Does less
Cost more
Fuck you
Want wheels sucker?
Gaming aside (though that particular gap is beginning to close) I honestly can't think of anything I've wanted to do with my various Macs over the years that I couldn't because of macOS.
The closest I can get to is running radio station playout software, but that was less something I needed to do, and more an itch I fancied scratching at that moment. Other than that, my Macs have always had a way to do exactly what I wanted with them.
Guess it's as good a place as ever to remind everyone who uses Patreon that if you are subscribing through Patreon app on iOS that prices are going up in Sept by 50-60% and if you want to save money go through the actual website. This is Apple charging more not Patreon.
Edit: Apple is forcing Patreon to abide by the 30% Apple store fee this going through Patreon App on iOS will increase costs for end users by at least 30%; easiest solution is subscribing through the website, still being able to access content through the iOS app.
https://www.imore.com/apps/your-next-patreon-sub-might-cost-more-if-youre-paying-with-iphone
This is a common trend actually, don't subscribe to services through Apple iOS apps if you want to save money. And to a lesser extent Android.
The monopolistic shenanigans aside. I hope that companies also learn from this and have functional websites again and stop forcing people to apps. It's gonna a be a win win
Why would anyone want to use an app for Patreon, anyway? It's very much a browser experience.
I don't disagree on the Patreon app point, but I sub to like 6 podcasts and never visit the app or website. For me it's very much an RSS feed experience via my preferred podcast app.
The most annoying thing is that in apples terms of service you are not allowed to tell people that you could go to the website for cheaper prices. Or if you don't offer payments through the app store why you are doing it. (because of apples stupid fee)
Android isn't really better, but at least you are allowed to link to websites that function out of the play store payments.
It’s also PATREON fucking up. I’ve got a couple people i follow that are moving to Ghost as a hedge.
Since I got downvoted on this - among other things, Patreon is removing the “per post” subscription model. One of the people I follow sent: “This is the second time in as many years that Patreon has screwed up my business”
Apple is not charging 60% more. That is patreon. How this drivel spreads is beyond me. Apple charges 30%. This has been pretty fucking consistent for a decade. Patreon is telling creators to raise their prices because they (patreon) aren’t going to take the loss, they’re going to force it on their userbase. Patreon could easily just eat the 30% or even 15%, but that would cost them profits so they don’t. And then they claim Apple is costing users a 60% price increase. Fucking ridiculous.
If they're (Patreon) eating 30%, wouldn't they lose money per transaction? I assume they take less than 30% of each subscription currently.
Most of Apple's history, actually.
Macs have a reputation for being expensive because people compare the cheapest Mac to the cheapest PC, or to a custom-built PC. That's reasonable if the cheapest PC meets your needs or if you're into building your own PC, but if you compare a similarly-equipped name-brand PC, the numbers shift a LOT.
From the G3-G5 era ('97-2006) through most of the Intel era (2006-2020), if you went to Dell or HP and configured a machine to match Apple's specs as closely as possible, you'd find the Macs were almost never much more expensive, and often cheaper. I say this as someone who routinely did such comparisons as part of their job. There were some notable exceptions, like most of the Intel MacBook Air models (they ranged from "okay" to "so bad it feels like a personal insult"), but that was never the rule. Even in the early-mid 90s, while Apple's own hardware was grossly overpriced, you could by Mac clones for much cheaper (clones were licensed third-parties who made Macs, and they were far and away the best value in the pre-G3 PowerPC era).
Macs also historically have a lower total cost of ownership, factoring in lifespan (cheap PCs fail frequently), support costs, etc. One of the most recent and extensive analyses of this I know if comes from IBM. See https://www.computerworld.com/article/1666267/ibm-mac-users-are-happier-and-more-productive.html
Toward the tail end of the Intel era, let's say around 2016-2020, Apple put out some real garbage. e.g. butterfly keyboards and the aforementioned craptastic Airs. But historically those are the exceptions, not the rule.
