New Laptop

Well I think its time to get a new laptop. I have had my Toshiba for almost 9 years and I think it is about on its last leg.

I would like to find something under $600. as it is just a everyday play computer ( goofing on line , a lilttle video and music playing and picture storage.)

Have been very happy with my Toshiba, just seeking a lil wisdom to what every one is useing and what is the hot brand now.

Any help would be great

Thanks.

Best Solution (Honestly): Spend an extra $400, buy a macbook and never look back.

^Agreed 100%. Look at apple.com and look at the refurbished Macbooks. I went this route and could not be happier. The computer looks unused, I saved 200.00, and it carries the same warranty as a brand new Mac. I came from a Toshiba (I still have it, but it is rarely used), and the Mac is better in all aspects (speed, battery life, etc.). You will not regret spending the extra jack.

The simplicity, performance, and reliability offered by a Macbook really is worth the extra dough.

agree 1000% love my macbook but if you're really strapped for cash my buddy who's reallll tech savy says acer offers the best value in computers

and try tigerdirect.com

windows 7 with a new hybrid seagate momentus XT drive... faster than a mac and just as nice to use.

Macs are overpriced.

Originally Posted by bennn

agree 1000% love my macbook but if you're really strapped for cash my buddy who's reallll tech savy says acer offers the best value in computers

and try tigerdirect.com

your friend must not like you.

i would avoid acer like the plague. stick w/ toshiba if you can't afford a mac. make sure it has windows 7 though.

Stay with Toshiba. They offer very nice bargains and they have everything that you are looking for. Then you don't have to pay for the software that you already have.

Originally Posted by mjfan23

Macs are overpriced.

I've never bought a mac used (and I totally agree with your statement), but they're so common nowadays that you can always find good craigslist deals by teenage crackheads who need to sell the macbook their parents bought them for college to get their next fix...

Ive had good luck with my Dell. Actually have 2 of them. Think I paid alittle over $500 for my big one last year and its been great!

Originally Posted by mendo247

Ive had good luck with my Dell. Actually have 2 of them. Think I paid alittle over $500 for my big one last year and its been great!

Forgot about them also. Here is my list of laptops that I would buy for my own use and not in a specific order

Dell
Toshiba
Fujitsu

whatever you do, DO NOT GO HP. Junk computers.

say what. i looked down and my wifes computer is a hp.you don't want her to open her can of whoopa$$ do you?

i wouldn't get an hp either.

my hp has been the best computer ive owned. i wouldnt hesitate to purchase another but who really cares.

Using an HP right now, like it sooooo much better than my much higher end work laptop, a Lenovo. We have a Sony at home too, surprised everyday how much abuse it's put up with from my wife dropping it (frequently) and our little one smashing on it. Thing has never missed a beat in going on 4 years.

They are all coming from the same places in Asia. You can't base it on the brand. You have to find the line(s) within that brand that are built well. And then you have to be comfortable with the support offered by that company. Personally I would get a dell through their small business side (you don't want to deal with home support). If you have the extra money get a crapintosh but you'll pay more than twice as much for a more limited experience. They are easily the prettiest however.

I love my HP mini!

Wes, how is a Mac a "limited experience"?

It is a closed proprietary system with extremely small market share - both factors that tend to get it ignored by software vendors. As long as your needs fall within the boundaries of these limitations you will likely be fine. If they exceed them it is frustrating. That being said there is nothing special anymore about apple hardware, so running windows (natively or virtualized) is possible, however there is expense involved and the realm of this thread seems to be about a limited budget.

I've been pleased with Dell. We are all Dell at work. I have 3 Dell laptops at home. One 17 that has been through hell and is 5 years old, one 15 on it's second year in college and a Mini 10 for the wife. I bought them all from the business side. They took great care of me, when I bought the 15" business computer for my son, and they do have some great sales from time to time.

Circuit City, which is also Tiger Direct, has some great sales too. I have considered buying an off brand, due to price for my next one, but haven't pulled the trigger on that yet. Like I said, Dell has been great. We were in the Apple store the other day and the computers were very cool, but also very pricey. The laptop was several hundred higher (maybe even double) than a comparable Dell; but I just took a quick look. I didn't study processors and stuff.

Originally Posted by pesos

It is a closed proprietary system with extremely small market share - both factors that tend to get it ignored by software vendors. As long as your needs fall within the boundaries of these limitations you will likely be fine. If they exceed them it is frustrating. That being said there is nothing special anymore about apple hardware, so running windows (natively or virtualized) is possible, however there is expense involved and the realm of this thread seems to be about a limited budget.

L O L. I completely disagree, sure there's only one hardware manufacturer (Apple), but I don't really see how it's more "propietary" than Windows based machines. On the software side, Mac OSX is built on FreeBSD/Unix (which I may add is way more stable than windows could dream of being and has been around a lot longer). Porting applications to OSX is actually relatively simple, versus windows where you have a very confined framework to work with. Likewise, Apple has always made a point to embrace open standards and frameworks (like webkit on the iphone) and does a ton for the community that no one actually gives them credit for.

Microsoft also does have a much bigger market share but that's slowly disappearing, why else would Windows 7 be a near mock of OSX? Why are hardware manufacturers like Dell/HP trying to copy "Apple"?

Honestly, at the end of the day, Apple really can't be beat, yes, they're more expensive, but honestly they're worth it. They're better built, last longer, more stable, etc, etc. If you want to save $500 and deal with a laptop that comes apart in 6 months to a year (if you're a intense user like me) that's fine, but in my opinion, Apples last much longer. I'm on my second macbook pro (current version), the one before this one I had for over 2 years and still runs without a single problem, I really just wanted to newer bigger screen. I had a Dell, and a Toshiba before that, and besides the issues with Windows, they both lasted less than a year, whether the batteries just stopped holding a charge, adapters went funky, pixels started dying on the screens, etc.

Originally Posted by dakid

your friend must not like you.

i would avoid acer like the plague. stick w/ toshiba if you can't afford a mac. make sure it has windows 7 though.

How do you mean plague? I got an acer as graduation gift back in 05 and am still using it today, never have had a single problem with it. Sure if you are planning on doing a lot of video editing and such you will want something more powerful, but I do not have a single complaint with mine. I've used it for numerous college projects/papers etc. and have solid music library on it and mess around on the internet with no problems at all. For the price, I have been very happy with it.

And cue fanboy in 3...2...1...

Talk about uninformed drivel. You probably think that Google "does no evil" lol.

Originally Posted by pesos

And cue fanboy in 3...2...1...

Talk about uninformed drivel. You probably think that Google "does no evil" lol.

And you probably work at the help desk at a community college, move along peasant.

On my 3rd Macbook Pro since 2000. My youngest sister just graduated college using my 2000 MacBook for all 4 years, and still runs and looks like new. My wife is a CAD tech and uses my 2005 Macbook Pro for all of her CAD work at home and at her office, she says it is much faster than the office desktop. I jumped down to the 13" Unibody Pro and use it all day at work running VMWare Fusion and XP. Then it goes home and runs Netflix & Hulu on my big TV so my kid can watch Thomas the Train episodes.

stay as far away from acer as you possibly can.

Originally Posted by rsanchez

L O L. I completely disagree, sure there's only one hardware manufacturer (Apple), but I don't really see how it's more "propietary" than Windows based machines. On the software side, Mac OSX is built on FreeBSD/Unix (which I may add is way more stable than windows could dream of being and has been around a lot longer). Porting applications to OSX is actually relatively simple, versus windows where you have a very confined framework to work with. Likewise, Apple has always made a point to embrace open standards and frameworks (like webkit on the iphone) and does a ton for the community that no one actually gives them credit for.

Microsoft also does have a much bigger market share but that's slowly disappearing, why else would Windows 7 be a near mock of OSX? Why are hardware manufacturers like Dell/HP trying to copy "Apple"? (iTouch is 2 years old with touch screen isn't functioning and 2 iPods that don't function anymore) I wouldn't purchase another Apple to save my life because of their close minded semi_overpriced hardware. Then there is the iPhone 4 that Steven believes that there is an attenagate issue and everyone is out to get them.

Honestly, at the end of the day, Apple really can't be beat, yes, they're more expensive, but honestly they're worth it. They're better built, last longer, more stable, etc, etc. If you want to save $500 and deal with a laptop that comes apart in 6 months to a year (if you're a intense user like me) that's fine, but in my opinion, Apples last much longer. I'm on my second macbook pro (current version), the one before this one I had for over 2 years and still runs without a single problem, I really just wanted to newer bigger screen. I had a Dell, and a Toshiba before that, and besides the issues with Windows, they both lasted less than a year, whether the batteries just stopped holding a charge, adapters went funky, pixels started dying on the screens, etc.

Then explain why every apple product that I purchase breaks right when it's out of warranty and Apple doesn't honor it after that. I have yet to have hardware breakdown from Toshiba, Dell, or Fujitsu after the warranty period.

I have a Dell desktop that is 12 years old that is still running strong with the original hardware. Then there is a Toshiba Laptop that is 7 years old that is running Win7 without issues.

I agree with Wes, you must be a fanboy.

Macbook or Ipad. Long time user and love them (yes even before iphones)

Originally Posted by dabell

Then explain why every apple product that I purchase breaks right when it's out of warranty and Apple doesn't honor it after that. I have yet to have hardware breakdown from Toshiba, Dell, or Fujitsu after the warranty period.

I have a Dell desktop that is 12 years old that is still running strong with the original hardware. Then there is a Toshiba Laptop that is 7 years old that is running Win7 without issues.

I agree with Wes, you must be a fanboy.

What hardware? The iPod that your daughter drops every day when she gets on the bus? Seriously go "feel" one of the newer macbooks or macbook pros, the actual physical construction is much more durable. The displays are wayyyy better, the OS is way more intuitive, the peripherals (in my overly humble opinion) have way more thought put in to design and use, and on and on and on.

