[hytek]

I have three computers in the house, a PowerMac for work and to make money with, and the other two are home built AMD based PC's. They are both overclocked and watercooled monsters and are used strictly for play and to spend money on, they're my babies. I don't care if they are PC's because if I could do the same with a Apple computer, I would. Which is why I wish Apple would open up a little and allow it's customers to purchase the components to build their own Mac through aftermarket channels. It wouldn't be enough to satisfy my thirst just buy the stuff to build a standard PowerMac though, for those like me, it would need to be something made for overclocking, cooling, modifying, and tweaking. If given the chance, I know the aftermarket industry would readily produce products for something like that much like the same way they already do for PC upgrades. I guess if you're not into "rolling your own" computer, then this wouldn't be of any concern to you, but it would be sweet just to see what Apple would come up with. Just my $0.02 worth.

[nonhuman]

While it would be nice to be able to do, I think it would cut too much into Apple's hardware sales. Basically it's no different than it was with the clones. The clones were far cheaper, and put up serious competition to Apple (although have you ever tried to get inside a PowerCenter? eugh!). I'm sure that the build-you-own-mac crowd would be smaller than the buy-a-cheap-clone crown, but, knowing Apple, I don't think they'd be any more open to the idea.

[ 03-05-2002: Message edited by: nonhuman ]

[turboSPE]

Here's what I think Apple should do:

Abandon their own chipset/MB/processor model. Yeah, it's "fast enough" to keep up barely, but I get the feeling they're not making any headway. Why not engineer the MacOS X to work on nVidia's nForce? That way, Apple wouldn't have to worry about supporting multiple chipsets, cheap hardware would abound, and they'd still be able to manufacture they're own good looking computers while also allowing people an alternative. I know I've left out quite a few details, and I'd love to hear other people's comments/criticisms about this.

turboSPE

Originally posted by hytek:
<STRONG>I have three computers in the house, a PowerMac for work and to make money with, and the other two are home built AMD based PC's. They are both overclocked and watercooled monsters and are used strictly for play and to spend money on, they're my babies. I don't care if they are PC's because if I could do the same with a Apple computer, I would. Which is why I wish Apple would open up a little and allow it's customers to purchase the components to build their own Mac through aftermarket channels. It wouldn't be enough to satisfy my thirst just buy the stuff to build a standard PowerMac though, for those like me, it would need to be something made for overclocking, cooling, modifying, and tweaking. If given the chance, I know the aftermarket industry would readily produce products for something like that much like the same way they already do for PC upgrades. I guess if you're not into "rolling your own" computer, then this wouldn't be of any concern to you, but it would be sweet just to see what Apple would come up with. Just my $0.02 worth.</STRONG>

[hytek]

Yeah, I guess they wouldn't be too open to the idea, but it would be k0ol just to see what Apple would come up with.

[ 03-05-2002: Message edited by: hytek ]

[Apple Pro Underwear]

there's not enough people like you.

[turboSPE]

Originally posted by Apple Pro Underwear:
<STRONG>there's not enough people like you.</STRONG>

Like who?

turboSPE

[MadMacs]

[hytek]

Originally posted by MadMacs

Oh, and to really sych people out, take the old G4 case and put a Windows machine in it.

Will a ATX motherboard really fit in a old G4 case?

[Cipher13]

Originally posted by hytek:
<STRONG>Originally posted by MadMacs


Will a ATX motherboard really fit in a old G4 case?</STRONG>

Mini-ATX, yeah, no prob... just redrill it.

[ReggieX]

Originally posted by MadMacs:
<STRONG>TOh, and to really sych people out, take the old G4 case and put a Windows machine in it.</STRONG>

Eww... Blasphemer!

[Apple Pro Underwear]

Originally posted by turboSPE:
<STRONG>

Like who? </STRONG>

like hytek.

mac's best selling computer is the imac.

imac is for the un-hardcore.

what does that mean?

most people want and like having a "simple" computer.

hytek wants Apple to sell it's parts seperately.

I wish Apple would open up a little and allow it's customers to purchase the components to build their own Mac through aftermarket channels.

so would apple make any dough catering to hytek and his like?

Nope. not enough people.

[l008com]

Originally posted by turboSPE:
<STRONG>Yeah, it's "fast enough" to keep up barely, but I get the feeling they're not making any headway.</STRONG>

Yeah we're only putting out a 2 GHz G4. Barely making any headway at all there. How can we support a company that puts out such horribly obsolete hardware?!

[hytek]

Originally posted by Apple Pro Underwear

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by turboSPE:

Like who?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

like hytek.

mac's best selling computer is the imac.

imac is for the un-hardcore.

what does that mean?

most people want and like having a "simple" computer.

hytek wants Apple to sell it's parts seperately.


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I wish Apple would open up a little and allow it's customers to purchase the components to build their own Mac through aftermarket channels.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

so would apple make any dough catering to hytek and his like?

Nope. not enough people.

Forgive me if I misspoke, but Apple wouldn't have to manufacture the components themselves. Instead their engineers would develop a Master Set of blue prints and then let high quality third-party motherboard and chipset manufactures use those blue prints to work off of. It's the same as AMD developing a reference motherboard for a new processor and then shipping that reference motherboard to Taiwan and Europe so that third-party motherboard and chipset manfactures can engineer the new specs into a motherboard that's ready for consumers.

This is how PC hardware technology got so far ahead of Apple and why it cost less. You've got all these motherboard and chipset manfactures working on making your platform faster and faster, it's the competition of these companies that drive PC technology up while at the same time drive the cost down. For comparision, I just built a PC for a friend two months ago and for less than a $1000 this is what I was able to put together for him. AthlonXP 1500+, GigaByte GA-7VTXE mobo, 384MB of DDR RAM, a Sony 16/10/40 CDRW, a ATI Radeon 7500 GFX card, SoundBlaster Live! value, 40GB 7200 RPM HDD, a SyncMaster 700NF monitor, a ActionTec modem, a InWin S508 case, and of course keyboard, mouse, floppy and all the rest. He bought his own copy of Mandrake-Linux 8.1 and WinXP and we set it up to dual boot. You have to shop around to find the deals, but still we got all that for less than $1000.

I guess this is just one of those "it bothers me because I care" type things. I love my PowerMac and I enjoy using it, but we're 3 months into the year 2002 and yet this years Apple line-up still uses 1998 core hardware technology. I feel that because Apple doesn't cater to or understand people like me is the reason why their hardware technology graph shows a straight horizontal line for the last few years, cosmetic changes and regular increases in processor speed don't count as new hardware technology. I feel like, OK you've catered to the "I'm too scared to take the cover off my computer" crowd long enough and it's time now to produce, and if you can't produce, get out of the way and let somebody else do it for you because you're holding up progress and it's a little irritating.

Edit: Apple would still make money off of licensing agreements with third-party manufactures, so they wouldn't lose money. They may not make the same profit as they do off of the PowerMacs , but they wouldn't lose money either. Also, I'm not suggesting they do away with their current line of computers, instead they could allow consumers to purchase Motorolla referenced motherboards made by, say, Asus and then buy a G4 or G5 just like I can buy a OEM or retail AthlonXP from, say, newegg.com and then buy a copy of OSX, and there you go, a whole new consumer base for Apple.

[ 03-06-2002: Message edited by: hytek ]

[turboSPE]

Originally posted by l008com:
<STRONG>

Yeah we're only putting out a 2 GHz G4. Barely making any headway at all there. How can we support a company that puts out such horribly obsolete hardware?! </STRONG>

I don't know a whole lot about the way threads, processes, and the like work, but I don't think a 2x1GHz is the same as 1x2GHz (or faster). Even though Apple has their "2GHz (2x1GHz)," AMD is stuck in the 80's with their Athlon MP, with a faster bus, faster drives, DDR RAM, etc.

yourself

turboSPE

[Leonard]

You can wish for it, but I don't think it's going to happen.

