*" And I really fail to see what is misleading about them.'

*try no costs, features, even what the machines look like, included software, where to get them.... just a smug little 'skit'... they ain't adverts at all...

I would have thought details like those would have been important in an advert.. would'nt you?

Not talking about those things is not misleading. Misleading would be lying to you about the costs or where to get them or whatever.

Do national Coke ads tell you how much Coke costs, where to get it, what the ingredients are, or even what it tastes like? I think you are misunderstanding the purpose of these ads.

whatever. you think what you think and I'll think what I think. whats it matter anyway?

I just don't like 'Smug' or "arrongant' and turn over when the so called 'adverts' come on.

It matters naught, except that you were labeling them as misleading which is incorrect. If you had said uninformative, then I wouldn't have bothered to say anything except maybe to point out that these are national brand awareness ads and as such probably wouldn't get into nitty gritty details anyway.

i just love the fact that my pc is cheaper to repair and upgrade....nuff said

The only time this whole "war" gets to me is when I'm minding my business using my powerbook and some smart a$$ walks up to me and starts with the whole Mac/PC nonsense. In an airport once I had to tell the guy to stop trolling because he was not on the internet and I was in particularly ornery  mood and I was going to hurt him. (layovers, delays, etc.) There was no need for him to start with me. I was sitting down charging my mac finishing up a movie that I started on a previous flight. (With earplugs!)

The sad thing is that any discussion with a PC zealot ends up reinforcing the, "arrogance" myth. I'm a nice guy, usually, and if someone asks me a non-loaded question I am happy to oblige. Most of the time it starts with, why did you waste your money on that? You could have..... Thats not nice and will not elicit a nice response.
I have never walked up to someone using a Dell or HP and bothered them. Never. I don't understand the compulsion to bother people with Macs. (Usually people just hover around and then decide to leave me alone. I'm not a very inviting looking person. Just every now and then someone gets a bug up their a$$ and deices to ruin my day)

I usually never take part in these threads because they are pointless. Everyone just gets pissed off and walks away with greater ill will toward the other camp.

A computer says absolutely nothing about a person and judging based on computer of choice is foolish. My friends have very similar personalities and they all use different platforms. Some Mac and some prefer PC. Some have a Craftsman drill at home others have Dewalt. Who cares.

Put some duct tape over the Apple logo. Keeps at least some of the morons away. Also, after giving them almost two grand for a computer, I don't feel like carrying around a billboard with free advertising on it.

i just love the fact that my pc is cheaper to repair and upgrade....nuff said Let's see: I switched in 1986 and I'm using my computer on a regular basis, i.e. several hours each day, mainly to make money. We have a hybrid environment in our office, about 10 Win PC, 1 Linux PC, and 1 Mac. The average administration overhead for a Win PC versus a Mac has been at least 20 minutes a week in the past 20 years. Most of the overhead is directly or indirectly caused by malware protection. I never wasted any time or money on any kind of malware protection for my Mac. Assuming an additional administration overhead of only 20 minutes a week for a Win PC makes in 20 years about 340 hours. I charge 200-400 bucks for my business hour and I'm my own sysadmin. The bottom line is: I saved around 100.000 $ because I've been using a Mac instead of a Win PC in the past 20 years. If I consider the superior hardware quality and backward compatibility of my Mac, the calculation gets even worse for the Win PC. Of course, your bottom line might look different, for example when money doesn't matter or when you're selling anti-virus software.

Along the same lines as VK and my earlier post on my company's switchover to Mac: Five years ago my kids' private elementary school switched from Mac to PC at the behest of a board member whose law firm was all PC and couldn't understand why anyone would own a Mac. They got what they thought was a great deal on all-new PCs and servers. But while the number of "seats" (desktop computers plus laptops) increased from 60 to 80, the annual per-unit and total system maintenance costs more than tripled over the next two years. It was an operating cost increase so huge (and unplanned) that it is now the second largest line item in the school's budget after teachers' salaries and benefits. It was, in the recent words of the headmaster, one of the worst financial blunders in the 80-year history of the school. As an aside, they are once again steadily increasing the number of Macs they have.

What I don't get is this myth about PCs being cheaper to repair. Where is this myth coming from? Ask any Mac owner not how much their repair cost, but if their Mac ever needed to be repaired. So... let's look at the math: if a Mac owner never had to take a Mac to get repaired, the "repair" cost for a Mac is Zero. Therefore, any PC that that must be fixed is automatically more expensive to repair than a Mac since Mac don't need to be repaired. I have 5 Mac. Started in 1993. Ask me how many times I took them to get repaired... go ahead... The answer is Zero. bB

Quote - Assuming an additional administration overhead of only 20 minutes a week for a Win PC makes in 20 years about 340 hours. I charge 200-400 bucks for my business hour and I'm my own sysadmin. The bottom line is: I saved around 100.000 $ because I've been using a Mac instead of a Win PC in the past 20 years. If I consider the superior hardware quality and backward compatibility of my Mac, the calculation gets even worse for the Win PC.

