[The Godfather]

I remember the sweet (or bitter) years when our G3s, G4s or G5s would retain 80% of its value every year. Now it seems very unattractive to buy a 2005 Mac, easily causing a 50% reduction in resale value six months after purchase.

I think it should be made official: immediate removal of "it retains its value over the years" from all Mac evangelism and switch propaganda. What do you think?

Have you seen the unlikely people ready to sue Apple for letting their "computer investment" dwindle down as fast as their neighbohr's Dell?

[hyteckit]

Hmm... seems like it. The powerbook doesn't seem to hold it's value like it use to either. My 2 year old Powerbook G4 1.25 that I bought for $2500, is about $1000 now. Kinda sad really.

[Lateralus]

It's been getting worse and worse over the years as Apple has moved the Mac into the commodity PC hardware realm. And I'm pretty sure it's only going to get worse with the switch to Intel processors.

[cjrivera]

I think the main reason for this is the switch to the Intel chip and now, especially the dual boot capability.

Once the Intel chips are standard across the board and new models start coming through, I think you see these first wave of Intel/Mac products hold a good residual value.

[rickey939]

I'd rather have some AAPL right now than my computer.

[volcano]

Originally Posted by The Godfather

I remember the sweet (or bitter) years when our G3s, G4s or G5s would retain 80% of its value every year. Now it seems very unattractive to buy a 2005 Mac, easily causing a 50% reduction in resale value six months after purchase.

I think it should be made official: immediate removal of "it retains its value over the years" from all Mac evangelism and switch propaganda. What do you think?

Have you seen the unlikely people ready to sue Apple for letting their "computer investment" dwindle down as fast as their neighbohr's Dell?

Honestly, resale value for PPC-based Macs should be expected to be on the low side because of the switch to Intel.

I sold my iBook a little less than a month ago - the current 12" model available at Apple - for $850 locally. I paid roughly $994 for it after my educational discount (after upgrading the HDD to 60GB), so I didn't lose much.

[Kr0nos]

Originally Posted by rickey939

I'd rather have some AAPL right now than my computer.

There is a really sad and deeper truth to this.

I don't think I'll sell the PowerBook I have now, nor will I ever see a Mac as an investment again. And with the switch to Intel, Apple has become just another manufacturer of disposable hardware.

[The Godfather]

[deleted due to wrong logic]

[krillbee]

I was a bit surprised about 6 months ago, when i got my g4 sawtooth on ebay, how much they still were worth.

for a computer that was 7 years old, it was hard to find one for under $100 !

So I think macs definately do retain value more than PCs. After all, a Pentium 3 computer from that era, could be had off ebay for around $50 probably.

The switch to Intel though will definately hurt the value of g4 and g5 macs.


But computers never have been an "investment" no matter how you look at it. Something faster comes out every few months, and in 10 years you can pretty much guarantee your computer wont be worth a dime.

Whereas with cars, its cool to have an old car, and they still function well, and can ride along modern roads, without an issue.

this is why i will never spend a ton of money to buy a top of the line PC or notebook.

[Big Mac]

I don't understand why people claim a durable good such as a computer is not an investment. Any substantial purchase is an investment in the general sense; investments do not by definition necessarily appreciate in value. If you're buying a computer for its investment properties, that's a poor idea, but it's still a substantial purchase that qualifies as an investment.

Macs should still retain value better than equivalent era PCs, but it's only to be expected that they will depreciate far faster than they would have otherwise because of the Mactels.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by volcano

Honestly, resale value for PPC-based Macs should be expected to be on the low side because of the switch to Intel.

BING! No one wants to buy a PPC Mac right now.

And with the switch to Intel, Apple has become just another manufacturer of disposable hardware.

How does the name of the chip effect if it is disposable or not?

[Kr0nos]

Originally Posted by Kevin

How does the name of the chip effect if it is disposable or not?

Maybe not the name of the chip, – but the quality of the product certainly does (and Apple's product 'quality' is going down the shitter faster than a well greased turd). *duh*

[11011001]

Originally Posted by Kr0nos

Maybe not the name of the chip, – but the quality of the product certainly does (and Apple's product 'quality' is going down the shitter faster than a well greased turd). *duh*

I'm just curious why you think this? Most new revisions of their products have had their problems. For instance the first Aluminum PBs had the white spots. But subsequent revisions have always been much better. In addition, Apple has always dealt with the problems, replacing, and reengineering the defects as necessary.

