Yeah, much like PC owners I expect everyone who owns a Mac doesn't play games.
Are we seeing a pendulum swing or are we seeing the end of PC?
- Thread starter infinix
- Start date
Yeah, much like PC owners I expect everyone who owns a Mac doesn't play games.
The end of PC?
Not anytime soon.
Desktops as we know them could be phased out though since technology existed for some time now to create just as powerful if not more powerful laptops (with decent cooling, that aren't bulky or huge).
The people who put the tech out into the market aren't stupid though. They will sooner milk us for all we're worth before phasing out desktops, and suddenly it's going to be 'revolutionary' that they were able to surpass desktops in such a 'small envelope'.
Lol... consumer tech is toying in obscurity for the most part, and prices for 'premium products' are extremely inflated even though there is no real justifiable way for them to be.
Anyway... in regards to Apple... quality hardware and software are very relative terms.
For one thing, I find Apple's OS confusing and too simplistic for my uses.
Whoever said that it's easy to work on an Apple OS must have forgotten that for any system, a person will have to spend a specific amount of time getting used to it.
Besides, I'm not an idiot to pay through the nose for a system which I cannot customize how I want or run things I need out of the box, with hardware that will be less powerful than a Windows one (and I had no problems assembling cheap computers that were long-lived either).
For the mobile market, Apple is actually in some aspects a better offer than the alternatives... predominantly because the GUI is hardware accelerated, and Android will only get that native support on smartphones with Ice Cream Sandwich release (Honeycomb not withstanding since it's tablets-only).
Plus the prices are a bit better compared to some 'high-end' mobile hardware (though still overpriced).
The major turn-off for me on iPhones is again the lack to customize the OS the way you want (though even that can be bypassed if you jail-break the phone - a process that can in some cases be tricky, and if you mess something up, the warranty goes out the window automatically).
Apple likes control.
I'm not saying Microsoft is automatically better, however, they do allow for a wider range in terms of 'freedom' when it comes to their OS.
When it comes to apple laptops on the other hand... you can kiss goodbye upgrading numerous components inside (apart from the RAM).
At least in majority of Windows based laptops, you can relatively easily change the RAM, CPU, HDD, and possibly the GPU (unless you have a soldered one).
The problem with current mobile market is that individual components can still be prices (the gpu's especially).
Not anytime soon.
Desktops as we know them could be phased out though since technology existed for some time now to create just as powerful if not more powerful laptops (with decent cooling, that aren't bulky or huge).
The people who put the tech out into the market aren't stupid though. They will sooner milk us for all we're worth before phasing out desktops, and suddenly it's going to be 'revolutionary' that they were able to surpass desktops in such a 'small envelope'.
Lol... consumer tech is toying in obscurity for the most part, and prices for 'premium products' are extremely inflated even though there is no real justifiable way for them to be.
Anyway... in regards to Apple... quality hardware and software are very relative terms.
For one thing, I find Apple's OS confusing and too simplistic for my uses.
Whoever said that it's easy to work on an Apple OS must have forgotten that for any system, a person will have to spend a specific amount of time getting used to it.
Besides, I'm not an idiot to pay through the nose for a system which I cannot customize how I want or run things I need out of the box, with hardware that will be less powerful than a Windows one (and I had no problems assembling cheap computers that were long-lived either).
For the mobile market, Apple is actually in some aspects a better offer than the alternatives... predominantly because the GUI is hardware accelerated, and Android will only get that native support on smartphones with Ice Cream Sandwich release (Honeycomb not withstanding since it's tablets-only).
Plus the prices are a bit better compared to some 'high-end' mobile hardware (though still overpriced).
The major turn-off for me on iPhones is again the lack to customize the OS the way you want (though even that can be bypassed if you jail-break the phone - a process that can in some cases be tricky, and if you mess something up, the warranty goes out the window automatically).
Apple likes control.
I'm not saying Microsoft is automatically better, however, they do allow for a wider range in terms of 'freedom' when it comes to their OS.
When it comes to apple laptops on the other hand... you can kiss goodbye upgrading numerous components inside (apart from the RAM).
At least in majority of Windows based laptops, you can relatively easily change the RAM, CPU, HDD, and possibly the GPU (unless you have a soldered one).
