That is the subject heading at one of the message boards on MTBR.com (Mountain Bike Review). The question he poses is:<P>"Stick the loyalty in your watch pocket for a sec, and just give me the hard facts. What do I miss out on (peripherals, software, whatever) if I go buy a mac?"<P>nNw I have only used Mac's at school and my knowledge of them and the software and hardware they support is limited. So I thought I would pose the questions here where I might actually get an intelligent response. I will then simply post any and all relevant responses back on the other board.<P>Looking forward to the answers,<BR>Jack<BR>
Please tell me the disadvantages of owning a Mac!
- Thread starter Jack in the Box
- Start date
- Status
The only problem I have with the Macintosh platform is the operating system. It's years behind everything else technically, and it's a little too "dummy-friendly" (by which I mean power is taken away from the user to prevent PEBCAK). I also would like to see lower prices, which admittedly has been Apple's trend over the last few years. The hardware is pretty good overall, especially now with the G4 (price/performance not so good but that should improve gradually).<P>If you'd like specific details about anything let me (and others) know.
Mmmm.<P>That is a toughie. Like i said, I am not to familiar with the major differences of mac compared to a PC.<P>Anything in particular you would like to expand on in relation to the original question posed?<P>Jack
JitB, the first question almost always is going to be "well what do you want to do with it?" How can you argue which platform is a better match for you when you don't give some kind of idea as to what your needs are? Anyone that tries to sell you on a particular platform before finding out the answer to that question should be looked upon with suspicion, IMHO.
I use a G3 mac here at work, and the one thing that always bugs me about it is when I surf the web, it seems that the majority of the Net is geared towards Windows. Seeing as how the PC dominates the market, it's understandable. <P>One example is Trivial Pursuit Online. I play it at home all the time, but on this Mac it is impossible. When you go to the site a box appears apologizing, but the game will not run on the Mac OS. Now I'm not going to play this at work, but if I had a Mac at home I would be disappointed. I'm sure others can offer up stronger examples.
If you are a gamer, there's really no reason at all to go with a Mac. There are many, many more video cards for the PC versus a Mac, which only have two or three 3d choice- ATI cards (which have poor drivers on both platforms, and are generally underperformers), And 3dfx Voodoo cards. There are no NVIDIA cards for the Mac.<P>The operating system on a Mac is incredibly horrible. It's awful- bug-ridden, slow, with technology that sucks. When MacOS X comes out, that might change. But both Windows 98 and NT trounce it completely, and they are available now. OS X should be out by summer, so we'll see how it stacks up then. Windows 2000 is due out by March, but I'll reserve my judgement of it versus the Macintosh until it actually comes out- to be fair with OS X comparisons.<P>The PowerPC G4 chip is more expensive then Intel or AMD chips, and it's also quite a bit slower- the fastest G4 available is 450 mhz. While many standard PC parts are used in Macs, the motherboards and chipsets are quite expensive- the PC has Macs trounced in every single area except notebooks, in which the G4's lower power consumption makes it a winner. <P>Basically, Macs are overpriced and crippled, the latter due to their crappy OS. The former can't be helped, but you can definitely buy a faster PC for the money, and a faster one period. If you are getting a laptop, I think they are much more competitive. (I'm not sure who wins, though)<P>Oh yeah, and it's possible to buy all the components of a PC separately and build it yourself- plus, you have a choice of thousands of PC vendors, so you will find one customized exactly as you like, or you can build one exactly as you like it. With Macs, you MUST buy from Apple. There's also a larger selection of operating systems for the PC, including MS Windows, Linux, xBSD, and BeOS, for starters.
Jack.<P>You miss out on playing Half Life.<BR>You miss out on TNT2 Video Cards.<BR>You miss out on amazingly cheap (in every sense of the word) hardware.<BR>You miss out on configuring your COM ports.<BR>You miss out on the Registry.<BR>You miss out on a 2 year buying cycle.<P>Dependant upon your needs any one of those might lead you to buy a PC.<P>Then again they might lead you to buying a Mac.<P>Just one more note:<BR>If someone starts telling you that Mac's are slow because they only "go" at 450 mhz - stop listening. He has no understanding of how speed is measured across chip families.<P>[This message has been edited by Roman A'Clef (edited January 25, 2000).]