[Kr0nos]

Originally Posted by 11011001

I'm just curious why you think this?

1. iPod (1st gen) f*cked do to sh1tty design of the FW port (dodgy contact)/Battery issues.

2. Al PowerBook 1st trackpad was damaged out of the box, the replacement is now showing f*cked up flaking in the paint (I guess the material is oxydizing or something) - cosmetics, but still annoying.

3. My 'Mighty Mouse' just took a dive (scrollball is broken), rendering it more or less useless.

4. The Airport is station constantly breaking down, and printing via usb chokes with pretty much anything over 1 page typed.

Need more?

[harrisjamieh]

Originally Posted by Kr0nos

Need more?

Yes. I don't think thats enough to justify Apple's hardware quality is reducing. IIRC, a survey not so long ago showed that only 13% of Apple desktops needed repairing at some point - which was the best in the industry. Apple laptops needed repairing 18% of the time, which gave them 1nd place to (i think,) alienware.

Your theory is rubbish.

[Kr0nos]

Originally Posted by harrisjamieh

Yes. I don't think thats enough to justify Apple's hardware quality is reducing. IIRC, a survey not so long ago showed that only 13% of Apple desktops needed repairing at some point - which was the best in the industry. Apple laptops needed repairing 18% of the time, which gave them 1nd place to (i think,) alienware.

Your theory is rubbish.

First of all, since Apple is charging a premium price for their products, non of the issues I've had should even be a problem.

Secondly, there have been enough reports on the MacBook Pro and the new iMac that make me a little bit more than sceptical about Apple's quality assurance (rev a. qualms aside)

I've been using Macs since 1992, and I certainly have noticed a decline in product quality in recent years (a buddy of mine had to replace the powerbrick on his PB after a week, another friend had to relace her iPod nano - damaged out of the box…several other people have had issues especially with iPods)

No, – I don't think my theory is 'rubbish' at all. As a matter of fact, I'm beginning to think that the move to Intel is the first solid nail in the coffin of Apple. Mac OS X being the essential life support system.

[harrisjamieh]

Originally Posted by Kr0nos

First of all, since Apple is charging a premium price for their products, non of the issues I've had should even be a problem.

Secondly, there have been enough reports on the MacBook Pro and the new iMac that make me a little bit more than sceptical about Apple's quality assurance (rev a. qualms aside)

I've been using Macs since 1992, and I certainly have noticed a decline in product quality in recent years (a buddy of mine had to replace the powerbrick on his PB after a week, another friend had to relace her iPod nano - damaged out of the box…several other people have had issues especially with iPods)

No, – I don't think my theory is 'rubbish' at all. As a matter of fact, I'm beginning to think that the move to Intel is the first solid nail in the coffin of Apple. Mac OS X being the essential life support system.

I think you will notice that if you look around at other manufacturers, the same thing is happening, but to a worse extent (not that i think this is happening to Apple). Dell laptops for example are a joke in their product quality, and I have also noticed a decline in Sony quality.

But I still think all the faults you are talking about are excusable. Yes, the new intel models have not been without their hiccups, but things like the problems with the 256 MB vid cards in the iMacs have already been addressed, Apple has said if you MBP gets too hot that they will change it, and the MBP whine is a software glitch, as the whine does not sound when booted into windows, so it will soon be sorted out. Apple is already on their 4th minor Revision of the MBP, which I think shows a real strive for customer satisfaction and quality. yes, one can argue that the problems should not have been there in the first place, but until large scale production and shipping commences, many problems are not uncovered - at least Apple is making a good effort to fix the problems that SOME users are having.

Maybe you should go out and buy yourself a Dell, and see how you like that. You'll soon come running back to Mac when you see the quality difference. Infact, when I show my iMac to any of my windows friends, their first comment is 'wow, look how well made it is', and it is, far superior to any other computer manufacturer.

As for macs having a premium price, yes, some do, but I for one think that both the new iMacs and Mac Mini's are fantastic value for money. I would (and do) pay a bit more for my hardware, and have it look beautiful than pay a bit less and have a hunk of junk sitting in the corner making a huge noise.

[kick52]

i think, that after the switch to intel and the boot camp thing, things will settle and hopefully, macs will start retaining more value.

agree?

[kick52]

I was a bit surprised about 6 months ago, when i got my g4 sawtooth on ebay, how much they still were worth.

for a computer that was 7 years old, it was hard to find one for under $100 !