The problem with current mobile market is that individual components can still be prices (the gpu's especially).
Less Mac owners use Steam than PC owners? I really don't see a big mystery here.
Which is it, Confusing or Simplistic? If you are confused by the simplistic nature of Mac OSX, then you may have more issues. Just kidding, poking a bit of fun at your oxymoron.
Simplicity can be confusing:
1) Simplicity can come at the expense of making it hard to do more complicated things. For example, when all the complicated things are hidden away for simplicity's sake, you can be confused when trying to do something non-trivial.
2) Simplicity can hide the essence of what you're doing or make questionable choices on your behalf. PHP is a great example of “simplicity” that leads to extreme confusion and insanity.
3) Doing something significant with simpler means is more complicated than doing it with complicated means. Take language for example. Having more words and syntax makes the language more complicated, but makes saying things easier. Talking to a dog is more difficult than talking to a human because the language of the dogs is more simple and therefore more confusing.
Simple things require more previous knowledge and/or more work to be applied to complex problems.
1) Simplicity can come at the expense of making it hard to do more complicated things. For example, when all the complicated things are hidden away for simplicity's sake, you can be confused when trying to do something non-trivial.
2) Simplicity can hide the essence of what you're doing or make questionable choices on your behalf. PHP is a great example of “simplicity” that leads to extreme confusion and insanity.
3) Doing something significant with simpler means is more complicated than doing it with complicated means. Take language for example. Having more words and syntax makes the language more complicated, but makes saying things easier. Talking to a dog is more difficult than talking to a human because the language of the dogs is more simple and therefore more confusing.
Simple things require more previous knowledge and/or more work to be applied to complex problems.
That would be stupid.
Without knowing the details that judgment seems a bit premature.
I don't see what's so difficult to understand here? If 11% of the PC market is Macs but only 6% of Steam users uses Macs then Macs are underrepresented in the gaming community. All things being equal, you should see the same proportion on Steam as all computers. You don't. This means that a PC owner is more likely to play games then a Mac owner. That's my point.
I've already explained the reasons why I think that is, which is a much more interesting conversation than the one we're having now.
Except that you're talking about Steam and not gaming in general, so you're operating under a logical fallacy. I've been gaming on the Mac for years; only decided to check out Steam a few weeks ago and other than the Orange Box and possibly Portal 2 I have to say I see little use for it given the existence of the Mac App store. Could be that many Mac gamers feel the same, but weren't interested in anything exclusive to Steam?
Well good for you then! But all you've been doing for this entire little side argument is using your personal anecdotes to argue against any sort of statistics or facts that are brought to bare. Steam is the largest games digital distribution channel with ~30 million users. If Mac gamers are underrepresented there but are getting their games in larger numbers from other channels instead, surely you can demonstrate this with actual numbers instead of your personal anecdotes?
I think you need to mellow a bit my friend.
I responded to a post anecdotally stating that "Mac users don't game" by stating that I, a Mac user, do game. You have since been the one trying to make a case that less Mac users game than Windows users solely based upon Steam statistics, forgetting that unlike Windows-land, Steam has real competition on the Mac from Apple itself (which I've already pointed out).
If anyone needs to supply actual numbers to prove a point, it's you not me. I'm not making some grand statement about the number/percentage of Mac users who are gamers.
No, you're just running interference on any of the data actually presented without actually presenting any of your own other then your personal anecdotes. At this point, I don't even know what you're trying to accomplish.
Once again, Steam is the largest games digital distribution platform. If you have any hard evidence that Mac gamers are buying their games from other sources, then by all means please share it! Such a contribution of actual, hard data would surely help to mellow me out. Until that time I will be forced to make the reasonable assumption that the Steam userbase is representative of the entire gaming population... especially since games like Team Fortress 2 are still wildly popular in the gaming community and are only available on Steam.
Um, okay, you're going to completely discount the Mac App store out of hand because Steam is the biggest digital distribution point. Given that you haven't even established the Steam is bigger than standard boxed media distribution of games, I really see no point in engaging you further on this.
I seriously hope you don't work in the sciences or any other field in which cogent argumentation is required because your methodology is extremely poor.