You oughta see it from my end. (warning: ungodly geek soapboxing ahead...) An average MCSE can feed and care for about 50-60 servers at a go, maximum, before their schedule gets choked up w/ patches, A/V updates, compatibility testing before each update, closing security holes post-update, and having to deal with every little breakdown that occurs. OTOH, I could readily care for and maintain the 150+ RHEL Linux, FreeBSD, and Solaris (and one Windows) boxes at my last employer, no sweat. The biggest part of my day usually consisted of a couple hours checking log results, firewall stuff, backup reports, and looking into any SMTP (email server) bounces to insure that any hangups get cleared. I have never seen any security-related settings open up because of a patch in *nix or Linux. The vast majority of my day could be spent listening to my users, tweaking the system when needs changed, and looking into new ways of getting something done. Downtime? The only time a *nix box needs rebooting is if a) the hardware fails, or b) a kernel patch goes in... and the downtime for that can be scheduled at sometime in the future about 999 times out of 1000. Windows Server 2k3 needs a reboot roughly once every 3rd patch (sometimes more, sometimes less). Each reboot (on either server) will eat about 10 minutes of downtime at the very least, assuming everything goes well. If not, you simply roll back to a previous kernel patch-level come next reboot in *nix to make it available for use while troubleshooting, but in Windows you need either Safe Mode (if you're lucky), or the Recovery Console and a lot of troubleshooting while the server is basically down (if you're not). Time spent on A/V? Well, there are a/v scanners that work in Linux (uvscan) that are sometimes required by the powers-that-be, but that can be scripted and basically ignored unless something pops up in the security newswires that needs a closer look (somewhat rare, but it happens). There's also an on-the-fly A/V scanner for mail services (such as ClamAV) which can be scripted to update itself so as to protect your Windows users from email-bourne crap... so I guess that counts a little. Security I could also compartmentalize security easier at the server level by editing one config file (iptables) and pushing it out, than the average MCSE could by clicking-in rulesets one at a time in IPSec, one server at a time (which many wouldn't even know how to do in my experience, so they rely on external products such as Checkpoint). There's also licensing... Windows Servers have these nasty little things known as CALs (Client Access Licenses), which can really add up as you pile on the servers. This is prolly why MCSEs (of all skill levels) average about $40k while the *nix admins (ditto) average $70K+ in salary... we can do 3x the work in less time, and don't require as much hardware muscle to get the same jobs done. Basically, you only need 1/3 the staff and 4/5ths the hardware budget to do the same job if the staff is competent. (whew...okay, all done now :) ) /P

Quote - I have 5 Mac. Started in 1993. Ask me how many times I took them to get repaired... go ahead... The answer is Zero.

I went through four: * a used Mac Clone ("Power Computing" 68K-based thingy from 1995)... got bored with it though. Got rid of it in 2002. * a used (when I got it) PowerBook 540 (which I gave to a buddy of mine 18 months ago; it was still working just fine w/ MacOS 7). * A Macintosh Cube (which I tore the crap out of to modify for a bigger vidcard, bigger processor, more RAM... I sold it on eBay in 2003 for $700) * My current PowerMac Dual G5, 2003-present, and still running just fine. Same repair costs as you, though - in spite of my penchant for frankensteining the things on occasion. :) /P

When looking after individual users, with computers on internet and networks we found 1 PC Technician was frantic with 40 - 50 users, without locking up the PC. While it would be nice if Macs never broke down that's not really true. On the pool of about 1000 Macs we support, (1 technician and 1 Help-desk) we have an average of 3 on the workbench. Most common problem is lightning strike, then hard-drive deaths. Our Power and Telecom system is all overland on poles. Taken as a pool and total costs, Macs are cheaper to maintain, but getting a single Mac repaired can cost more than a PC because: 1. Apple service centers are normally staffed by Apple Certified Technicians, so the labour rate may be higher. There may also be less competition. If you have a brand name PC and seek out the qualified service center for that brand then the rates would be comparative, but who does? Just about any old Joe Bloggs thinks he's qualified to build and service PC's. 2. If the service part is an industry standard unit, such as RAM or Hard-drive then the price should be equal. But you may find that a uniquely Apple service part is more expensive. I'm not sure how Apple price the parts but I think they must include additional handling and storage costs. They do have a very generous discount for module exchange. I always purchase AppleCare so if a part fails it's Apples problem. And a good insurance policy for accidental damage also keeps the repair costs down. I have noticed that organizations with over 5 Mac's may be better off not buying AppleCare and taking the risk of part failure themselves. YMMV. And yes, the Unix underpinnings of OS X helps with support and stability.