"Stick the loyalty in your watch pocket for a sec, and just give me the hard facts. What do I miss out on (peripherals, software, whatever) if I go buy a mac?"<P>As dent asked, "well what do you want to do with it?" This question is very important.<P>But I'll try to answer to the best of my ability.<P>You miss out on alot of crap. (please read on before flaming)<P>Because the Wintel (I prefer Wintel over PC, because the Mac is also a Personal computer) market is so large, the crap market is also large. <P>By crap, I'm referring to the dirt cheap games, components, cameras, printers, etc. that exist. Now to be fair, some of these exist on the Mac side just not as many.<P>I really have a hard time, trying to figure out the real differences.<P>True, you can get a Wintel for cheap, but you get what you pay for. A high-end Dell is not that much cheaper than a similarly configured Mac.<P>True, you can run 3DS and Authorware only on a Wintel (the real reason I own a Dell), but Mac has Cinema 4D and Director (you'll need the Wintel for cross platform titles with Director). (Very similar in capabilities) Lightwave is available on both as is Strata Studio Pro. There are some cheaper solutions on the Wintel side, but if you're serious, they aren't worth it.<P>Honestly, it's probably easier to find support for the Wintel, but it's just as hard to find <B>good</B> support for either. <P>As for the OS I find either equally easy/hard to use. So that is totally up to the individual.<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR><I>Originally posted by Ozguid:</I><P>The operating system on a Mac is incredibly horrible. It's awful- bug-ridden, slow, with technology that sucks. When MacOS X comes out, that might change. But both Windows 98 and NT trounce it completely, and they are available now. OS X should be out by summer, so we'll see how it stacks up then. Windows 2000 is due out by March, but I'll reserve my judgement of it versus the Macintosh until it actually comes out- to be fair with OS X comparisons.<P>The PowerPC G4 chip is more expensive then Intel or AMD chips, and it's also quite a bit slower- the fastest G4 available is 450 mhz. While many standard PC parts are used in Macs, the motherboards and chipsets are quite expensive- the PC has Macs trounced in every single area except notebooks, in which the G4's lower power consumption makes it a winner. <P>Basically, Macs are overpriced and crippled, the latter due to their crappy OS. The former can't be helped, but you can definitely buy a faster PC for the money, and a faster one period. If you are getting a laptop, I think they are much more competitive. (I'm not sure who wins, though)<P>Oh yeah, and it's possible to buy all the components of a PC separately and build it yourself- plus, you have a choice of thousands of PC vendors, so you will find one customized exactly as you like, or you can build one exactly as you like it. With Macs, you MUST buy from Apple. There's also a larger selection of operating systems for the PC, including MS Windows, Linux, xBSD, and BeOS, for starters.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Ok JitB,<BR> This above post is EXACTLY the kind of post that you DON'T want to pay any attention to. Notice the <B>extreme</B> bias and slant. I use both a Mac and a PC running Win98. You will never architecturally notice the difference between MacOS and Win98...errr well there's one difference Win98 multitasks a little better but I couldnt' say that this is a good feature to base a platform decision on. Ignore anyone who uses "suck" when describing an OS. Macs use the PowerPC processor. It's strength is it's low power consumption, meaning it can be used in Portables and it's a very efficient design. A G4/450 machine will feel as quick as a 700MHz Pentium III or Athlon. However overall it will be slower but not by much we're talking stopwatch timing kind of differences. I built my PC and believe me it's nice to choose every component but if it's your first system go with a reputable maker that offers a great warranty. Already i've had my CD player go out and my graphics card, both from decent companies but they're electonics it does happen. Guys like Ozguid are NOT they guys you want to get information from. Why on earth would you want to run all those OS's (which BTW can all be run on a Mac). If you're even slightly familiar with Macintosh my recommendation would be to stay with Apple. PC's are inexpensive and if you decide you want to try PC's there's always that option. Many devices like Printers and Scanners and cameras run on both plaforms so that's no problem. There are plenty of apps available on both platforms with games being dominant on PC's hope this has helped.<P>[This message has been edited by hmurchison (edited January 25, 2000).]