I seem to remember this same exact topic coming up somewhere when the smartphone came out and/or when the Netbook came out. Everyone thought it was the end of the PC and it wasn't. I have seen a guy on a "desktop replacement" and it is a huge laptop. There are a lot of gamers out there and as long as they exist and want super PCs, the desktop will be around for a long time.
Because you've done such a good job at providing relevant hard data or anything beyond personal anecdotes!
In any case, establishing that Steam is larger then boxed retail is immaterial (of course it also isn't true). The point is that the Steam community is a representative slice of the gaming community at large. This is a safe assumption because of the very large following that games that can only be found on Steam... or at least, require Steam to play regardless of the purchase channel. I'd be perfectly willing to entertain the suggestion that the App Store is where Mac users are going instead if you could show me numbers to support that, which of course you didn't do. I said that at least once already.
So feel free to ride your high horse into the sunset, but in actuality your argument has been unscientific, biased and unsourced. You can make cutting remarks about what you think of my reasoning abilities but the reality is you're just stubbornly ignoring a reasoned argument because you don't like the conclusions and refusing to provide a counter argument backed up by evidence... and that's about as unscientific as one get. If I am really wrong then you should be able to prove it with hard data.
Or maybe you just need to mellow out?
And you keep forgetting that I'm not making an argument here, you're the one saying the proportion of Macs-owners who play games is lower than that of people who own Windows PCs solely on the basis of one online service. There's nothing to disprove here because your statement has no foundation to stand upon.
For all you know %5 of Steam members might be running Windows on Apple kit or running Steam in an emulator like Parallels, but I don't suppose you've considered that possibility or maybe that doesn't count because they use one OS for one thing and one for another?
There are heaps of things a PC can do that no other device can..
CAD? Photoshop? 3Dmax? what if I want to fit 6TB of diskspace? or a 3 way SLI/crossfire setup with 6 monitors?
And then there's the issue of power, no other device has the raw computing power, flexibility, a PC can be a database server if needed or a media PC or whatever else you need.
The PC isn't going anywhere, its what people want, its what people need...
CAD? Photoshop? 3Dmax? what if I want to fit 6TB of diskspace? or a 3 way SLI/crossfire setup with 6 monitors?
And then there's the issue of power, no other device has the raw computing power, flexibility, a PC can be a database server if needed or a media PC or whatever else you need.
The PC isn't going anywhere, its what people want, its what people need...
Some people, but a lot of what people use a desktop for can and will be supplanted by some other device. I think people will still have laptops and desktops, but that number will go down over time.
I know for my daughter I would rather get her an iPad than a laptop; the fact that it's a closed system would make it less likely I'd need to fix it and she'd get the same level of functionality out of it with the addition of a bluetooth keyboard.
So you don't believe that Steam is a popular gaming service that is representative of the gaming community? You don't believe that games like Portal 2 and Team Fortress 2 have large followings in the gaming community at large? For I think the third time now, due to the popularity of games on Steam I think it is a reasonable assumption to take its numbers to be a good sample of the gaming community on both platforms. All you've really done thus far is wave your hands around and say "no it isn't" without giving any reasonable argument as to why. And once again, I'm perfectly willing to drop the assumption if you can provide evidence that it is faulty beyond extending personal anecdotes.
Just so I'm clear here... do you believe that the percent of Mac owners who play games is the same as the percent of PC owners who play games? Or do you just have a problem with the structure of my argument and not the conclusion?
That's probably the first interesting point you've made in this entire line of discussion. If we're delineating between Mac and PC/Windows users, where do we put people who are running Windows on Mac hardware? My first thought is to not categorize them as Mac gamers because by switching OS's they're bypassing all the core issues with Mac games... bad ports, missing games, bad drivers, etc. But it's definitely a bit of a grey area for the purposes of this conversation.
I have no idea if the proportion is the same, but your reasoning is flawed and doesn't present a compelling argument.
Unless Steam is the only method of game distribution the only conclusion you can make from the percentage of Steam users that run OS X is that it's less than the percentage of computer users generally who run OS X. Any further conclusions are pure conjecture and without any foundation because of the existence of retail (Apple Store) and the Mac App store, both of which are significant competition for the hearts and minds of Mac users.
Sure so-called "core" gamers might know what Steam is, but I doubt Valve has gone far beyond that market in advertising itself.
Similar threads
