"... It seems that the figures show that, despite the hype, what Apple sells is nothing more than an average PC. You get charged an arm and a leg for one of Apple's sleek looking toys, but you would be better off with a machine from Asus, Toshiba or Sony, in terms of reliability...." http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1562733/apple-machines-reliable
From the article: "Laptops from Toshiba and Sony were nearly 40 per cent more reliable than those from HP." Sounds like the Motor Trend "Car of the Year," bought and paid for... Most every HP laptop is crap because they come from what used to be Compaq. But, so are many Toshiba models. And, Sony Viao's are legendary for their shit construction as well as Sony's pathetic customer support. OTOH, I can only speak for a 5 year old PowerBook and a 2 year old MacBook Pro. Both have had a couple problems during their lifetime, but nothing like I've seen from the above vendors. Maybe the cheaper iBook models have more problems, dunno. Interesting they didn't compare the leading business laptops -- Thinkpads...
Interesting stats, however Nick Farell sounds a bit biased, doesn't he? ;-) Take a closer look at Figure 5, especially the small differences between the rates of the top suppliers. Who cares about a rate of 15.6% vs. 17.4% when at the same time you get such a superb OS and so many excellent tools included for free, all in an nice aluminium case? I own a Macbook Pro and it was certainly the best buy I have ever done in my life. This thing makes me more efficient and effective like nothing else, while I can enjoy the process in the meantime. I think they are still inexpensive for what you get. If I will ever need a new one, I would be willing to pay twice maybe even thrice as much.
I'm the farthest thing from a Mac apologist but I think Mac-lovers buy them for the OS not the hardware. Most people talk about software reliability not hardware reliability since 99% of computer problems are software related. Yes I made up that figure.
Everyone that has ever owned an apple product knows this. But I strongly disagree on two points: 1) Macs or anything AAPL makes is hardly average. The MacOS GUI is the envy of the Unix/Linux world. 2) When it does fail, they are generous to replace. Still, it is a pain and a time waste, and AAPL has to get better on this.
PCs are garbage MACs are works of art it is like comparing the sistine chapel in italy with the venetian hotel in las vegas both look alike but only one is a REAL work of art
not a big fan of gates, but computer is an arena where you want to run with the herd at least 90 percent of pcs are MS based, and that means that the most software is written for MS in mind, becasue that's where the market is even if a program is written for both, the bulk of the development and testing will give priority to MS side, becasue that's where 90 percent of the users are
The herd is smelly really, I'd run with what I know best... use a windows machine behind a whitelisting firewall for business and a MAC for everything else...
Sure. I have been pounding away on my 06 mac pro with no problems. Very long runtimes only to be reset when I install an update. Last time I had 60 days uptime only to have to reboot it when I downloaded a few updates. Mac Pro is not a toy. It has a more robust server grade powersupply for high reliability, Server grade processors with ECC in the cache, Server grade memory with ECC and it runs Certified Unix. And a much higher quality constructed case. Go and see what two Xeon chips cost.
I've always used Vaio notebooks. I've never had a problem with them except on one model the little rubber feet wouldn't stay glued on and after years of nearly constantly being on, the fan has gotten noisey. My iPhone, which I love, is a different story. It crashes occasionally and has locked up a few times and should come with a magnifying glass for us old geezers.