So I think macs definately do retain value more than PCs. After all, a Pentium 3 computer from that era, could be had off ebay for around $50 probably.

The switch to Intel though will definately hurt the value of g4 and g5 macs.


But computers never have been an "investment" no matter how you look at it. Something faster comes out every few months, and in 10 years you can pretty much guarantee your computer wont be worth a dime.

Whereas with cars, its cool to have an old car, and they still function well, and can ride along modern roads, without an issue.

this is why i will never spend a ton of money to buy a top of the line PC or notebook.

i agree. i bought my sawtooth (sig) for £200 ($430?) and i love it, but i think i would be dissapointed if i bought a rev1 imac g5, as there would be revb, a couple more revs, higher specs, then a better one with a camera and then one with a much faster intel chip. all this happened in about 6 months?

i hope the "upgrade the line every minute" style of apple settles and becomes spread out.

[harrisjamieh]

Originally Posted by kick52

i agree. i bought my sawtooth (sig) for £200 ($430?) and i love it, but i think i would be dissapointed if i bought a rev1 imac g5, as there would be revb, a couple more revs, higher specs, then a better one with a camera and then one with a much faster intel chip. all this happened in about 6 months?

i hope the "upgrade the line every minute" style of apple settles and becomes spread out.

Whilst I would like the rev cycle to slow, you are exaggerating a bit;

The iMac G5 came out 31st Aug 2004. The rev B iMac with ambient light sensor came out in May 2005, a full 9 months after the into of the G5 version of the iMac.

Then, in October 05, the iMac G5 iSight came out. OK, thats was a shorter gap between revs, but still 5 months.

Then, finally, in Jan 06, the iMac with Core Duo inside came out. Whilst this was a mere 3 months, this was not an everyday rev. Apple wanted to get an intel machine out that could appeal to a wide range of their customers - their mid-range mac.

So, yes, the gaps have been getting smaller, but you did exagerate in your post, made it sound like there had been at least 6 revs of the iMac. And the latest rev cannot be seen as a standard rev. I personally see the iMac CD as a Rev A product, not a Rev D

[kick52]

oh yer, sorry, im not a imac sort of guy. i dont follow the g5s much, as my main apple is my PowerMac

[cjrivera]

Originally Posted by kick52

i hope the "upgrade the line every minute" style of apple settles and becomes spread out.

There's the problem...

if Apple continues with frequent updates, it makes recent buyers and people who use their macs as investments unhappy, but potential owners, the media/computer pundits, and stockholders are happy.

if they slow down the upgrades, then everyone else besides recent buyers and the "mac investors" are crying that the last Apple Event had nothing and was a big disappointment, and then the idiots like Dvorak and Thurrot are writing Apple's death knell once again...

Apple can't win.

[Cody Dawg]

Make sure you buy your Macs with the student discount (even if you have to lie about it like some people do) and it'll hold more value.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Kr0nos

Maybe not the name of the chip, – but the quality of the product certainly does (and Apple's product 'quality' is going down the shitter faster than a well greased turd). *duh*

*duh* You act like it's a known fact. As a matter of fact, you often exaggerate you opinion as if it were a fact.

I guess you don't remember the Powerbooks that caught on fire in the 90s?

The whole Performa line?

NUBUS?

Give me a break

[Cody Dawg]

Yeah, like when Apple got sued because the Titaniums burned mens'...private parts.



Those Titaniums sure held their value...

For the George Foreman line of grills.

[Kr0nos]

Originally Posted by Kevin

You act like it's a known fact. As a matter of fact, you often exaggerate you opinion as if it were a fact.

If stupidity caused pain, you'd be screaming in agony all day.

This has nothing to do with what I think is a 'fact', or me exggerating. A lot of people have been experiencing 'difficulties' with Apple's products recently, and I don't think that's a mere 'coincidence' (and it sure as f*ck isn't my opinion).

BUT BEYOND THAT, Apple claims to produce premium quality products, for which they are certainly charging a premium price – and for that reason alone (dig?) these issues shouldn't even exist.

Originally Posted by Kevin

I guess you don't remember the Powerbooks that caught on fire in the 90s?…

Hmmm, I can clearly remeber owning a PowerBook in the 90s. Never had a problem with it.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Cody Dawg

Yeah, like when Apple got sued because the Titaniums burned mens'...private parts.