As for the "does more", well, that's debatable. Considering this is using Apple's 90s logo, I think it's pretty fair. Compare System 7 (released in '91) to Windows 3.1 (released in '92), and there is no contest. Windows was shit. This was generally true up until the 2000s, when the first few versions of OS X were half-baked and Apple was only just exiting its "beleaguered" period, and the mainstream press kept ringing the death knell. Windows lagged behind its competition by at least a few years up until Microsoft successfully killed or sufficiently hampered all that competition. I don't think you can make an honest argument in favor of Windows compared to any of its contemporaries in the 90s (e.g. Macintosh, OS/2, BeOS) that doesn't boil down to "we're used to it" or "we're locked in".
Windows did a few vital things that Apple failed miserably on in the 90's.
Mac dropped support for legacy software and hardware on every new OS in the 90's. Microsoft maintained backwards capability. It was a major reason windows was more resource intensive and had more bugs. It was a smart move because windows OS was able to handle more software and hardware than Macs. This is the top reason why windows demolished Mac in sales.
Microsoft's business model allowed greater range of pricepoints. Most users in business or at home do not need the capabilities of the lowest priced Mac model. You don't need much to check e-mail, browse the web, and do some basic word processing. Apple did not service this largest section of the market at all.
Windows benefited by not being tied to the hardware. So if you could slap together a bunch of parts and swap out a few dozen floppies you could get a Windows machine. Which meant there were a ton of companies making Windows machines for cheaper than Apple could make Macs.
Apple tried to allow clones, but ran into the same problem because the clone makers could make cheaper machines by slapping together parts.
My graphic design teacher in high school had a PowerPC and that thing was awesome.
Does a small handful of things extremely well, is otherwise stupidly limited by choice and costs way too much.
Think different, even if it means thinking worse.
What small handful of things?
- Best trackpads. By far. Gaming? Use a controller. I will die on this hill.
- All of their OSes are a great user experience. They're stable, they're intuitive, and--most importantly--they're aesthetically pleasing.
- Logic Pro.
- Actually, basically every app that Apple makes is pretty good. I would swap out the majority of the software on my Pixel for Apple apps if it wasn't proprietary and exclusive.
- iPhone videos are outstanding. My Pixel can't match my old 13 Pro's video, and it's a newer phone. Photos are also slightly worse here, but not after some editing.
- Objectively better build quality
if you ignore planned obscelecense. My MacBook just feels well built. It feels sturdy and durableeven if a speck of dust can kill the display, and every factor of the build is just better than anything else available. Phones are mostly up to spec, but my Pixel just doesn't feel as nice as my old iPhone, especially the objectively worse button and camera layout.
Mostly everything else? No. I can't install cool FOSS projects on my phone, or know what's running on it. I prefer Linux as an OS, but not any DE compared to macOS. I've also had some periods where stuff doesn't just work, such as iCloud fucking my free space and wiping almost my entire system when I try to fix the issue as per instructions I was given by an employee. Then, there's just that Apple is gross. I don't need to explain that, or anything about repair. Else.. the closed source software is excellent closed source software. The unrepairable, proprietary hardware is excellent hardware.
They're just a few steps from being better than any other company or project.. a couple of several thousand mile long steps.
Macs are like uncannily good at real-time audio processing, also audio and MIDI routing in general has less friction. Less tinkering in general when connecting external synths
Like with anything you can find tons of people online who have no issues with their windows based production setup, YMMV. But macs are ubiquitous in the music space, from my experience I think it’s deserved
14 hours of lifetime on Macbook while also being silent is great.
Um, being a status symbol, and um, its got some good software…
You know, it's not always, but apple does sell things that are price-competitive with similarly performing competing products.
Some iterations of the Mac Mini have been hard to beat with a tiny PC with similar performance.
The M1 MacBooks had some surprisingly cheap options for the relatively premium laptops they were.
Samsung's Ultra phones tend to cost more or less the same as the Apple Pro Max phones.
The main difference is sometimes just that Apple doesn't make low-end or low-mid-range, or sometimes not even anything below "relatively high-end", products in a particular category.
