# Mac VS PC



## Jim F

I've never owned a Mac. People I know who do say "Once you go Mac you'll never go back." What I do know is that I'm fed up with the constant crashes, viruses, malware etc associated with PC. Both desktops I've owned, our laptop, out kid's laptops have all had problems. 

Are Macs really immune? Would love to hear from Mac and PC owners about this.


----------



## Scuba_Dave

I like Macs from the limited use I've had
Last one I had was OS 8.5
It was an older Mac tower - free

Macs do have problems, there are virus' out there
But the bad guys seem to target microsloth the most

If price were not an problem I would buy a Mac


----------



## awoo23

I've seen my gf's Macbook Pro crash before. I was surprised too because I thought that they were supposed to be crash-proof too.

The other thing I noticed is that I can't find any of the things I'm used to Windows. Like I couldn't figure out how to find where 'My Computer' was when I tried to print something off of my USB.

I suggest you go to the Apple Store and really test drive one before you spend all that dough.


----------



## Leah Frances

DH bought me a MacBook Air when he broke my old IBM. 

Love it. Love it. Love it. 

In 18 months it's crashed maybe three times.
- It always works.
- It's always fast. 
- I've never had to de-frag, anti-virus, or undo anything. 

Love it. Will never go back. Am saving my pennies for a Mac desktop.


----------



## Fox

Ok, I'll weigh in on this. There's a lot of overly-emotionally invested opinions on this topic out there, and a lot of people just picking up the opinions of others and then spending a lot of money without thinking much or drawing their own conclusions. As a computer technician for a very long time (and a network security administrator now) I might have a good bit of information for you.

My father is sixty years old and his PC has never crashed, never locked up, never gotten malware or a virus. All he does is check emails and read online newspapers.

My sister screws her's up at least twice a year to the point that I have to format and reinstall it. I'm beginning to think she seeks out malware and downloads it on purpose...

The user has a great deal to do with the system. Mac has rode the "hype train" for a great while as they didn't have a lot of compatibility for a while. (long ago)

The short answer is: Yes, Macs crash. Snow Leopard recently hosed up a friend of mine's Mac. If Macs didn't crash, you wouldn't need the following link:

http://www.apple.com/retail/geniusbar/

The difference is quite simple: any programmer who develops code to attack a machine either to simply be malicious or to attempt to infect your machine with software in the hopes it will somehow obtain information (spyware) or get you to buy something (adware) is going to write this code to attack the greatest demographic. Right now PCs still have the largest market share. They probably will for a very long time. So if you run a Windows system and you're not securing it, and being careful about where you're going, (If it looks sketchy, don't click it!) use the right software (*Do NOT use Internet Explorer*) you'll be fine.

If you buy a Mac will you likely have less software attacking you? Yes. Will you have to learn a completely new way of working a computer? Yes. Will it be annoying? Probably. Does all the same software work on Macs that does on Windows? A lot more than used to. You can also now run Windows on your Mac, and there's always emulation.

Little history lesson here:
Macs long ago used to be high-end hardware that ran operating systems that were fantastic for digital artists, and I saw them as such. As a computer technician at the time, I refused to work on them as they were a nightmare. This wasn't going over incredibly well, and Apple was slipping into oblivion while MS was skyrocketing. I'm not certain how many of you remember this:

http://blogs.seattleweekly.com/dailyweekly/2009/08/this_day_in_history_microsoft.php

I still recall, rather well, when MS kept Apple afloat just because no one else was in the market, and they didn't want split apart in an anti-trust. They finally brought Steve Jobs back into the fold after his little exodus, and despite being a jerk who ripped off Xerox, he knows how to run a company, if mostly from a psychological standpoint. (He understands his customer) This is where I have problems with Apple.

In the same way that I see Facebook as a wonderful social networking tool if you don't get bogged down in all those crappy applications, Mac can be useful tools to accomplish certain tasks if they're built in such a manner. The problem is that a great many Mac users want you to drink their damn kool-aid. Their aggressive marketing campaign and overpriced hardware has targeted the 'elitist' group of customers who seem to purchase items to make themselves feel better about who they are, not just to buy a tool to get work done.

http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2002/07/12/

During a long Mac commercial campaign about "Things Mac users can do that PC users can't" was the following running joke amongst technicians: 
"The one thing PC users *can* do that Mac users can't: _Shut up._"

A great deal of this seemed to be a self-justification by the individual owning the Mac. One of those situations where you turned to look at them and had to say, "Are you trying to convince me, or yourself?"