Yeah the only real sucky thing about a Mac, IMO, is the gaming market.<P>Unless you buy something that was a hit on the PC and was ported over (after waiting a year), most Mac games suck big time.<P>This is especially true if you have a specialty niche of games that you are a fan of-- like realistic racing simulators (Gran Prix Legends, nascar), Golf, Flight sims, etc. The Mac market seems to get stuck with a few PC hits and a boatload of amaturish garage productions. <P>That's why I bought a PC -- they're great game machines (although PC games are a hell of a lot more buggy then console games)<P>
Hmurchison: I can run Windows and BeOS on a mac? Disregarding quite old versions of Windows NT that could run on PowerPC CHRP computers (not macs), you can't run Windows at all. BeOS only runs on pre-G3 computers, sadly enough.<P>But it's true, Macs cost more then PC's, even when you take into account performance differences- A 450 Mhz G4 is _NOT_ faster then a PIII or Athlon 700. Don't fool yourself into thinking it's not.<P>I don't see why my post was so biased. I think Macs suck, so what? I've used plenty of them for a long time, so my opinion is VERY informed. And Windows 98 is not "a little stabler then MacOS", it's a whole crapload more stable. There are tons of advantages.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR><I>Originally posted by Jack in the Box:</I><BR>That is the subject heading at one of the message boards on MTBR.com (Mountain Bike Review). The question he poses is:<P>"Stick the loyalty in your watch pocket for a sec, and just give me the hard facts. What do I miss out on (peripherals, software, whatever) if I go buy a mac?"<P>nNw I have only used Mac's at school and my knowledge of them and the software and hardware they support is limited. So I thought I would pose the questions here where I might actually get an intelligent response. I will then simply post any and all relevant responses back on the other board.<P>Looking forward to the answers,<BR>Jack<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>The real question is: <B>what exactly was on your mind that you want to do or accomplish or purpose in buying a computer?</B><P><BR>--treatment--
Well my biggest thing is the technology in the OS.<P>1. MacOS lacks preemptive multitasking. Instead it uses something called "cooperative multitasking" which is really a synonymn for "no multitasking." Basically it leaves control of the CPU up to the application. This allows any program to monopolize the processor and cause the system to be unresponsive. An OS with preemptive multitasking, such as Windows NT/2000, retains full control of the processor(s) at all times. It tells applications when they can use the CPU, and when their turn is over. Each unit of time is divided up and parceled out to each program that wants a turn with the CPU. The net result of this is vastly improved performance, responsiveness, and stability across all applications. Additionally, the system reserves the right to take control if something goes wrong, so you are never left with a frozen computer. You can always kill offending tasks if they get out of control.<P>2. Lack of support for multiple processors. Any real workstation should have SMP support without question. This does not mean only that the OS will simply run on a computer with multiple processors. It means that the kernel and system services are designed to divide themselves between multiple CPUs for maximum processing efficiency. It also means that the system automatically schedules application threads across multiple processors. So when I spawn threads in my program, the OS automatically schedules the additional thread(s) across multiple CPUs if that is the most efficient configuration. Windows NT/2000 has this capability, but MacOS (and the Win9x) does not.<P>3. Protected memory. PM is an OS feature (with help from the hardware) that prevents one application from writing on the memory of another, or of the system. An OS with PM monitors the actions of programs and forcefully terminates them if they attempt to violate the memory space of another application. In Windows, this is known as an Access Violation (AV). Most people think AVs are bad, but the alternative is much worse. PM is yet another feature absent from MacOS. I could write a program in ~15 lines of code that would purposely write all over the system software's memory space and completely crash the machine. Windows would not allow this to happen - my program would simply be shut down and I would be informed that it caused an AV. OS control of the memory space is not something to brush off, it is a vitally important piece of a modern OS.<P>I have a couple of other beefs with MacOS, such as security, but I don't really have time to write more.<P>Now, before the flaming starts, MacOS X is scheduled to ship with all of the above features. I haven't used the developer's release myself, so I cannot comment on the quality of the implementation it will have. Being Mach-based, I imagine it will be pretty good. Until the product ships, we won't know for sure. Windows 2000 will be on shelves Feb. 17, and I guarantee you it will AT LEAST equal OS X in terms of performance, stability, security, TCO, compatibility, accessibility, and scalability. I know this from intimate personal experience. Windows 2000 kicks ass.
