I've used Macs since 1992, of course back then Macs were simply light years of PCs. Mac OS X promises much and seems reliable. But Mac bigots need to think differently. The new iMac is a case in point. Adding a G4 and a decent graphics card is to start well behind the field in a race that PCs have already won. PC owners can upgrade, can buy software in the high street, which you can't do in the UK, have a OS in XP that shows promise and benefit from much more competitive packages. But as I write this message on my 15 month old iMac DV+, I wonder about the merit of buying something that is so fundamentally non upgradeable.

Is the iMac so cutting edge? A G4 running at 800mhz, pentium munching? Can Apple seriously compete against the faster Athlons and Pentiums, which are getting faster and why a graphics card with only 32mb that will be obesolite in six months. The iMac is not making any huge, beyong asthetics, leaps over new fast PCs. It needed to start well ahead of the field, it doesn't.

How will the iMac look in 14 months. Like mine in need of retirement all but for the basic tasks.

Geez. More stuff about Apple vs. Winders. Ho Hum....

I use both. I have a G4 773 with 1.5 GB ram running OS X and I have a home made Athlon 1800XP box with XP home. The Athlon box whomps the Mac, but who cares????????? I dont. I got the mac becuase for certain things, it is a better tool than the winders machine.

I would never do any serious music or video or photo work on anything else BUT a mac. And I would never attempt to play any serious kind of a online game on my Mac. The upcoming G5 macs may in fact trounce the PC but thats in the future.

The point is is that you use whatever platform is best as doing whatever it is YOU ARE DOING with it. Anything else is rubbish.

Now go outside and play.

Hey look, the G4 includes the "Velocity Engine"

Velocity = displacement

Nobody seems to have told Apple that velocity can also mean going backwards... :-)

Do I dare put my name at the bottom? Yes :-),
IntelMole

The point of Macs... Especially the iMac and the one thing Apple has always tried to do was make their Macs as small as possible. Obviously the speed is hurt, but if the cost is kept down along with the size, the thing becomes perfect for buisness/school use. What would a secretary rather use? A small compact iMac, or a big (and don't say they arn't) PC?

Compared to the iMac, PC cases are huge, and you may talk about the small cases, but compared to the availability of the iMac, they suffer.

So when it comes to doing spread sheets and excel, the iMac is perfect.. For that extra oomph though, PCs plow through it..

Just my point of view...

Draal

draalranger@hotmail.com
FLAME ME!!!

Lao Tze, TwoFer: Why do you even bother? You are trying very, very hard to discredit/degrade Macs, it seems, and I just can't see why you care.

It is [i]certainl/i] not clear to me that the anti-Mac crowd is any less fanatical than the pro-Mac crowd (er, mostly resteeves). How else to explain the dedication to the cause?

[q]I love your style resteves, you slowly direct the argument to pure sematics, it is an argument that cannot be proven right now,
Semantics??
You made a claim, I asked you if you could prove it, you posted some URLS, one didn't prove it, one proved you incorrect.
So you can't prove it. How is that "semantics??" [/q]
It is semantics because it has gotten down to words, words that are meaningless. I am an engineering student, I like facts, simply stating opinions, un-proven facts, and rhetoric is "semantics".
[q]So know you want all of us to take it on faith that your numbers are real. Sure, I am willing to believe you. I really don't think you are lieing, just because you can't prove it.
OTOH, the other link you gave says the price is too low, and the other machine spec'd (by nuclear?) showed your price was too low. But hey, I am willing to believe you. (Unless taking your word for something is just another 'semantic' argument) [/q]
By my definition it would be a "semantic argument", however I explained that I get 10% off of listed prices, I may even be able to build the machine cheaper, I would have to go talk to a sales friend who works there.

[q]But, you have a history in this thread for not making exact comparisons. Your first post was a computer that was missing some expensive components. Now, *you* may not think those components are worthwhile--fine. But to make a valid comparison, as much as possible has to be equivalent. Without anything to use as back-up; it is hard to know if you are making a valid comparison. Like, did you include the OS? [/q]
I acknowledged the error in not having many of the same components and posted a machine to your specs upon your request, I posted the original machine to show how mauch a person could get for there money.