Apple's direction seems to be to standardize the hardware and make it simple. People nowadays want a computer that they can treat like a TV, turn on it seconds, do your work and turn it off. They don't want to have to deal with setting it up, installing software, upgrading it. Hell, there's people that wish Apple sold iMacs with the exact amount of RAM they want - go out and upgrade your RAM - it's easy.

Developers and Apple like the standardization of the hardware, they don't have to handle 1,000,000 different configurations of motherboards, hard drives, different types of RAM, different brands of graphics cards, etc.

[Apple Pro Underwear]

Originally posted by hytek:
[QB}

Edit: Apple would still make money off of licensing agreements with third-party manufactures, so they wouldn't lose money. They may not make the same profit as they do off of the PowerMacs , but they wouldn't lose money either. Also, I'm not suggesting they do away with their current line of computers, instead they could allow consumers to purchase Motorolla referenced motherboards made by, say, Asus and then buy a G4 or G5 just like I can buy a OEM or retail AthlonXP from, say, newegg.com and then buy a copy of OSX, and there you go, a whole new consumer base for Apple.
[/QB]

once again, not enough of you. why license when they can make more money doing what they've been doing.

also, outside design and publishing, macs are wanted because of the simplicity. proof is the sales of imacs. when powermacs outsell imacs, then you may see a reason for apple to change their already sucessful business plan.

i'm trying to be objective, but i went to a wiz yesterday and saw the imac again. that thing is so goddamn cool, i wanted to bow down to it. if apple keeps on making products like that, i don't care if they make powermacs even less upgradeable (except for ram of course)

[hytek]

once again, not enough of you. why license when they can make more money doing what they've been doing.

There might not be enough Mac users that prefer to build there own computers right now, but that's because right now you don't even have the option to build you own Mac. It's like the chicken before the egg syndrome, but why do you keep saying there aren't enough people like me. There are hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of people around the world and in every country that build there own computers. Do you really think the PC world would survive very long or PC hardware technology would continue to advance so quickly if it was all left up to Dell, Gateway, and Compaq?

[Apple Pro Underwear]

hytek,

i'm not arguing with you...but you're wrong:

There are hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of people around the world and in every country that build there own computers.

i think you think there are a lot because you are one. i just came out of college and i don't recall out of all my mac designer friends...anybody (besides me) with the slightest interest.

there's this lady at work who asked me to plug in her calculator last week. i don't think most people want to build and i don't think people even know how and thats what i think squashes your chicken&egg theory

prove me wrong and i'll eat my words. get a lot of people to confirm that there are millions of people who want to build their own macs and i'll take it all back

[The Jackalope]

While I do think it would be a REALLY COOL THING (the idea of having one of my technoid friends building me a quad-1ghz G4 with ALL the bells and whistles is drool-worthy), I think it would hurt Apple in the long run.

I feel your pain though. Apple puts out some GREAT hardware (I'm still a huge fan of the Yosemite case), their turnaround for certain things leaves them in the dust a lot of the time.

Hell....I invest enough of my time on building and learning more about tattoo machines and firearms than to start thinking about building my own computer! Heh!

[jcadam]

Originally posted by Apple Pro Underwear:
<STRONG>hytek,

i'm not arguing with you...but you're wrong:



i think you think there are a lot because you are one. i just came out of college and i don't recall out of all my mac designer friends...anybody (besides me) with the slightest interest.

there's this lady at work who asked me to plug in her calculator last week. i don't think most people want to build and i don't think people even know how and thats what i think squashes your chicken&egg theory

prove me wrong and i'll eat my words. get a lot of people to confirm that there are millions of people who want to build their own macs and i'll take it all back</STRONG>

I want to build my own mac as well. In fact, I did a few months ago:
The ONLY apple specific parts you need are the motherboard and processor. I got a B&W mobo off ebay and a G3/500/1mb module from OWC, then I got an ATX case (took some hacking to get the Apple mobo to fit), ram, drives, radeon card, etc. and I was in business.

My problem is that if you build this way, you're not going to get the newest/fastest/best parts from ebay, you have to go a generation behind..........

[juanvaldes]

Originally posted by Apple Pro Underwear:
<STRONG>hytek,

i'm not arguing with you...but you're wrong:

</STRONG>

No, I think you are.

i think you think there are a lot because you are one. i just came out of college and i don't recall out of all my mac designer friends...anybody (besides me) with the slightest interest.

The key word there is "all my mac designer friends..." I have some bad news for you APU, as of OS X graphics is NOT apple's only market. While still important it's not the only one.

I am apples new (one of, I believe many can be "core") core market. I think hytek is among this new market with me. Cheerios as well. We are people who are here because of OS X (okay, not me really, but it kept me here and not on linux).

We are technical people. We are programmers, tinkerer, UNIX/Linux people, we are windows converts. We are computer scientists. We are apples new "core" market. Here are some examples...

quote: curley from slashdot.org
"As a long time PC user I find myself more an more tempted to get theh new iMac. I can't really justify it let alone afford it yet I can't help myself - it's so tempting now with OS X.

My best guess is that Apple computers are laced with crack....it's an addiction and it may cost me a fortune."
Some more links....
just one of many
slashdot link where there are even more examples...
This one is just too good to pass up..
quote: epepke
"Windows is like Budweiser
� Linux is like homebrew
� Mac is like hand-pumped Abbott ale

The Budweiser people who don't understand why some people like to drink Abbott ale never will, because in their minds,

1. You can get a lot of Budweiser really cheap.
2. It gets the ****ing job done.
3. Everybody buys it. Look at that market share! Woohoo!

The homebrew people are a bit more flexible. They might like Abbott Ale, or they might not, but if they don't like it, it's either because they don't like it on its merits or they would rather change the recipe."

My point is apple is wooing UNIX people, windows people, TECHNICAL people. The kind of people who's argument against apple for all these years has been "unstable OS, no CLI" and "Expensive proprietary hardware".

Apple BLASTED away #1, and I feel that if apple made it possible to build your own mac box #2 would too. I know A LOT and when I say A LOT I MEAN A LOT, of people would would LOVE to either jump ship back to apple or give OS X a spin, but just can't get past the price.

<STRONG>prove me wrong and i'll eat my words. get a lot of people to confirm that there are millions of people who want to build their own macs and i'll take it all back</STRONG>

I think millions is way out of proportion. Remember there is supposedly only 25 million of us in the fire place, but 100,000, 200,000? Maybe more who knows really. But I do feel that apple would be selling most of these kits to first time or returning mac users. And not their core market.

[ 03-07-2002: Message edited by: juanvaldes ]

[Apple Pro Underwear]

i disagree, with you now senor

Originally posted by juanvaldes:
<STRONG>

I think millions is way out of proportion. Remember there is supposedly only 25 million of us in the fire place, but 100,000, 200,000? </STRONG>

look at your quote. apple is supposed to license and do all that stuff for 200,000 people? When they can just sell you the whole thing and make money off you outright, it would make no sense.

I don't dispute the that "if you build it, people will come" theory but:

"As a long time PC user I find myself more an more tempted to get theh new iMac. I can't really justify it let alone afford it yet I can't help myself - it's so tempting now with OS X.

the imac is super un-expandable. in the new imac, apple has designed a computer in which it makes a case for less expandability, because it's so good to begin with. We're talking powermacs here but remember....imacs are the biggest seller out of the entire mac lineup.

also, this "building, rolling" your mac stuff is like a hobby right?