Can confirm on the MacBook side. My girlfriend got a m series macbook and it's better than anything in it's price range. That device is so snappy while having a battery life that's incomparable to anything with windows
I've owned 4 MacBooks. A white plastic one, a 13" MBP, a 15" MBP, and now a 15" M2 Air.
I've had the Air for a year and I still can't wrap my head around how it's technically in a class below the fully specced 15" 2015 MBP, but outperforms it in literally every way. Don't get me wrong, I understand that, even without Apple Silicon, computer tech jumped on in leaps and bounds in the 8 years between my last two, but the performance difference is astonishing.
Sure, it's a lot of money for an 'entry level' laptop, but this fucker is going to last me ten years or more. When Apple no doubt drop OS support for it in a few years, Asahi Linux will almost certainly be rock solid enough to fully replace macOS.
Samsung offers a lot more models so they tend to have a higher high end and a lower low end than Apple.
The trash can Mac pro was pretty compelling value at release (for a little while at least)
Well, that button probably dates from the late 80s or early 90s, when Apple was comparing Macs to branded IBM PS/2s and such that were sold to schools and enterprises.
And they weren't wrong, at the time. Those PS/2s were fuckin' expensive.
apple was never cheaper than their competition, and when IBM got into PCs they were also not even comparable in quality anymore. Reality is that even in the early days apples was also more expensive and they relied on a dedicated fan base to sell their trash, to be fair they sorta earned their reputation in the super early PC space with actually good products but when IBM came in, it had better PCs at lower prices and apple was basically riding on pure brand power. Then they had a few good hits with the ipad and later the iphone (tho the ipad was not as significant at the time as people seem to think it was looking back) and now they have been entirely eclipsed when it comes to phones and are once again reliant on hype and brand recognition.
It is not a unique history by any means but i feel it is especially egregious considering just how shit apple products are and how expensive they are.
So, I lived through that time, and I supported computers professionally during that time. I started working at a university help desk in 1989.
It's easy to go back and look at Apple products and white-box PCs of the era (or quasi-legit clones like Compaq, HP, Gateway, etc) and say, "oh, on specs, the Apples were MASSIVELY overpriced -- you can get a much better deal with the PC".
The problem was that PCs were nowhere near on par, functionally, with Macintosh.
-
Networking. We were running building-wide Appletalk networks -- with TCP/IP gateways -- over existing phone wires YEARS before anybody figured out how to get coax or 10base-T installed. We were playing NETWORK GAMES (Bolo, anyone) on Mac in the late 80s.
-
And when they did... what do you do with networking in DOS? Unless you ran a completely canned network OS (remember Banyan, Novell, etc. ad infinitum?) and canned apps specifically designed to work with it, you were SOL. Windows 3.0 and 3.1 were a joke compared to System 7.
I configured PCs and Macs for the freshman class in 1995. For the Mac? You plug the ethernet port in and the OS does the rest. For the PC... find a DOS-compatible packet driver that works with your network card, get it running, then run Trumpet Winsock in Windows 3.1, then... then... it was a goddamned nightmare. We had to have special clinics just to get people's PCs up and running with a web browser, and even then, there were about 10% of machines we just had to say "nope". Can't find a working driver, can't get anything working right. Your IRQs are busted? Who fuckin' knows. I ran the "Ethernet Clinic" until the late 90s, when Windows 98 finally properly integrated the TCP/IP layer in the OS.
- Useful software on the Mac had a pretty consistent look & feel. On the PC? Even in Windows 3.1, it was all over the map. You might have a Windows native program, you might have a DOS program that launches in a console window, you might have a completely different graphical interface embedded in the software (Delphi apps, anyone?). Games were using DOS into the mid 90s because getting anything working right in Windows 3.1 was a total fuckin crap shoot.
Windows 95 started to fix things, finally. And Windows XP would finally bring an OS with stability comparable to Mac (arguably WIndows 2000 as well, but it was never really offered on non-corporate PCs).
The short version is: that $3000 Mac could do a lot more than that $1800 PC, even if the specs said that the CPU was faster on the PC.