[q]Your price lists certain things as 'upgrades' yet you are building it yourself.... so what are you 'upgrading'. IME that is a term used when they are building something for you. So it would be helpful to have a site that I can go to and verify things for myself. I don't think you are lying, but that doesn't mean you are being accurate. (Even if the inaccuracy is by accident.) [/q]
At techtronics, there are base prices for complete machines (w/o monitor). they come with bottom of the line components, whenever I build machines I know not to use some of the components(aka tnt2 vid card comes standard for a "base" machine). Unfortunatly they don't keep there site up to date, I hardly think this is a reason for concern, there are many logical things which you will not find on the list(cd media for example).

[q]So, you have made claims that no one can back up, and you can't prove. Yet somehow *I* am the one being manipulative.... not sure how that works. IIRC, there are lots of examples of PC's in this thread that are shown to be more expensive than the equivalent iMac; yet yours is the only one that shows otherwise; don't you think that is reason enough to be unsure of the accuracy of your claim? [/q]
It is easy to see that the argument was steered in that direction, I made a claim, backed it up to the best of my ability, you looked for any loophole(which I am not able to prove wrong). As for PC's being more expensive, if you buy from compaq or whoever, they will be the same price, i do not debate that, I guarantee that I can build the equivalent machine for a lot less though...

[q]I am still willing to compare the iMac against an equivalent PC, but to be a valid comparison, it needs to be equally equipped, and verifyable.[/q]
Apples nd oranges, if the g4 chip + mobo was offered for DYI's I would be able to build it cheaper(provided no gouging)...

Hey, Loa...

Could you please let me know the points (or at least one or two) that I have been proven wrong, yet refuse to cede?

I am just curious...

.

twofer
[b]
resteves, give me some sources behind your "99.5%" figure.

You can't? That's because you just made it up -- like you do with much of your "facts". [/b]
heh... guilty as charged. It was an "educated guess". Since Compaq has about 10% of the market, and this was one very small part of their sales; I estimated that the overall sales from Compaq (and the other OEMs) was about .5% of all computers sold. I suppose I could try and get better numbers from their SCC filings, but that is really way too much hassle.

SO, what do you think is a better number? What percentage of computers sold do you think are that easy to change the RAM? Remember, this is not just screw free 'technology'; it is having one small door that can be easily openned, that gives easy access to the RAM slot. (or something equivalently easy)

I bet I would be willing to use your number instead of .5%; so what do you think it would be?

Lets say I am way off, and it is 2.5%

Fine, that means I am 97.5% right, and you are 97.5% wrong.

OTOH, you could ignore the exact percentage, and deal with the overall message. That I was making a generalization on the vast majority, and you were making a generalization on a small minority.

.

[b]
I love your style resteves, you slowly direct the argument to pure sematics, it is an argument that cannot be proven right now,[/b]
Semantics??
You made a claim, I asked you if you could prove it, you posted some URLS, one didn't prove it, one proved you incorrect.
So you can't prove it. How is that "semantics??"

So know you want all of us to take it on faith that your numbers are real. Sure, I am willing to believe you. I really don't think you are lieing, just because you can't prove it.
OTOH, the other link you gave says the price is too low, and the other machine spec'd (by nuclear?) showed your price was too low. But hey, I am willing to believe you. (Unless taking your word for something is just another 'semantic' argument)

But, you have a history in this thread for not making exact comparisons. Your first post was a computer that was missing some expensive components. Now, *you* may not think those components are worthwhile--fine. But to make a valid comparison, as much as possible has to be equivalent. Without anything to use as back-up; it is hard to know if you are making a valid comparison. Like, did you include the OS?
Your price lists certain things as 'upgrades' yet you are building it yourself.... so what are you 'upgrading'. IME that is a term used when they are building something for you. So it would be helpful to have a site that I can go to and verify things for myself. I don't think you are lying, but that doesn't mean you are being accurate. (Even if the inaccuracy is by accident.)

So, you have made claims that no one can back up, and you can't prove. Yet somehow *I* am the one being manipulative.... not sure how that works. IIRC, there are lots of examples of PC's in this thread that are shown to be more expensive than the equivalent iMac; yet yours is the only one that shows otherwise; don't you think that is reason enough to be unsure of the accuracy of your claim?

I am still willing to compare the iMac against an equivalent PC, but to be a valid comparison, it needs to be equally equipped, and verifyable.

.

TwoFer
He is using the same logic as you were. Hence the "made up" aspect of the statistics. (I think he was being generous)

The bizarre thing is that I think you two would agree on several points if you were talking face to face.

oh well.

resteves, give me some sources behind your "99.5%" figure.

You can't? That's because you just made it up -- like you do with much of your "facts".