Actually I've had a few problems with my mac over the years. (Dual 1ghz G4 Quicksilver)

The three biggies are listed below. I have had other problems they were caused by me ;)

1. One of the processors went bad and it sat at an apple authorized repair center for a month while they trouble shot. (I told them it was a processor when i brought it in but you know how that goes. I did my own trouble shooting. They ended up changing the motherboard, modem, ram and wire harnesses before they changed the processors.)

2. I have had random problems with firewire. I thought i lost it completely a couple weeks ago so i went out and bought a fw pci card. after plugging it in and getting it all set up... the built in started working again. - there when $50)

3. One of my ram slots wont recognize ram any more. I tired different ram but I cant figure out if its a bad stick or a bad slot. ( i don't care much anymore becasue i don't have time to play with Shade or Poser much right now. And I have been planning on buying a new pro tower for some time. Actually i was about to get a G5 when they announced the switch.)

Then again I haven't had a lick of trouble with my wifes 867 Ti Book. Even the battery is still over 87% of original capacity when fully charged.
Soooo... As with all electronics YMMV. (As stated by Kaveman. (Hey do you have Geiko insurance?))

Quote - When looking after individual users, with computers on internet and networks we found 1 PC Technician was frantic with 40 - 50 users, without locking up the PC.

Oh yes... you couldn't pay me enough to do help desk support anymore. I'll stick w/ services, thx. :D I was fortunate - my last job had ab't 50 employees total, 3/4 of whom were programmers who could (and preferred to) do their own desktop maintenance. The rest were DBA's, project mgmt, web-user support, and CM types who were the same way. /P

Strange. None of Macs I have worked on over the years at school, at jobs, and family members own... does quick math roughly 53 various Macs over 2 decades, have ever needed a repair. The only Apple repair I have ever seen was for my sister's Mini iPod. She had Apple Care. She just paid for the postage to send the iPod to Apple. Apple couldn't fix it, so they sent her a brand new iPod! Now that's service! oO My Mini iPod hasn't had any problems. ^^ bB

I did some pc tech support back when I was finishing up my CS degree, and I was fortunate enough to the one Mac guy (I hated macs at the time, lol). The old Power PC 7x00 with which version of MacOS was terrible....and yes, those had all sorts of problems. Apparently someone fired Jobs and the company had several years of really bad leadership.

However, once the iMac (or whatever the bubble computer/monitor thing was called), I changed my mind. The OS was solid, and the machines were a breeze to get up onto the network. I think it took about 1/2 the time to get them set up compared to a dell. And I don't think I ever had to troubleshoot one of those, except to upgrade memory or hard disks.

I like the UK ads better. www.apple.com/uk/getamac/ads/

Re ccotwist3D's UK ad link, it's funny to see the ads done by another pair of actors. The identical dialogue is actually kind of disturbing. I think I like the American ads better in part because the PC guy is Gates-like and more obviously nerdy, and the Mac guy looks more like the US Gen Y prototype dude with a slacker-cool wardrobe. But maybe that's how the Brits see theirs. Now what I'd REALLY like to see is Fergie and the Queen do the ads. "Hi, I'm a queen" and "Hi, I'm a boor".

Quote - A computer says absolutely nothing about a person and judging based on computer of choice is foolish. My friends have very similar personalities and they all use different platforms. Some Mac and some prefer PC. Some have a Craftsman drill at home others have Dewalt. Who cares.

I agree with you 100%.

I've used Macs on-and-off in the past......and I prefer my PC.  But if someone else prefers the Mac -- big deal.  That's their choice for themselves, and it's all good with me.

BTW - I work in the engineering world.  Most people in the engineering world don't know what a "Mac" is.

I used 8 Macs in 20 years, basically one of each processor generation (Macintosh Plus, SE/30, LC II, Performa 475, Power Macintosh 7500/100, G3 beige, G4 @400, iMac G5), with a grand total of 2 hardware failures (1 harddisk, 1 power supply) and repair costs of about 300 $. I still have all of them, except for the LC II. *This is prolly why MCSEs (of all skill levels) average about $40k while the nix admins (ditto) average $70K+ in salary... we can do 3x the work in less time, and don't require as much hardware muscle to get the same jobs done. Basically, you only need 1/3 the staff and 4/5ths the hardware budget to do the same job if the staff is competent. Very interesting. I guess the "Win PCs are less expensive" legend exists because many people (even IT pros) buy a computer like a can of beer: A smaller number on the price tag means a cheaper product.