On a fast enough Mac I can run VirtualPC and toss NT on the top easy. I saw a guy running NT on VPC and a NT Database just fine. He said NT ran better than 98 on VPC which I believe(provided you have enough memory).<P>I didn't say that a G4/450 would beat PIII or Athlon 700's always I merely said it would "feel" as quick as an Athlon or PIII. I EVEN said it would overall be slower. At least I'm being as honest as I can.<P>My point is, your post sounds like you haven't had any "Recent" experience with Macs. Sure you may have used an old Quadra here and there but It's not the same. You resorted to making bold claims that weren't backed up with any proof...just conjecture. That's all. If you think Macs suck then you think they suck but you also have to realize when doling out opinions to someone looking for purchasing info that THEY are not like you and what meets YOUR needs may not meet theirs. You have lots of knowledge no doubt but I don't know if you could "sell" someone basically.
OK, here's the #1 reason peaseas rule and macs drool:<P>My friend has a mac and he uses that "hotfiles" crap botware to find software on the cheap (ie free). It has a terrible interface and he's constantly at the mercy of guys with porn sites who make you play games clicking on banners and tracking down hidden passwords to get into their server.<P>Just go to a decent newsgroup server and look at all the great PC software. I don't mean crap, either - Premiere, AfterEffects, CuBase, Acid, Maya. This may be strictly illegal, but the fact is it's there. Thus, you can learn to use incredibly powerful software on a wintel box that would likely cost tens of thousands of dollars on a mac, simply because of all the copy protection and time-limited demos inherent to the mac world. In the PC world, if it's worth having, it's zero-day, baby!<BR>
The GUI is ugly, they crash a lot, the software section in any given computer store is usually miniscule and I'm not interested in having a religion, just a computer.
Do you mean *Hotline*?? There are clients/servers available for both Mac OS and Windows, and its the easiest thing in the world to use. There are even search engines available for it. Sorry....<P>I use Macs more than PC's, but find myself in front of a Windows box often enough to know shit. Sure the Mac OS lacks SMP, but most users aren't going for multi-proc machines anyway. And no protected memory? It blows goats, but I still find my Macs crash no more often (in fact, much less often) than my Win95/98 machines. Of course, your results may vary. But i don't think that for consumers (or even for graphics pros) these limitations force you to go get a PC. Macs are more than usable for most stuff.<P>Serious limitaions? Lack of supported hardware in many fields. Then again, it does depend what you want. A new top-o-the-line AGP card may not have Mac OS drivers available for months afteer release. Then again, there are occasions where the mac has the advantage: if your in the music field for example, the Mac is a far better choice. And for most 3D/video applications, Mac OS and NT are equal (as good as you can get on consumer hardware, that is).<P>So it depends.... target market and target application. Personally, i find the mac UI cleaner, and applications interact better. But I use both anyway.<P>[This message has been edited by a blindmouse (edited January 25, 2000).]
price.<BR>dell vs apple<P>dell and apple both have<BR>64 megs of ram, 10 gig drive, dvd drive, 56k modem, 10/100 base t ethernet(apple's default fast configuration)<P>dell is $1064 and it also includes a pentium 3 500 and a printer<P>mac is 1599<BR>350 mhz g4<P>so the mac is 600 dollars more. is it worth it?<P>now for the high end(fastest, but i took out the dvd ram and the iomega zip drive).<P>dell and apple both have:<BR>256 megs of ram, 27 gig hard drive<P>dell is $2456 and had DUAL 500 pentium 3, tnt 2 video card<P>the apple is 3099 and has 450mhz g4 and a dvd drive (purchasable for 60 bucks online), so the difference is 600 dollars.<P>now, i don't know, but at both ends, it seems that the price/performance ratio isn't so great on the mac.<P>Ted<P>note: This was posted by me on posted January 13, 2000 15:58, so i hope that the prices haven't changed on me.<P>if they can both get the job done, why not get it done for 33% less?
Plus Dell computers can play DVDs. View image: /infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif<BR>Check it out. <P>[This message has been edited by Onyx (edited January 25, 2000).]
