Modding How to Make a Mac Killer

If I had the money, I would buy an iMac as a secondary machine. The build quality and styling are unsurpassed. However, I would IMMEDIATELY install Windows 7 on it and replace the crappy Apple keyboard and mouse with something more useful. The OS choice is a completely subjective thing. Besides, if I marry a Mac, I would have to keep in mind that they may one day throw away the whole platform and start over (they've done it several times before). Macs are for PPL who value style over substance. You can get a PC with similar build quality as Mac for about the same price, but with Mac you get a snobby attitude, which I do not require...

 

Not true. How did the NT line (NT, 2000, XP) come about? Evoloved from the msdos days(3.1, 95, 98FE, 98SE, ME). Its not something that just happened over night.

God, create any thread with Mac and PC in the same thread and you get "Battle of the Fanboys"....

 

The main difference between an mac and a pc is the OS. I don't buy an overpriced mac then put windows on it, I buy a mac to run OSX. No one said you can't build a cheaper and faster PC, but with vista as the OS, its no mac killer. You could have at least put the windows 7 RC on it. Kind of a pointless article IMHO.

 

I'm Apple Certified, and I won't touch a Mac.

Closed ecosystem development, limited innovation in software, draconian control schemes and have you EVER torn apart a Mac? That SOB was never meant to be serviced. I routinely get iBooks GLUED SHUT from the factory.

**** Mac and the horse they rode in on.

Or with the horse they rode in on. Not that they'd notice the difference.

 

how the hell does this have anything at all to do with macs? you basically just built an unremarkable PC, and then put the mac flamebait in there for the page hits, amirite?

 

QFT, sadly..

I'm forced to use iMacs at school, and I kinda want to carry my keyboard in my backpack due to how much the iMac keyboard ruins my wrists when I type essays..

I've also been using Windows OSes since Windows 95, and have been through everything (besides ME) since then. I'm sure that if my parents bought me the equivalent Apple instead of my first PC (a Sony Vaio T700MR with 266mhz Pentium II power and iirc 32mb RAM and ATI Rage graphics that couldn't run Diablo II... it still runs!) (link to the picture: http://kunkoku.com/new/datahtml/images/img_usermaster/t700mr[1].jpg) (oh the memories), then I would be using a Macbook instead of my Eee PC right now, and instead of my sig rig, a Mac Pro or something. I'm just so used to using Windows that I have no desire to switch. I'm sure that out of the box, OSX is far better and has more features than Windows XP, Vista or maybe 7, but given the slew of software that I add to any of my Windows installs, and the tweaks that anyone can do, and the nLiting that goes on, etc. Windows ends up being better.

Plus, I like playing games.

I don't even see the reason to try installing OSX onto any of my PCs at home, nLited XP or Win7 RC run as well as I could ever want.

 

notatoad: It's a good comparison of what you get for the same money. What exactly is the part you don't get?

To me a direct comparison of specs, quality of peripherals etc makes all the sense, as I don't put any value on the brand/formfactor.

 

I really don't see how these two machines compare, they obviously cater to two different demographics. For one, the build you guys did, great as it was, was not a simple one; it involved watercooling and modding a case. Most people who buy the iMac are not looking for that kind of commitment of labor.

If one is in the market for an iMac, they probably eyeing one specifically because its already made, a snap to setup, and takes very little work to maintain; which is a completely different demographic from the tinker culture that many bit-tech readers (myself included) take pride in.

 

NT 3.1 (the first version of the NT line) came in 1993, way before even Windows 95.

Obviously the 9x and the NT lines share some aspects, such as the looks and the API (because they are both "Windows"), but the innards are totally different. They have NOTHING in common inside.

Actually, they didn't come up with NT just like that, it's highly based on OS/2 which was developed by Microsoft and IBM together, but I think my argument is still valid: Windows NT is developed from scratch and is not at all based on DOS.