There's also the long running issue that they tend to value form over function. For a very long time, mice on Macs only had a single button. You had to use a key combination (Apple+<insert key here>) in replace of a simple right click. There are other examples of this that I won't get into. (Mac has since embraced two button mice...for the most part)

PCs are not without their little diva either. SONY has long designed their machines in obnoxiously overpriced and impractical designs, being understood by engineers as "The Mac of the PC world".

All my PCs run Windows XP SP3. (And I administer a sizable network) My routers run Linux. I own no Macs. However, I'm a network security specialist, so I know how to lock down a Windows network. While getting my Master's degree, two of my Computer Security friends going for their Ph.D.s were using Macs. They stated it was for security purposes. They seemed to like them. (Though the school paid for them, and as stated before, they were not without problems)

My significant other is an artist. She cannot stand Macs. She takes great pleasure in accomplishing the exact same things on a PC.

Conclusion:
Both can run Windows now, have Intel architectures, and they're starting to look like each other with each new operating system release. Macs break just like PCs, they're just not targeted with as much malware. Try a Mac extensively before you get it if you've never tried them. They're overpriced and over-hyped, but they're still a machine that accomplish a task: It's all about what you want it to do.

Respectfully, someone who keeps driving off the road isn't going to stay on it any better if they switch from a pick-up to Prius. If you're running into a great deal of software issues, perhaps it might be wise to change your computer using habits, rather than your computers?

My recommendation would be to purchase a single copy of some hard drive imaging software. This takes a snap shot of your machine. So you wipe your system clean, get it exactly like you want it with all the software you'd like installed, then you take this snapshot and put it on DVD or an external hard drive. If the machine ever gets messed up, you just take it back to that snapshot. (Make sure you keep all important documents backed up to something like an external drive as well, as the snapshot will erase everything that wasn't in it at the time.)

In the meanwhile, use software like Firefox and Chrome, stay away from questionable sites, don't open attachments from people you don't know, and if they're currently permitted, keep your kids off your system. (Kids seem to seek out malware, I swear.)

I hope this helps,
--Fox


----------



## bigcaddy

I love them both. For business, PC, for art, music/design, MAC

for stability. both. 

My windows 7 is every bit as stable as my MAC and everything works, just like a MAC. Macs are nice because you'll never have hardware compatibiliy problems but I've never had problems with my 7 box either so it's really up to you which layout you like. I do a bunch of gaming and my job is IT so I stick with PC. 

but I do have a mac around for IMovie.

oh and very well said above.. "Are you trying to convince me, or yourself?"


----------



## cellophane

You could always go for a Linux install  Although it suffers from the same flaws as any other OS. 

I will agree with *bigcaddy *- my Windows 7 installs have been fantastic. If you do go PC - get Windows 7.


----------



## clb2010

Sigh. Allot of misinformation here. 

Caveats:
I am going to way over simplify this so for those of you with propellers on your hats please take a step back and view it from that point of view before frothing at the mouth and engaging the flame thrower. 

At this time I do not have in depth experience with Windows 7 so I cannot comment on it. 

I am OS and platform agnostic. That means that I will use whatever OS and applications let me do my job in the easiest way possible. It has to work, it has to be easy, it has to be safe, it has to be stable, and it has to do what I want it to do when I want it to. I don't care if that's OS X, Windows, or BeOS for that matter. It just has to work.

Security (viri/malware/et al.)
OS X is a BSD Unix derivative with Apple's GUI interface loaded on top. This means that it has been around since the 1970's and its been beaten on quite a bit. This means that it is a much more mature and stable underlying operating system than Windows. It runs in an entirely different way than Windows does in terms of how the operating system functions and interacts with applications. Thus the flaws found in Microsoft software are not there in Unix because of the way it works. Unix by its design is more secure out of the box and by its design is not as vulnerable to viri, malware, etc. 

OS X/Mac hold about 5ish percent of the total OS market space. As mentioned above attackers are going to go for the maximum payout for the least amount of calories expended. That means Microsoft for two reasons. Microsoft holds onto 80%+ of the OS market and is notorious for writing poor code ergo the biggest bang for the buck will be to exploit it instead of something like Linux or OS X which is inherently more secure and has less market share. 

