Apple's Mac Makes Strong Market Share Gains in Quarter

"OS X is the same OS on both PPC and X86 platforms"

....just not nearly as fast on one as one the other. i seem to remember that Mackie's like to criticize Windows Vista performance on low-end machines (ie. Celeron's and P4's) with little memory (512MB), when Leopard hasn't even released yet and yet Apple is telling partner stores to recommend the same system configuration as most PC OEM's are recommending for Windows Vista - a Core 2 Duo with AT LEAST 1GB of RAM (but 2GB is preferred).

i can say that without a doubt there will be G3 users with 512MB saying that OS X "runs fine", wherein they don't believe that Windows Vista is just as capable just meeting the low requirements on older P4 systems (Hyperthreading actually gives Vista a huge efficiency boost too).

there was an article i read on ZDNet a couple weeks ago about Windows Vista Home Basic on such a system, but i can't find the article now (little help?)

XP

Sub:

Were you, by any chance, one of those people who, when the iPod launched said, "But it doesn't even do FM Radio! And you can't swap out the battery! And it only syncs with iTunes! And it sucks! My creative player can do so much more!"

Yes. Yes I think you were.


And secondly, how does having an Intel chip inside make OS X "much better"? Nothing actually changed - OS X is the same OS on both PPC and X86 platforms. And yes, there are vulnerabilities in OS X, but none of them are being exploited.

So, Sub, what the hell is your point?

Well its about damn time Apple did something with actual computer sales. With Apple so far behind, it had no choice but to come up. But I don't know whether to laugh or shake my head. Vista has essentially assimilated OS-X and has basically rendered Apple Macintosh's obsolete. I'd be more excited about a new Linux suite before I get excited about Apple do anything with their computers.

I can see why Verizon decided to pass on IPhone. The battery issue was an obvious "Here's Your Sign" moment. All quality cell phones have interchangeable batteries. If it can't support 3G, I seriously doubt IPhone would have been EV-DO capable by launch. The blairing security vunerabilities and multiple hacks shows just like OS-X, anything made by man can be destroyed. No keyboard for text messages was an obvious, "Dee-Dee-Dee!" Other features that are not present on IPhone just made Verizon stay with proven makers of cell phones. Eventually they'll come out with a phone that makes IPhone look like ICrap.

But I will give them credit, the Intel switch was 15 years overdue. It has breeded much better hardware and in return the OS is much better. However, the number of vunerabilities are raising. Its not as invunerable as Apple or the Mac boys want everyone to believe. Again, where that OS-X PC edition, Apple?

You know, I have been absent a while. And I can see exactly why in this comment thread.

Apple had a really good quarter. The Mac is growing, the iPhone sold well in two days, but, with a few exceptions, all you guys have are more insults. No one, not even you Tayme (who I usually think of as more mature than others), could muster up a simple, "Yep, let's give them some credit - they did well."

It's the same ol' stuff. If you're read one of these threads you've read them all. They're all about Apple. Which, quite frankly, says more than any market share figure or quarterly results sheet ever could.

"this should make cable internet finally boost their bandwidth as well"

currently i get pretty close to 7Mbps down, 450Kbps up (technically it's supposed to be 384Kbps, but most speed tests don't say that) for about $47CDN with a 60GB/mth bandwidth cap on Rogers Cable. DOCSIS 2.0 (which is what they currently use) is supposed to support 40Mbps down and 10Mbps up. there is no fiber optic consumer-level internet service in Canada yet on the open market, although they may be testing it in undisclosed locations. IPTV is supposed to be "coming soon" with this service as part of Bell Canada's partnership with Microsoft, but from several Bell tech's (not that that means much), it's supposed to be 25Mbps, so who knows at this point. all i know is that my 7Mbps is still better than Bell's 3Mbps aDSL that i switched from for the same amount of money - and i'm not in a major urban center either.

XP