Thanks very much for the comprehensive rundown, I really appreciate the
effort you put into such a detailed reply.
You're welcome.[/QUOTE]
Let me preface this post with the comment that I use both PCs and Macs,
however I am essentially ignorant when it comes to PCs.
So far, I have used my PC strictly to run one application, a $900 voice
recognition app' that is superior to any similar app' for a Mac.
That restricted use is a waste, which is why I am eager to learn more
about the PC platform.
Bottom line, keep in mind that I know next to nothing about PCs.
Not only does one have to accept Apple's hardware
configurations (and nauseatingly cutesy cases)
without hope of true customizations, ...<clip>...
You are absolutely correct there, that is the drawback of standardizing
a computer, or standardizing anything else, for that matter. It means
that I have to be very careful to pre-select such things as the "right"
graphics card in a laptop model, because it is next to impossible to
change to a "better" graphics card after my purchase.
At the time of purchase, Apple offers a choice of graphics cards on
their higher priced laptops, but _only_ at purchase time.
Minor things like adding more RAM and installing a larger capacity hard
drive can be done by the user.
For someone who likes to build up their own computers from scratch,
mixing and matching all component parts, a Mac is not the way to go.
...but the Apple operating system simply won't work
on anything else.
Correct, will only work on similar Mac hardware. For example, when the
new Mac OS 10.5 code-named "Leopard" comes out in a few months from now,
I will buy one copy of it.
That one copy I will install on my 3 Intel-based computers, which are:
1) Mac Mini Duo
2) 15" MacBook Pro
3) Desktop Mac Pro
It will _not_ work on my older Macs, which vary in age from 3 years to
7 years old.
Also, there are no competitors to spur lower prices.
Sure there are, all the PC manufacturers.<g>
How can MacOS licenses possibly become any more restrictive?
They could tie their OS to one particular Mac, which is effectively not
done at the present time.
About the Mac OS license:
Aren't they all strictly the equivalent of "OEM?"
Yes, but OEM is a nasty word to PC users, because in that case the
license has more restrictions than the more liberal OEM license from
Apple.
About Mac OS X:
Will they even work on a competitor's PC?
No it will not, but then neither will Windows XP work directly on a Mac.
And don't you actually have to pay to obtain
the MacOS equivalent of a Service PAck?
Not really, Apple calls them updates, which are free.
Major upgrades are sold at reduced rates to present users. For example,
the old OS 10.2, code named "Jaguar", (I think around year 2000) was
charged for, as was a slightly the slightly newer OS 10.3 "Panther", as
was the even newer OS 10.4 "Tiger".
The 8 updates to Tiger, namely OS 10.4.1 up through the present 10.4.8
were all free.
In all likelihood, there _might_ be one last free update which would
be called 10.4.9, before the next major for-pay upgrade OS 10.5, the new
"leopard" OS which will probably be out in late summer this year.
But why? Doesn't each Mac already come with the OS pre-installed?
Yes they do come pre-installed.
The difference is that when I buy a major upgrade for my 3 different
modern Mac models, I only buy one license. That one OS gets installed
on all 3 of my Macs.
That will not work with one Windows license on 3 different PCs.
Now whether the Mac case is strictly legal I can not say, because I
never read the license details, I just click "I accept" on all the
screens.
The present de-facto situation is that it _does_ work that way with
Macs, is commonly done by most all Mac users, and I have never heard of
Apple prosecuting anyone for doing so.
The present de-facto reasoning is one license for _all_ of that user's
Macs, provided the Macs are recent models that the OS will actually work
on.
How the Mac license is actually written, I do not know.
To me, the present de-facto situation seems fair. Apple makes a good
profit by selling OS licenses to individual users, and those users get
the freedom of using that one license on all of their recent Mac models.
I detest pirating of software, if for no other reason than it hurts us
all in the long run.
I also detest unreasonable restrictions placed on what I can do with my
OS license once I purchase it.
Of course what is unreasonable in one mans view is entirely reasonable
in another mans view, which is the basic reason why we can't keep
everyone happy.
Both Apple and Microsoft TRY to keep their customers happy, one just
tries harder than the other. ;-)
<users plug in their own idea of who tries harder> ;-)
FWIW, I could not get by with just Macs or just PCs, in my case I need
them both.
Presently, I have six Macs and one PC, I would like to remedy that
imbalance.
I plan to do a lot of high end video work in the future. Towards that
end I would like to get hold of a modern desktop high-end PC.
Any recommendations?
Should I hold off for awhile on a 64 bit PC, or do enough 64 bit
applications for such a powerful PC exist at the present time?
Just curious.
My 64 bit Mac does not yet have too many 64 bit app's available for it,
so I assume that the 64 bit PCs are also lacking many kinds of software.
Mark-