-
At the same time Windows is going down the drain, so if you compare removed to that it definitely has an edge. And that 8GB Air is not that expensive either... And fanboy can tell you it can swap to SSD so fast blah blah...
But if you have the knowledge to use Linux, there are less and less reasons to go even near removed computers...
You for got to mention the free and heavily discounted prices to get Mac computers into schools to get kids hooked on them. Which is something they still do to this I think.
My Apple IIC was the stuff back in the 80s.
It was also the last Apple product I owned.
The interaction between Jobs (Michael Fassbender) and Woz (Seth Rogen) pretty much sums up the Apple ][ era.
There's a reason why no-one bought IBM PS/2s. They were horrible value for money.
The real competition at the time was the thousands of other brands selling PCs. By that time IBM was plummeting in sales and other companies were selling most of the PCs. That's where 95% of the market was.
A study from 2022 found that deploying Macs in the enterprise has a lower TCO than Windows. Mainly because they have to buy less extra software and they don't need as many IT staff to support them. Also, employees with Macs are more productive and do better on their performance reviews.
I don't see this mentioned there, but that Apple has largely ignored enterprise works out as a strength; other companies wrote and open sourced pretty good tools. That can result in tools that better meet your needs, and generally will result in a lower TCO.
And since Macs are just UNIX machines under the hood, a lot of those open-source things are already built-in or can be added without much trouble.
Yes and by contrast Microsoft has been enshittifying the hell out of Windows in order to extract more and more money out of the corporations they have contracts with. They force everyone to use Teams, Azure, OneDrive, and Office 365 so that they achieve total lock-in and ratchet up the cost of the support contracts.
Microsoft is basically following the same playbook IBM pioneered in the enterprise: use a slick sales team to get your hooks into into the CEO, CIO, and other senior VPs in charge of IT in order to force all their crap onto the company by top-down fiat rather than bottom-up informed decision making.
Depends on the enterprise. If you're a 1 user to 1 device shop maybe. If you're an institution with shared devices...good fucking luck, be prepared to enter device management hell
MacOS supports PAM and LDAP just like any enterprise-class UNIX system, as well as lots of enterprise class device management tools such as InTune.
If you know what you’re doing, it’s more manageable than Windows, even.
They meant that it costs less for apple, not the customer
I had an Apple ][+ in 1982 and an Apple ][c in 1984.
Cost less is a relative term depending on application.
They were cheaper than full business model IBM computers (who hadn't much entered into the home computer market) but significantly more expensive than other home offerings such as commodore or (shudder) radio shack.
My username is from playing Thexder on my grandparents' Apple ][gs. I had a lot of fun learning Basic on that computer.
It's true! My last mac cost me nothing because it was provided by my job. And the case popped open after the battery swelled within a year of me getting it, something my personal laptops have never done before.
That tends to happen when the laptop battery is kept at a high temperature for long intervals.
My work laptop security doesn't play nice with Windows Update, so "update and shut down" actually does "update and restart" and proceeds to incinerate the laptop in my bag until the battery is exhausted.
Took me a while to figure out why my batteries would turn pillow so frequently.
I don't really ever travel with my laptops, at least not to put them in bags. I think the Mac laptops had a known issue with defective batteries, though.
What's next? Google becoming evil ?
Impossible, they are so quirky they let their workers play xbox 360 at work, they are surely a good company with good intentions.
Does more, lol. Think Apple might need a dictionary considering iPhone is just barely getting home screen customization and the Mac mouse actively works against doing anything.
This post was maybe true 5 years ago, but PC laptops have really started to suck. My macbook air was only $300 and it's way better than my work's $1k+ Dell laptop in terms of performance and battery life.
Macbook air is only $300???
Yes. Supplier markup is 50% above cost, so set up a price watch and wait for it to go on clearance. You'll get it 50% off.
I got mine new at Best Buy last year when they were clearing out M1 stock.
Where is a macbook air $300? Off the back of a truck?
https://www.macofalltrades.com/apple-macbook-pro-13-inch-2-3ghz-core-i5-mid-2017/
This is actually a step above the Air for that year.
