Their hardware is decent (not excellent, but decent) on the quality factor
Who builds better quality hardware than Apple?
Who builds better quality hardware than Apple?
Externally, they are designed very nicely, and the internals of the desktops have always impressed me. I'd love to see something else similar come along. The closest I can remember is the old MIPS-based SGIs.
"To argue against an idea honestly, you should argue against the best arguments of the strongest advocates." - http://lesswrong.com/lw/lw/reversed_stupidity_is_not_intelli...
Rephrase the question, then, who makes better laptop hardware than the Aluminium Unibody MBP?
Or are we forced to accept Apple's business model as a given, just like Microsoft fought against the netbook pricing model because it began to make their OS pricing look ridiculous?
That's why the "it just works" attitude is very powerful amongst the almost entire population for whom replacing hardware is a really huge deal, because they
a) have to be without their stuff for the time it takes for the computer repair guy to fix it, and b) because they're scared pantless that their stuff will have been destroyed.
If you're not in the know, broken computer _might_ mean loss of data. That thought means loss of sleep.
Are you
a) defining or redefining "quality" to so that a cheap item can be considered high quality because it can be replaced cheaply?
b) avoiding answering the question of who makes a better laptop hardware than the unibody mbp because you can't suggest any company and don't want to admit that
c) you think I am refusing to see some obvious and relevant point because I'm an apple fanboy or that I am just being obtuse
d) other ( insert answer here )
But, and this is where it gets interesting, you can do the same in the opposite direction and conclude that a motorbike is just a really crappy bicycle because it's heavy, expensive etc.
You could say the same about most web apps versus their desktop equivalent.
So, to a lesser degree, a laptop designed within the constraints of a factor of 4 price difference, perhaps with mobility (and all the many non-obvious things that mobility entails, like the iBooks being designed to be put in student backpacks and so not having little breakable flaps covering ports) being paramount are going to be faced with very different set of engineering trade-offs. I think it's simplistic to say that the Apple one has greater quality if you don't take that into account. (Especially when their expensive material choices seem to regularly kill wireless signals, that's a quality and engineering factor too).
Apple themselves have said that they don't know how to build a cheap netbook that isn't crappy (I think that's almost a direct Jobs quote) so I don't see why they should be getting plaudits for sitting out a market that they've decided is difficult, when you're calling out the folk who actually make products for their lack of quality. I think it's a good business move for them, and I'd continue to buy their products as I have for years, if I couldn't get something much, much cheaper, that does the same thing (and often a few more things) and doesn't lock me in to a series of interlocking, expensive purchases within their ecosystem. What locks-in their users, also locks out people like me.
I still use that ThinkPad (well minus the new motherboard) on my electronics bench, but to say that its on par with the iPhone or Mac Pro in terms of quality is laughable. The whole thing looks and feels like its made out of recycled plastic. Its so ugly it looks rugged.
And I still love the damn thing... go figure.
Wait, I thought that Apple was the eco-conscious company.
Same as mine. Replaced with MacBook Air, without regrets.
I found a 1990s Thinkpad in my desk at work. It's makes for an excellent step ladder.
On the other hand my iPod has already got three scratches in it. One was because my keys were in my pocket (which I do all the time with my cell, without any issues) the other when when I dropped it two feet (of my bed, and not on purpose).
Sure the iPod stuff is nice, but I wouldn't rely on it for actual work.
It is more durable than cheap PC hardware though, which is why I called it middle-of-the-road in terms of durability.
But I still massively prefer the aesthetics and designs of Apple's hardware. I do not see why you couldn't design a Toughbook-type machine with sparse Apple-like aesthetics. In fact, it almost seems like it would make it easier... fewer connectors and buttons means less points for liquid entry, eliminating extra drives means fewer moving parts, etc.
If I ditched Apple for Linux, I'd probably take a look at the Sony Vaios... they're pretty sparse and seem well made.