Guild Summit: Mac users better really want it...

[Kennkra]

Lol indeed. Nothing you said is actually true.

 

Developer licenses cost $100 each for OS X and iOS, per year. And you can develop anything you like on Macs, not just native apps. Unix apps, web apps, Flash apps and .. Gasp, yes, even Windows apps.

 

 

 

If you're seriously one of those "linux on the desktop 2012!" people, seek professional help now.

 

At home i've windows with a LINUX and Mac in a Virtual machine, and a mac mini siting in my desktop.

 

at work i have a mac pro server(runing several vms of it) and a PC with Linux & windows. But im a developer not a movie maker. i rly dont know what you are saying when u say "linux on the desktop 2012". But meh.

 

There are apple linces that cost 10 times more than that, and no, xcode doesnt have support for complicated things, like integrating DBs with a phone, calling a SAP RV to get the info on one of your clients and then printing it via wifi/bt/mail. Only if you are making that stuff for apple, but if you are using java for android & BB, php/.net/etc for webservices, ABAP & SAP for RVs and oracle DBs better get a PC. no support for sims other than iphone/ipad, etc.

Edited March 6, 2012 by Kennkra

[DarianRoze]

I almost bought a Mac Once. Yeah, the guy selling it even offered to throw in a Free Box of Paperclips so I could reset it when it needed it.

 

I decided to go with the Paperclip Free PC instead.

 

Best decision of my life.

[Kennkra]

I almost bought a Mac Once. Yeah, the guy selling it even offered to throw in a Free Box of Paperclips so I could reset it when it needed it.

 

I decided to go with the Paperclip Free PC instead.

 

Best decision of my life.

 

LoL i used to work with those g3 emacs 10 years ago xD

 

GL gettin a CD out xD

 

OK, this is it for me. Good luck getting a mac client (i seriously wish you good luck not trolling). ME3 at %99 xD

Edited March 6, 2012 by Kennkra

[Dayfax]

At home i've windows with a LINUX and Mac in a Virtual machine, and a mac mini siting in my desktop.

 

at work i have a mac pro server(runing several vms of it) and a PC with Linux & windows. But im a developer not a movie maker.

 

Good for you?

 

There are apple linces that cost 10 times more than that, and no, xcode doesnt have support for complicated things, like integrating DBs with a phone, calling a SAP RV to get the info on one of your clients and then printing it via wifi/bt/mail. Only if you are making that stuff for apple, but if you are using java for android & BB, php/.net/etc for webservices, ABAP & SAP for RVs and oracle DBs better get a PC. no support for sims other than iphone/ipad, etc.

 

Hey, I didn't say XCode was any good. But it does exist, and it is free. I'll grant you that it is primarily supposed to be used to develop native Mac software, but that shouldn't be a surprise (given that it was produced by Apple and, again: FREE).

 

First it was $2,000. A post later, half that. What Apple developer licenses cost $1,000? Throw me a link.

 

Web services, seriously? Better get a PC? Macs are based on BSD, run a crapton of *nix software and have Apache, Perl, Python, Ruby, and MySQL installed out of the box. You realize that the lead developers of Rails, for example, all use Macs, right? But everyone should be using PCs because ... ?

 

Let's review: you said Macs can be only be used to develop Mac software, and that licenses cost $2000. Both of those statements are demonstrably not true. So what was your point?

Edited March 6, 2012 by Dayfax

[Perik]

http://bitsandpieces.us/2010/04/29/pc-vs-mac/

 

Enough said.

[Toxen]

Many analysts (including market researchers from PC companies) predict that macs will out sell all PC brands in 2012. BW would be smart to "invest" in the Mac market by making a Mac client or AT LEAST a Mac port.

[MustrumRidcully]

The good aspect of having bootcamp is that you cannot just run TOR. You can run pretty much every Windows Game.

 

Of course, if you really love PC games so much, I question the wisdom of relying on Mac in the first place, but in the end, there can be lots of reason to use either system.