I may be a fan boy, but I use nearly all apple products for my business and would never switch back. I do buy into new trends (like the iPad), but I use and abuse technology and I find that apple products on the average are more durable and more "useful" than anything comparable I've purchased. I love the fact that I don't have to restart my computers nearly ever, I can leave work open on the screen on my laptop, close it, open it back up the next day and it starts nearly immediately and I'm back to work. I love the fact that I've never had any of my mac desktops or laptops lock up and BSOD, I love the fact that if an OS upgrade comes out, it's always less than $100 (not a new license every three years when the latest version of winblows comes out), I love the fact that the built in web browser actually follows open standards, not microsoft's benign interpretation of them.

I'm all about practicality, but it's okay to call me a fan boy. I noticed both of you guys have "Tech" occupations, which from my experience, your "types" are overly egotistical and don't understand the bigger picture of what technology should be used for - that's why you generally work for other people rather than using your intelligence and knowhow to build something and will never get beyond your 9-5 paycheck, dwindling 401k, and shrinking home values.

Anyways, I attached a picture of my "Fan boy" setup so you don't think I'm some poser blowing smoke. Insult my posts, calling them "uninformed" drivel and "fan boy" banter is kind of ironic, enjoy working for the man.

Couldn't have said it better Rob, and this is coming from somebody who HATED on Apple products for years. I hassled my brother for buying a macbook pro last year saying he could have gotten something comparable for less money going PC, but man have i put my words in my mouth. I got my macbook pro a couple months ago, and NEVER looking back. I laugh as my Dad waits minutes for his pc to start up while i open my macbook and am on safari in 4 seconds. I'm posting this from my custom built win xp desktop that I still love, but you have to be somewhat of a savy user to keep it fast by avoiding unnecessary registry edits and bad software/malware But now I see what all the hype was about with the macbooks, they just flat out work, no waiting around, no worrying about viruses, they just work.

If you are in college you can get a 13 inch mac book pro for around 930ish dollars, after you sell the free ipod touch that comes with it, along with the discount you get.

weird how my 3yr old desktop and 2yr laptop loads up just as fast as macs. and i can't tell you how many times i've dropped my laptop and spilled coke on it....still runs like a champ!

Originally Posted by wakeboardertj

am on safari in 4 seconds.

i wouldn't take advice from a guy that in his bragging, admits to using safari!

Originally Posted by rsanchez

What hardware? The iPod that your daughter drops every day when she gets on the bus? Seriously go "feel" one of the newer macbooks or macbook pros, the actual physical construction is much more durable. The displays are wayyyy better, the OS is way more intuitive, the peripherals (in my overly humble opinion) have way more thought put in to design and use, and on and on and on.

The Touch was mine and the two iPod's were my 17 and 19 year sons (at the time that the items were broke). Dropping definitely wasn't the issue. I can assure you of that. It was from useage not dropping.

I have looked and felt the items. yes, the are nice no doubt but I would prefer to get similar products if not better hardware spec's (faster CPU, more memory in the computer, ...) for cheaper.

The OS and being intuitive is definitely a matter of opinion. I find Windows very intuitive since I have been using it for 15 years. I did work on a friends Mac 12 months ago because they wanted some settings changed. I was able to find it but it wasn't where I would expect it.

As for browsers, who uses the default browser. I can have safari, google chrome, firefox, ... That list goes on.... There are alternatives to everything.

Then there is the iPhone... Well, I'll keep my HTC Evo Android phone. At least I can find some good pron on it.

Originally Posted by dakid

weird how my 3yr old desktop and 2yr laptop loads up just as fast as macs. and i can't tell you how many times i've dropped my laptop and spilled coke on it....still runs like a champ!



i wouldn't take advice from a guy that in his bragging, admits to using safari!

I was going to be a prick, and like link you to a Fisher Price laptop (http://www.kidslandusa.com/images/pr.../N3682_d_1.jpg), but then I saw a semi decent pic of a red 430 on your website ....

There's tons of videos on youtube demonstrating the startup times of macs verse PCs new and old. It's nearly impossible to argue that your PC starts up faster than a mac, but I don't really think that's the point. The biggest thing for me is that my macs recover from "Hiberation" or sleep, whatever you want to call it, to usable much faster than any PC that I've ever owned could dream of. I like walking away from my computer, coming back, and clicking the mouse and I'm ready to go...

Joe, what's so bad about Safari? I'm actually curious, I have both fire fox and safari installed but I kind of like the feel of safari better IMO. And i don't give a shiz about extensions and what not, I save all the serious browsing and web developer tools for the PC since that's what I mainly edit on. Love my macbook but can't give up my dual screens on the PC.

Originally Posted by dabell

The Touch was mine and the two iPod's were my 17 and 19 year sons (at the time that the items were broke). Dropping definitely wasn't the issue. I can assure you of that. It was from useage not dropping.

Okay, in all fairness, the itouch/ipod/iWhateverYouHold in your hands, always suffer a lot of abuse. I've been annoyed when my ipod (3 years old at the time) stopped holding a charge, but you've got to expect stuff like this when these devices are typically beaten up. The iTouch has a glass screen so it's susceptible to a decent amount of issues and I can feel your complaints there. I've gone through three iphones, I've dropped an iphone from my pocket while riding a motorcycle at an excessive speed and haven't broken the screen (just scratched the hell out of the case), and then a few months later it fell off a hotel bed to carpetted floor and the screen shattered - so what gives. I'm not saying the stuff is industricable, and I don't think that apple sets a "ticking timebomb" in their devices to blow up when the warranty expires, but there's literally nothing to compare their devices to to be fair. I mean what other phones out there right now (maybe something that came out recently) has a screen that's covered in glass, with as good of a picture, etc...

I have looked and felt the items. yes, the are nice no doubt but I would prefer to get similar products if not better hardware spec's (faster CPU, more memory in the computer, ...) for cheaper.

You pay money for the name, and when doing so you're paying for a lot more R&D than the competition puts into their products hands down.

The OS and being intuitive is definitely a matter of opinion. I find Windows very intuitive since I have been using it for 15 years. I did work on a friends Mac 12 months ago because they wanted some settings changed. I was able to find it but it wasn't where I would expect it.

I'm not talking about where settings menus are located or where the top toolbar is, I'm talking more about overall "usability" of the OS. Now I use a lot of add-ons (like QuickSilver, an app launcher) that make it more useful to me, but out of the box, there's no doubt OSX is more usable than any version of Windows in my mind - no matter if you're a "simple" or advanced user.

As for browsers, who uses the default browser. I can have safari, google chrome, firefox, ... That list goes on.... There are alternatives to everything.

You missed the point.

Then there is the iPhone... Well, I'll keep my HTC Evo Android phone. At least I can find some good pron on it.

If you had the iPhone and were near WiFi you could use facetime and see live streaming porn.... Just throwing that out there .

Originally Posted by wakeboardertj

Joe, what's so bad about Safari? I'm actually curious, I have both fire fox and safari installed but I kind of like the feel of safari better IMO. And i don't give a shiz about extensions and what not, I save all the serious browsing and web developer tools for the PC since that's what I mainly edit on. Love my macbook but can't give up my dual screens on the PC.

Check out Chrome. If you're a developer it has all of the Safari like developer tools (in fact their "Inspector" app or whatever you want to call it is identical to Safari's). I've noticed FireFox (especially if you even have firebug installed) gets bloated and slow - it's like Windows, have to restart it all the time.

By the way, if you are doing any web dev'ing on your PC, you really should check out the development options on the Mac, I do quiet a bit of coding and love TextMate - honestly it's the reason I bought a Mac in the first place.

Macbook macbook macbook I actually am selling my old macbook pro for $500 if your interested. 2GHz Intel Core Duo with 2 Gigs of Ram. PM me if interested.

Originally Posted by rsanchez

Okay, in all fairness, the itouch/ipod/iWhateverYouHold in your hands, always suffer a lot of abuse. I've been annoyed when my ipod (3 years old at the time) stopped holding a charge, but you've got to expect stuff like this when these devices are typically beaten up. The iTouch has a glass screen so it's susceptible to a decent amount of issues and I can feel your complaints there. I've gone through three iphones, I've dropped an iphone from my pocket while riding a motorcycle at an excessive speed and haven't broken the screen (just scratched the hell out of the case), and then a few months later it fell off a hotel bed to carpetted floor and the screen shattered - so what gives. I'm not saying the stuff is industricable, and I don't think that apple sets a "ticking timebomb" in their devices to blow up when the warranty expires, but there's literally nothing to compare their devices to to be fair. I mean what other phones out there right now (maybe something that came out recently) has a screen that's covered in glass, with as good of a picture, etc...

You are probably correct but I had my Original HTC Touch smartphone for nearly 3 years and never had one issue with the touch screen. That phone definitely took a licking and continued to work. The case was even cracked because it fell out of my hands and the screen still worked.

Originally Posted by rsanchez

You pay money for the name, and when doing so you're paying for a lot more R&D than the competition puts into their products hands down.

The processors are both Intel today. What more R&D does Intel do for Toshiba (example) compared to Apple? Absolutely more more R&D. That can also be applied to memory, motherboards, ... in the computers.

"I'm all about practicality, but it's okay to call me a fan boy. I noticed both of you guys have "Tech" occupations, which from my experience, your "types" are overly egotistical and don't understand the bigger picture of what technology should be used for - that's why you generally work for other people rather than using your intelligence and knowhow to build something and will never get beyond your 9-5 paycheck, dwindling 401k, and shrinking home values."