They are both overclocked and watercooled monsters and are used strictly for play and to spend money on, they're my babies.

-hytek

is apple supposed to be helping maintain your "watercooled monsters"? Or are they supposed to be making, great, simple, easy to use, PRODUCTIVE hardware and software?

[hytek]

APU, I wasn't trying to argue with you either, but as far as hard numbers on those that build there own, take the total forum member count of just Anandtech's community and HardOCP's community and let's say that only half of them build there own and you get a number of a little more than 50,000. I'm sure the number is even higher for those that have atleast swapped out their motherboard, CPU, or have hacked their computer in some way. That's just two website communities, I'm sure there is 10 to 20 times that amount scattered across the globe elsewhere.

Originally posted by Juan Valdes:

But I do feel that apple would be selling most of these kits to first time or returning mac users. And not their core market.

Exactly. If your a home builder, you've already got a hacked up PC or two in your house and swapping out motherboards and CPU's is nothing new. In my two PC's, I've swapped out the motherboards twice in the last six months and I've made the move from WinXP on both, to WinXP on one and Linux/FreeBSD on the other. So, what's the easiest, and sometimes only, way to get these people to switch to Apple? Get them a Apple motherboard that will fit into thier ATX case, a G4 processor, and a copy of OS X. Those three things are what separate a PowerMac from a PC. It's kinda hard to lose money when most of these people wouldn't buy a pre-built computer anyways, and atleast by doing it this way there is a direct link back to Apple for them to follow and just think about how many ATX cases are already out there. You've got to plant the seed in these people's mind, but you've got to speak their language to do it.

[juanvaldes]

Originally posted by Apple Pro Underwear:
<STRONG>i disagree, with you now senor

</STRONG>

Thanks okay, I disagree with you on this one

look at your quote. apple is supposed to license and do all that stuff for 200,000 people? When they can just sell you the whole thing and make money off you outright, it would make no sense.

Again that was just a wild guess. I really have no clue how many are out there but I think there are enough. And remember the premise of this is that they would not buy a mac otherwise. Sure a small % of current savvy mac users (mostly the kind on this board) would ditch apple to build their own. But that would only represent a small % of this new group. The vast majority of which would be converts and people who would otherwise never get a mac.

Hell, if apple could make some way to keep iDVD, iMovie, iTunes, ietc, to only work on their system (ie stop giving it away for free) that would increase the value of their systems which might entice people to get a apple mac instead of build their own. Or just buy the software from apple after market (like appleworks).

<STRONG>is apple supposed to be helping maintain your "watercooled monsters"? </STRONG>

no. They don't now, why should they later? People can and do this stuff to apple systems but if something goes wrong (ie you push the CPU up too much) and it is buster your out a lot more money having to buy a new system then just go to IBM or Moto and get another part.

[quote] Or are they supposed to be making, great, simple, easy to use, PRODUCTIVE hardware and software?[/quote

This would not impact how apple does things in the least. I doubt it would do little else then increase it's user base and make them some money. Better yet (and yet another reason why this would never happen) it might even push apple to create better, cheaper, hardware itsself!

[ 03-07-2002: Message edited by: juanvaldes ]

[Apple Pro Underwear]

i think this brings us back full circle.

THERE STILL ISN'T ENOUGH OF PEOPLE LIKE HYTEK.

Anandtech's community and HardOCP's community and let's say that only half of them build there own and you get a number of a little more than 50,000.

i need something more concrete. No offense, but this is a load of bullshit. Concrete is the keyword. An article in a reputable magazine or website will suffice.

Better yet (and yet another reason why this would never happen) it might even push apple to create better, cheaper, hardware itsself!

Creating competition for yourself is not a good idea. In fact it may just hurt Apple.


In the end, will Apple benefit by helping a bunch of overclockers? They make billions already. What will help them is spending all their time and effort in attracting more "core users" from wintel. Attracting a couple more overclocking-linux dudes is not gonna cut it for them. There are just not enough of you guys. I think OSX is attracting enough Linux users already.

obligatory emoticon to remind these guys not to take something "Apple Pro Underwear" says too seriously:

[Millennium]

I think Apple shouldn't have killed the clones. But what's done is done.

Even given this, though it's not impossible to work out a DIY solution. If Apple were to produce and sell its own ATX version of a Mac motherboard for a reasonable price, would this not satisfy the home-builders? Not as good as the old clone licensing deals, but perhaps enough, particularly if the prices are good.

[jcadam]

Maybe a happy medium here would be if Apple sold their PowerMac towers in a 'bare bones' configuration.

Just the case, motherboard, and a choice of processors.


pretty much all the proprietary hardware you'd need. You can
scrounge for cheap stuff elsewhere to piece together a complete system.

This would take the sting out of upgrading my B&W G3 (I'm here cuz of OS X too by the way, I'm a computer scientist guy), since I could move all of my drives and stuff over to the G4, and I wouldn't have to pay for a complete new system

[ 03-08-2002: Message edited by: jcadam ]

[TNproud2b]

The 'Apple' motherboard is the very least of the problems. It is essentially a PeeCee motherboard (made by a PC motherboard manufacturer, too) with a proprietary ROM (or BIOS). The data on the ROM is the key. How the OS interacts with the motherboard hardware is defined by the ROM.

The Apple motherboard would be a common $79 part, if it weren't for the data on the ROM.

There is *nothing* standing in the way of selling Apple clones *today* except the programming of the ROM....which is easy enough to figure out (copy the ROM) but would result in a lawsuit if sold.

edited to add: There would be millions of people like me who would build an Apple clone if they could get the parts. I would be willing to pay $200 for the 'Apple' programmed EEPROM chip....perhaps they should sell a licensed 'clone chip' ?

[ 03-08-2002: Message edited by: TNproud2b ]

[jcadam]

Originally posted by TNproud2b:
<STRONG>The 'Apple' motherboard is the very least of the problems. It is essentially a PeeCee motherboard (made by a PC motherboard manufacturer, too) with a proprietary ROM (or BIOS). The data on the ROM is the key. How the OS interacts with the motherboard hardware is defined by the ROM.

The Apple motherboard would be a common $79 part, if it weren't for the data on the ROM.

There is *nothing* standing in the way of selling Apple clones *today* except the programming of the ROM....which is easy enough to figure out (copy the ROM) but would result in a lawsuit if sold.

edited to add: There would be millions of people like me who would build an Apple clone if they could get the parts. I would be willing to pay $200 for the 'Apple' programmed EEPROM chip....perhaps they should sell a licensed 'clone chip' ?

[ 03-08-2002: Message edited by: TNproud2b ]</STRONG>

unless someone were able to reverse-engineer the apple ROMs and come up with a 'compatible but not a copy' product.

[TNproud2b]

Originally posted by jcadam:
<STRONG>

unless someone were able to reverse-engineer the apple ROMs and come up with a 'compatible but not a copy' product.</STRONG>

It's against the law to 'reverse engineer' the Apple ROM.

What you need is the same situation that DVD playback found itself in. Somebody 'cracked' the encryption without reverse-engineering or stealing confidential code. Pure hard work.

Nobody knows how to treat the end result...it is semi-legal because no laws were broken to get it.

While it is impossible to change the DVD encryption without every current DVD player losing the ability to play DVDs - it's a cinch for Apple to slightly change the ROM data at any time they see fit - in response to the 'cracking' of the old code. Apple controls both the software and hardware - unlike the DVD industry which has to comply with existing hardware standards.

[jcadam]

Originally posted by TNproud2b:
<STRONG>


It's against the law to 'reverse engineer' the Apple ROM.