[kitharen]

I hate bootcamp. The only reason I installed it on my Mac has been TOR. I'd use a Mac client in an instant, would even be willing to spend another 60 bucks for it.

 

Note: I own a pretty decent PC capable of running TOR on highest settings, I just don't use it because I dislike Windows for private use.

[Lethality]

Macs are not meant for gaming - period. They don't have the ability to get the same gaming performance a PC can - Macs can't SLI or crossfire which is huge in gaming performance. Their processors are the lower end processors - the firs I5 and I7 processors in the macbooks and Imacs weren't even true quad cores - they were dual core hyperthreaded.

 

I thought I could be done with this thread, but I see the ridiculous flow of misinformed posters continues.

 

Here's what you need to know: It doesn't take anything close to current gen hardware to run TOR on max settings for everything. Fact.

 

And guess what - most Windows PCs that are the target of TOR cannot run the game on max settings. Fact. That's why they have multiple settings.

 

The last fact you need to know is that every single Mac w/ the exception of the Air more than meets the hardware specs for TOR. That means everyone who buys a Mac today (and in the past few years) is a potential TOR subscriber.

 

There is no other source BioWare could extract more new TOR subscribers from than the Mac market. And actually, that's the only fact you need to know.

[Lethality]

Not exactly. OEM software is sold to computer manufacturers and intended to be bundled with a brand new computer. It's not supposed to be sold seperately regardless the computer it will be installed on. It doesn't matter if you intend to install it on a Bootcamp partition or on a PC, if it didn't come with the computer you bought then the manufacturer of the OEM didn't intend for you to obtain the OEM license.

 

Regardless, it isn't illegal to purchase and install OEM software. There's no law whatsoever that prevents anyone from doing this.

 

$200 sounds more like the retail price than an OEM price. Buying either OEM software or hardware is almost always cheaper than buying retail since OEMs are usually purchased in bulk for steep discounts.

 

Anyway, a quick search just revealed an online store that sells all MS software (not OEMs but retail versions) at discounted prices. They had Win Vista priced at $50. So again, unless you simply must have the latest version for your Bootcamp partition there is money to be saved if you're looking for a copy of Windows to run the game.

 

 

 

It seems to make sense for BioWare considering how many of their games they've made available for Mac OS.

 

Sigh...

 

Here's everything you need to know about why you cannot install the OEM license on Boot Camp, and why Microsoft will not support you:

 

http://www.microsoft.com/OEM/en/licensing/sblicensing/Pages/licensing_for_hobbyists.aspx

 

And even right now, BioWare support turns a cold shoulder if you call them running TOR on Boot Camp. Call and find out for yourself, don't take my word for it.

[Ironspeed]

I dont care one bit if they do or dont port the game to mac, personaly I dont want one, I dont like mac os, and I dont like apple, it's a personal thing though.

 

But I doubt we'll see a native Mac client any time soon, between fixing the game and all, I think moving away from Directx is going to be though, main reason alot of the old bioware games comes with both I guess is the engine, AFAIK UE3 engine from ME series is opengl/directx compatible, not sure if heroengine is though...

[namoni]

Originally Posted by Iandayen

Just look at Pixar - they are owned by apple pretty much and they use Sun systems and Linux based systems for their rendering farms, and HP for their animation computers.

 

 

 

 

The fact that you're allegedly an "Apple tech" who just posted this in a public sphere should be deeply embarrassing, as it's wildly inaccurate on several levels.

 

It pretty much destroys the credibility of your entire post.

 

 

 

http://www.sun.com/smi/Press/sunflash/1997-05/sunflash.970506.1112.xml

http://www.pixar.com/howwedoit/index.html# Look at the 13th picture.

