic things about the platform.

Not trying to pick a fight with you, it just irks me when people spout of ignorant shit while pretending to me some sort of authority on the subject.

It's like when Honda drivers used to come up to my Viper at a light and yell "I've got the same horsepower!" ... yeah, but they were still in a Honda.

That's another straw-man, because now you're talking about a GPU that would be priced like a Mac's GPU would be. So, you're not comparing PC to Mac, now you're comparing Mac to Mac and pretending like you aren't.

Today I Learned: Someone who you've never met personally knows more about your computer than you do.

100 Apple haters.

My K-Mart purse is the same as your Louis Vuitton -- they're both made out of fabric and hold things.

Umm, hate to break it to you but I was there when Lion was released. There were a LOT of issues with upgrading older Macs. They likely eventually got ironed out I'm sure, but to say the issues weren't there is pretty ignorant.

By the way... the kernel is software, not hardware. So no, Your 2009 Mac Pro does not have EFI64 "out of the box". The software that runs on it does.

Either way, you missed the point. The point was the simple fact that newer Mac hardware is not supported in older OS X software, not that older Mac hardware isn't supported in newer OS X software.

For instance, the Intel Xeon 5620's that I run in my machine simply will not run on 10.5. Nor will 10.6 run on the 5620 or newer cpus to this day. The same thing applies to GPU's.

Nor would it run on 10.6 "out of the box". Support for the 5620's didn't come until 10.6.3, or 10.6.4. I forget which one. But after working with a few people at insanelymac, I got 10.6 running, updated it to 10.6.3 and it ran otherwise flawlessly on my machine until 10.7 came out. And with 10.7 came the ability to "vanilla install" OS X on to my machine.. meaning, ALL pure Apple software, no hacked kernels; no modified kexts; no EFI strings.

Oh and for the sake of being thorough, at the time I was running an Inno3D GTS 250 512MB 256B with full QE/CI capabilities on 10.6 (not that that I expect you to really know what that is)...

:thumbsup:thumbsup:thumbsup

Godamn apple for not being able to see into the future when they code their OS iterations. Cunts.

As in my last post, with 10.7 came the ability to run pure OS X. No modified kernels, no modified kexts, no EFI strings. 10.6 was trickier for sure, but the end result was the same.

Any why wouldn't my system run on your cinema display monitors? What, because the specific card I have doesn't have displayport/mini displayport? That's easily resolved.

Why would I need to worry about Apple support? Unlike you, I know exactly what is in my machines, and therefore I wouldn't be stuck calling a hotline and saying "something' wrong, please help". I'd know how to identify the problem and fix it myself.

As far as not spending the money on a Mac.. I chose not to. At the end of the day, the system I run now ran me a bit over 3k. Choosing not to spend another 1k+ for "Mac hardware" of the same spec was exactly that, a choice. But I like how you try to used the same failed argument that every other mac fanboy uses... you didn't kick out the money for a "real" mac because you can't afford to.

And once again, I could run Lion, and likely even mountain lion, on this machine in their pure form - meaning not having to "hack" shit to make it work flawlessly. The only thing I have to do is run a separate boot loader to work around lack of EFI in my bios. That's akin to running windows bootloader, or grub, or grub2 and has zero impact on the system software itself.

Translation - I enjoy the Mac experience so much, over the Windows /PC, that i have spent

Trying to recreate the Mac experience... on a 'pc'...

However I cant / Wont / am unable to afford the same 'Out of the box experience that I am DESPERATELY trying to emulate...

So I will slag it off, and call those who CAN enjoy it stupid...

http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instanc...0/31028441.jpg

YOU'RE WELCOME!


:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

The point.

You missed it.

But thanks for playing.

I advise you to stick with poo :D

I don't even think I've ever seen a hammer hit the nail on the head so correctly as you just did. :thumbsup

Let me explain it to you idiots one more time. Your Mac is just a pc with an Apple logo on it which makes it twice as expensive.
There is nothing better about it. It's just more expensive.
Your Mac is not better than my pc because it's a Mac.
You only think it is because you paid 1000 bucks more for it.
I don't hate Apple. I hate idiots who think their Mac is something special. Something better than my pc. It is not.
You live in a retarded fantasy world.
Their marketing works well. Very well.

Sure thing. If that's what people want to believe then so be it.

I'm sorry for you guys though who hold on to the tired ass "you can't afford a real mac" nonsense in order to feel superior with the shit they wasted money on.

Ignorance would be implying that this particular Mac is anything but identical to the current one you'd buy in the store. You're talking out of your ass, trying to cover up for fucking up. You were wrong, it's ok -- we all make mistakes. But trying to backpedal and invent excuses for it is just silly. This Mac is identical to the newer macs, and if they run it, so do I. If you're implying that Mac OS X had some sort of install issue on the current generation of Macs, then that'd be a completely separate issue, and not one I really care about since it's not relevant to your mistake.


Since EFI64 has nothing to do with the kernel, it seems you're once again talking about something you don't understand. But it's ok: I'm used to it by now. The kernel mode preference for a Mac was 32-bit in client machines and 64-bit in server machines for the 2009 model. Mine is a 64-bit "out of the box" kernel. When I went to OS X Lion, it was 64 by default in the OS, so it stopped mattering. Sorry if that's too complex to wrap your brain around, but I really can't dumb it down any further.


It's you who is missing the point: my hardware isn't "older," it's current-gen equivalent. If you went to a Mac store right now to buy one, you'd get one that's just like the one I'm typing on. Implying it's "older" or "different" somehow doesn't even make sense.

No one brought up the "older" software but you, and you were wrong. It was a strange thing to say then, and making it seem like there was some weird incompatibility with the current-gen Mac Pro is not only incorrect, but a weird thing to say.