What you need is the same situation that DVD playback found itself in. Somebody 'cracked' the encryption without reverse-engineering or stealing confidential code. Pure hard work.

Nobody knows how to treat the end result...it is semi-legal because no laws were broken to get it.

While it is impossible to change the DVD encryption without every current DVD player losing the ability to play DVDs - it's a cinch for Apple to slightly change the ROM data at any time they see fit - in response to the 'cracking' of the old code. Apple controls both the software and hardware - unlike the DVD industry which has to comply with existing hardware standards.</STRONG>

Well then, the motherboards will just have to be manufactured illegally, then we can send someone over to Russia to buy several from some of the street vendors there to bring back to the States.

[istallion]

What you need is the same situation that DVD playback found itself in. Somebody 'cracked' the encryption without reverse-engineering or stealing confidential code. Pure hard work.

Actually the work was relatively easy. One of the DVD licensees accidently left their decryption key in plaintext somewhere and some hacker found it. From there, they could decrypt any dvd and find the keys of other companies too.

[TNproud2b]

Originally posted by istallion:
<STRONG>
Actually the work was relatively easy. One of the DVD licensees accidently left their decryption key in plaintext somewhere and some hacker found it. From there, they could decrypt any dvd and find the keys of other companies too.</STRONG>

I like my version of the story better even if yours is likely the real truth of the matter. At any rate, it is currently used as though it is legal - yet few people are willing to take much of a risk by marketing the 'dubious' DVD decryption software. Most simply give it away.

[hytek]

Originally posted by APU:

i need something more concrete. No offense, but this is a load of bullshit. Concrete is the keyword. An article in a reputable magazine or website will suffice.

As much as I would like to give hard numbers, I can't, nor could anyone else. Simply because there is no way to track the number of home built computers because all the components have to be purchased separately. The number of those that build their own along with all the regular PC component upgrade purchases would just blur together. A good measurement would be to find the number of computer cases sold per month through retail stores, but that would only give you the number of new home builts for that month and not how many are already out there or those that re-use older cases. So, it's impossible to give concrete numbers, but just look at how well AMD is doing against Intel. AMD's core market is home builders because very few computer makers even offer AMD chips as a option. It's a two-way success story. The AMD chipset, motherboard, CPU cooler, and DDR memory manufactures are all riding high on AMD's success and AMD's success is riding high on the new technology these companies come up with.

The market for home builts is certainly there should Apple want to explore it, and I see this as having three major benefits.

• It would give x86'ers a easy and cost effective way to "kick the tires"
• Some existing technology and maybe some new technology gained by competing third-parties could be implimented into Apple's pre-built, pre-configured products more easily and more cost effective
• and, this would allow Apple to reach a large and important consumer base that they wouldn't otherwise be able to reach, the PC do-it-yourselfers.

Edit: Bad grammar

[ 03-08-2002: Message edited by: hytek ]

[Apple Pro Underwear]

Originally posted by hytek:
<STRONG>Originally posted by APU:

the PC do-it-yourselfers.[/list]
</STRONG>

well, the stuff you mentioned is what we've been disussing since the start.

I don't see why apple needs to convert PC do it yourselfers, because there:

�aren't enough to turn a decent profit
�worth the sacrifice of not owning the whole "widget"
�competing with itself

also pc do it yourselfers (wintel variety) hate macs to the ends of the earths.

try to convert them? can't, because they're the trolls that come to macnn like "wiggles"

i also think, owning the whole widget is better than trying to give you guys a cheaper way to overclock...then they came do some cool stuff with no hassle

[jcadam]

Originally posted by hytek:
<STRONG>Originally posted by APU:


As much as I would like to give hard numbers, I can't, nor could anyone else. Simply because there is no way to track the number of home built computers because all the components have to be purchased separately. The number of those that build their own along with all the regular PC component upgrade purchases would just blur together. A good measurement would be to find the number of computer cases sold per month through retail stores, but that would only give you the number of new home builts for that month and not how many are already out there or those that re-use older cases. So, it's impossible to give concrete numbers, but just look at how well AMD is doing against Intel. AMD's core market is home builders because very few computer makers even offer AMD chips as a option. It's a two-way success story. The AMD chipset, motherboard, CPU cooler, and DDR memory manufactures are all riding high on AMD's success and AMD's success is riding high on the new technology these companies come up with.

The market for home builts is certainly there should Apple want to explore it, and I see this as having three major benefits.

• It would give x86'ers a easy and cost effective way to "kick the tires"
• Some existing technology and maybe some new technology gained by competing third-parties could be implimented into Apple's pre-built, pre-configured products more easily and more cost effective
• and, this would allow Apple to reach a large and important consumer base that they wouldn't otherwise be able to reach, the PC do-it-yourselfers.

Edit: Bad grammar

[ 03-08-2002: Message edited by: hytek ]</STRONG>

The reason I build computers myself is money (and fun, I guess). I can save a lot more money having a continually evolving computer (buy parts every so often, so that the thing is constantly getting better, and do the motherboard/CPU swapout thing every 2 years or so). MUCH cheaper than buying a completely new system every couple years.

[juanvaldes]

Originally posted by Apple Pro Underwear:
<STRONG>I don't see why apple needs to convert PC do it yourselfers, because there:

�aren't enough to turn a decent profit
�worth the sacrifice of not owning the whole "widget"
�competing with itself

</STRONG>

1)Then basically both of our arguments come down to I think there are enough people and you don't, thats fine. But as someone earlier posted there is just no way to know how large this market is. But from what i have seen at a windows only computer science department. I think apple would have a decent shot.

2)Thats their loss, if they end up liking the mac and they do want the whole "widget" then for their next mac they can buy one.

3)And what's wrong with a little competition? Competition only leads to better products at lower prices. And that would be good.

<STRONG>also pc do it yourselfers (wintel variety) hate macs to the ends of the earths.

try to convert them? can't, because they're the trolls that come to macnn like "wiggles"
</STRONG>

First that statement is wrong. Flat out wrong. That is what I thought once, but was quite shocked that most all are open to the idea of the Mac OS. I would say about 95+% of this is due to it being UNIX now, and not the classic OS.

What stops then? Cost. They can't justify putting down serious cash on a mac when they just aren't sure if they would want to keep it and switch. But if they only had to invest say $300-$500 (BTW that $$$ was quoted to me BY one of my windows only comp sci friends) in a apple motherboard and CPU, then throw the rest together from parts or buy them cheaply, and they can "kick the tires" as another posted said.

As for how every windows user is a "wiggles" nope again. I have found 1 guy who is passionately against macs. No clue why, doubt he has ever even used one but I guess 25K in free software from M$ speaks wonders. :-/

TN: I saw you in here, would you consider coughing up some cash to throw together a mac box to "try it out"?

[Apple Pro Underwear]

Originally posted by juanvaldes:
<STRONG>

First that statement is wrong. Flat out wrong. That is what I thought once, but was quite shocked that most all are open to the idea of the Mac OS. I would say about 95+% of this is due to it being UNIX now, and not the classic OS. </STRONG>

i can only say from my personal experience, but the tech dept at my work thinks macs are cool (they look at my ipod and peep out osx sometimes) but....ultimately they dismiss it completely and have no idea why the graphics and publishing industry use macs. they have goofed on macs and consider it as a like a children's toy compared to their monster wintel machines.

i still think "rollers" would scoff at a mac. but once agin...we can't prove that, but i still think i'm right that most "wintel rollers" are diehard wintel junkies. so this is a stalemate, just like the total amount of mac rollers debate we just had.