Actually I work for myself, am "rich" (according to Obama lol) and unlike some am not a religious zealot when it comes to technology. I can't afford to be in my line of work and there is no point to it. I pointed out the facts (you can bitch and moan all you want but the simple fact is when it comes to the software ecosystem out there - regardless of the reasons why it is - there are plenty of people who can't get done what they need to get done on OS X; and I don't just mean in the business world - I encountered this with 3 friends this week alone) and made some practical suggestions to the OP. As I said before, if your workflow and required toolset fall within the confines of the OS X ecosystem (which yours clearly do) and you can afford the price premium (which you clearly can) then you'll be just fine. You just might want to take note of the fact that you are in the vast minority (hence the relatively small 5ish percent market share apple enjoys)

In addition to my three dell machines I own a macbook (bought used), an iphone, and an ipad. I don't care what laptop brand you buy, I would never let a friend get one without a 3 yr warranty. This pushes even the base level 13" MBP up to $1,450 before tax. The OP is working under budget constraints so there is really very little reason for him to be looking at a $1,500+ solution IMHO when a $700 dell setup will have the same specs, run all the software he wants, and keep 8 hundo in his pocket. It's simply a practical decision, no need to get butthurt about it. The plastic base level Macbook is a whole different story construction-wise (which I know you understand since you specifically call out only the more expensive aluminum models). Still not a bad machine, however - I recently set up my mom on her 2nd one (first was destroyed by a tree-wielding tornado). Runs Windows 7 like a champ. For friends who have the budget to get a macbook w/warranty I always make this my top recommendation; especially if they can afford a $90 windoze license to go with it.

I'll pit my workstation startup time against any machine, regardless of OS. Sometimes I remotely flip it on from my phone and then race it down the stairs. Never can beat it to my desk. It's probably on the order of 7 seconds if that. Not bad for a $500 machine, and certainly far from impossible to argue that it starts up faster than any Mac. Windows 7 starts up faster than any consumer OS (with the exception of Windows 2008 R2 but that is stretching the definition of "consumer"). On the flipside, OS X does a far better job of protecting users from themselves (aided somewhat by its market share which provides a layer of security through obscurity) than XP/Vista but 7 has made a large leap forward in this respect - however it is still relatively easy for a careless user to hose a Windoze machine.

@Taylor: as far as browsing on OS X there is nothing wrong with Safari.

As for the quip about the cost of OS upgrades, I don't think you are doing your math right as Apple throws out a "major" release once a year and charges $129 for it (that was 10.0, 10.1, and 10.2 - from 10.3 on they started doing $29 upgrades, whew) - whereas Winblows gets its major service pack updates for free. Over the course of 8 years there were 3 paid winblows OS versions (which can each be had for $90) and 7 paid OS X versions. So even if you didn't bother buying Windows upgrades and got a full version each time, you're still paying $270 for windows home, $450 for Windows pro/biz, and at the cheapest (all upgrades) $380 for OS X. So depending on your winblows edition you are either paying roughly $11/year less or $9/year more than your crapintosh buddies.

Originally Posted by rsanchez

You pay money for the name, and when doing so you're paying for a lot more R&D than the competition puts into their products hands down.

I'm not talking about where settings menus are located or where the top toolbar is, I'm talking more about overall "usability" of the OS. Now I use a lot of add-ons (like QuickSilver, an app launcher) that make it more useful to me, but out of the box, there's no doubt OSX is more usable than any version of Windows in my mind - no matter if you're a "simple" or advanced user.

Actually the sad part is that due to Apple's growth and the switch to using the same cheap Taiwanese stuff every other OEM uses their R&D and QC just hasn't kept up - it used to be one of their biggest advantages and I hope they start pumping more money into that side of things because their support really can't keep up. The draconian measures they take to clamp down on any dissent or complaints on their forums and other avenues of support (not to mention their insane legal team who clamps down on consumers who have the gall to air their grievances) are also pretty pathetic. My hope is that the whole antennagate debacle starts to cultivate some cultural change on their campus in this regard.

As for your point about UI it's completely personal preference. Personally OS X, while beautiful, is incredibly clunky and poorly thought out in my opinion - but it's just that - my opinion. And don't get me started about trying to get into its guts or god forbid try to do something basic like resize/repartition your disks lol.

Originally Posted by dabell

You are probably correct but I had my Original HTC Touch smartphone for nearly 3 years and never had one issue with the touch screen. That phone definitely took a licking and continued to work. The case was even cracked because it fell out of my hands and the screen still worked.

Like I mentioned before, you're comparing apples to oranges. I too used to have an HTC phone (PPC 6700 one of the first half decent smart phones at the time), they're totally different devices. And to the best of my knowledge, the iPhone is the only glass screen smart phone around, naturally it's going to have some complaints about cracked screens, etc etc, what do people expect - devices aren't bullet proof.

The processors are both Intel today. What more R&D does Intel do for Toshiba (example) compared to Apple? Absolutely more more R&D. That can also be applied to memory, motherboards, ... in the computers.

Oh ok, ya because R&D is just about chip development, memory, etc.. Actually it's not... R&D = research and development. Not the word "development", this is way more than chip manufacturing (which apple does do and has been for some time), battery development (oh wait, Apples been doing that for a long time, maybe thats why my macbook pro with a 17in screen has 7 hours of battery life?), software development, etc... You're forgetting there's more to this than just putting some chips together and throwing a label on the box (Apple != DELL, HP, COMPAQ, TOSHIBA, etc). Apple spends tons of money really pioneering "technologies" and applications and it's unfair to compare that to Toshiba, Dell, et all, who make devices and not whole solutions. Multi touch devices are a perfect example of this.

Hey Rob, weren't the power PC chips motorola and the new Intel processors are all well, Intel? The intel stuff is "off the rack" just like you can buy from newegg. Apple is doing no more processor R&D than HP or Dell... everybody is just buying that part from Intel. To analogize to boats... Malibu, Mastercraft and Skiers Choice all use Indmar motors. You can't really say Mastercraft has better motors than Malibu ... because they are the same.

To the OP, if you really want a mac, consider running a hackintosh by installing OSX on a PC. Costs you an extra hundo for the software and some time to get it running, but it's quite possible to get a running "mac" for less than what the apple store charges.

You chide someone for comparing apples to oranges and then you start comparing a completely consumer-oriented company to companies that make huge revenues and spend a lot of R&D on business equipment and technologies.

I think this the biggest thing people fail to realize in general when thinking about Apple - fanbois get so caught up in how special Apple is that they forget how SPECIAL Apple is. It really is its own beast and comparisons to other "computer" companies is tricky.

Generally speaking, however, it would be great if they'd spend a bit less on lawyers and false advertising and a bit more on their slipping QC. Gone are the days of their machines being bulletproof and the rabid fanbois being willing to pay $80 for a keyboard because it was made of clear plastic. They have taken their products to the masses and it has been a rather rocky shift overall. I hope they work the kinks out because I am a huge fan of their products generally speaking and have put my money where my mouth is.

Originally Posted by pesos

"I'm all about practicality, but it's okay to call me a fan boy. I noticed both of you guys have "Tech" occupations, which from my experience, your "types" are overly egotistical and don't understand the bigger picture of what technology should be used for - that's why you generally work for other people rather than using your intelligence and knowhow to build something and will never get beyond your 9-5 paycheck, dwindling 401k, and shrinking home values."

Actually I work for myself, am "rich" (according to Obama lol) and unlike some am not a religious zealot when it comes to technology. I can't afford to be in my line of work and there is no point to it. I pointed out the facts (you can bitch and moan all you want but the simple fact is when it comes to the software ecosystem out there - regardless of the reasons why it is - there are plenty of people who can't get done what they need to get done on OS X; and I don't just mean in the business world - I encountered this with 3 friends this week alone) and made some practical suggestions to the OP. As I said before, if your workflow and required toolset fall within the confines of the OS X ecosystem (which yours clearly do) and you can afford the price premium (which you clearly can) then you'll be just fine. You just might want to take note of the fact that you are in the vast minority (hence the relatively small 5ish percent market share apple enjoys)

If you're implying I'm some religious zealot when it comes to technology you're way wrong. And I really challenge your IT experience. Let me put it this way, I can't really come up with any plausible examples where a Mac can't do something "as well" or to the same effect of "Windows". There are two exceptions, AutoCad (though there are Cad products for OSX), and Active Directory. There's a few replacements for Active Directory, but that's definitely the trump card in my book that Microsoft has on Apple. Outside of that, media design/development has always been better on Apple products (hence the artsy image of the company), and I really fail to find any real world examples where Apple outside of the price consideration really lacks.

If you really want to talk about pricing people out of technology, look at Microsoft. They have so many bloated and overpriced products (besides Windows) that because they control a large majority of the desktop marketshare, they abuse it. Perfect examples include Exchange, MS SQL Server, Server Licensing, etc...

There is no doubt that apple is doing something right. There's also no doubt that a ton of what you pay for apple devices are for the name, there's a reason they have more cash on hand than nearly any other company in the US that they could be compared to.

In addition to my three dell machines I own a macbook (bought used), an iphone, and an ipad. I don't care what laptop brand you buy, I would never let a friend get one without a 3 yr warranty. This pushes even the base level 13" MBP up to $1,450 before tax. The OP is working under budget constraints so there is really very little reason for him to be looking at a $1,500+ solution IMHO when a $700 dell setup will have the same specs, run all the software he wants, and keep 8 hundo in his pocket. It's simply a practical decision, no need to get butthurt about it. The plastic base level Macbook is a whole different story construction-wise (which I know you understand since you specifically call out only the more expensive aluminum models). Still not a bad machine, however - I recently set up my mom on her 2nd one (first was destroyed by a tree-wielding tornado). Runs Windows 7 like a champ. For friends who have the budget to get a macbook w/warranty I always make this my top recommendation; especially if they can afford a $90 windoze license to go with it.