[q]Lao,

Well good. I see that you still haven't refuted anything I said (except the speakers) so we can let it stand. You made a claim, didn't back it up; finally gave two URL's, one proved you wrong, and the other 'doesn't keep their site up to date' [/q]
yeah they don't list everything... the prices are dead on...
[q]Fine, you can come back when you get something to actually back up your rantings. [/q]
Flip-flop,
I love your style resteves, you slowly direct the argument to pure sematics, it is an argument that cannot be proven right now, however I am willing to bet you $10,000 right now, If you are so dead sure that i am full of shit, then send me an Email: Nichevo13@hotmail.com, you can take a trip up to Canada to lose a bet.(I'll even pay your airfare if I am wrong)
I don't ask you to prove that the iMac is "more convienent to use" or "easier to use" , because it is a pointless argument, If I wanted to indulge in such arguments I would simply go to a yahoo chat for kids and start arguing "who is better, superman or spiderman?"
rearsteves, I think it is time for you to grow up, you haven't been able to cede a sigle point even though you have been proven wrong many times. Personally I am sick of your fallacious and manipulative argument style.

twofer
[b]Your tired old argument which I referred to is the one about PC cases not having easy entry -- which is blatantly false, and which I've
addressed with you several times in TR's comments in the past. I'll grant that you can find PC cases which still require screws to ope/b]
Sorry, but I have never said anything about "PC cases not having easy entry" What I said was that the 2 year old iMac would have been able to add RAM more easily than the 2 year old Gateway. Now, I will continue that thought, and include any G3 iMac in the last 2.5 years. And at least 95% of the PC's. I also never mentioned screws. And even those without screws are rarely as easy as the iMac. Just because someone is using no screws "technology" doesn't make it as easy as the iMac.

[b]But you were wrong, as I showed by my experience with the Compaq. How did that -- which was exactly the same process as you
described with the iMac -- prove you right?

You then wander off into a bizarre rant on how a counterexample doesn't constitute disproof -- which isn't the logic I studied in college,[/b]
Okay, I can agree with that. Since you can find a counterexample I am wrong. The fact that you are saying that PC's are just as easy as a Mac... and *I* can find a counterexample (hundreds actually) than you are also wrong.

Well, looking at the numbers; since the iMac is easier than 99.5% of the PC cases, than I am 99.5% right, and 0.5% wrong. While you are 0.5% right, and 99.5% wrong.

I can live with that. I just don't understand how you can get so vehement about using 0.5% of the PC market to describe the market in general.

If that is the case, than I can say
PC's are as easy to add RAM as a Mac
PC's don't come with network cards
PC's don't come with optical drives
PC's can't read DVD's
PC's don't have monitors
PC's etc. etc.

Now, just because I can find a small percentage of machines that fit the above, does not make the statements any less ridiculous. Your assertion that PC's would be as easy as an iMac, based on such a *small* number of boxes; is pretty darn disengenuous.

.
[b]

It appears you're not just being ingenuous or ir ignorant of the facts; you're actively making up the "facts" as you go along. [/b]
Okay, I used 99.5% of the PC's to represent all PC's for a generalized statement. You used 0.5% of the PC's to represent them for a generalized statement. How am I the one making up facts??

.

[b]See...this is the kind of deliberate "blinders on" rationalizing that constitutes so much of Apple advocacy. You deliberately missed or
ignored the points I was politely trying to get across [/b]
Careful, you are now trying to guess what I am thinking. And you are not very good at it.
What you said was
[i]It seems to me that if you go the bargain Mac route--iMac--you get basic capability, certainly. But you get little to no hardware longevity
in terms of upgradability,[/i]

It seemed pretty plain to me that you thought the iMac got "little to no hardware longevity" I was refuting that claim by using the same example you had given. The iMac had just as much 'longevity' as needed by the user you mentioned. *and* it would have been easier to install on the iMac.

Now, in fairness, you also said
[i] and when you can upgrade your choices are comparatively scrawny in terms of hardware.[/i]
But I didn't respond because, comparatively speaking, you were right.

Yet you jumped to the conclusion
[b]Let
me just address the points you raise and fill in the gaps you are so anxious to avoid: [/b]
I wasn't 'avoiding' the hardware issue, I was agreeing with it.