What stops then? Cost.

agreed. the current price of a mac is quite expensive. i paid soooo much for my tibook, but at the same time: totally worth it. i love it.

i mentioned that i had some interest in rolling too....but after this thread, i change my mind. i'd be doing it for the price (i don't love doing it like hytek does) and i'd rather pay more and have total satisfaction. and to be honest i like supporting good people, so i will pay for apple products, my NY times from Kelly at my news stand and adam sandler movies at the cineplex for 9.50.

emoticon for no particular reason at all:

[TNproud2b]

Originally posted by Apple Pro Underwear:


well, the stuff you mentioned is what we've been disussing since the start.

I don't see why apple needs to convert PC do it yourselfers, because there:

�aren't enough to turn a decent profit

A few years ago I would have agreed with your statement, today it's insane how many people build their own computer. There are hundreds of companies that cater to the do-it-yourself computer builder. Hardware and interfaces are standardized (and backward compatible) to the degree that anyone can screw it all together - even if they needed help selecting the components to begin with.

�worth the sacrifice of not owning the whole "widget"

The 'whole widget' concept is smoke and mirrors. Funny how Apple's widget shares 95% of its components and peripherals with my homebuilt x86.
The 'whole widget' means that the Mac OS has pre-installed drivers for Apple-approved peripherals. You didn't think it was magic when you plugged in that Apple pro mouse and didn't have to manually load a driver did you? It worked because there are 200MB of driver files waiting for you to need them. Windows has their own version of this...it's called plug&play.


�competing with itself

Good. They aren't competing with anyone else I can see.

also pc do it yourselfers (wintel variety) hate macs to the ends of the earths.

You couldn't be more wrong.

try to convert them? can't, because they're the trolls that come to macnn like "wiggles"

This site would suck if there was only one point of view being expressed. If a Mac is as good as you claim then it will succeed on its own merits, people won't need to be 'converted'. Wiggles kicked everyone's ass, btw, and generated more interest than MacWorld.


i also think, owning the whole widget is better than trying to give you guys a cheaper way to overclock...then they came do some cool stuff with no hassle

The 'whole widget' is merely a driver database, remember?

Overclocking is the most fun you can have legally. It's the next progression after learing to build a computer. Sorta like hotrodding your car, it's something that will always be popular with the hardware geeks.


and yes, I would spend $500 for a Do-it-Yourself 'Apple' motherboard - as long as it didn't have any crappy built-in features like video, sound, ethernet, etc. If I wanted non-upgradeable built-in crap hardware I would buy the 'whole widget' like everyone does now... instead of building it myself.

[juanvaldes]

/\
|
|
|

see?

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally posted by TNproud2b:
<STRONG>[b]Originally posted by Apple Pro Underwear:
The 'whole widget' concept is smoke and mirrors. Funny how Apple's widget shares 95% of its components and peripherals with my homebuilt x86.
The 'whole widget' means that the Mac OS has pre-installed drivers for Apple-approved peripherals. You didn't think it was magic when you plugged in that Apple pro mouse and didn't have to manually load a driver did you? It worked because there are 200MB of driver files waiting for you to need them.</STRONG>

Wow. That's actually the best description of the 'Whole Widget' myth that I've seen. Dead on... that's literally about all it boils down to.


Still... even though I've long realized this- I've personally given up on the idea of build-your-own-Macs, or any more Mac clones of any kind. So long as people buy Macs at a level that Apple finds profitable... that's the price/quality/options level that will exist. If the market dictated to Apple that they HAD to go with another business model, then fine, but until it does, they can sail their ship in any direction that makes them the most money. Bottom line� it ain't my company.

They can sell a Mac for whatever price people are willing to pay, whole-widget myths or not- and all the people wanting a clone option outside of that game plan, are just going to be S.O.L. as long as the current business model works. And truthfully.. more power to Apple. I'd run any company I had the same way- find a business model that works for me, and stick with it so long as it does. How can I continue to fault Apple for doing what most any business in same position would strive to do?

Obviously the PC indy has adapted to the co-existence of the 'build your own' and the 'buy pre-assembled from a name-brand' business models... but Apple chooses (and probably wisely so) not to go down that road so long as they have the control over the situation. Again, can't blame 'em.

[ 03-09-2002: Message edited by: CRASH HARDDRIVE ]

[Apple Pro Underwear]

well, when i first glancened at your post...i was a little worried. But the points you "made" are not really relevant. This thread has come down down to a 3-way conversation between, Juan Valdez, Hytek and myself. If you want to participate, i suggest you read our conversations more closely.

A few years ago I would have agreed with your statement, today it's insane how many people build their own computer. There are hundreds of companies that cater to the do-it-yourself computer builder. Hardware and interfaces are standardized (and backward compatible) to the degree that anyone can screw it all together - even if they needed help selecting the components to begin with.

we're not talking about PC-builders in general, we're talking about Mac-builders. We already decided we can't agree on a number and it's impossible at this point and time to estimate accurately.

The 'whole widget' concept is smoke and mirrors. Funny how Apple's widget shares 95% of its components and peripherals with my homebuilt x86.
The 'whole widget' means that the Mac OS has pre-installed drivers for Apple-approved peripherals. You didn't think it was magic when you plugged in that Apple pro mouse and didn't have to manually load a driver did you? It worked because there are 200MB of driver files waiting for you to need them. Windows has their own version of this...it's called plug&play.

I can't believe you guys don't understand this "widget" concept. You and Crash Hardrive must be rolling something other than computers... Let me explain: the whole widget implies that software, hardware, peripherals, service and etc are by the same company and therefore are tightly integrated and allows Apple to create products like the Ipod.

Apple supports and spearheads the firewire standard.
Apple created music software in itunes.
Apple distributes itunes on all it's hardware for free.
Apple creates Ipod, a firewire device that uses itunes.

This goes far beyond just including a few hundred megabytes of drivers on their computers. Apple was able to create a sucessful, kickass product like the Ipod because they had control over the entire experience.

To contrast this, let me use MIcrosoft as an example. Plug and play is a great technology, but because M$ does not make the hardware, software, and the experience overall outside their OS, how many freakin' mp3 players do you see out there? Some of them are good, they work, very nice in fact. Let's not kid though. They're slow (usb), use their own seperate software for music (i know you can now use other programs but in my experience the most reliable was their own software), and use old standards or have no clue. They are all staggered and DO NOT work togther to provide us with the best products. You know what i'm talking about i'll stop here.

Good. They aren't competing with anyone else I can see.

They're competing with Microsoft. I know, I know, this is in reference to other mac dealers. however, we must realize who the real competition is. Making parts available for rollers is not gonna get Apple to 10%. Making great products, software and experience is what's gonna convert those people to our side.

This site would suck if there was only one point of view being expressed. If a Mac is as good as you claim then it will succeed on its own merits, people won't need to be 'converted'. Wiggles kicked everyone's ass, btw, and generated more interest than MacWorld.

i respect your opinion, i already stated that i feel i'm right when i say that too many wintel-rollers consider macs a joke to seriously consider converting. By the way, the word "converting" is just a phrase. I'm not terming it in some weird theological way. I do think macs are better but Apple needs to do some more work to make it even more better and lose the reputation it has gained it over the years. wiggles was smart but he was a jerk and treated us with no respect.

The 'whole widget' is merely a driver database, remember?

Overclocking is the most fun you can have legally. It's the next progression after learing to build a computer. Sorta like hotrodding your car, it's something that will always be popular with the hardware geeks.

"whole widget" is not a database to the untrained eye, remember?

Overclocking is the most fun YOU can ever have. As i stated in earlier posts, i would rather pay more for a computer that is rock solid and provides me with no trouble and a great user experience.