 

Sun Workstations such as those used by Pixar run an operating system called Solaris, which is a Unix-type OS. From the article cited above, the specifications on the Ultra 4000s used for Toy Story can be summarized:

 

 

The 48 Sun Ultra 4000 workstations that RenderFarm uses have the aggregate performance of 1,680,000,000,000 operations per second. Each system's compact enclosure (13.5" x 19.7" x 22") houses 14 processors. The upgraded RenderFarm system will consist of over 650 processors with more than 45 of the high-powered Sun multiprocessing computers working in unison to constitute a potent computer graphics rendering machine. The result will offer audiences a marked difference in the tones and textures of the animation in upcoming productions. In addition to the high-resolution final rendering, the enhanced RenderFarm will generate the test images animators need to plan and evaluate lighting, texture mapping and animation.

 

http://www.sun.com/smi/Press/sunflash/2001-11/sunflash.20011128.3.xml

In their latest efforts, which would include Finding Nemo and Ratatouille, they have upgraded their systems to use an array of Sun Enterprise 4500 servers, which are substantially more powerful than the 4000s.

 

 

 

Sources: Sun and Pixar

Edited March 6, 2012 by namoni

[SpearlikeAtom]

I wouldn't say a lot of users have Macs

[Lethality]

The denial and ignorance of players in this thread who do not comprehend the a) size of the Mac market b) the growth of the Mac market and c) the importance of both of those to an entertainment software developer and their plans for growth is... staggering.

 

Expanding into the Mac market is the single largest source of new subscribers that BioWare could gain. By far.

 

Don't worry, TOR on the Mac is coming.

Edited March 6, 2012 by Lethality

[Sheff]

You know, just for a laugh the other day I had a look on the Apple store to see how much an iMac Pro would cost with the spec of my PC.

I couldn't get an exact match as they only sold them with ATI cards as far as I could see. And ones that are below mine. I got pretty close in the end, but you know how much it would cost?

 

£8122.02

 

Yes you read that right. That is two and a half times the cost of my PC (which I built)

And you would still have to buy two more GPU's, a gaming mouse and keyboard and a new 120mhz monitor to be on par.

This is why pretty much any gamer (with any sense) will use a PC. Unless you want to pay and extra few thousand pounds to have a shiny Apple logo.

 

They are simply not cost effectove for gaming, everyone knows they are just rip-off merchants that over charge for hardware that is out of date.

 

I agree that there maybe some money to be made by dev's to try and get the Apple fanbois to play their games. but I doubt it is cost effective initially. Which I imagine is why there was no client made for release.

 

You can sit there till you're are blue in the face talking about the Mac markets "staggering" numbers, but my point is, most games are not released with a Mac client as it just isn't worth it from a business stand point. If it was, don't you think there would be far more PC games that were released that way?

 

Mac's are garbage for gaming, as I showed above it cost two and a half times more to get a decent one for that purpose. Developers know it, so does any gamer worth his salt.

Edited March 6, 2012 by Sheff

[Dayfax]

Sources: Sun and Pixar

 

Not what I was referring to.

 

The poster I quoted claimed that "Apple pretty much owns Pixar, yet..."

 

This is not true and was never true. Steve Jobs owned Pixar, which he bought from George Lucas. He was the largest single stockholder until Pixar merged with Disney, after which he became the largest single stockholder of Disney.

 

None of this has anything to do with Apple as a company.

 

Second, the poster implied that since Pixar uses *nix based servers for its rendering farms, that's somehow a mark against Apple. Of course Pixar uses *nix for its server farms. That's what everybody uses, outside of Microsoft and Microsoft based shops.

 

Making comparisons to professional grade server farms in the context of this thread is ludicrous. We're talking mostly about home PCs and gaming rigs, and this guy is talking about server farms used in the film industry. It's like comparing the John Deere tractors that Monsato uses on factory farms with the the riding mower you use to cut your front lawn.

 

Again, none of this has much to do with Apple, their products, or the topic at hand.

 

And this is coming from an "Apple tech" claiming he has some sort of technical background. It's laughable.

 

(Your post is interesting, though, because Sun went out of business 2 years ago).

