Anyone using Mac?
 

Anyone here using Apple's Airport Express, Airport Extreme or Time Capsule? Are they reliable, and work as advertised?

they are just standard wireless routers

more of Apples sneakiness by selling normal things with obscure names.

Get yourself a d-link 655.

I have a mac and I don't buy anything that I don't need. Unless you're a trend following loser, there is no need to buy everything mac for your mac.

I use the Time Capsule to run Time Machine backups for our 4 Macs... quite useful! :) Also works as a regular storage/file server. Quite reliable, though sometimes it pops up with a DNS server issue.

I want to upgrade the HDD though. 500GB is not enough when you have 4 Macs! Hehe.

So yes, they work as advertised.

I don't consider any backup system with a single drive that reliable.

I use airport extreme, works well, it's dual band so there's no interference. I got a macbook pro, a iMac, a mac mini, ps3, wii, 360, and a three other pcs.
Posted via RS Mobile

I was going to start looking for a new router, as mine is an old one. Of course the Apple products are not the only ones I'm looking at. The Time Capsule is supposed to use a server grade HD, but it apparently runs a bit hot, which may affect long time reliability. The Airports also seem to use high grade components. The price is not an issue, because I get wholesale pricing from Apple at work.

yeah but whats the wholesale pricing on an Apple product vs every other company?

What? Do you mean mark-up percentage? That would depend on the product...it's shitty on the Macs, but better on the Airport, iPods & accessories.

I'm talking about the wholesale price you get on the Apple products, vs whatever wholesale/retail price you get on another brand. I know any apple product costs a lot more than it's really worth but is it apple or the retailers doing this?

Do you not get wholesale prices on other products?

Don't get sucked in man. I've seen some very good people turn into complete assholes/Apple freaks.

It's industry wide. Mark-up on computers can be as low as 2% on the PC side. Macs are a bit better because you are forced to sell at a certain price, but not by much. Accessories can be marked up much more. That Firewire cable you buy at Futureshop for $29.99 actually cost them way less.

I can, but we're not an authorized dealer for other brands per se, although we are able to special order Toshiba, Sony, & HP. We are an authorized Apple dealer though. I'm just trying to keep an open mind. In the end I'll get whatever product that best suits my needs.

I'm sensing a general negativity towards Apple here...? An Apple fanatic is no different from a Windows fanatic. You just get the system that you like best.

What I figured. So it is Apple that chooses to charge an inflated price for the same hardware. I know the markup on accessories is rediculous, never buy wires retail.

The thing about Apple fanatics is generally they know nothing about the actual technology. Like my friend who told me to buy a Mac because itunes crashed my PC and didn't understand why I laughed at her. Or the other one that told me to buy a Mac and use Safari because it's secure and Macs don't get viruses.

This is why Apple uses nonsense terms like "Airport Express" for their router. It's just a damn router, and a Mac will work with any other router just fine, but these clowns slap some made up name on it with their logo and double the price. That's BS. Personally I wouldn't have such a strong dislike for Apple if they didn't base all of their advertising/marketing on deceiving people who aren't tech savvy and boosting profits with stupid markups.

Yeah, Apple's advertising can suck in the less technical, I agree, and people do buy them based on their looks. You can't deny that their Mac Pro and Macbook Pro line are good products though for the creative professional. I bought my Macbook Pro because there simply wasn't anything better in the 17" workstation class range of laptops for my $3000 budget cap. I was close to getting an HP Elitebook, but they got too expensive when I spec'd them out to be similar to the Mac. The HP is thicker and heavier too, although HP's have accidental spillage and drop coverage. Apple has their stupid Applecare that costs $299 for 3 year coverage that does not cover accidental spillage or dropping. I just have to be careful. :p As a photographer who has to work with about a thousand 30MB+ RAW files after every wedding, fashion or product shoot, the wide gamut and high resolution screen is a godsend. It was a difficult decision, as I've been a PC user and Apple/Mac OS hater for the past 15 years, but I thought I'd give it a go. The learning curve has been steep, but it's working out ok....so far. I'm starting to like Snow Leopard more than XP (yes, I know XP is getting long in the tooth). I'm going to give Win7 a try though.

For photographers/anything where colour re-creation is key I can see where Macs step in, the colour etc on them is supposed to be superb as far as laptops go. Any other claims people have about Macs being superior for photo/video has seemed fairly false thus far though. I know my friends IBM is all but bulletproof (though it might be) but the screen looks terrible. My HP definitely comes short on the screen end of things as well but that's not what I got it for (the screen gets uglier every time I think about it haha)

You have no idea how wrong you are. Windows users just use Windows because that's what's best for them. Apple fanatics are ... different types of people.

I should mention the battery life. It's simply amazing. I work on the Macbook at work, as I can have two full pages of a spreadsheet or word processor open at once with legible text(!). Of course, I have the screen dimmed down and use aggressive battery management but at the end of the day I generally have 10% battery life left and that's after watching a downloaded episode of Top Gear during lunch! I don't bother taking the power adapter anymore. I do put the computer to sleep when I have to help clients, but I also use my computer for software demos if clients request it - in which case I switch to the dedicated graphics card. I haven't run out of battery power yet.

"Could you snag my latte for me? I have to go trim my goatee and adjust my beret before the poetry reading."

Ah, yes...IBM/Lenovo. Check out the W700 series monster "lap"top. A client had one...OMFG it's amazing. A 10" screen pops out from behind the 17" one so you can put all your palettes on the smaller screen and work on your main image without distractions. Built-in colour calibration AND a built-in Wacom tablet in the palm rest! The W700's screen shows 72% of the Adobe RGB gamut, which has been equaled by the newer Macbook Pros, but nonetheless when I first saw it I wanted it. Then I found out it cost him $5000. O.O

I've always wanted a Thinkpad... IBM used to have the best keyboards on the market. Don't know about now.

You need to look in the mirror...you sound like a Windows fanatic. :p

If both computers have the same or similar hardware & software, I honestly don't think there will be much difference.

I was referring to an older IBM, but now that you mention the new ones yeah it really is something. I was blown away when I saw the ad for a dual screen laptop, I too wanted one until I saw the price. Maybe one day when I'm rich and bored and they have a triple screen laptop or something haha.

That was my argument, since the hardware can be the same on both and the software is generally the same, the OS shouldn't have a very significant effect on the results.