I would like to see Apple gain 10% and their company solid as a rock before they start licensing parts to all you dudes.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally posted by Apple Pro Underwear:
[QB]If you want to participate, i suggest you read our conversations more closely.

Who are you talking to, and from what imagined 'authority' did you think you were dictating this thread? From the looks of things you have no idea what you're talking about, and your level of Mac experience seems to be 'Gee! I can plug in this AMAZING space age device that no one else on the planet has ever heard of called an MP3 player! WOW!!'

I can't believe you guys don't understand this "widget" concept. You and Crash Hardrive must be rolling something other than computers... Let me explain: the whole widget implies that software, hardware, peripherals, service and etc are by the same company and therefore are tightly integrated and allows Apple to create products like the Ipod.

First off, the concept of the 'Whole Widget' has been around a lot longer than the iPod. Secondly, there's a whole world of people out there using Macs whose existence doesn�t revolve solely around an MP3 player, either a hardware or software one... that's something that pre-teens are probably thrilled over but most other people got over it the first time they saw one YEARS ago. Yeah, the iPod is cool for what is is... but please! That's what you think the pinnacle of Mac use is? And who was even talking specifically about iPods to begin with?


The �whole widget� point that obviously sailed WAY over your head, is the fact that the same company (Apple) does NOT make the hardware and peripherals used in a Mac system, and not by a long shot. As has been pointed out numerous times, Apple in fact makes-and therefore has no direct quality control over- virtually NOTHING in a Mac other than the code on the ROM chip.

Also, I'm really sick and tired of this nonsense notion- even from those who've been rooked by the 'whole widget' idea- that no one using a Mac ever had to deal with any third party drivers. Oh really? WHAT the F planet are those that believe that from? Oh I know... probably people that never use their Macs with anything beyond what came out of the box it shipped in, to do nothing more than surf the web and play with their iPod. I assure you however, there are many who are no strangers to the fact that the Mac platform can be a quagmire of dependence on third party drivers every bit as much as any other platform. Even the database of included drivers, is itself heavily third-party dependant... Apple doesn�t come up with software drivers for other people�s perifs in a vacuum.

Apple supports and spearheads the firewire standard.

The standard is actually just as commonly referred to as IEEE 1394, it's completely cross platform, and although of course Apple invented it, it's continually developed, supported and improved on by a number of companies. Take for example; Oxford Semiconductor. Sony calls it iLink on their devices. Several companies, Phillips, Sony, NEC and others lead the way in developing a wireless Firewire standard.

Apple created music software in itunes.

No�! Really?

Apple distributes itunes on all it's hardware for free.

Quick! Someone alert the media! This just in...!

Apple creates Ipod, a firewire device that uses itunes.

Hate to break this to ya, but the iPod also works on a PC as well. To unlock many key features even on the Mac� guess what� ya need to turn to *gasp* third party software.

If you want to get technical about the iPod, even it contains what are actually standard parts manufactured by other companies. To you, it�s a Firewire/iTunes device-the absolute pinnacle of all that is Apple� to many others it�s yet another device to hook to their standard IEEE 1394 ports on whatever system they want, install some hack, and upload/download music/files to it. To those at Oxford, it's merely the fruits of THIS.

This goes far beyond just including a few hundred megabytes of drivers on their computers. Apple was able to create a sucessful, kickass product like the Ipod because they had control over the entire experience.

Man, you are really hung on the iPod.

To contrast this, let me use MIcrosoft as an example. Plug and play is a great technology, but because M$ does not make the hardware, software, and the experience overall outside their OS, how many freakin' mp3 players do you see out there? Some of them are good, they work, very nice in fact. Let's not kid though. They're slow (usb), use their own seperate software for music (i know you can now use other programs but in my experience the most reliable was their own software), and use old standards or have no clue. They are all staggered and DO NOT work togther to provide us with the best products.

Where does one even start? First off, THANK GOODNESS MS doesn�t make the hardware! And by the same token, thank goodness Apple doesn�t either- it actually really would SUCK if anyone really did have to buy any of his / her machine parts from Apple itself and that was the only option. The reality is, a true 'Whole Widget' situation for any platform would suck, suck, suck.

Try this exercise; name me the list of hardware that works with a Mac and dosen't work with PCs? Give me a list of them that are **actually** manufactured by Apple. Are you even aware that, other than the CPU/mobo and possibly the graphics card (not including the chipset itself) I could yank virtually every part out of your Mac, put it in my PCs and it will work just fine? Most of it (hard drives, CD/RW DVD/Combo drives, monitor, RAM, keyboard, mice, etc) will require no additional drivers and work perfectly. And try this on for size... most of it will also be on average about 6 months to several years OUTDATED in my PCs.

Second- you're hopelessly stuck on the iPod. Who was even talking about the iPod specifically anyway? Is anyone here wanting to build their own iPod? I don�t. If I want an iPod, I�ll go BUY an iPod. I was under the impression this thread was about Macs--you know--the computers. Some people have actually been using these things for many more years than the iPod has been around, and I�d suspect for more years than YOU'VE been around.

You know what i'm talking about i'll stop here.

No, no, by all means, go on!

[ 03-10-2002: Message edited by: CRASH HARDDRIVE ]

[Apple Pro Underwear]

Well i did my best to keep this thread loose, and i think that hytek and juan valdez know that although i disagree with them, i have respect for what they say. This is Hytek's thread and if you read it he's directing it. Juan Valdez and I have been the "major" contributors to this thread. Look at the thread and you'll see that it has come down to us three with most other people losing interest.

To be honest i'm losing interest too, This time i'll address this to you specifically, Mr. Crash Hard Drive.

Who are you talking to, and from what imagined 'authority' did you think you were dictating this thread? From the looks of things you have no idea what you're talking about, and your level of Mac experience seems to be 'Gee! I can plug in this AMAZING space age device that no one else on the planet has ever heard of called an MP3 player! WOW!!'

If you bothered to read the posts and the posts before it....You would see that i took quotes from TN2bProud. Crash, you want me to admit my level of experience? Fine, i'm not hardcore like these fellas, but i do own a mac. A tibook 500. I have an ipod and i believe the best part of having a mac is the simplicity. I installed my own extra ram and i think my real skill extends to graphic software. I can troubleshoot things well but with hardware, it's a little waning.

I wanted to speak in a clear manor because i knew somebody would probably try to quote me and i didn't want to seem obtuse otherwise people might twist my words around.

First off, the concept of the 'Whole Widget' has been around a lot longer than the iPod. Secondly, there's a whole world of people out there using Macs whose existence doesn�t revolve solely around an MP3 player, either a hardware or software one... that's something that pre-teens are probably thrilled over but most other people got over it the first time they saw one YEARS ago. Yeah, the iPod is cool for what is is... but please! That's what you think the pinnacle of Mac use is? And who was even talking specifically about iPods to begin with?

I was using the ipod as an example. It illustrated my point exactly as i wanted it to. I don't understand why you think i'm hung up on the ipod. If you read my entire post i just mention it in that one statement to explain the "whole widget" phrase. How am i hung up on it? I think you're so hard up on trying to make me look stupid that you just pulled some stuff out of you butt. You know this is true, look at my post and don't you deny it. I'm not hung up on anything. In fact her's proof:

quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------

The 'whole widget' concept is smoke and mirrors. Funny how Apple's widget shares 95% of its components and peripherals with my homebuilt x86.
The 'whole widget' means that the Mac OS has pre-installed drivers for Apple-approved peripherals. You didn't think it was magic when you plugged in that Apple pro mouse and didn't have to manually load a driver did you? It worked because there are 200MB of driver files waiting for you to need them. Windows has their own version of this...it's called plug&play.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

I can't believe you guys don't understand this "widget" concept. You and Crash Hardrive must be rolling something other than computers... Let me explain: the whole widget implies that software, hardware, peripherals, service and etc are by the same company and therefore are tightly integrated and allows Apple to create products like the Ipod.