[Apocalypsezero]

Many analysts (including market researchers from PC companies) predict that macs will out sell all PC brands in 2012. BW would be smart to "invest" in the Mac market by making a Mac client or AT LEAST a Mac port.

 

iPads are considered computers. It is the iPad that will out sell windows/android OS based machines but they do not have the power to run a game like SW:tOR.

 

edit: Yet. With the way technology is advancing I can see MMO's(if they survive) being played on tablets within the next 10 to 15 years. Maybe even less.

Edited March 6, 2012 by Apocalypsezero

[Prolyfic]

Omg is there is anything this thread has taught me its

 

PLEASE bioware anything to keep these stuffy mac ppl out swtor I am in full support for!

[misterME]

There is so much misinformation in this thread...

 

Here are some hard facts:

 

Malware

 

There are no Mac OS X viruses. There are a few trojans that work under Mac OS X running around, but they all require the user to be fairly stupid and not paying attention to even work. And even when they do, they can't do anything harmful to the OS.

 

Built on a Unix core, Mac OS X simply isn't as vulnerable as the hobbled-together Windows code. And the OS isolates the main parts of the system in such a way that a virus can't do on a Mac what it's designed to: replicate, spread, access hardware, etc.

 

And Macs are becoming safer all the time. New app requirements for Macs include sandboxing, which means even 3rd-party program code can only access hardware and file system functions that it's designed to. And the next OS, Mountain Lion, uses a program called Gatekeeper to avoid even the user-errors that allow trojans to do their thing.

 

I won't claim that the smaller market share of Mac has nothing at all to do with the fewer attempts at Mac malware. But more important than it's smaller marketshare is the fact that it's just damned hard to write malicious Mac code. The system is too smart, and users have to be practically brain-dead, to allow them to function as intended.

 

Hardware

 

There is a difference. Sure, at face value, the two systems look very similar. You can pull all the components out of a Mac and install them into a PC with no problem (assuming you can find Windows-compatible drivers for them, which you can if you look). This is why programs like Boot Camp work. It uses native Windows drivers for every piece of hardware in the system to run whatever version of Windows you want. But just because the specs of a PC you buy off the shelf at Best Buy for $899 are the same as the specs for the $1799 iMac doesn't mean it's the same hardware. Apple tests the hardware that goes into their systems rigorously for dependability, consistency, compatibility, longevity. You pop open a Mac, and you won't find last year's generic doodad that they could get from Korea for the cheapest price. You'll find what they know, through thorough testing, is the best fit, physically and functionally.

 

Price

 

You get what you pay for. Sure, that iMac costs $2600. Now open it up and look at all the parts (well, don't actually, or you'll void the warranty). Go buy a PC from Dell that has the same components (not just the same specs, but the same quality components), and you'll pay $1500 - $1600. Maybe more. "But that's $1000 less!!!" Sure it is. Now go buy a 27" 2560x1440 LED-backlit LCD monitor from Dell to go wit your PC. How much was it? $1000? Hmmm... So where's the cost savings?

 

Actually, for some models, Apple is a whole lot cheaper than the competition. Find a comparably-equipped and spec'd notebook sporting SSD and HD graphics as the 13" MacBook Air for $1399. Not...gonna...happen...

 

And resale? A $2000 PC is worth less than $400 after two years. A $2000 Mac? usually around $1400. You do the math.

 

User-Experience

 