[b]Of course the "delivered to his door" description is designed
to imply that such an arrangement is actually better than going into a major retail outlet store like Best Buy's and simply buying the unit
off the shelf. It's an expression which rationalizes the blunt fact[/b]
Here you go trying to guess what I am thinking again, and again you are mistaken. By saying "delivered to his door" I was not trying to imply superiority, it was just a way to imply that I had included shipping with the cost; since often times it is forgotten. I wasn't rationalizing anything; just trying to show that the iMac had the necessary 'hardware longevity' as I had asserted.

[b] the blunt fact that if my friend had had a 2-year old iMac and walked into Best
Buy's he wouldn't be able to buy *any* 3rd-party peripheral add-on hardware for it because Best Buy no longer sells Apple
hardware.[/b]
ummm... not sure. Before BB carried iMacs they still carried Mac peripherals; so you may be able to. Plus, a lot of the peripherals can be used for both; so I think it is pretty likely that you can walk in and get a Mac item.

[b]So your guy would have to buy it online or mail order, unless he lives in an area which still has active Mac dealers--or
one of the few new retail Apple stores.

The point to my whole anecdote here is that its a fact that x86 hardware is far more plentiful in the general retail markets in most
areas of the country,

There is, of course, absolutely nothing wrong with
Internet or mail ordering--but it's just very convenient when you can visit national stores like these and find x86 hardware
components on the shelf and in good supply. [/b]

And again, I am not avoiding anything. You are right. It would be great if I could walk into BB and have it stocked with Mac stuff; no one is saying differently. I am not sure how you assign a negative connotation on my not disagreeing with you.

[b]

Ok, I hope that now I've succeeded in getting my original point across, which was simply choice of hardware and convenience being
far superior to Apple's in the interim after the initial system purchase itself is mad/b]
Hey, no problem, nor arguement. But that is a different statement than talking about not being able to upgrade; which was your statement that I was responding to.

I was going to respond to other points you made, but maybe later.

.

Sweet, precious AG 197,
[q]You make it sound like there's an organization of some sort. Like PC EvangeListas. I think you need to get a life. [/q]
I think of it more as a kind of on-line community, of which you are a part of. I suppose that if I need a life, you do as well.
[q]And what if the product is intended to be sold to suckers with lousy fashion sense? [/q]What a great way to prove my point there, Versace.

[q]I would rather be doing something with a girl. Or at least with people. I don't look to computers for companoinship. [/q]Again you ignore the point and go for a personal assult. If that is what you prefer then what I said does not apply to you! If you must know, and the reason your venom has no sting, I live with my girlfriend. I have so much companionship that its rare for me to be alone. It's a pain in the ass.

[q]Surely you're not talking about Apple! Replacing a $10 floppy drive with a $1000 DVD writer just so they didn't have to admit that people still used removable media isn't about being first. And since USB and IEEE-1394 first appeared on PCs (even though Apple owned the rights to they underlying technology, they failed to develop it), they didn't try hard enough to be first. Revisionist history doesn't move me. [/q]They did try though. You didn't mention anyone who has attempted as much from the PC OEM world. The only one I can think of is Sony. (I know everyone thinks they suck but at least all of their PC's come with firewire) And, yes IEEE-1394 is the patent name. You are so smart! Yes you are!

[q]If by "we" you mean yourself, since that's all you represent right now, you can place your loyalties where you like. As for "simplicity" I don't see anything that shows Apple's products cornering the market in this vague, undefined trait. [/q]Of coures you don't. All you see is what you want. What are my "loyalties" pray tell? I'm sure you have no idea as you have not paid attention to what I've really been saying.

Have fun with your trolling responses. I enjoy them! Hey, maybe you will even get to do something with a girl soon!

Lao,

Well good. I see that you still haven't refuted anything I said (except the speakers) so we can let it stand. You made a claim, didn't back it up; finally gave two URL's, one proved you wrong, and the other 'doesn't keep their site up to date'

Fine, you can come back when you get something to actually back up your rantings.

[quote]
still hold that 2-way speaker, on average, put out a larger sound range, and usually better quality.
[/quote]

and i thought everybody would have known this... itīs not hard to see that it is hardly possible of making a speaker which ranges from 30Hz to 20,000Hz without having to make any compromises.

good subwoovers are BIG, HEAVY, tweeters are so small - impossible to design a one-in-all without compromises.

usually, broadbandspeakers have weaknesses both in the very high and very low frequencies.

perhaps this is the reason why i have never seen a $20,000 1-way-speaker...

Lao Tze let's talk about MTV's new GamePC

[q]Lao Tze, you DO know that

How do you know??? 9watt a side single drivers are better than 120pnpo 2ways???