There was never an issue upgrading this Mac, and to imply there was or ever could have been is just incorrect, like much of what you've been saying.


You don't have a Mac, so what you have in your machine, and whether it's compatible with Mac OS X doesn't matter. Never have I had to modify anything on my machine to install an OS X upgrade, nor has anyone else with the generation of my machine.


Implying that my technical knowledge is somehow inferior to the guy who is consistently wrong is also a weird thing to do .. but I understand why you'd do it.

Since you're just randomly making shit up now for the sake of trying to cover up how poorly you understand the space, don't be surprised if I don't reply. My apologies -- again, not trying to be a bad guy here, you're just completely talking out of your ass at this point.

And, since I run a Mac, I never had to do any of those things. Shazzam.


So your assertion is that when I run into a kext that is broken in an OS X update, I should somehow modify it myself instead of talking to my dedicated Apple rep, who forwards it to Engineering, who fixes it in the next rev? Yup, makes perfect sense. Wtf?


:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Ok, I'm out. Like shooting fish in a barrel.

This. :thumbsup

To me, it's nothing more than preference. I choose to run Mac, because I like Mac OS X, and it works more easily with my native Mac, than having to bungle around with Hackintosh like some kid. Is that worth $1k to me? Yup, because again: I'm not a kid. I'm a business man who wants to get to doing business, not cock around with the inner workings of my computer to save a few bucks.

Sheep that blindly defend the Mac like it's some God-like object because it costs more are retarded. Use what you want, don't try to tell people your shit is better -- it's better for YOU. For me, it works wonders for my productivity. For someone else, it might be harder to use. To each his or her own. The flip side of the coin, people who blindly rage against Macs, don't make much sense either .. and, as we've seen in this thread, they rarely know what they're even talking about.

I think this is likely the only time I'd ever agree with you on anything.. but this is exactly it.

I said it many times, I don't hate Mac, or Apple, or any of their products. I simply choose to not pay more than something is worth just so I can feel like the product I own is better, even though the hardware is the same as what I actually bought.

And as far as the "Honda vs Porsche" failed analogy goes... how do you figure a system with the exact same hardware specs as the Mac Pro from it's time makes it a honda? That alone truly shows just how little you actually know.

The only discernible difference between a PC and a Mac is the chassis... and, well. I like my Aerocool Xpredator x3, thanks. The internals are the same. Intel didn't make a "better" Intel Xeon CPU line for Macs. Foxconn didn't make a "better" motherboard line for Macs. Samsung, Micron, etc didn't make "better" ram for Macs. IBM, Seagate, Toshiba didn't make "better" hard drives.... so on and so forth.

How much work do I have to do to get it to run Mac OS X? None. I turn my system on, and my Mac OS X desktop loads. By your own admission, you've wasted a ton of time on that same thing. Your time must not be valuable to you -- mine is.

That's all that matters, really.

You don't seem like a bad guy, but you keep trying to defend your simple mistakes with more and more outlandish stores. It makes you seem petty and a bit ridiculous. If you would have just said something like "I don't understand Macs because I've never owned one, but I think this is what you'd run into, and this is why," you would have gotten a lot further than just throwing out random "OMFG YOU ARE WRONG I KNOW MORE ABOUT YOUR COMPUTER THAN YOU DO" stuff ... especially since you were wrong about so many times, lol.

But, again, to each his or her own.

The only difference you have proven between yourself and I is... While you're calling the customer support hotline asking for help, I already have the answers.

Just think. If people never CHOSE to go in and tinker with hardware, software, or anything else in the world... there wouldn't be PC's, wouldn't be Macs, wouldn't be linux, etc. We'd still be in the dark ages.

I could just as easily have bought a Mac Pro. But why waste money that I don't need to waste?

I like building shit. I like tearing things down and finding out how they work. And as an end result, I can run install and run Windows, Linux or Mac on this machine, natively. The choice is mine. And it's people with minds like mine - well, far greater than mine really, but with the same or similar ideology - that make all these things simple consumers such as yourself enjoy.

Again, while you're on the phone with Apple support, I've already addressed the problem. This is the difference between you and I.

I just still don't understand why these Apple user haters get their vitriol from.

Why do they *care* what OS someone else uses?

Its really not about 'Believing...' - Its the words directly out of you're own mouth...

I dont care if you have a PC or a Mac - Nor do I care about what your bank balance is...
Neither effect me, in any way shape or form...

However I dont agree with the 'slaggin off'

CHOICE is a GREAT THING - Mac ? PC? Whatever - I'm just glad we live in a world where we can choose :)

Peace :)

So how would you have fixed a weird video bug in the newest Kext? They introduced the bug as part of a software update, and I wasn't interested in rolling back the Kext to an earlier version.

So you'd invest what -- a few weeks -- in fixing that, when I can just call Apple, and they send me a free video card, just IN CASE it's a bad card and not a software bug? Makes COMPLETE sense, lol.

It's weird that you think I don't do it because I *can't* do it, rather than WHY would I do it? Practice? LOL.


Because, instead, you're wasting your time. I'm working on my next project, and you're dicking around with something that isn't making you money.


That's a weird argument, since I was the Vice President of Business Development for the company that released Python 2.0 -- something you use when you install Linux. What contributions have you made, with all of your tinkering? Not trying to be a jerk, just trying to point out why your assumptions are a bit silly.


No, you really haven't, unless you have access to Apple's code. You aren't going to be fixing a bug in their OS release. It's weird to imply that you would, or could. What you WOULD be doing is going out to the store to go buy a video card. Me? I'm making a phone call, and in 5 minutes, one is in the mail to me, as well as a follow-up from the engineers to make sure the problem is getting fixed, if it's a software problem.

Your arguments are bizarre, I'm really sorry to put it that way.