You just can't understand this until you've used one for a time. But there is no comparison. I'm typing this on a 15" MacBook Pro running 10.7.3 (Lion). My browser is full-screen, encompassing one of 8 desktops currently open on my Mac. With one simple gesture and one tap (less than 1/2 second) I can move with ease between this, my email program (also running full-screen), my workspace for a presentation I'm building at work, my graphics editor (also running full-screen) producing graphics for my presentation, my primary desktop housing my calendar, the App Store (because I'm downloading some new software), and the dictionary app, and several other desktops running things like AutoCad (for floor plans I'm working off of for my presentation) and several clip-art browsers, amongst other things. It's seamless. No lag. I tap my trackpad, or swipe, and instantaneous results. Shortcuts in every program are unified (except for PowerPoint...frackin Microsoft). Menus always arranged the same way so I always know how to find something, even if I've never used the app before. I hit print and it prints out to an HP printer located several doors down, wirelessly, with 0 setup (opened "Printers" and there it was. Made it my default. No driver installation, no config). I could write pages about why Macs are superior to Windows machines in usability. The above just scratched the surface. Never mind in-line autocorrect, dictionary, thesaurus, and wiki-linking across the entire OS, or that it *never* crashes (according to my dashboard, my Uptime on this *notebook* is 65 days, 3 hours; I turned it off for the last long trip I took), or that it's been dropped twice and sat on once, with no adverse effects. Again, I could go on and on...

 

Gaming

 

The components are there. The latest iMac has an option for a 2GB AMD ATI 6970HD card, which is more than adequate to run SWTOR on max settings, at 2560x1440... All that's missing is the OS support. Which would require them to adapt the code for OpenGL. And that's why it hasn't been done.

 

But don't tell me there's no difference. There is a huge difference, and people are starting to notice. Sales of Macs have outpaced sales of PCs, year over year, for the past five years. Macs are gaining marketshare, and driving PC vendors like HP to leave the PC business. Marketshare for Macs is now over 10% in the US, and climbing yearly. More than 60% of the computers purchased last year for or by US college freshmen in August were Macs (not iPads; Macintosh computers and laptops).

 

I'm not criticizing you for not knowing. I was right there with you all 5 years ago. I thought Mac users were a bunch of elitist snobs that used inferior, overpriced computers just to be different. Then I was forced to use one at work. And within a month I'd given my home PC to my cousin, sold my Gateway laptop on eBay, and had purchased an iMac and MacBook Pro. They really are that much better, and you just will never know until you use one for a little while.

 

Apple is the most valuable company in the world. And it's not there by accident. Sure, their success of late had been driven by the iPad and iPhone. But customers who buy those devices are also buying into the Apple ecosystem, and tiring of the insecurity, incompatibility, and instability of the Windows platform. Macs are gaining marketshare. Bioware would be wise to note the trend and support the largest growing computer demographic in the world...

[astrocanis]

I have to ask, what advantage does Mac have over a PC that makes it worth the extra money spent on the Mac? Perhaps better for some professions out there?

 

There is no difference between a Mac and a PC other than: no bios on a mac and the bsd-like kernel is much lighter.

 

In almost all ways, technically OSX is a far superior O/S. The problem is market penetration and "custom". Microsoft won the ubiquity game. It's like McDonalds vs a steak in my mind.

 

Apple is not a software vendor. They started as a hardware vendor and O/S. Now they are a convergence vendor and Microsoft is chasing them as hard as they can.

 

Tell you what: run Windows 7 on a machine with 512MB of RAM and tell me how that works out. I have a Mac right now that is serviceable with OSX and has 512MB. Why do you suppose that is?

 

I use both, but, as a Unix programmer, prefer the Mac. Screen is better, resolution is better, interoperability is better, system resource usage is better, ability to code against is better.

 

I use Windows because I game. That is not a promotion for Microsoft, nor an indictment of Mac, at least technologically. It is a recognized fact that Microsoft has more mind-share (witness the anti-Mac posts here). That was caused by the fact that both Microsoft and Apple were rapacious towards their customer base and MS went out of their way to "sell" (even though they get a royalty for the "Windows Game" logo) their O/S to every Tom, Dick and Harry hardware vendor while Apple kept its nose firmly in the air and said "No compromise."

[Lethality]

There is so much misinformation in this thread...

 

Here are some hard facts:

 

Malware

 

There are no Mac OS X viruses. There are a few trojans that work under Mac OS X running around, but they all require the user to be fairly stupid and not paying attention to even work. And even when they do, they can't do anything harmful to the OS.