I'll pit my workstation startup time against any machine, regardless of OS. Sometimes I remotely flip it on from my phone and then race it down the stairs. Never can beat it to my desk. It's probably on the order of 7 seconds if that. Not bad for a $500 machine, and certainly far from impossible to argue that it starts up faster than any Mac. Windows 7 starts up faster than any consumer OS (with the exception of Windows 2008 R2 but that is stretching the definition of "consumer"). On the flipside, OS X does a far better job of protecting users from themselves (aided somewhat by its market share which provides a layer of security through obscurity) than XP/Vista but 7 has made a large leap forward in this respect - however it is still relatively easy for a careless user to hose a Windoze machine.

Without wasting a bunch of time linking videos on youtube, there's tons of examples where people using exactly comparable hardware show Windows 7 boot up time versus Mac OSX boot up time and OSX on the average is faster...

@Taylor: as far as browsing on OS X there is nothing wrong with Safari.

As for the quip about the cost of OS upgrades, I don't think you are doing your math right as Apple throws out a "major" release once a year and charges $129 for it (that was 10.0, 10.1, and 10.2 - from 10.3 on they started doing $29 upgrades, whew) - whereas Winblows gets its major service pack updates for free. Over the course of 8 years there were 3 paid winblows OS versions (which can each be had for $90) and 7 paid OS X versions. So even if you didn't bother buying Windows upgrades and got a full version each time, you're still paying $270 for windows home, $450 for Windows pro/biz, and at the cheapest (all upgrades) $380 for OS X. So depending on your winblows edition you are either paying roughly $11/year less or $9/year more than your crapintosh buddies.

Ha, service pack updates for the record are never really "Feature packed" (with some exceptions) they're normally fixing big issues. Apple has been giving out free software updates for a long time, and major OS versions can be had for cheap (I paid $29.00 for leopard when it came out so I'm not sure where you're getting your pricing from). Granted "Upgrades" for windows have been reasonably priced for a long time, I'm just not a big fan of their licensing model. You're also not putting it into perspective, I for example have 20 or so apple computers within my office, it cost me exactly $29.00 + time to upgrade the OS on those. Assuming I went out and bought non corporate licensing (in my windows days I had MSDN subscription) I would be paying out the ass to upgrade OSs to cover major issues. Why also does Microsoft keep revamping their UI every time (which btw, each release becomes more and more OSX-like, you have to admit that) and Apple has maintained their oh-so-simplistic interface for a long time.

Originally Posted by pesos

Actually the sad part is that due to Apple's growth and the switch to using the same cheap Taiwanese stuff every other OEM uses their R&D and QC just hasn't kept up - it used to be one of their biggest advantages and I hope they start pumping more money into that side of things because their support really can't keep up. The draconian measures they take to clamp down on any dissent or complaints on their forums and other avenues of support (not to mention their insane legal team who clamps down on consumers who have the gall to air their grievances) are also pretty pathetic. My hope is that the whole antennagate debacle starts to cultivate some cultural change on their campus in this regard.

On a percentage basis of their gross profit, apple spends a ton of money on R&D, it's a waste to quote figures, but those shinny cool devices that work well don't come cheap.

OH ya, because Microsoft doesn't go around doing anything remotely as bad. I noticed you were in the bay area, your neighbor SalesForce just settled a stupid nasty lawsuit from Microsoft for patent infringement, if you know anything about the case it's obviously a bunch of BS, just anti competitive. Or how about the massive anti-trust cases that were filed against them by numerous countries (although I agree they're bogus). Or the handling of so many other consumer issues.

As for your point about UI it's completely personal preference. Personally OS X, while beautiful, is incredibly clunky and poorly thought out in my opinion - but it's just that - my opinion. And don't get me started about trying to get into its guts or god forbid try to do something basic like resize/repartition your disks lol.

It is preference. I've switched a ton of people to apple products, some by necessity (ie they work in my office) or some by just convincing them to buy an apple when they bought a new laptop. It's not because I'm some zealot, I just think they're better products. Not one of these people has ever complained and not a single one has gone back.

And I'm not sure what you're talking about, it's not really that hard to resize or repartition a disk, I've done it before without a hitch.

Originally Posted by shawndoggy

Hey Rob, weren't the power PC chips motorola and the new Intel processors are all well, Intel? The intel stuff is "off the rack" just like you can buy from newegg. Apple is doing no more processor R&D than HP or Dell... everybody is just buying that part from Intel. To analogize to boats... Malibu, Mastercraft and Skiers Choice all use Indmar motors. You can't really say Mastercraft has better motors than Malibu ... because they are the same.

To the OP, if you really want a mac, consider running a hackintosh by installing OSX on a PC. Costs you an extra hundo for the software and some time to get it running, but it's quite possible to get a running "mac" for less than what the apple store charges.

Yup, see my point above about R&D being much more than slapping chips in a aluminum or plastic case. I don't know if you know this, but Toshiba, Dell, HP, etc, they're all hardware/device companies, and they just focus on putting a laptop/desktop/whatever together using decent components for the lowest cost possible. Apple on the other hand, does the same thing, but they put a lot more effort into designing their products, managing the software for the products, etc. When Toshiba, Dell or HP come out with their own product wrapped around their own software you can compare them fairly...

Originally Posted by pesos

You chide someone for comparing apples to oranges and then you start comparing a completely consumer-oriented company to companies that make huge revenues and spend a lot of R&D on business equipment and technologies.

I only compare them to show how different they really are. And for your information, I only started "chiding" you when you stooped down and called me a "Fan boi", and said my post was uninformed drivel, you sir, are the uninformed one.

By the way, you act like apple is some small company, they do have 34k employees and did $15bil in revenue last quarter, microsoft did $16b and dell $15b. Apple is no small potatoes...

I think this the biggest thing people fail to realize in general when thinking about Apple - fanbois get so caught up in how special Apple is that they forget how SPECIAL Apple is. It really is its own beast and comparisons to other "computer" companies is tricky.

I like how we're going from "Apple products really aren't that superior" to "Apples QC process has really diminished". Both statements I obviously disagree with. I don't really know what quality issues you're speaking of, besides this idiotic dropped call issue with the new iPhone (which I haven't actually experienced and I don't have that stupid bumper on my phone either).

Generally speaking, however, it would be great if they'd spend a bit less on lawyers and false advertising and a bit more on their slipping QC. Gone are the days of their machines being bulletproof and the rabid fanbois being willing to pay $80 for a keyboard because it was made of clear plastic. They have taken their products to the masses and it has been a rather rocky shift overall. I hope they work the kinks out because I am a huge fan of their products generally speaking and have put my money where my mouth is.

False advertising? LOL, please do tell. People like myself pay $80 for a keyboard or $70 for the new mouse, because they like the product and feel the price is justified, and in my case, they work better for me.

I'll be happy to address the software/pricing issues you raise (oh boo hoo, people are CHARGING for software!) in a separate post, don't have the time ATM.

As for the youtube vids, the mac zealots that make the startup vids on identical hardware (which means macs) ignore the fact that due to the way macs startup bootcamped installations add a HUGE amount of time to the startup process (once the partition actually goes live and winblows boots it is extremely fast). A true comparison will boot winblows on a machine that was designed to run winblows. Will put together a vid if/when I get a moment.

Service packs actually do often add new features (xp sp2 for example which was basically an entire rewriting of the entire security subsystem). You still seem to be having trouble with the math. Apple releases NEW OSes EVERY YEAR, pretending that they are radical rewrites and charging for them. If you have to pay $29 EVERY YEAR to stay current, plus the initial $129 for 10.1 and $129 for 10.2, it really adds up. No reason to buy winblows upgrades when you can get the full oem version for $90. So I am not understanding your statement about being able to upgrade your 20 macs for $29 each. That's $29 EACH PER YEAR broski - whereas you don't pay for a new version of Winblows every year. So whether it's $29/year per machine for 3 years, or $90 per machine ONCE every 3 years, it's a wash.

Let's also not forget that Windows XP is STILL being actively maintained and updated by Microsoft. Try getting Apple to provide you security and bug fixes for 10.1 lol - they'll laugh at you. You can also run Windows 7 on older hardware and it runs beautifully - I have it on my old dell laptop from 2003 and it runs like a champ. You can't even load the last few OS X revisions on hardware that old because they arbitrarily drop support for older hardware: JUST BUY A NEW ONE GUYS CMON WE KNOW YOU HAVE THE MONEY, YOU PAID $80 FOR OUR FRIGGIN KEYBOARD! Lol. One of the many reasons Apple doesn't exist outside the consumer and SOHO space (which is fine, they have their niche, they know it, and they address it) - they abhor backwards compatibility because it doesn't fit their revenue model. They need fanbois to continue replacing their hardware at insane rates to keep that cash coming in. This is how they subsidize OS X in the first place. Microsoft on the other hand is not a hardware company and makes their money off of licensing - hmm maybe that's why they charge money for their software LICENSES? You don't find it the least bit funny that you blast Microsoft for their software licensing costs on solid enterprise class products like SQL and Exchange, and then make a statement like "There's also no doubt that a ton of what you pay for apple devices are for the name." Hilarious!

So if you add it all up, not only are you paying the same amount for OS X as you are for Winblows, but you are still paying a crapload more for the Apple hardware. There's no getting around it, it's simple math. And once again, that's fine if you can afford it and your workflow fits into their software world.

As for UI, Microsoft made a significant change from XP to Vista. Vista to 7 hardly changed the UI at all, not sure what you're getting at. That's like saying why did Apple change their UI from os9 to OS X? Again, UI is a matter of opinion - I personally find OS X's interface clunky and unintuitive (not that windows is amazing in this respect either).

Please do explain how the incredibly easy to use Mac OS allows a Regular Joe to, for example, delete a couple of extra partitions on a disk and then create a new one in their place. And don't bring up pdisk, that isn't Regular Joe material.