I've had very few repair costs on any of my PC's.  The vast majority of my expenses have gone for upgrades over the years.  I've had a couple of HD crashes -- but that's inherent in the nature of HD's.  That's why the cardinal rule of computing is: back it up.........

I did lose a laptop once due to a fried motherboard.  It was a Compaq -- and the motherboard wasn't worth replacing for the $600 that Compaq wanted for a new one.  Especially not for a ~2.5-year-old laptop.  So I trashed the laptop.

But I've never had a single problem like that with a desktop PC.  And I've owned + worked with a huge number of PC's over the years.

At the same time -- I've known people who had trouble with their Macs.

I think that it has something to do with us being imperfect creatures -- and therefore we produce imperfect devices.

I've yet to find the perfect computer -- or car -- or television set.

Quote - Very interesting. I guess the "Win PCs are less expensive" legend exists because many people (even IT pros) buy a computer like a can of beer: A smaller number on the price tag means a cheaper product.

Sort of... The reason Windows is more prevalent among smaller businesses is because it doesn't take as much know-how to knock one up and get it running (now securing it properly and keeping it that way? That's another matter...) For smaller businesses with light-duty apps and little-to-no Internet connection from the server? After an initial contracted setup, it can be maintained day-to-day by the company accountant, and then calling Geek Squad when anything really hairy comes up that either a reboot or Windows Update won't fix. For a small business with a small budget (and a much higher tolerance for risk), this makes sense to the business owner. The reason *nix has a strong hold on larger businesses is different - *nix is as efficient as all hell - and not just in how many hours an admin spends on it. A typical server (Dell, HP, whatever) costs the same to the corporation either way (comes with no OS since the corp usually has the requisite site licenses). But - a *nix-based OS doesn't swallow 20-40% of the resources in feeding a GUI that no one but the admin uses, and doesn't require 5-10% more of the CPU cycles to get lost in keeping, say, Norton A/V Corporate scanning and network bandwidth (usually eaten at night) to keep its signatures updated. Open Source *nix kernels can then be re-compiled and trimmed of any modules you don't need or use, freeing up a ton of RAM that you can put to use towards the programs you bought the server to run (up to 50% less overhead than the default kernel uses, depending on what you do with it. So what does all this mean in English? Well, it means that if your department bought an Oracle license, and need servers to run it on, so that it can run a huge-arsed database for a project, it's nice when you can squeeze out as much 'oomph' as you can from the hardware, lowering the overall pricetag and Total Cost of Ownership a bit - helping to bring it in under budget. Thing is, it takes a bit more know-how to run a *nix server farm (pointing-and-clicking one's way through installation, tweaking, or troubleshooting is simply not an option), which means that it's going to cost a little more to hire someone who knows it well enough. Then again, that someone can handle many times the servers, so it still comes out cheaper in the end for large-scale operations. /P

The upcoming Longhorn servers look very interesting, by the way.
At least one version will come without a GUI. You're right, Peng, why spend RAM and CPU on a GUI that is almost never used (if things go well). And if you want a GUI for management, why not run it on a workstation and administer the server remotely?
And the new command line shell looks promising indeed. More than one hardcore Unix fan has admitted that the Longhorn shell has all the possibilities of the Unix shells, plus quite a few handy tricks that they miss in Unix.
I haven't played with any Longhorn beta yet, and I don't know how well it does when it comes to security. But those guys in Redmond know that they won't be able to sell a new server OS that isn't at least reasonably secure.

As for scripting, I agree that most MCSE's don't know scripting. You can script the hell out of a Windows 2000/2003 server, just like you can - and must - do with Unix. But the run-of-the-mill Windows sysadmin doesn't know how to do that. Not a problem when administering a small network, but a definite problem for larger networks.

Case in point - my brother had to migrate 150 users to another domain. Windows 2000 server systems at the time. He COULD have done it by hand. Instead, he wrote a script. Took about the same amount of time as doing the migration by hand.
That script came in very handy two years later, when 8000 users had to be migrated.

I like the commercials,they're funny,and I'm a PC user
they don't drive me to buy anything
I also like the mac guy-Justin Long,he's a cutie
and I don't think he will forever be known as just mac guy
he's done lots of movies,when I first saw the commercial I said" hey look it's Darrey from Jeepers Creepers!

-The3dZone