 

Built on a Unix core, Mac OS X simply isn't as vulnerable as the hobbled-together Windows code. And the OS isolates the main parts of the system in such a way that a virus can't do on a Mac what it's designed to: replicate, spread, access hardware, etc.

 

And Macs are becoming safer all the time. New app requirements for Macs include sandboxing, which means even 3rd-party program code can only access hardware and file system functions that it's designed to. And the next OS, Mountain Lion, uses a program called Gatekeeper to avoid even the user-errors that allow trojans to do their thing.

 

I won't claim that the smaller market share of Mac has nothing at all to do with the fewer attempts at Mac malware. But more important than it's smaller marketshare is the fact that it's just damned hard to write malicious Mac code. The system is too smart, and users have to be practically brain-dead, to allow them to function as intended.

 

Hardware

 

There is a difference. Sure, at face value, the two systems look very similar. You can pull all the components out of a Mac and install them into a PC with no problem (assuming you can find Windows-compatible drivers for them, which you can if you look). This is why programs like Boot Camp work. It uses native Windows drivers for every piece of hardware in the system to run whatever version of Windows you want. But just because the specs of a PC you buy off the shelf at Best Buy for $899 are the same as the specs for the $1799 iMac doesn't mean it's the same hardware. Apple tests the hardware that goes into their systems rigorously for dependability, consistency, compatibility, longevity. You pop open a Mac, and you won't find last year's generic doodad that they could get from Korea for the cheapest price. You'll find what they know, through thorough testing, is the best fit, physically and functionally.

 

Price

 

You get what you pay for. Sure, that iMac costs $2600. Now open it up and look at all the parts (well, don't actually, or you'll void the warranty). Go buy a PC from Dell that has the same components (not just the same specs, but the same quality components), and you'll pay $1500 - $1600. Maybe more. "But that's $1000 less!!!" Sure it is. Now go buy a 27" 2560x1440 LED-backlit LCD monitor from Dell to go wit your PC. How much was it? $1000? Hmmm... So where's the cost savings?

 

Actually, for some models, Apple is a whole lot cheaper than the competition. Find a comparably-equipped and spec'd notebook sporting SSD and HD graphics as the 13" MacBook Air for $1399. Not...gonna...happen...

 

And resale? A $2000 PC is worth less than $400 after two years. A $2000 Mac? usually around $1400. You do the math.

 

User-Experience

 

You just can't understand this until you've used one for a time. But there is no comparison. I'm typing this on a 15" MacBook Pro running 10.7.3 (Lion). My browser is full-screen, encompassing one of 8 desktops currently open on my Mac. With one simple gesture and one tap (less than 1/2 second) I can move with ease between this, my email program (also running full-screen), my workspace for a presentation I'm building at work, my graphics editor (also running full-screen) producing graphics for my presentation, my primary desktop housing my calendar, the App Store (because I'm downloading some new software), and the dictionary app, and several other desktops running things like AutoCad (for floor plans I'm working off of for my presentation) and several clip-art browsers, amongst other things. It's seamless. No lag. I tap my trackpad, or swipe, and instantaneous results. Shortcuts in every program are unified (except for PowerPoint...frackin Microsoft). Menus always arranged the same way so I always know how to find something, even if I've never used the app before. I hit print and it prints out to an HP printer located several doors down, wirelessly, with 0 setup (opened "Printers" and there it was. Made it my default. No driver installation, no config). I could write pages about why Macs are superior to Windows machines in usability. The above just scratched the surface. Never mind in-line autocorrect, dictionary, thesaurus, and wiki-linking across the entire OS, or that it *never* crashes (according to my dashboard, my Uptime on this *notebook* is 65 days, 3 hours; I turned it off for the last long trip I took), or that it's been dropped twice and sat on once, with no adverse effects. Again, I could go on and on...

 

Gaming

 

The components are there. The latest iMac has an option for a 2GB AMD ATI 6970HD card, which is more than adequate to run SWTOR on max settings, at 2560x1440... All that's missing is the OS support. Which would require them to adapt the code for OpenGL. And that's why it hasn't been done.