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR><I>Originally posted by Detnap:</I><BR>price.<BR>...<P>if they can both get the job done, why not get it done for 33% less?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Uhmm, but mac-buyers get that really excellent hockey-puck yo-yo of a mouse! I think they can justify the $600 difference you mentioned by that alone. I'm not even gonna mentioned that really racy ATI video-card, that space-age keyboard, and that ultra-cool grip-handles on the g3/g4 chassis. Uhhh, I just did, didn't I?<P> View image: /infopop/emoticons\icon_wink.gif<P><BR>--treatment--<P>
Yeah, that mouse is soooo cool.<BR>And ATI grafix-card...what can I say?! As Dan would put it: those ATI-ppl sure "know thier shit"! View image: /infopop/emoticons\icon_wink.gif<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR><I>Originally posted by Roman A'Clef:</I><BR>You miss out on amazingly cheap (in every sense of the word) hardware.<BR><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Speak for yourself. The hardware I buy is inexpensive, but it is by no means "cheap".<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR><BR>You miss out on configuring your COM ports.<BR>You miss out on the Registry.<BR><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Survey time for all Windows users - When was the last time you have done either one of these things? I haven't messed with COM ports since Windows 3.1, and haven't touched my registry in over a year - with the exception of running RegClean which is an automatic process.<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR><I>Originally posted by Dan:</I><BR>The GUI is ugly, they crash a lot, the software section in any given computer store is usually miniscule and I'm not interested in having a religion, just a computer.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Dan do us a favor and SHADAAAAAAP!<BR>
I had to remove one of my COM-ports in order to get a IRQ that my NIC would accept. Stupid card kept telling me that "These occupied(sp?) IRQ's are available, but those free IRQ's are occupied!". But this was a case of "cheap" H/W.<P>I've also had to fiddle with the COM's for a portable. But this was a case of <B>bad</B> computer-manufacturer(big Q).<P>Only wisit the register when doing some "heavy" tweeking.(haven't done so lately)<P></poll>
Just a note. If you're going to compare the low-end Dell, compare it to a low-end Mac. Just to be fair.<P>An Imac DV:<P>64MB of RAM<BR>10GB HardDrive<BR>DVD Drive<BR>10/100 Enet<BR>56K modem<BR>G3/400<P>$1294<P>that's only $200 more than the Dell and it includes the 15" monitor.<P>BTW, this is for EasyRhino, I've been running Dual Processors in my Mac for over a year now. I realize that the OS doesn't support it outright, but DayStar (RIP) wrote a nifty little patch that let this work with the 604e chip. I will admit it's not the best MP machine, but it works.
Laner,<P>In regard to your quick poll:<P>Reconfigure the COM ports? Never. I leave them at their defaults. I've never had an instance to set COM2 as an infrared port, either. <P>Registry? Never had to dick with it to fix a problem. I have opened it and looked at it. Under NT, I change the registry setting for the location to search for the I386 folder -- because I copy the folder to the hard drive, and this change negates the need to insert the WinNT CD when installing services! But that change is something I choose to do myself, and it's certainly not needed for every user.
<BR>Detnap,<BR>if you are going to try and play these stupid pricing games, you need to at least give more info, like maybe a url to get to the exact configuration.<P>I have had to drudge through crap like this before, and it always turns out that the Mac runs from 5% cheaper, to 15% more expensive; once care is taken to really match the systems. The real advantage to the PC is being able to pick what you want and don't want.<P><BR>And yeah JinB, Ozguid is pretty darn biased. TO a point of making himself inconsequential. The rest of the posts seem to do a pretty good job of describing the situation.<P>
Uhh resteves you had to run through this crap before and you ended up with PC 15% cheaper with higher quality sound and video. I also went out of my way to get identical parts otherwise, like spending extra for one stick of ram instead of two. I also had a better proccessor. You also don't want to try this now with G4's sitting at the same price and speed for 3 months with AMD and Intel moving on.<P>
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR><I>Originally posted by stephenb:</I><BR>BTW, this is for EasyRhino, I've been running Dual Processors in my Mac for over a year now. I realize that the OS doesn't support it outright...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>...which is exactly what I said the important part was. Multiproc doesn't do you much good if the OS doesn't use anything but proc0.<P>
hey abg, would that registry entry be located at \HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\WindowsNT\CurrentVersion\SourcePath?