 

Just a question to all those who are saying - "I would take the mac"

If that is the case what are you even doing on a PC hardware and modding site if you are one of these people who just like to open the box and plug it in?

 

So you are saying that all the console game reviews on this site are useless if you are a Mac-user? My primary system is a unibody macbook, that does not mean that I don't enjoy myself when tinkering with pc's?

And yes I would take the Imac over the cpc assembled system.

The biggest selling point for Macs are the fact that they are Macs.....but cant we just all get along?

 

I did not say that. console reviews are a ligitmate response to my question.

See that does not make sense to me, you enjoy tinkering with PC's yet would rather not build one?

Again I am confused.. as to why you would want the inferior machine?

You buy them for the name then?

 

Yes you did say that.
I said that my PRIMARY system is a Mac....
And yes I would take the iMac over the cpc machine, and no the iMac is not inferior in my eyes, I really enjoy OSX and I like the style of the machine.
And no I don't buy them for the name, I never said that? I'd buy them for what they are!

 

No i did not. If you refer to my first post you will see that I ask a question, hence the ? and the "Just a question to all....." I did not make any such statement. I asked why you came here.. you awnsered that in that you come here for console reviews. end of story.

So the reason you choose the mac is the case and the OS then rather then the hardware?

I may have mis interprited but thats what it sounded like. hopefully the awnser to my previous question will tell me what you meant.

 

I still read most of the hardware reviews, and I read project logs as all of that still interests me, and I still tinker with pc's. But lately I have moved away from PC-gaming and I actually prefer games on consoles for many reasons: 1. you don't have to upgrade your console to play the latest games. 2. I game comfortably in my livingroom on my full hd flat screen and hifi system. 3. It just works!

And I prefer to use macs because of the os and I just love the quality feel of the hardware that they make, and in my view it worth the price premium, in short I prefer the complete package

 

I forgot to mention that I don't need the fastest graphics in my macs, therefore I made the argument that I prefer to use consoles for games, sorry

 

I feel that the whole point of this article is a little flawed, as with main others here have pointed out.

First you don't buy a mac for gaming, so adding a 'gaming' test is a little pointless. Also the choice of graphics card in the mac killer a completely wrong choice IMO, most people buy macs and combine them with adobe software, considering adobe has enabled CUDA in CS4, wouldn't a nvidia card have been a better choice.

I don't understand why apple would offer an ATI 4850 as an upgrade, as i cant see any real use for it, other than playing the odd game in a boot camped windows install. (think its boot camp that used not a mac owner) but then there is no point in owning a mac.

 

it really is pointless to try and compare them, as there is no comparison. Macs get slaughtered by the PC in everything, especially gaming, i mean, crysis on the mac, that was like pistol whipping a blind kid.

 

The comments at the end of the article reveal something that should have been spotted earlier. If you want to move on from Garage Band, iMovie and iPhoto, where do you go? On a Mac, you can jump straight to Logic Pro Studio, Final Cut Studio and Aperture, and you can do this and still have change out of £1,000. If you want to jump to the pro level on a PC, then you're looking at ProTools, AVID and Lightroom -- all of these run on a Mac as well, of course. I know and love ProTools and Avid, but they cost a fortune and are clunkier than Logic and Final Cut. In fact, I stopped upgrading Avid when I bought Final Cut. Lightroom I do use -- it's more expensive, but it integrates better with Photoshop than Aperture does.
Bottom line: if you want to run games, a PC is a great machine. If you want to edit video or music, then the hardware cost will be dwarfed quickly by the software cost if you try to do it on Windows. That's not a Fanboi comment -- a lot of Logic users were furious when Apple bought it off Emagic and promptly announced that Windows was no longer supported, and they were right to be. But Apple's business strategy has been harder-edged over the last few years, even though the reputation for 'evil' has stuck with Microsoft -- despite the fact that Bill Gates gives a huge amount of money to charity.

 

I'm more of a PC guy but I still enjoy using a Mac once and a while