I think he meant MacBook Pro, rather then the Mac Pro.
you posted the exact same infographic).
Sony VAIOs used to be the closest equivalent before other manufacturers started copying the design of the MacBook Pro and MacBook Air with their Ultrabooks. Apple was even going to license OS X exclusively to Sony at one point so you would have been able to buy a Mac from Apple or Sony if things had turned out differently.
The moment anyone starts getting into looks is the moment you know Apple are winning in the "look good in spite of lifespan/functionality/reliability) stakes.
Ultrabooks in general are the OEM answer to Macbooks I'd say. You get the thin, classy ones that compete with the macbook air, and the slightly bigger & more powerful ones that compete with the Pro. However they're all expensive!
Call me cynical, but don't they look like they're heavily influenced by macbook design?
The point of that comparison was to compare workstations with workstations in the same sort of price range, not expensive workstations with significantly cheaper computer parts that you buy from the likes of eBuyer and Scan. We all know OEMs like to charge ridiculous prices for parts. It's not just Apple that does this.
While they might share CPUs that's not the only thing to consider here. the Mac pro was massive and offers great expandability, the Z600 does not, so you want to compare like for like with the Z800, which is HP's (and BMW's) very own attempt at a mac pro.
The Z600 has six dimm slots, only three per CPU, while the mac had four and the z800 has 6. Additionally the Z600 only has a 600W PSU, while the Z800 had 850 and the max had 950. Then there are drive bays. The mac natively has four hdd bays, so does the Z800, the Z600 has two, and you have to compromise the optical bays and purchase addons to get the extra space.
My Point is that if you're doing a comparison you need to compare like for like. Apple's entry into the workstation market has always been at the very top end, but you were comparing this with a mid range HP workstation.
I've always wanted a MAC, one of those nice G5's would suit me fine.
Never really had experience of MAC, never had the chance - most people I Know use PC's, either Windows or Linux.
I'm running OSX Mavericks on a PC, this is purely for training purposes and works great. However I do like it's stability and ease of use and can definitely see why people go for MAC's.
I'm amazed at how fast it is too, it's pretty rapid - 4GB RAM isn't a lot these days either!
mac_shinobi (20th April 2014)
Before one of those lovely G5s turned up the wife was running Snow Leopard on a Q6600 was totally 100% stable
She wanted back onto apple hardware tho so meant downgrading CS again and going back to 10.5.8.
If you're careful in your choice of hardware OSx86 is perfectly stable not legal but stable.
As long as you stay away from the dual 2.5ghz G5s they're still brilliant machines, especially with an ssd drive plus shed loads of ram too.
I think the key thing is neither camp is going to be swayed by the other, for me healthy competition is a good thing drives improvements through etc.
My wife's cousin is an Apple freak I mean he's on Facebook all day slagging everything off except apple.
He was banging on about the Android vulnerability to Heartbleed but call him up on the stray line of code that screwed ssl on everything apple and he doesn't like it.
He bought 2 Samsung tabs just before Xmas when they were £79 and went mental that they didn't have kitkat on them.
Does make me laugh and that's always a good thing.
The trackpad on a mbp/Air is easily worth $300. Only trackpad on any laptop I've had that I could use properly instead of a mouse.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)