PMPO is a meaningless figure... right? [/q]
Yes it is meaningless, but I am saying that rearsteves is simply running around from claim to claim, looking for something, anything, that he can win at. He's already started arguing points that cannot be proven. At this point he is a lost cause.
BTW having a driver rated at 9watts is also meaningless. I guarantee that if i put a true 9 watts of power into that driver(s) it would blow. It is probably being driven at 0.1 to 1 watts.
I still hold that 2-way speaker, on average, put out a larger sound range, and usually better quality.

Lao Tze, you DO know that

How do you know??? 9watt a side single drivers are better than 120pnpo 2ways???

PMPO is a meaningless figure... right?

LOL

He said Wang

LOL

200th P05T!!!
w00t!!!

[q]What I don't understand is how come there are any Mac users that visit T/R??[/q]Do you know what Jehova's Witnesses are? Well, macolytes are the Jehova's Witnesses of the Internet. They come uninvited, they aren't very good company, and they don't care when they've outworn their welcome.

Look! Steve Jobs' new car!
http://www.edmunds.com/news/autoshows/articles/47802/page006.html

[q]I am just totally shocked at the attitudes of my fellow PC builders and users.[/q]You make it sound like there's an organization of some sort. Like PC EvangeListas. I think you need to get a life.

[q]Try to look at the product as what it is intended to be. Look at the whole picture.[/q]And what if the product is intended to be sold to suckers with lousy fashion sense?

[q]To many people, time is more valuable than money. While you are building and tinkering and everything (I realize that many including myself, enjoy this in and of itself) I would rather be shooting and editing video and animating.[/q]I would rather be doing something with a girl. Or at least with [ieopl/i]. I don't look to computers for companoinship.

[q]They try to be first. That got to account for something good, right?[/q]Surely you're not talking about Apple! Replacing a $10 floppy drive with a $1000 DVD writer just so they didn't have to admit that people still used removable media isn't about being first. And since USB and IEEE-1394 first appeared on PCs (even though Apple owned the rights to they underlying technology, they failed to develop it), they didn't try hard enough to be first. Revisionist history doesn't move me.

[q]We as PC users owe a lot to Apple and the Macintosh. Does simplicity deserve to be demonized?[/q]If by "we" you mean yourself, since that's all you represent right now, you can place your loyalties where you like. As for "simplicity" I don't see anything that shows Apple's products cornering the market in this vague, undefined trait.

Originally Posted by Transman88
What I don\'t understand is how come there are any Mac users that visit T/R??

They don\'t ever cover any Mac hardware or software (other than to laugh at it), and it\'s pretty clear that the focus of this site is for the PC do it yourself geek.

Why would you want to go to a website that has no coverage for what you are interested in? It\'d be like me going to www.realhamster.com :) Other than to argue, which is really kind of sad.

Not that I am saying anything NEGATIVE about Mac users or their choice in computers.

Nuclear,
I messed up in my post, the original machine (from 125) also came with an sblive 5.1 +assorted periphrials(1.44 etc.)

[q]Lao troll

You make this *way* too easy. [/q]
Lets have lesson in finding restevian logic:

[q]Remember, you said you could drive to the store, get all theparts, check out, and drive home, in 35 minutes. [/q]
The one at www.techtronics.ca, it happens to be about 10 blocks away, the one at www.top-logix.com is 3 blocks away from the the former.

[q]And how many stores are you going to???
How did you get those prices?? [/q]
I go to 1 store techtronics, the "top-logix" store I go to less since they have higher prices, but sometimes they have stock that isn't offered at techtronics.

[q]The two links you gave me
Do not offer a DVD-R drive
Do not offer a 15" LCD for $500
Do not offer an Aluminum case. [/q]
So what, they haven't been keeping up on their price lists, I know for a fact tha techtronics carries them. (BTW the Daytek LCD for 550, I get for 500)

[q]So how many stores are you going to in that 35 minutes???[/q]
1, whats with the repetive questions

[q]And I thought you were building it yourself, or are you ordering it? Either way is fine, but you keep switching. [/q]
I have always maintained that I build them myself. I think that you need to learn how to read.

[q]I could not figure out how to modify the system at the techtronic site. So I used the Top-Logic site: [/q]
LOL, you are an idiot then...