elevate: That would certainly be it. Of course, I'm lazy so I just launch regedit and search for 'sourcepath' -- that works great if you do it before installing apps, since they put in their own SourcePath key. View image: /infopop/emoticons\icon_wink.gif
OK, here's the example I've used for quite a while:<P>A Mac is like buying a SounDesign stereo system. It has all the components in one box; you plug it in, and it works. However, if you want to use a component other than one that SounDesign makes, or other than the ones that came in your particular model, you are out of luck.<P>A PC is like buying a Carver amp, Pioneer tuner, Sony CD-player, Aiwa tape deck, ADC equalizer, Toshiba turntable and Infinity speakers. It is going to be a pain in the ass to set up, but when you are done, it is exactly what you want, if a bit more difficult to control. Also, you can swap out components as new things come along.
Yeah, what she said. Roman a clef seems totally ignorant and sucked in by the propaganda Apple puts out there. Get a clue.<P>
Gee dan and you're just a tower of openmindedness.<P>I see two Ad hominem attacks in your post but no actual points. Would you like to actually say something or are you going to continue with your off topic swipes?<BR><P>[This message has been edited by Roman A'Clef (edited January 26, 2000).]
Why anyone would use a Pioneer tuner, Aiwa tape deck, ADC equalizer, Toshiba turntable and Infinity speakers with a Carver Amp is beyond me. <P>Personally, I'd give up everything before I'd give up my Linn turntable, MangaPane speakers and Tascam tape deck. <P>As for comparing the Mac to SounDesign, you're completely flawed in your analogy. The Mac may be a closed system (although I don't know of anything that I'd want to install on my Wintel that I can't find available for my Mac) And true, I may have to pay a bit more, but you and I have different tastes and standards. (I'd sooner die than lay my original pressing of "Blueberry Hill" on a Toshiba turntable) But, the components tend to be of higher quality than those used in the Wintel world (this excludes you who prefer to roll your own) So comparing a stock Mac to SounDesign would put companies like eMachines down to a level that I couldn't comprehend. <P>The components that matter to me the most, (independent of the OS itself) are my hard drives Ultra-Wide SCSI Seagate Barracudas. (Cheetahs run a bit too hot for my taste) Same price Mac or PC. Adaptec Controller Same price. Boston Acoustic Speakers (it's a computer, the good speaker on on my stereo) Same price. Yamaha CD-R, same price. 2 RasterOps 19" monitors (I've always preferred the Hitachi tube) same price. UPS, same price. All my network switches, same price. etc. <P>As you see, once you get past the cost of the base system. The costs really tend to even out.
"the components tend to be of higher quality than those used in the Wintel world"<P>There are more choices in the Wintel world. With a wider choice, some will be worse than what's available on the Mac. That's why there are brand choices (after all, Dell didn't get that big by being cheapest).<P>I don't go along with this. I can pick a company going for the absolute lowest price, or I can pick someone like Dell and get high-quality components and still come in lower than a Mac.
Sorry if my point wasn't clear.<P>I took offense to the comparison of Macs to SounDesign and Wintel to Carver. (I'm talking hardware only)<P>This is seriously flawed logic. And I don't think that anyone out there wouldn't agree with me.<P>I didn't say that Macs were the best hardware, and I didn't say that all Wintel boxes were crap. My point was that, if we were to take every computer ever made and compare the hardware. The Mac would be in the upper end with Dell. But, there is a lot of crap out there on the Wintel side. Much more than there is good.<P>I used to build these things (4 months, part-time job) and we would use whatever the owner could get the best deal on. Half the time, when the buyer would bring it back we'd end-up telling them some bull about a software problem, that they had caused and replace a crappy component with another crappy component. I left because I hated lying to people and taking their money. Especially for only $4 an hour. <P>A couple years back, (okay, maybe more than a couple) I bought a Mac SE and a AST 286. I can't remember offhand, but they were pretty similar in price. The 286 died and was replaced with a 386 (died), then a 486 (died). Then a Pentium Pro which is still around sitting with a Pentium II and III. The SE was complemented by a IIc1, then a 6100, then a 7100, then a UMax S900, then a PowerBook. All of which are still in use today, including the SE. I think that has alot to say about the quality of a Mac.
- Status