Those Titaniums sure held their value...

For the George Foreman line of grills.

Lets not go into the Apple "dead pixel" portable in 89

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Kr0nos

If stupidity caused pain, you'd be screaming in agony all day.

Did you just read that on the bathroom wall?

This has nothing to do with what I think is a 'fact', or me exggerating. A lot of people have been experiencing 'difficulties' with Apple's products recently, and I don't think that's a mere 'coincidence' (and it sure as f*ck isn't my opinion).

Kr0nos I am not denying this. What I am saying is, IT's NO DIFFERENT THAN BEFORE. Therefore would not cause Macs to go DOWN in price.

Apple and every other company has problems.

Unless you can show how Apple has MORE problems now than it did before (I dare ya) And how that directly correlates into low resell value, it IS your opinion.

BUT BEYOND THAT, Apple claims to produce premium quality products, for which they are certainly charging a premium price – and for that reason alone (dig?) these issues shouldn't even exist.

Nothing is EVER perfect. But Apple DOES have a history and present rep for being BETTER than most. Not perfect.

Hmmm, I can clearly remeber owning a PowerBook in the 90s. Never had a problem with it.

Well good. I never said you did.

But Apple did indeed have problems with Powerbook batteries catching on fire in the 90s, and recently as well.

I believe it was the 5300

[edit] Yup it was

I've owned a number of Macs in addition to the Mac II, mostly laptops. Here is a quick rundown: PowerBook 140, PowerBook 520, PowerBook 5300c, Power Mac 6100. I've got a couple of other machines that I've collected over a few years, such as a Mac Plus. My primary computer until 1997 was the 5300c, which are quite famous for catching on fire. Mine never did over several years of ownership, although it used to get really hot

[Lateralus]

Originally Posted by Kevin

NUBUS?

...what does NuBus have to do with anything?

[Kevin]

It was HORRIBLE! And the products that went with them were WAAAAY overpriced.

And they were hard to resell once they dumped NUBUS finally.

[Kr0nos]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Did you just read that on the bathroom wall?

No, I don't have to visit public bathrooms to do my business? Are you using the one the trailer park provides because your RV didn't come with a john?

Originally Posted by Kevin

What I am saying is, IT's NO DIFFERENT THAN BEFORE.

Suuuuuure. Rev B.!!! Yeaah!! It's going to be all different!

We'll see…

In my personal experience and from what I've read on various message boards (especially in regards to the MacIntels) product quality is on the decline.

Though you are right in saying that they have always had some minor issues.

Originally Posted by Kevin

Apple and every other company has problems.

Not every other company has Apple's prices though.

Originally Posted by Kevin

But Apple DOES have a history and present rep for being BETTER than most. Not perfect.

No, as a matter of fact in recent history, pretty f*ckin' far from it.

[The Godfather]

Originally Posted by Kevin

It was HORRIBLE! And the products that went with them were WAAAAY overpriced.

And they were hard to resell once they dumped NUBUS finally.

You mean like Firewire products are now?

[chabig]

Originally Posted by Big Mac

I don't understand why people claim a durable good such as a computer is not an investment. Any substantial purchase is an investment in the general sense; investments do not by definition necessarily appreciate in value. If you're buying a computer for its investment properties, that's a poor idea, but it's still a substantial purchase that qualifies as an investment.

I wholeheartedly disagree. With any investment, the desire is that the value increases. Investments may not always appreciate, but only a fool plans to lose money. The word "invest" has multiple meanings. Just because you "invest" money in something does not make that an "investment".

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Kr0nos

No, I don't have to visit public bathrooms to do my business? Are you using the one the trailer park provides because your RV didn't come with a john?

Wow that was really lame Kr0n. You are showing your age.

Suuuuuure. Rev B.!!! Yeaah!! It's going to be all different!

We'll see…

Why are you arguing things I am not saying? That makes no sense.

In my personal experience and from what I've read on various message boards (especially in regards to the MacIntels) product quality is on the decline.

From ONE product? (And that is even debatable.)

Man I bet you would have been saying Apple is DEAD when those 5300s came out catching on fire.

Though you are right in saying that they have always had some minor issues.

I don't consider a powerbook catching on fire as being minor.

Not every other company has Apple's prices though.

Because not every company has their over-all quality. And still doesn't.

No, as a matter of fact in recent history, pretty f*ckin' far from it.