 

But don't tell me there's no difference. There is a huge difference, and people are starting to notice. Sales of Macs have outpaced sales of PCs, year over year, for the past five years. Macs are gaining marketshare, and driving PC vendors like HP to leave the PC business. Marketshare for Macs is now over 10% in the US, and climbing yearly. More than 60% of the computers purchased last year for or by US college freshmen in August were Macs (not iPads; Macintosh computers and laptops).

 

I'm not criticizing you for not knowing. I was right there with you all 5 years ago. I thought Mac users were a bunch of elitist snobs that used inferior, overpriced computers just to be different. Then I was forced to use one at work. And within a month I'd given my home PC to my cousin, sold my Gateway laptop on eBay, and had purchased an iMac and MacBook Pro. They really are that much better, and you just will never know until you use one for a little while.

 

Apple is the most valuable company in the world. And it's not there by accident. Sure, their success of late had been driven by the iPad and iPhone. But customers who buy those devices are also buying into the Apple ecosystem, and tiring of the insecurity, incompatibility, and instability of the Windows platform. Macs are gaining marketshare. Bioware would be wise to note the trend and support the largest growing computer demographic in the world...

 

 

I never do this, but... THIS ^^

[misterME]

iPads are considered computers. It is the iPad that will out sell windows/android OS based machines but they do not have the power to run a game like SW:tOR.

 

edit: Yet. With the way technology is advancing I can see MMO's(if they survive) being played on tablets within the next 10 to 15 years. Maybe even less.

 

Far less.

 

Tablets released in 2014 will have specs meeting or exceeding many high-end computers available today.

 

The iPad 3 is rumored (with a lot of supporting info) to sport a 2048x1536 resolution with full 3D capabilities...so I don't think graphics horsepower will be a problem.

 

We'll know for sure tomorrow...

 

Meanwhile, if someone wanted to, they could make a pretty in-depth MMO for iPads right now. There are already a few on the App store, but nothing to brag about...

[ounkeo]

I never do this, but... THIS ^^

 

Yes, and that completely disregards PC gamers own experiences as well as Anadtech who have tested it and bootcamped Macs get outperformed by the same specced PC counterpart.

 

But let's not let facts get in the way of shiny logos, a hip brand and being associated with the most profitable company on the planet. I mean those things = superior performance despite all the info out there?

 

In case anyone actually missed it, my mid 2011 Envy 17 with a 6850M outperforms the recent MBP's by about 15-20+%. But I don't know, information like that gets lost when people justify their very expensive purchases.

[Biytor]

Okay here's the truth...

 

Mac users bought a status symbol. Period. End of discussion. You bought a logo.

 

A PC can do everything a Mac can do at a 1/3 of a price. You bought an over priced status symbol to make yourself feel good about who you are. The other 90% of us with PC's just laugh at you. Then you come on a gaming forum and whine about not having the game programmed in OSX for you? If you can waste that much money on a Mac, then you can afford to buy a Windows OEM license.

 

 

Hell, the Mac population is so small, even the Russians won't write viruses for them. That's why there are no viruses for Macs, there's no profit in it. Not that the operating system is so robust, it isn't. There's no profit in it, the amount of Macs out there is too small to make any money at it.

 

 

So... Feel good about you purchase. If you've got that much money to waste, you're doing well.

[astrocanis]

 

Far less.

 

Tablets released in 2014 will have specs meeting or exceeding many high-end computers available today.

 

The iPad 3 is rumored (with a lot of supporting info) to sport a 2048x1536 resolution with full 3D capabilities...so I don't think graphics horsepower will be a problem.

 

We'll know for sure tomorrow...

 

Meanwhile, if someone wanted to, they could make a pretty in-depth MMO for iPads right now. There are already a few on the App store, but nothing to brag about...

 

That would completely blow the "ubiquity of MS" argument out of the water. I hope 'sooner'.