And you mean the dropped call issue that was so stupid Apple felt obligated to give out free cases to every single person who bought the phone? Seems rather serious to me. Just google apple false advertising if you want to see the multitude of issues over the years. And don't get me started about utter failures like the MobileMe data debacle and the Time Machine data destruction bug.

As much as I can go on and on about things I hate about certain Microsoft products, you're seriously going to sit there and complain that they charge a whopping $900 or so for a rock solid enterprise collaboration system like Exchange 2010? You've got to be kidding. In fact really the only MS product you can really even try to make a case against pricing-wise is Office, which can be exorbitant. Although they do offer the $400 suite to students for $65, and a 3-license version for $125. And again oem licenses offer a cheap way for small businesses to get in on it. And now that their dev schedule actually lines up with Software Assurance (which initially was a ridiculous failure) large businesses can take the sting out of staying current.

And say what you will about the schmucks in Redmond, they reach out to the nonprofit community. My 501c3 clients get $30,000 worth of MS software for $2k. Not bad at all. Apple curiously ignores the nonprofit sector - I guess it doesn't jive with their "we're hip and have lots of money" vibe. They are notorious tightwads when it comes to hardware and software donations and don't even allow charitable contributions through the in-app payment system oddly enough.

Originally Posted by pesos

I'll be happy to address the software/pricing issues you raise (oh boo hoo, people are CHARGING for software!) in a separate post, don't have the time ATM.

I don't have a problem paying for software, I'm just saying I disagree with the Windows pricing model, as has the millions of people who have been pirating it for years.. I think microsoft is out of touch.

As for the youtube vids, the mac zealots that make the startup vids on identical hardware (which means macs) ignore the fact that due to the way macs startup bootcamped installations add a HUGE amount of time to the startup process (once the partition actually goes live and winblows boots it is extremely fast). A true comparison will boot winblows on a machine that was designed to run winblows. Will put together a vid if/when I get a moment.

Those videos do exist as well .

Service packs actually do often add new features (xp sp2 for example which was basically an entire rewriting of the entire security subsystem). You still seem to be having trouble with the math. Apple releases NEW OSes EVERY YEAR, pretending that they are radical rewrites and charging for them. If you have to pay $29 EVERY YEAR to stay current, plus the initial $129 for 10.1 and $129 for 10.2, it really adds up. No reason to buy winblows upgrades when you can get the full oem version for $90. So I am not understanding your statement about being able to upgrade your 20 macs for $29 each. That's $29 EACH PER YEAR broski - whereas you don't pay for a new version of Winblows every year. So whether it's $29/year per machine for 3 years, or $90 per machine ONCE every 3 years, it's a wash.

Yo guy, you're not paying attention to what I wrote, I paid $29 to upgrade 20 machines, a $1.50 each. lol..

Let's also not forget that Windows XP is STILL being actively maintained and updated by Microsoft. Try getting Apple to provide you security and bug fixes for 10.1 lol - they'll laugh at you. You can also run Windows 7 on older hardware and it runs beautifully - I have it on my old dell laptop from 2003 and it runs like a champ.

No, they'll tell you to upgrade, why is that? Because they have a different software strategy. They have consumers pay for upgrades yes, albeit much cheaper (see my point above), though their paid updates are about as frequent as windows versions.

You can't even load the last few OS X revisions on hardware that old because they arbitrarily drop support for older hardware: JUST BUY A NEW ONE GUYS CMON WE KNOW YOU HAVE THE MONEY, YOU PAID $80 FOR OUR FRIGGIN KEYBOARD! Lol. One of the many reasons Apple doesn't exist outside the consumer and SOHO space (which is fine, they have their niche, they know it, and they address it) - they abhor backwards compatibility because it doesn't fit their revenue model. They need fanbois to continue replacing their hardware at insane rates to keep that cash coming in. This is how they subsidize OS X in the first place. Microsoft on the other hand is not a hardware company and makes their money off of licensing - hmm maybe that's why they charge money for their software LICENSES? You don't find it the least bit funny that you blast Microsoft for their software licensing costs on solid enterprise class products like SQL and Exchange, and then make a statement like "There's also no doubt that a ton of what you pay for apple devices are for the name." Hilarious!

First off, it is my opinion that MSSQL is a overpriced piece of ****. To put it in perspective, I own a call center, with 20 macs (used by management and software developers) and 250 dummy terminals (though they're really not terminals, just web "kiosks"). I don't really use a single windows based product (I do have a few HP touch screen machines lying around that I bought to test), not because I hate microsoft products, but because they don't work in my environment.

Speaking of SOHO, the biggest thing I hate about Microsoft is their licensing pricing, and if you're complaining about the cost of apple products, look at a mid sized company like mine. If I had to go out and license my SQL server (4x cluster with 4x quad core setup) I'd have to license 64 cpus. If you know anything about SQL server licensing, you'd know that cost about as much as a nice house.... Whereas I use mySQL, with a enterprise support (which I bought because I felt the need to give back) and drum rolllll, guess how much (excluding the enterprise support) it cost...nothing. I feel mySQL is much easier to manage and maintain as well. Let's not even talk about what it would cost to license exchange, windows, etc.

I also have an intimiate connection with microsoft, I'm sure more so than you. I spend a lot with their advertising division (who manages the ad space for all of their web entities, like msnbc, msn, hotmail). They have the most back asswards accounting practices, and company management - I can only assume the rest of the company is run that way and that's probably why they're so out of touch with their licensing.

So if you add it all up, not only are you paying the same amount for OS X as you are for Winblows, but you are still paying a crapload more for the Apple hardware. There's no getting around it, it's simple math. And once again, that's fine if you can afford it and your workflow fits into their software world.

Again I disagree. You do pay more for the name, but I feel it's a superior product in design without rehashing the same arguments I made before.

As for UI, Microsoft made a significant change from XP to Vista. Vista to 7 hardly changed the UI at all, not sure what you're getting at. That's like saying why did Apple change their UI from os9 to OS X? Again, UI is a matter of opinion - I personally find OS X's interface clunky and unintuitive (not that windows is amazing in this respect either).

I feel if you took 100 computer users and dumped them into the room, and made them ignore the apple hype (which does exist), and had them use a PC versus a mac, I feel more than 50% would prefer the Mac UI, and I think that's about half of our argument here. That's obviously my opinion, but again, I've yet to meet someone that I've introduced to apple that didn't prefer their UI.

Originally Posted by pesos

As much as I can go on and on about things I hate about certain Microsoft products, you're seriously going to sit there and complain that they charge a whopping $900 or so for a rock solid enterprise collaboration system like Exchange 2010? You've got to be kidding. In fact really the only MS product you can really even try to make a case against pricing-wise is Office, which can be exorbitant. Although they do offer the $400 suite to students for $65, and a 3-license version for $125. And again oem licenses offer a cheap way for small businesses to get in on it. And now that their dev schedule actually lines up with Software Assurance (which initially was a ridiculous failure) large businesses can take the sting out of staying current.

LOL Buddy, exchange is way more expensive than $900. Try putting more than 5 people on it and see what happens to the pricing.

And say what you will about the schmucks in Redmond, they reach out to the nonprofit community. My 501c3 clients get $30,000 worth of MS software for $2k. Not bad at all. Apple curiously ignores the nonprofit sector - I guess it doesn't jive with their "we're hip and have lots of money" vibe. They are notorious tightwads when it comes to hardware and software donations and don't even allow charitable contributions through the in-app payment system oddly enough.

Guy, I agree with you on their discounting of software. I used to subscribe to MSDN (which was like $2k when I was a "teenager" - not that long ago, but a lot of money for me at the time) and I loved it. But when happend was microsoft didn't seem to put a good effort into making sure people didn't steal their product, and instead just jacked up the pricing. I'm not going to waste time making up numbers, but if they cracked down on their massive software piracy issues they wouldn't have to charge but a 1/3rd of what they did for XP for example to gross the same amount....

Apple may not give out to the non profit sector (I don't actually know if that's true or not) but if you're a student I believe you get a 10% discount, which is huge. I've spent over $100k in the last year alone on Apple products and I get a measly 5% business discount, so it says something to me.

Originally Posted by pesos

Please do explain how the incredibly easy to use Mac OS allows a Regular Joe to, for example, delete a couple of extra partitions on a disk and then create a new one in their place. And don't bring up pdisk, that isn't Regular Joe material.

First, why don't you explain to me why a regular joe would need a disk partition? Have you used the Disk Manager built into OSX?

And you mean the dropped call issue that was so stupid Apple felt obligated to give out free cases to every single person who bought the phone? Seems rather serious to me. Just google apple false advertising if you want to see the multitude of issues over the years. And don't get me started about utter failures like the MobileMe data debacle and the Time Machine data destruction bug.

They gave them out because they were getting so much attention for no reason. The media likes to attack people when they appear to be down, why was their so much heat on BP (who I hate) with the Oil Spill? You think it was because CNN really gives a crap about the Alabama coast? I doubt it, the media likes to blow up the demise of people. I use my phone for at least 3 hours of talk time every day, I'm in the car a lot as well with it moving around. My iPhone 4 has yet to drop a call anywhere that my blackberry on sprint wouldn't have...

Time machine data destruction? LOL, how many people have lost tons of data on Windows, either by hardware failures, OS crashes, what have you. I'd say at least a 1/3 of the population that actually uses a computer has. I know I have tons of times. Most of the time it's hardware problems, but still..

Originally Posted by rsanchez

I don't have a problem paying for software, I'm just saying I disagree with the Windows pricing model, as has the millions of people who have been pirating it for years.. I think microsoft is out of touch.

Yo guy, you're not paying attention to what I wrote, I paid $29 to upgrade 20 machines, a $1.50 each. lol..