Again, your opinion.

[production_coordinator]

The same thing happened when we switched to PPC. Everything pre-PPC started hitting rock bottom. The transition to Intel will be the same way. I can IMHO still do 10X more with an old Mac as compared to an old PC (without having to load Linux on the system)

Four years later, my $1100 (original) PowerMac still sells for ~$350. Which holds nearly perfectly true to the "80%" rule.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by The Godfather

You mean like Firewire products are now?

Firewire products tend to be HIGH END, and that is why they are more expensive.

NUBUS wasn't high end at the time. Not even close. It was a poor, poor performer.

You didn't see me complaining about SCSI did you?

[Lateralus]

Originally Posted by Kevin

NUBUS wasn't high end at the time. Not even close. It was a poor, poor performer.

In comparison to ISA? I think not.

NuBus cards being expensive because they were of proprietary design has no bearing on the quality of the standard itself and the quality of the cards. In comparison to the PC solutions of the time, NuBus was a much more elegant, reliable and faster way of doing things and technologically it has a number of advantages over even PCI.

A great number of technologists wish Apple had pursued a higher-spec of the NuBus interface rather than gone PCI.

[davesimondotcom]

I've never been that concerned with my Mac retaining value. I've only sold one of them off to someone else. I still have, but don't use anymore, a circa January 2000 G4 tower that I got plenty of use out of.

I mean, if you put the price in terms of hours of use, I probably paid a penny per hour...

AND, very likely that I'll be giving that G4 to my dad who is still using a bondi blue iMac bought on the day the iMac launched.

I still view a Mac as an investment and that I'm going to to get it's lifetime of use out of it, then get a new one.

[Cody Dawg]

My Mac has value because *I* own it.

If I put it up on eBay with my real name I'd get a lot of money for it.





Kevin, I'm with you on this one all the way.

Heck, the first iBooks held their value a lot longer than those pieces of plastic crap right now.

[The Godfather]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Firewire products tend to be HIGH END, and that is why they are more expensive.

NUBUS wasn't high end at the time. Not even close. It was a poor, poor performer.

You didn't see me complaining about SCSI did you?

No. I meant Firewire products that have USB2 equivalents, like drive enclosures. They are pricier now, but if Firewire was dropped, you would have trouble selling them.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Lateralus

In comparison to ISA? I think not.

NuBus cards being expensive because they were of proprietary design has no bearing on the quality of the standard itself and the quality of the cards. In comparison to the PC solutions of the time, NuBus was a much more elegant, reliable and faster way of doing things and technologically it has a number of advantages over even PCI.

A great number of technologists wish Apple had pursued a higher-spec of the NuBus interface rather than gone PCI.

Yes, and you think we should have stayed PPC as well.

I see a trend.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by The Godfather

No. I meant Firewire products that have USB2 equivalents, like drive enclosures. They are pricier now, but if Firewire was dropped, you would have trouble selling them.

Firewire is still faster.

[harrisjamieh]

Originally Posted by Cody Dawg

My Mac has value because *I* own it.

If I put it up on eBay with my real name I'd get a lot of money for it.

Is that a joke?

[analogika]

Originally Posted by Kr0nos

I've been using Macs since 1992, and I certainly have noticed a decline in product quality in recent years (a buddy of mine had to replace the powerbrick on his PB after a week, another friend had to relace her iPod nano - damaged out of the box…several other people have had issues especially with iPods)

Have you considered that in 1992, you paid around €7500 (well, 15 000 DM) for the top-of-the-line model, while today, it's less than half that?

Apple does NOT charge a premium over *comparable* competing products especially not considering the bundled software.

Fact is, however, that component quality INDUSTRY-WIDE has gone down simply due to the fact that people aren't willing to PAY more.

And despite that, Apple has consistently led every single failure-rate and customer satisfaction statistic made in the past fifteen years at Number One. That includes the iPod, btw - on the mobile player market, they're quite a bit better than their next competitor (Samsung, IIRC), with Sony and the abominable Trekstor far off, well into the double-digit failure rates.

[analogika]

Originally Posted by Cody Dawg

Yeah, like when Apple got sued because the Titaniums burned mens'...private parts.

That was Dell, honey.

[Lateralus]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Yes, and you think we should have stayed PPC as well.

I see a trend.

Indeed.