[q]Well, I also get a discount when buying Apple parts. So that top iMac is 1700. [/q]
Why do you get a discount, bending over for Jobs??? With all the bad publicity you give them with your ranting they should charge you twice.

[q]Yep, yours is cheaper, you get to save $26 USD. Congrats. [/q]
You don't have a clue.

[/q]I get:
better speakers [/q]
How do you know??? 9watt a side single drivers are better than 120pnpo 2ways???
[q]USB hub in my keyboard
smaller system
much fewer wires and cables
built in microphone
wireless antenae [/q]
So what, I could go into what I get that is better, you are missing the point. You flip-flop around changing what the stories is about, Kinda like Jobs. More restevian logic...
[q]Appleworks
Quicken
Otto Mattic
World Book
Chess
iMovie
iTunes
iTools
iDVD
iPhoto
and you are stuck with Win98. [/q]
Actually XP home, like I said, I am not gonna go around prancing that I have solitaire on my machine.

[q]But you save $26... Oh yeah, you also get to spend all the time adding the components that didn't come with the system. [/q]
Actually I am going to stick with my regular price 1403$, I would give you the machine if I couldn't build it at that price.

[q]BWAHAHAHAHAHA...... You made it **SO** easy... thanks...:-) [/q]
12 year old???

[q]Now, if you can post *real* numbers, instead of just making them up, I may continue to play along. Otherwise you are spouting crap just for trolling. And that is getting tiresome. You have made many pricing assertions, and failed, totally failed, to back them up. Using *your* site, I have proven my point that the iMac is a great deal, Unless you can *prove* otherwise, my point will stand. [/q]
A great deal, you are a fucking bonehead! Doesn't it make you feel like an idiot to have me refute everything you say??? Why don't you just admit it? No, instead you throw more half baked, non-sequitur, arguments at me...

Nuclear:
[q think lao made a big mistake
I created a computer with around the same price 3038 With canadian taxes for this system [/q]
Actually I posted this machine(in post 125):
[qol, You mac fools for 1800(2800 Can.+tax)) I could build:
Athlon 1700+
Abit kg7 mobo
256 DDR2100(micron cas 2) (upgradable to 4gigs)
Radeon 8500
16x burner
16x DVD rom
16" LCD (1024x768)
40 gig ata100 HD
10/100 nic
el-cheapo speakers
keyboard
optical mouse
AND A BRUSHED ALUMINUM CASE!!! (300w PS) [/q]
It also comes with XP home...
But rearsteves was being a little bitch about, because it didn't have firewire, dvd-r, and fruit colors...
The machines are pretty equal, I chose to up the LCD size, burner, and proc, you have better sound(card+speakers) and bigger HD...

Originally Posted by nuclear
I think you have some point hexenhaus.
I too think that mac deserve some point. It is a company (apple) that implement many thing first. But they do not devellop many things. It is merely a company producing an os and developping a solution trying to use proven hardware (and not so proven hardware like the dvd-r which wil be the next thing) Usb was develloped by intel. The ppc by ibm. Firewire was both devellop by apple and by the ieee.
It just think that many apple entousiast says that the mac is the best thing in the world and that\'s why i try to compare it from a price base to the perfomance you will get.
Sure apple has some good point and they\'re quicktime movies are great. But they\'re is so much fanatism behind it.

My reason for brigging that little system was only to point out that you could have a good pc for the same price. The only missing feature is the dvd-r. And i agree that most people don\'t want to build it and don\'t want to pass time to correct the problem on it. That\'s why there are computer store selling clone computers (no oem). They will build it for you and will help you (for a fee) with the problem that might arose from that computer.

I am just totally shocked at the attitudes of my fellow PC builders and users.

Try to look at the product as what it is intended to be. Look at the whole picture.

To many people, time is more valuable than money. While you are building and tinkering and everything (I realize that many including myself, enjoy this in and of itself) I would rather be shooting and editing video and animating.

This all in one package allows alot of out of the box functionality.
Apple is trying to anticipate the desktop video revolution by including the DVD-R rather than reacting to the market passively like other OEM's. This is the same behavior that brought us the Personal computer, the mouse, GUI, Firewire, CD-ROM, etc.

They try to be first. That got to account for something good, right?

We as PC users owe a lot to Apple and the Macintosh. Does simplicity deserve to be demonized?

Hey resteves, you are pretty cool to take all of those jabs and come back with rational, clear thoughts. I resect anyone who could put up with this much groundless abuse while still trying to be understood and attempting a casual technological discussion.
Cheers!