No, they'll tell you to upgrade, why is that? Because they have a different software strategy. They have consumers pay for upgrades yes, albeit much cheaper (see my point above), though their paid updates are about as frequent as windows versions.

Speaking of SOHO, the biggest thing I hate about Microsoft is their licensing pricing, and if you're complaining about the cost of apple products, look at a mid sized company like mine. If I had to go out and license my SQL server (4x cluster with 4x quad core setup) I'd have to license 64 cpus. If you know anything about SQL server licensing, you'd know that cost about as much as a nice house.... Whereas I use mySQL, with a enterprise support (which I bought because I felt the need to give back) and drum rolllll, guess how much (excluding the enterprise support) it cost...nothing. I feel mySQL is much easier to manage and maintain as well. Let's not even talk about what it would cost to license exchange, windows, etc.

Bwahahahahahahaha. So let me get this straight... you paid $29 which is the cost to upgrade a single instance of OS X to the latest version, then illegally used the disc you bought on all 20 of your macs? You just stole 19 versions of OS X from Apple, what's 19x$29? You are no different than all those people you just mentioned who pirate windows because of their licensing scheme. You can't make this stuff up, classic.

And I guess you also have trouble with dates if you think the OS X paid versions come out as frequently as paid Windows versions. Once again - let's start with Fall 2001 when both XP and OS X 10.1 came out (we'll skip 10.0 in March 2001 because it was such a turd that Apple had to give 10.1 to all those poor people for free). Since that time, Microsoft has released two paid versions of Windows (Vista and 7) for a total of $180 in licensing costs ($300 if you went with the pro/biz versions). In the same time span, Apple has released the $129 10.2 upgrade (no $29 option was offered), 10.3 ($29), 10.3 ($29), 10.4 ($29), 10.5 ($29), and 10.6 ($29) - and now 10.7 ($29) is around the corner. That adds up to roughly $310. Winblows is cheaper.

You need to look at SQL licensing again my friend. This is hilarious - you're trying to call me out for not knowing anything about SQL licensing and you keep making yourself look like an uninformed idiot. You condescend and don't even seem to know the difference between sockets and cores. SQL cpu licenses are based on physical sockets, not cores, genius. So if you have a single quad-core processor in your machine you buy a single cpu license, not 4 cpu licenses. Derf.

i thought this was funny

Originally Posted by pesos

Bwahahahahahahaha. So let me get this straight... you paid $29 which is the cost to upgrade a single instance of OS X to the latest version, then illegally used the disc you bought on all 20 of your macs? You just stole 19 versions of OS X from Apple, what's 19x$29? You are no different than all those people you just mentioned who pirate windows because of their licensing scheme. You can't make this stuff up, classic.

LOL, OH OK. By the way, I was again incorrect, I bought the family pack $49.00, and you could easily argue that I needed the "unlimited pack" but I disagree completely and even the guy at the apple store agreed with me. I'll consider this a grey area. You're free to nit pick at this though...

And I guess you also have trouble with dates if you think the OS X paid versions come out as frequently as paid Windows versions. Once again - let's start with Fall 2001 when both XP and OS X 10.1 came out (we'll skip 10.0 in March 2001 because it was such a turd that Apple had to give 10.1 to all those poor people for free). Since that time, Microsoft has released two paid versions of Windows (Vista and 7) for a total of $180 in licensing costs ($300 if you went with the pro/biz versions). In the same time span, Apple has released the $129 10.2 upgrade (no $29 option was offered), 10.3 ($29), 10.3 ($29), 10.4 ($29), 10.5 ($29), and 10.6 ($29) - and now 10.7 ($29) is around the corner. That adds up to roughly $310. Winblows is cheaper.

You need to look at SQL licensing again my friend. This is hilarious - you're trying to call me out for not knowing anything about SQL licensing and you keep making yourself look like an uninformed idiot. You condescend and don't even seem to know the difference between sockets and cores. SQL cpu licenses are based on physical sockets, not cores, genius. So if you have a single quad-core processor in your machine you buy a single cpu license, not 4 cpu licenses. Derf.

First off, I was incorrect about per core licensing versus per socket licensing - I have never purchased a real SQL server license (other than MSDN subscription) and I was under the impression it was licensed like that of Oracle. I'll say again, I stand corrected on this one instant, but it's okay for you to use circular reasoning and keep trying to argue a new angle and never debating the original argument with me other than saying "It's a preference thing".

By the way, I do appreciate the genius comment, as I live an extremely comfortable life because of technology, I daily drive a ferrari, I have a nice boat, a warehouse full of nice toys, and I'd tend to think I have a good feel for technology as I've made a lot of money with it. I'm not saying I know everything, but I tend to believe I have a great understanding of how technology can play a great role in a business when used properly, and how Microsoft in my opinion has a benign pricing/software model and develops inferior software (not in all cases). If it's not obvious, I'm a huge proponent of open source software and I give back to the community in so many ways. I've purchased licensing/support on nearly every major application I use in my business, and my name is listed in the credits for numerous Asterisk, SQL, PHP, and FreeBSD revisions and addons for a reason. So don't think for a second I steal software, or don't believe in paying for anything. You imply I'm some stupid fan boy that's blinded by Apple throughout this thread. I love apple products, I like nice things, but I also know and believe that I make more money every day because I use a macbook pro that's always been reliable, a desktop that's extremely fast with over priced 30in screens that I certainly could have bought for half the price from dell. I believe apple delivers more value for the money in most cases (though they have some stupid products like their servers) and thats why I recommended a Macbook to the original poster regardless of someones budget, and thats why I always recommend apple products. I'm not sure why you're so bitter towards apple or towards me (by the way you first attacked me, not that I can't handle you or being attacked). From your arguments above that you have a used macbook, and older desktops "still running strong" it sounds like you may come short of being able to afford them, and I don't point that out to be a dick, but that seems to be everyones argument against apple computers, but they don't seem to look at the bigger picture either, especially TCO. You complain apple doesn't give out free security updates, but also imply that they're pretty defensive in terms of "getting infected" like Windows - so are the security updates really even needed? No. You can continue to nit pick my posts, and I think it's funny, and I'll continue to spend the 90 seconds or so that I spend every response to you, but at the end of the day it is what it is, I'm stuck being a "apple fan boy" and you're stuck with your views (by the way, I'll dub you a Microsoft "fan boy").....

Originally Posted by dakid

LOL! Buddy your one response is an image of david hasslehoff implying I got owned on "one point" and I agree I was incorrect but you've yet to respond to my post above to you. You sir, infact were owned before this thread was ever opened.

steer it towards me if you want, but;

Originally Posted by dakid

steer it towards me if you want, but;

lol, I do appreciate the comic relief.

Originally Posted by rsanchez

I daily drive a ferrari, I have a nice boat, a warehouse full of nice toys, and I'd tend to think I have a good feel for technology as I've made a lot of money with it.

is your alias "Lon" by any chance?

Originally Posted by dakid

is your alias "Lon" by any chance?

Nope, and I haven't sunk a x80 yet, sorry to disappoint .

Joe is on a role tonight

Rob: comparing two devices with touch screens while the HTC begin used more than the other isn't apples to oranges. I was comparing two touch screen and stating that apple makes a product that doesn't hold up to other similar or less usesuch as my HTC.

So, what do you think a good comparison of touch screens would be?

Lol Rob, I have no doubt you're successful. I'd like to think I'm somewhat successful myself. I wouldn't buy a Ferrari, but I'll bet it would be fun to drive one. I suppose I could have gone a different route and made a whole lot more money, but I am living very comfortably and despite the numerous hours I put into my business I feel good about the fact that I am donating tens of thousands of dollars every year to the fantastic nonprofit groups my business focuses on, while bringing them enterprise-class solutions that wouldn't otherwise be possible.

I've got around 20 computers and computing devices around the house at the moment, the macbook was picked up used because I needed something for OS X testing at 9pm one night and thanks to good ol Craigslist, $300 later I had the little guy in my hands. I actually bought a new Macbook Pro not all that long ago but ended up selling it because Apple still refuses to put a decent screen resolution on their 15" model - impossible to get anything done with that little screen real estate. So when the ipad won't cut it and I need a physical keyboard I still fire up the old Dell I have laying around because of its super high resolution (everything I do is via rdp/citrix anyway). I suppose partially it is somewhat a badge of honor thing, but I also like taking it around to clients as it comes in handy when explaining the whole terminal server concept to let clients see super-fast computing happening on the screen of a 7 year old machine. I am hoping that by the time it finally gives out Apple will have a high-res option on their 15" models. Congrats on your success but it seems to have potentially put you a bit out of touch with folks like the OP who are looking for a solid computing option without breaking their bank.

By the way, it's not nitpicking to point out that you're stealing from Apple. Even if you bought a single family pack, you are still stealing from Apple. For one thing, a family pack only covers up to 5 computers, leaving 15 licenses you stole. In addition to that, the 5 you did purchase are being used illegally as Apple makes it quite clear that "This license does not extend to business or commercial users." Doesn't matter what some idiot at the Apple Store does or doesn't think, there's no grey area there.

And seriously, LOL at you balking about the $60/head licensing cost of Exchange when you gleefully encourage the OP to pay $800 more for a macbook pro?

Not sure how you can label me a Microsoft fan boy when I've been quite clear about the fact that not only do I purchase Apple products for myself and my family, but recommend them highly to friends who value my opinion. They have their time and place for those who can afford them. Simple as that. Of course, I guess if you can spin something as clear as OS X family pack licensing into covering your 20 work computers, then I suppose you can spin just about anything.

Originally Posted by pesos

Lol Rob, I have no doubt you're successful. I'd like to think I'm somewhat successful myself. I wouldn't buy a Ferrari, but I'll bet it would be fun to drive one. I suppose I could have gone a different route and made a whole lot more money, but I am living very comfortably and despite the numerous hours I put into my business I feel good about the fact that I am donating tens of thousands of dollars every year to the fantastic nonprofit groups my business focuses on, while bringing them enterprise-class solutions that wouldn't otherwise be possible.