I'm against the death of the Mac platform. Fact of the matter is that the Mac, as a computing platform, no longer exists. The new Intel Macs only differ internally from PCs in that they have a security chip integrated into the motherboard that the OS X boot loader searches for before booting. There was a time when the Mac really did function as a spearhead for new and innovative technologies.

The sad part is that people like you never understood a great deal of what the Mac as a whole represented in the industry because you don't have a comprehension of the hardware behind it all. So long as your applications run well and look pretty you really don't care. But not caring about the death of something you don't understand really doesn't give you a whole lot of ground to stand on to dismiss the death of it to the people who do know and do care.

You can throw as many smiley and laughing emoticons into your posts as you want, it isn't going to hide the fact that you're arguing points that you're incapable of making.

[The Godfather]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Firewire is still faster

Granted. No one is arguing that. In fact, I wouldn't switch my FW HD and DVD-R drives even when I get an Intel iBook, which reportedly is faster in USB2 than previous models.

[production_coordinator]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Yes, and you think we should have stayed PPC as well.

I see a trend.

I always felt like PPC was behind x86. Sure, at the high end, we usually had a system from time to time that could our preform a high end x86 system, but it was never anywhere near consistent.

That being said, the middle and lower end consumer computers put out by Apple weren't even in the ballpark of where x86 was at the time. A prime example is my iBook. It is a great system, but trying to tell me that a $1000 G4 1.33 GHz is on par with a 1.7 GHz Pentium M processor is just silly. Granted, I get a longer battery life, but

http://www.systemshootouts.org/shoot...26_lt1000.html

I'm happy paying the Apple tax for my hardware as they have proven time and time again that they build great hardware... but the speed of our middle and lower end systems simply fall off the x86 charts. Also, with x86, we have options... down the road, if Intel starts charging too much, we can transition some of our hardware to AMD.

I feel x86 has more room to offer a wider range of systems. I want to see a Mac that is the size of a PSP... and I think Intel can take us there.

[analogika]

Originally Posted by Lateralus

Indeed.

I'm against the death of the Mac platform.

Thankfully, so is Apple

Originally Posted by Lateralus

Fact of the matter is that the Mac, as a computing platform, no longer exists.

As a HARDWARE platform, that is true. It died in 1992, when the 680x0 architecture was left behind.

Originally Posted by Lateralus

The sad part is that people like you never understood a great deal of what the Mac as a whole represented in the industry because you don't have a comprehension of the hardware behind it all. So long as your applications run well and look pretty you really don't care. But not caring about the death of something you don't understand really doesn't give you a whole lot of ground to stand on to dismiss the death of it to the people who do know and do care.

That was true during the PPC era (the 680x0 architecture was full of nasty hardware hacks that haunted the Mac until the final death of OS 9 - hacked-on video memory in the 128K, for example (the details escape me)). Of course, the Mac hardware platform was long dead by the time the true beauty of the PPC architecture could fully blossom on optimized logic boards.

The sad part is that people like YOU don't understand that Macintosh has NEVER been about what's INSIDE the box. The whole point of Macintosh since its inception has always been that nobody should ever need to CARE what's inside the box.

It's nice that some geekier people do, but it's COMPLETELY irrelevant to what actually makes a Mac a Mac - the Computer For The Rest Of Us.

The only time that Apple really pushed the technological advantage - back when the PowerPC platform actually WAS faster than Intel's offerings - was the same period that saw Apple's graceless decline and near demise, with floundering efforts to modernize an operating system that had LONG since lost nearly all the qualities that made Macintosh so important as a concept.

It wasn't until Apple actually resurrected the Macintosh concept with OS X that sales really began picking up again (ironically enough partly due to the extreme geek appeal of the *nix underpinnings).

[Stogieman]

Originally Posted by Lateralus

Indeed.

The sad part is that people like you never understood a great deal of what the Mac as a whole represented in the industry because you don't have a comprehension of the hardware behind it all. So long as your applications run well and look pretty you really don't care. But not caring about the death of something you don't understand really doesn't give you a whole lot of ground to stand on to dismiss the death of it to the people who do know and do care.

It has nothing to with making our applications look pretty. It's about making computing more affordable. I owned a Performa 6115 back in the day and trust me I don't miss any of the "hardware behind it." Expensive NuBus cards, the extremely limited selection of ADB mice & keyboards with no hot-swapping capability, AAUI-15 ethernet ports, and expensive SCSI hard drives.