Apple supports and spearheads the firewire standard.
Apple created music software in itunes.
Apple distributes itunes on all it's hardware for free.
Apple creates Ipod, a firewire device that uses itunes.

This goes far beyond just including a few hundred megabytes of drivers on their computers. Apple was able to create a sucessful, kickass product like the Ipod because they had control over the entire experience.

To contrast this, let me use MIcrosoft as an example. Plug and play is a great technology, but because M$ does not make the hardware, software, and the experience overall outside their OS, how many freakin' mp3 players do you see out there? Some of them are good, they work, very nice in fact. Let's not kid though. They're slow (usb), use their own seperate software for music (i know you can now use other programs but in my experience the most reliable was their own software), and use old standards or have no clue. They are all staggered and DO NOT work togther to provide us with

That's the only place where i mention it. Explain to me further on how i'm hung up on the ipod. I use it in one isolated statement to illustrate one point.

First off, the concept of the 'Whole Widget' has been around a lot longer than the iPod. Secondly, there's a whole world of people out there using Macs whose existence doesn�t revolve solely around an MP3 player, either a hardware or software one... that's something that pre-teens are probably thrilled over but most other people got over it the first time they saw one YEARS ago. Yeah, the iPod is cool for what is is... but please! That's what you think the pinnacle of Mac use is? And who was even talking specifically about iPods to begin with?


The �whole widget� point that obviously sailed WAY over your head, is the fact that the same company (Apple) does NOT make the hardware and peripherals used in a Mac system, and not by a long shot. As has been pointed out numerous times, Apple in fact makes-and therefore has no direct quality control over- virtually NOTHING in a Mac other than the code on the ROM chip.

Also, I'm really sick and tired of this nonsense notion- even from those who've been rooked by the 'whole widget' idea- that no one using a Mac ever had to deal with any third party drivers. Oh really? WHAT the F planet are those that believe that from? Oh I know... probably people that never use their Macs with anything beyond what came out of the box it shipped in, to do nothing more than surf the web and play with their iPod. I assure you however, there are many who are no strangers to the fact that the Mac platform can be a quagmire of dependence on third party drivers every bit as much as any other platform. Even the database of included drivers, is itself heavily third-party dependant... Apple doesn�t come up with software drivers for other people�s perifs in a vacuum.

Th whole widget spans over to services (applecare), hardware (powermacs, tibooks,ipod) and software (itunes, iphoto, idvd, imovie). I won't use the ipod example anymore, i'll use applecare this time. i hope you don't think i'm hung up on applecare now too. If my G4 powerbook has a problem, i call applecare (whether you buy it or it's in the 1st 90 days). They can diagnose my problem is a software problem, hardware problem or whatever because their company put the thing together.

Let's contrast this with the wintel version. If something is wrong with a non "widget" type company, isn't it much more difficult for them to troubleshoot?

As has been pointed out numerous times, Apple in fact makes-and therefore has no direct quality control over- virtually NOTHING in a Mac other than the code on the ROM chip.

I'll refute this statement with your own statement:

The standard is actually just as commonly referred to as IEEE 1394, it's completely cross platform, and although of course Apple invented it

it seemed like Apple had something to do with the Mac other than the ROM now doesn't it? Speaking of firewire...

The standard is actually just as commonly referred to as IEEE 1394, it's completely cross platform, and although of course Apple invented it, it's continually developed, supported and improved on by a number of companies. Take for example; Oxford Semiconductor. Sony calls it iLink on their devices. Several companies, Phillips, Sony, NEC and others lead the way in developing a wireless Firewire standard.

So in other words, Apple spearheaded it. Thanks, i know i was right.

quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Apple created music software in itunes.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
No�! Really?


quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Apple distributes itunes on all it's hardware for free.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quick! Someone alert the media! This just in...!

you're trying to mock me? i didn't mock TN2bProud. I never took his quotes and twisted them around to make him look like a moron like you did to me. Don't you have any respect for other people? I disagree with Juan Valdez, Hytek, and Tn2bproud, but in this thread...i respect the hell out of them and would never talk down to them like you're doing to me.

Hate to break this to ya, but the iPod also works on a PC as well. To unlock many key features even on the Mac� guess what� ya need to turn to *gasp* third party software.

If you want to get technical about the iPod, even it contains what are actually standard parts manufactured by other companies. To you, it�s a Firewire/iTunes device-the absolute pinnacle of all that is Apple� to many others it�s yet another device to hook to their standard IEEE 1394 ports on whatever system they want, install some hack, and upload/download music/files to it. To those at Oxford, it's merely the fruits of THIS.

What i was trying to say about the ipod is that it's a good example of the "whole widget". You guys seem to agree that it's a "driver database". I wanted to simply state that it's not just not a driver database. I use third party stuff as well. I don't dispute it's useful. In terms of this conversation though....my point is that Apple made a great product because they have control. Microsoft can't do something nearly as easy.

Where does one even start? First off, THANK GOODNESS MS doesn�t make the hardware! And by the same token, thank goodness Apple doesn�t either- it actually really would SUCK if anyone really did have to buy any of his / her machine parts from Apple itself and that was the only option. The reality is, a true 'Whole Widget' situation for any platform would suck, suck, suck.

Try this exercise; name me the list of hardware that works with a Mac and dosen't work with PCs? Give me a list of them that are **actually** manufactured by Apple. Are you even aware that, other than the CPU/mobo and possibly the graphics card (not including the chipset itself) I could yank virtually every part out of your Mac, put it in my PCs and it will work just fine? Most of it (hard drives, CD/RW DVD/Combo drives, monitor, RAM, keyboard, mice, etc) will require no additional drivers and work perfectly. And try this on for size... most of it will also be on average about 6 months to several years OUTDATED in my PCs.

Second- you're hopelessly stuck on the iPod. Who was even talking about the iPod specifically anyway? Is anyone here wanting to build their own iPod? I don�t. If I want an iPod, I�ll go BUY an iPod. I was under the impression this thread was about Macs--you know--the computers. Some people have actually been using these things for many more years than the iPod has been around, and I�d suspect for more years than YOU'VE been around.

I don't even know what thell you're talking about. This whole portion of text is trying to rip me apart without you even saying anything important. You mention things that i don't agree with and things i agree with you on, and just generally very confusing. I think if you read this thread from the start, you'd have a better view of how i feel.

I just read it again....i'm trying to find something to refute, but it's all gibberish mostly. Try taking a english/debate class so you can organize your thoughts a little bit more clearly.

No, no, by all means, go on!

well, you managed to stray completely off the topic.

have respect for other people, even if i'm not as expert as you doesn't mean i don't have an opinion.

i may have sounded a little ticked in this very post and i apologize for it. I was a little angry...so sorry man.

twisting my words around like you did was just plain f*cked up though.

I started some threads in other forums to get a fresh view on what the concept of a "whole widget" is:


Alnora

MacAddict

MacWorld

if you read them, nobody shares the same idea that it is a database like you think.

If i'm a moron that has what you think no idea of the "whole widget" concept is...so be it

Edit: i added links here because hytek put an end to this miserable thread. If you want to take this to personal messages....so be it.

[ 03-10-2002: Message edited by: Apple Pro Underwear ]

[TNproud2b]

I understand what the 'whole widget' is.