The M2 Mac Mini is $599, or $499 if you can get the education discount. There is not a (new) Windows PC in that price range that has the same performance (especially performance-per-watt) and Thunderbolt 4. The M1 MacBook Air is getting a bit old, but it's on sale for $600-700 pretty often and will knock the socks off most PCs in that price range, especially in build quality.
Apple's pricing gets ridiculous when you try spec'ing up with certain memory or storage upgrades, sure, and most internal upgrades are a no-go. The base models of most of their computers are incredibly competitive, though.
At 600 you can get a computer with an actual graphics card. The only outstanding feature of the M1/2 macs is the very low power consumption, the rest is quite subpar.
A $600 PC with a dedicated graphics card is probably going to have a worse CPU than an M2 or M3 Mini, and probably no Thunderbolt. You would only be cross-shopping a PC like that with a Mac Mini if you were thinking of graphically-demanding productivity work, like video editing or Blender. If it's for gaming then the Mac wouldn't be in the running at all.
It’s really up to personal preference but I’m a big fan of the metal unibody of Mac laptops. While my friends’ PC laptops plastic bodies were starting to separate and show wear, my laptop was still looking mint. That alone also helped determine how long I kept a Mac laptop going (I was on a 2017 MBP 13” up to just recently and the body is still near mint).
So while it could be perceived as a simple cosmetic preference, it was also about the longevity of the laptop’s use.
That said, I have an ASUS ROG Zephyrus that has a pretty solid body, despite being plastic. Some of them have gotten better, but a lot are still flimsy crap.
It’s the same reason I prefer the body of my iPhone, vs the multitude of plastic Android flagship phones I churned through back in the day. The G1 still holds a place in my heart though and had a metal body (and I still have it in its original box!)
Well now I just need apple to provide a real os.
I use Nixos btw.
If I'm buying a Mac personally I always buy a refurbished one. The machine has the same warranty but you save a couple hundred bucks.
That pin can be found for $30 or $35 on on ebay here and here, where it is described as being from the 80s and as an "employee pin".
I was thinking that this might have been something aimed specifically at technology buyers in US schools in the 80s or 90s, to whom Apple offered substantial institutional discounts in a (relatively successful) effort to dominate that sector. However searching the phrase "does more costs less" i found this TV spot advertising the Quadra 605 which at $1000 was the cheapest computer Apple sold when it was introduced in October 1993 (and allegedly cheaper than something else they refer to as "PC Leading Brand" 😂). That system was sold under the LC and Performa brands up to 1996, but it was only sold as a Quadra until October 1994, so, to answer OP's question: that slogan was in use at least sometime in that year.
Before I landed a good job, I was buying used Macs for years. Mac of All Trades is your friend.
That aged like milk lol
seeing the mac logo im thinking this was when steve jobs was between. Nobody wanted an apple in 1999 and even early 2000's I remember a guy who used to stick apple stickets on his ibm to deter thieves.
Apple purchased NeXT in 1997. Steve became the i(nterim)CEO shortly after. iMac was first introduced in 1998. Steve was running the show already. That's around when the logo stopped being multi-colored.
Thanks for the context. One thing I liked about ios was the way it used many next things (that and I was so jacked that it was built on freebsd). They were my favorite machines back in 1994ish. I was aware jobs went from there back to apple but I thought it was more a falling out previous to that. I was a fanboy by 2005 (well as much as Im gonna be about anything) but it only lasted half a decade as the service at the mac store faltered combined with the whole iminmalist thing when I like them due to maximalist.
It doesn't even do anything more especially for the price. Just make an AMD rig that blows it outta the water ez.
Luxury brand is what happened.
(First it was colored plastic.)
I love the look of colored plastics.
Join us at /3dprinting
They costed less back when the competition was the IBM PC, which cost as much as a car back in the 80s. Hasn't been true for decades now.
Just Capitalism Problems
"The more you buy the more you save" - NVIDIA
Seems like they both went to the same school
Do the words "IBM PC-Compatible" mean anything to you?
Think different