It wasn't about being successful, but you call me and idiot and say my posts are uninformed drivel, I'm just saying it's not like I make this **** up and don't "put my money where my mouth is". Anytime you're in AZ though, you're more than welcome to use and abuse the yellow car .

I've got around 20 computers and computing devices around the house at the moment, the macbook was picked up used because I needed something for OS X testing at 9pm one night and thanks to good ol Craigslist, $300 later I had the little guy in my hands. I actually bought a new Macbook Pro not all that long ago but ended up selling it because Apple still refuses to put a decent screen resolution on their 15" model - impossible to get anything done with that little screen real estate. So when the ipad won't cut it and I need a physical keyboard I still fire up the old Dell I have laying around because of its super high resolution (everything I do is via rdp/citrix anyway). I suppose partially it is somewhat a badge of honor thing, but I also like taking it around to clients as it comes in handy when explaining the whole terminal server concept to let clients see super-fast computing happening on the screen of a 7 year old machine. I am hoping that by the time it finally gives out Apple will have a high-res option on their 15" models. Congrats on your success but it seems to have potentially put you a bit out of touch with folks like the OP who are looking for a solid computing option without breaking their bank.

I don't own or use the 15in, though I agree the resolution is a little small. I luckily use the 17inch which has a huge screen. I don't really consider myself out of touch especially considering the OP was asking what was recommended and like you admit, and I've always experienced, any user that switched to a mac has yet to look back (any user I've made or suggested to switch).

By the way, it's not nitpicking to point out that you're stealing from Apple. Even if you bought a single family pack, you are still stealing from Apple. For one thing, a family pack only covers up to 5 computers, leaving 15 licenses you stole. In addition to that, the 5 you did purchase are being used illegally as Apple makes it quite clear that "This license does not extend to business or commercial users." Doesn't matter what some idiot at the Apple Store does or doesn't think, there's no grey area there.

LOL such a nit pick. Read below. I like by the way, how you go from insulting me, to a "fairly logical" post above, to calling me an idiot, to congratulating me to my success, all the time only taking like 1/10 of the arguments I make and responding to them.

And seriously, LOL at you balking about the $60/head licensing cost of Exchange when you gleefully encourage the OP to pay $800 more for a macbook pro?

I never told the OP to buy a pro, the macbooks are plenty good for his needs and cheap. They can be had even cheaper if they don't buy brand new.

When you have a small organization, Exchange is a great product. Especially cuppled together with BES, when you start having a decent amount of mail users, Exchange get's very expensive. $60/head for a e-mail user LICENSE seems really excessive to me. I've got close to 300 mail users, that'd cost around $18,000, just for e-mail, and then I'd need some good filtering software like Postini, and the costs mount up. Then you need to have some beefy hardware. While quiet on the contrary, I have a BSD server, with maybe $3k in hardware and about 3 hours of my time setting it up and integrating into our backend business software and I have a much better mail platform. We use our own LDAP/WebDav based calendaring and contact system, and probably spent maybe 10 hours setting everything up total. Granted a lot of this comes from previous knowledge so it's not like joe blow can set it up, but considering what you get with exchange, I find it way to expensive for medium sized businesses that would easily out use the included number of CALs. You can obviously get bulked discounted licensing but for any one with more than 5 or whatever people and not spending millions with microsoft, probably not going to happen.

Not sure how you can label me a Microsoft fan boy when I've been quite clear about the fact that not only do I purchase Apple products for myself and my family, but recommend them highly to friends who value my opinion. They have their time and place for those who can afford them. Simple as that. Of course, I guess if you can spin something as clear as OS X family pack licensing into covering your 20 work computers, then I suppose you can spin just about anything.

LOL, SPIN? You're the guy overhere spinning my jab on SQL server licensing (which again is overpriced) into the "You [ROB] are an idiot" argument (I obviously am an idiot with technology ). And although I was wrong on how it was based on sockets not cores, it's still way overpriced. Whether I'm a hypocrite or not, considering how much I've spent on Apple hardware over the past year or two (which to me was worth the investment, and I easily saved that money ten fold elsewhere + increased productivity), I found myself justified. Not to mention, I only had to upgrade 4 machines to snow leopard - ironically enough 3 of those are predominently "home computers" anyways. So you can call it "spinning the truth" (the twenty figure came from above when you were arguing licensing costs), but I'll call it reality. Just so I can't be accused of stealing though, I'm going to go ahead and buy enterprise pack for $500 off of apple.com right now ..

Your experience with microsoft seems to come from the small little non-profits you claim to help, which is great. But they, regardless of whether you want to admit it or not, have a skewed licensing model, inferior and overpriced applications.

Originally Posted by dabell

Joe is on a role tonight

Rob: comparing two devices with touch screens while the HTC begin used more than the other isn't apples to oranges. I was comparing two touch screen and stating that apple makes a product that doesn't hold up to other similar or less usesuch as my HTC.

So, what do you think a good comparison of touch screens would be?

Absolutely it is. You're comparing a Windows Mobile device running windows mobile with a plastic case and standard screen to a truly totally different device. Yes, they're both smart phones, but the iPhone has so much more in such a smaller size with a different type of "input" (the glass screen). Most of the complaints about the iPhone that I've seen come from the screen and people breaking them, this is because it's GLASS. And they do hold up fairly well, they wouldn't have the foothold on the market like they do if they didn't hold up and people weren't happy with them.

Actually these nonprofits are not small at all, they are fairly large, and I have consulted on large for profit installations as well, and trust me they feel their investment in something like exchange more than pays off, just like you feel your extra costs to stick with the Apple platform do. There is a reason Exchange is so ridiculously pervasive and that every phone manufacturer out there (apple included) is sure to license Activestink from Microsoft so that their phones play nice with it. To label Exchange an email platform is to not understand what Exchange is and does :-) And now Microsoft is (finally) getting smart and getting themselves into the hosted exchange business where the smaller orgs you are talking about can buy in at far lower costs - you are right that in-house licensing is far from cheap and it just doesn't make sense for an org with 500 or even 1,000 seats in a lot of cases to do their Exchange implementation in-house anymore, especially with such aggressive hosted exchange pricing out there.

But yes, if I'm in the area one of these days I will be happy to take a spin in the car and buy you a few beers!

Originally Posted by pesos

Actually these nonprofits are not small at all, they are fairly large, and I have consulted on large for profit installations as well, and trust me they feel their investment in something like exchange more than pays off, just like you feel your extra costs to stick with the Apple platform do. There is a reason Exchange is so ridiculously pervasive and that every phone manufacturer out there (apple included) is sure to license Activestink from Microsoft so that their phones play nice with it. To label Exchange an email platform is to not understand what Exchange is and does :-) And now Microsoft is (finally) getting smart and getting themselves into the hosted exchange business where the smaller orgs you are talking about can buy in at far lower costs - you are right that in-house licensing is far from cheap and it just doesn't make sense for an org with 500 or even 1,000 seats in a lot of cases to do their Exchange implementation in-house anymore, especially with such aggressive hosted exchange pricing out there.

I'm not labeling it a e-mail platform at all, see my post above. I recognize the power in exchange, I also see it's down falls, most importantly licensing costs . I don't want to come across like a cheap ass, I buy apple products, obviously I'm not that bitchy about paying for good stuff . But the point is, like I've said before they're (like you said) out of touch with their pricing. I think they should adapt a more realistic usage model like Apple has done with the app store (kind of a different situation but you get the jist). For example, I would in theory use exchange for say just basic collaboration (in reality, e-mail), why can't they break up the product more, charge for a yearly support model (like most other enterprise level products do), not have to come out with a "New Version" every 3 years that's totally new licensing, etc, etc.

But yes, if I'm in the area one of these days I will be happy to take a spin in the car and buy you a few beers!

Please do :-)

I'm not understanding the difference between you supposedly saving money in productivity by buying expensive apple computers, and companies saving money in productivity by buying exchange?

Also, I'm not really following your pricing logic either... There is nothing forcing companies to move to new versions of exchange, in fact most places skipped 2007 altogether and are going straight from 2003 to 2010... So if you take that $60 initial investment per person it actually only cost them $9 per year. Now if you are smaller and (sensibly) don't want to deal with the costs of actually purchasing/configuring/maintaining your own server, you can do hosted exchange from the big solid providers for about $95/year. Pretty much on par with Apple MobileME which is $99/year.

I really don't think $9/year for something as robust as Exchange is bad at all. If you went all out and did upgrade to 2007 in there as well, then you'd be up to a whopping $18/year...

Hosted Exchange is not new - it's been around forever. Microsoft has been targeting Exchange at large businesses and hosters for a long time now - it's not meant for smaller shops (that's what they have the Small Business Server products with exchange integrated for if folks REALLY want to have their stuff running in-house and want to do it cheaply licensing-wise). What is new is Microsoft providing hosted exchange services themselves instead of leaving it up to partners. It will be very interesting to see how that shakes things up.

Originally Posted by pesos

I'm not understanding the difference between you supposedly saving money in productivity by buying expensive apple computers, and companies saving money in productivity by buying exchange?

You misunderstood me, I'm not comparing savings that I view from Apple computers on the business side

Also, I'm not really following your pricing logic either... There is nothing forcing companies to move to new versions of exchange, in fact most places skipped 2007 altogether and are going straight from 2003 to 2010... So if you take that $60 initial investment per person it actually only cost them $9 per year. Now if you are smaller and (sensibly) don't want to deal with the costs of actually purchasing/configuring/maintaining your own server, you can do hosted exchange from the big solid providers for about $95/year. Pretty much on par with Apple MobileME which is $99/year.