And some day you might, as well.

Until then, you'd be better off not straying into threads and pretending to know something about computer hardware.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Anyway...

Not even going to bother with you A.P.U. You took a couple of cheap shots for no reason, acted like you owned this thread, and then get bent out of shape when called on it. There was absolutely nothing said initially to get you 'angry' as you claim. Me personally, I was responding to TN's point- not anything you said (though the fact that I left your name on the quote by accident may have confused you).

Anyway, as for even the much touted iPod being a 'whole widget’ if you look a little deeper beyond it than just blind-worship of Apple, you find that it too, isn't just the result of virgin-birth from out of Steve Jobs's ass, rather the concept, the hardware knowledge and the labor of others, appropriated by Apple into a product with their name stamped on the outside.

From a Macobserver article in August, 2001- interview with James Lewis, the president of Oxford Semiconductor (Keep in mind the iPod was released in November 2001)

Oxford is demoing a version of firmware that lets the ARM do more: administering a filesystem. Why should they want to do this? Connect a FireWire hard drive to a Mac, and the Mac administers the files, right? Sure, but what if you want to access data on the drive when it's not connected to a computer?

Add an MP3 codec and some audio chips and you've got a hard drive that doubles as a standalone MP3 player. "This merges into Apple's iTunes very well," said Mr. Lewis. "Obviously iTunes allows you to manage MP3 files on your Mac. What we can do now is just write those MP3 files from [the] directory structure on your Mac, dump them into the MP3 player in seconds." Remember now, this is at 42 MB/sec FireWire speeds, not USB. Could this setup conceivably enable a hybrid MP3 player and FireWire hard drive? Yes. That means no more synchronizing with iTunes at all. Keep the iTunes library on this hybrid device. Use iTunes when it's connected to a Mac or unplug it, and use it as a standalone player.

By sticking to the open specification of FireWire, they haven't needed any assistance from Apple. "We've obviously had discussions with Apple, just to make them aware of what we're doing and allow them to test the chips. They've kept a healthy interest in everything we've done so far, and stuff that we're doing for the future."

Pay attention to what other companies that are loosely related to Apple are coming up with and you might have a bit of a heads up on what to expect next from Apple itself. Clearly the people who follow what Oxford is up to had the heads up- 3 months before the iPod release.

By the way, a side note: in true 'Widget by Commitee' fashion, Apple chose not to use the more expensive yet faster Oxford chip with the iPod, but rather the TI chip to save a few bux.

[ 03-10-2002: Message edited by: CRASH HARDDRIVE ]

[juanvaldes]

Originally posted by Apple Pro Underwear:
<STRONG>They're competing with Microsoft. I know, I know, this is in reference to other mac dealers. however, we must realize who the real competition is. Making parts available for rollers is not gonna get Apple to 10%. Making great products, software and experience is what's gonna convert those people to our side.</STRONG>

Problem is people are just not willing to put down so much cash to give mac a try. If they could do it cheaply and if they didn't like it easily cover the system back over to windows/Linux/whatever... then it would not have been such a big loss.

A lot of people are interested, but only a few are willing to put their money where their mouth is.

okay, we have come full circle (a few times) I believe their are more then enough people out there who would be willing to give a mac a spin if they could cheaply get one.

[hytek]

I believe their are more then enough people out there who would be willing to give a mac a spin if they could cheaply get one.

Spot on, and if they like it and want to stick with Apple, then they're likely to buy a iMac or some other Apple product for their next computer, and if a existing customer wants to build their next Mac, then let them go right ahead, at least they didn't jump ship and build a PC. To me the benefits far exceed any risk to Apple's profitability here. Even if the guy that had a PC and turned it into a Mac doesn't buy a iMac and keeps his home-built forever, he still bought a copy of OS X and he's using it and he's using OS X software, so he is just as important as any other Mac owner.

The End

[theolein]

Just to add my own couple of �0.02's to this fun fest with my two old friends, TN and Crash, I would say if someone asked me offhand that there would definitely be potential in this for Apple. I don't know who here has the misfortune to read the ZDNet talkback tabloids now and again or Slashdot flamefests but from what I could gather from reading those feedbacks, is that everytime an article about OSX came up there would usually be a fair proportion, I'd say a third, who would say that they'ld love to use OSX, but they can't for one reason and one reason alone: money

Some of them said that they had a large investment in PC software that would cost too much to replace. Others said that they couldn't afford the hardware prices that Apple charges because they can get an extremely cheap PC by building their own. The first group will be nigh on impossible to convince and they have valid reasons, software is expensive. The second group, I can virtually garantuee you, would be a good potential market for Apple, if Apple were to offer a basic Mac in Kit form for a lower price than they are now available as.

There is, as regular slashdot readers will know, a manufacturer of PPC motherboards that started up a couple of months ago. However, those PPC motherboards cost near to $3500 and only run G3's, and above all do not have the OpenFirmware FlashRom and interpreter that Mac motherboards do. There are no Mac Roms on motherboards anymore. That ended with the "OldWorld" motherboards of the beige G3's and Wallstreet PB's. OpenFirmware is an open standard and is also used by SUN. But I'm getting OT.

Apple's considerations on this, and you can bet that they have thought of things like this before, should be obvious and perhaps what one should think about before posting a topic like this. How would such a move affect their current very good hardware sales and revenue flow. I don't know of course what they think, but I would guess that they wold think along the lines of what TN and Crash were posting: In no time whatsoever there would be dozens of little one man companies building these Kits up into Macs and selling them at prices below that which Apple can offer as well as just selling all the add-on extras such as RAM, Drives etc.

Apart from the main reason that so many people buy PC's with Windows, which is simply because that is what 90% of them are confronted with in their environment, be it home, friends, school or shops, they also buy mostly no name brand PC's from discounters because they very cheap. Most PC users have little or no interest in building or maintaining their PC's. They just want to type, surf, email and play the occaisional game. Note that I am refering to those people that everyone of us knows, our mothers, sisters, and other normal people who aren't obsessed with these moronic devices and technology like we are and who plainly couldn't give a f�ck whether
it's Windows or an Amiga for that matter. They just use the thing and look for something that is as cheap as they can get. These people would be a prime market for all these new bustling little companies: the rebirth of the clone industry, albeit with a difference that Apple would be the one making the motherboards.

What do you think Apple would decide, given that Apple is targeting these very same people with products such as the iMac and the iBook and stands to make a lot more money on each iMac/iBook than it does on a motherboard? Apple is not the Salvation Army. It's a for profit enterprise. If Apple could find a way to sell Kits to people who like building their own without complications like those mentioned above they would, as I'm sure they're not above getting the extra cash. The thing is that hardware is not governed by the same sort of restrictions that software licences are and there would be no legal way that Apple could stop companies like those mentioned above doing their business.

From all that feedback reading I've come to gather that there are very many PC users who hate Windows with a passion, and who don't go flaming in Mac boards about how wonderful it is. Those people would love to change if they thought they could, many of those are serious researchers and such (also from slashdot about a group that would prefer to do clustering with Macs but can't afford it) but unless Apple can find that loophole, which it should IMO, I don't think this will happen soon, unless Apple does a deal with IBM for large servers running OSX.

[juanvaldes]

Yet another thing to add. This would have more of a ripple effect, for every geek we get onto a mac this way could easily turn into a lot more mac users.

I am sure everyone here gets bombarded all the time with questions of what kind of computer to get, what is a good deal, can you build it for me?, can you help me this this problem or that?...etc...

And what do people normally recommend? What they ues of course!

sorry if that was round about and not very clear, it's spring break and I left my brain at school