Buddy, $9 a year to license collaboration software (I won't call it mail server software even though that's what it is at it's core) licensing per seat is ridiculous! You're not even considering hardware, OS licenses, and maintaining it. Hosted solutions are obviously really nice, but again in a lot of instances are plausible or practical. And before 2010 (and as you say no one used 2007), there was no real anti spam/protection solutions that you didn't have to pay through the nose for. When I was younger i worked for an ISP that used Exchange and Postino and I remember we wasted so much money on protecting our mail server.

I don't know of any enterprises that actually use MobileMe, I find it to be an unpractical product. Before you say "Oh, look there's no real alternative to exchange", google has huge offerings that have tons of traction and a lot more product dedication behind them that solve anything and more that you can do with Exchange - not that I use any of them.

I really don't think $9/year for something as robust as Exchange is bad at all. If you went all out and did upgrade to 2007 in there as well, then you'd be up to a whopping $18/year...

Hosted Exchange is not new - it's been around forever. Microsoft has been targeting Exchange at large businesses and hosters for a long time now - it's not meant for smaller shops (that's what they have the Small Business Server products with exchange integrated for if folks REALLY want to have their stuff running in-house and want to do it cheaply licensing-wise). What is new is Microsoft providing hosted exchange services themselves instead of leaving it up to partners. It will be very interesting to see how that shakes things up.

Originally Posted by rsanchez

Absolutely it is. You're comparing a Windows Mobile device running windows mobile with a plastic case and standard screen to a truly totally different device. Yes, they're both smart phones, but the iPhone has so much more in such a smaller size with a different type of "input" (the glass screen). Most of the complaints about the iPhone that I've seen come from the screen and people breaking them, this is because it's GLASS. And they do hold up fairly well, they wouldn't have the foothold on the market like they do if they didn't hold up and people weren't happy with them.

I never said the glass was broken on the Apple Touch. The screen doesn't respond any more hence the comparison. One is a plastic screen and the other is glass as you said however you are assuming that I have the issue with glass but the issue is the touchpart of the screen which is an apple to apple comparison. Apparently I did not explain myself well enough.

Apple does make a nice product but I think Wes and I are trying to say that there are better values out there.

Wes, if I'm putting words into your mouth I apologize. We had this discussion about MS vs Apple awhile ago I think.

Haha trust me I am intimately familiar with the Google options and they aren't ready for prime time. This is why Exchange still dominates. Don't get me wrong I am very glad they are there though because it keeps Microsoft moving - Google is THE reason that Exchange 2010 is so good. I have a new client with around 50 employees getting ready to jump to 100 and they are already being held back by their google implementation.

How can you complain about having to pay for server hardware (which you have to do for ANY server including your BSD implementation) when you're willing to pay a huge premium for apple hardware? You're looking at $2k and $600 for your server and OS license - that's less than Mac Pro will run you lol. And if you were up on virtualization and licensing you'd know that these days OS licenses for the size of shops that need to run Exchange in-house cost nothing. You buy a single datacenter license and you can virtualize as many servers as you need on it (all windows server licenses are automaticlaly covered - it's beautiful) - or if you don't need that large an installation you buy an enterprise license and you get 4 free enteprise VMs covered. MS Licensing has come a long long way since 2004. For smaller shops a $1,200 server will do the trick and the SBS licensing (which gets you OS, Exchange, Sql all built in for a mere $700) will get you squared away for very little. And the best part is that you know that 8 years down the road Microsoft will still be supporting the product if you choose not to upgrade that whole time.

Hosted solutions are incredible plausible and practical - so much so that hosted exchange represented 1% of the market in 2008 and will have 20% or more by 2012. That is huge uptake and it will only continue from there.

Solutions such as Postini (now google) and MXLogic cost around 75 cents per mailbox per month. And they are totally worth it, and 10x better than anything built into any product (spam is a big enough problem that it requires dedicated solutions). It's too bad google has ruined postini since buying them, they used to be the best :-( Most exchange providers these days contract with postini, mxlogic, or cloudmark (who makes the main engine mxlogic uses) to build their services right into their hosting environments.

Originally Posted by dabell

I never said the glass was broken on the Apple Touch. The screen doesn't respond any more hence the comparison. One is a plastic screen and the other is glass as you said however you are assuming that I have the issue with glass but the issue is the touchpart of the screen which is an apple to apple comparison. Apparently I did not explain myself well enough.

Right, that's why I said "most user complaints" are about the screen. They're handheld devices, they're susceptible to being beat up, which is generally what happens, unless it's a manufacture defect....

Apple does make a nice product but I think Wes and I are trying to say that there are better values out there.

Depending on the use of the product, I could agree. For example, I don't like using the iPhone for e-mail so I have a blackberry (and BBIM) so I understand where you're coming from, but I certainly disagree that Apple produces poor products which I feel is what you implied in your initial post..

Wes, if I'm putting words into your mouth I apologize. We had this discussion about MS vs Apple awhile ago I think.

NP .

Originally Posted by pesos

Haha trust me I am intimately familiar with the Google options and they aren't ready for prime time. This is why Exchange still dominates. Don't get me wrong I am very glad they are there though because it keeps Microsoft moving - Google is THE reason that Exchange 2010 is so good. I have a new client with around 50 employees getting ready to jump to 100 and they are already being held back by their google implementation.

Why are Googles products not ready for prime time? Sure there's problems, but for the price point and the offerings, they cannot be rivaled. It's not like a ton of Universities don't use them .

How can you complain about having to pay for server hardware (which you have to do for ANY server including your BSD implementation) when you're willing to pay a huge premium for apple hardware? You're looking at $2k and $600 for your server and OS license - that's less than Mac Pro will run you lol. And if you were up on virtualization and licensing you'd know that these days OS licenses for the size of shops that need to run Exchange in-house cost nothing. You buy a single datacenter license and you can virtualize as many servers as you need on it (all windows server licenses are automaticlaly covered - it's beautiful) - or if you don't need that large an installation you buy an enterprise license and you get 4 free enteprise VMs covered. MS Licensing has come a long long way since 2004. For smaller shops a $1,200 server will do the trick and the SBS licensing (which gets you OS, Exchange, Sql all built in for a mere $700) will get you squared away for very little. And the best part is that you know that 8 years down the road Microsoft will still be supporting the product if you choose not to upgrade that whole time.

We can argue about servers all day, but here's the reality, I would need 2x the hardware to support an equal number of "users" on a Windows box (be it exchange, or terminal services). You can't argue that exchange, windows, etc, don't have a ridiculous amount of OS overhead (this is obviously a different argument than the Windows/Apple discussion).

Hosted solutions are incredible plausible and practical - so much so that hosted exchange represented 1% of the market in 2008 and will have 20% or more by 2012. That is huge uptake and it will only continue from there.

I love the SAAS model, and I think hosted exchange (especially a real offering, not some shaby web host gone exchange provider) is a great concept and works well for some. In some instances, regulatory compliance will not work for the hosted environment - though it's probably safe to assume any one that would fall under that has no problem wasting money on $90CALs .

Solutions such as Postini (now google) and MXLogic cost around 75 cents per mailbox per month. And they are totally worth it, and 10x better than anything built into any product (spam is a big enough problem that it requires dedicated solutions). It's too bad google has ruined postini since buying them, they used to be the best :-( Most exchange providers these days contract with postini, mxlogic, or cloudmark (who makes the main engine mxlogic uses) to build their services right into their hosting environments.

Ha, you don't actually think Google cared about keeping postini as a great product right? I know you're a google disliker (in terms of their corporate policy I'm sure), but it was definitely a good move on their part. $0.75 per mailbox per month is actually really expensive, even though postini at the time was a great product.

Originally Posted by rsanchez

Why are Googles products not ready for prime time? Sure there's problems, but for the price point and the offerings, they cannot be rivaled. It's not like a ton of Universities don't use them .

We can argue about servers all day, but here's the reality, I would need 2x the hardware to support an equal number of "users" on a Windows box (be it exchange, or terminal services). You can't argue that exchange, windows, etc, don't have a ridiculous amount of OS overhead (this is obviously a different argument than the Windows/Apple discussion).

I love the SAAS model, and I think hosted exchange (especially a real offering, not some shaby web host gone exchange provider) is a great concept and works well for some. In some instances, regulatory compliance will not work for the hosted environment - though it's probably safe to assume any one that would fall under that has no problem wasting money on $90CALs .

Ha, you don't actually think Google cared about keeping postini as a great product right? I know you're a google disliker (in terms of their corporate policy I'm sure), but it was definitely a good move on their part. $0.75 per mailbox per month is actually really expensive, even though postini at the time was a great product.

Actually not that many universities use them. More have moved to Exchange 2010 Online. Google just doesn't have the integration down, and more importantly their support model is AWFUL. Ultimately universities and companies alike (at least the ones that know what they are doing) realize there is a cost associated with productivity.

I think you are a bit out of touch with both server hardware and OS overhead. It's not 2003 anymore lol - Win2008 R2 is incredibly fast and lean, and Exchange's engine has been rewritten to do 90% percent of its writes sequentially and is targeted at inexpensive SATA drives. The thing is a screamer, believe me.

Compliance and hosting are not necessarily mutually exclusive, but yes where they are $60 cals (your numbers keep jumping all over the place) are probably not a big deal.

Not sure why you think 75 cents/mailbox is expensive, that is actually the low end of google/postini pricing. More advanced features like archiving etc go up from there.

Typical, Google thinks its customers should do things ITS way and then cries like a baby when they make a decision to go with a solution that actually fits their needs:

http://www.liveside.net/main/archive...ries-foul.aspx

Been running into a lot of this same thing with my new client who is still on gmail. There is simply zero support, customization, or flexibility. It's not a workable system. Great option for smaller organizations who want free and will deal the limitations and without having support, but not scalable.