One of the reason's that Microsoft writes poor code is that they have to be compatible with hundreds of thousands of hardware/software combinations as well as all the legacy code and applications that are out there starting with Windows 3.x and in some cases DOS. Apple has essentially one hardware/software spec and guards its standards like a miser with his gold. The more combinations you add into the mix the more likely someone somewhere is going to do something stupid in terms of coding because they need to "make it work" not "make it secure".

Cost:
If you do a comparison of an Apple in terms of hardware inside the machine to a comparable machine on the PC side you will find little to no price difference. Macs are no more expensive than a like kind PC

Ease of use:
From a Human Computing Interface standpoint OS X is easier to use (more intuitive) than Windows. Period. Full Stop. Don't believe me? Look up the following: Humane Interface: New Directions for Designing Interactive Systems (ISBN 0-201-37937-6) by Jef Raskin Now cross check Jef Raskin and Apple. You will find your answer.

Windows historically was not well designed from a HCI stanpoint. Much of it is counter intuitive. The user has to be trained in the Windows process. OS X does not have this problem as much as Windows does. It was designed from the ground up to be more intuitive. This is why so many PC users have a problem. They are trained and used to doing things a certain way and then have to unlearn the bad habits and relearn good ones.

Windows, because of the multitude of software/hardware combinations that need to be supported, does not do well with plug and play. As in plug a printer in and it just works. Its gotten better but OS X/Apple still dominates this area. For one of the same reasons why the platform is more secure. There is only one hardware standard and any 3rd party hardware suppliers must subscribe to the Apple way otherwise they don't get to play.

Bottom line: 
Figure out what you want to do and what software you need to do that. If the Mac does that for you at a price you find acceptable get the Mac. If not go PC and deal with the problems.


----------



## Clutchcargo

clb2010 good writeup. 
I disagree about the cost. I found Macs much more expensive for comparable performance. 
My wife was a PC user and fell for the Mac advertising. 
After 2 years with her Powerbook, she hates it and finds the PC UI much more intuitive.
For connectivity, it took nearly a day to get the Powerbook wirelessly connected and another 3 hours to finally be able to print to the wireless network printer.
My PC on the other hand only took about 10-15 minutes to get networked and find the printer.
If you have a mixed network forget about transferring files between the two.
I'm PC user and I guess a rarity because after a year and half, I have never had a crash with Vista and I never needed to reload windows. It run solid with all my apps (Sony Vegas, Photoshop, and MS Office mostly) and games. Mac on the other hand did need to be rebuilt once.
YMWV but this has been my experience.


----------



## clb2010

Clutchcargo said:


> clb2010 good writeup.
> I disagree about the cost. I found Macs much more expensive for comparable performance.


Cheers mate. But key difference is that I said to compare it from a hardware to hardware standpoint. As in find a PC that has the same video chips, mother board, etc. Performance-wise you are right though.



> My wife was a PC user and fell for the Mac advertising.
> After 2 years with her Powerbook, she hates it and finds the PC UI much more intuitive.
> For connectivity, it took nearly a day to get the Powerbook wirelessly connected and another 3 hours to finally be able to print to the wireless network printer.
> My PC on the other hand only took about 10-15 minutes to get networked and find the printer.


I believe that the powerbook was a OS 8/9 platform, no? OS X is an entirely different animal. And prior to it I wouldn't go near a Mac. I use it now because of the Unix base. Of course I also use a PC because Autocad doesn't run well under Parallels and I need it to.



> If you have a mixed network forget about transferring files between the two.
> I'm PC user and I guess a rarity because after a year and half, I have never had a crash with Vista and I never needed to reload windows. It run solid with all my apps (Sony Vegas, Photoshop, and MS Office mostly) and games. Mac on the other hand did need to be rebuilt once.
> YMWV but this has been my experience.


On the network side that isn't quite true. Look into file sharing OS X and Windows. Its just a drive mount aka share. 

That is good to hear on the Vista side. I actually wiped and reinstalled after 2 painful months with Vista because of the constant problems. I am very hopeful about Windows 7 and look forward to getting to try it out when I can afford to purchase it.


----------



## Fox

Clutchcargo said:


> I'm PC user and I guess a rarity...


Not as much as a great many marketing campaigns would have us believe.

As for intuitive GUIs, I learned on DOS, then PC Shell, and moved to Windows 3.11. It's a long way to go back, and maybe it's because I grew up with these OS, but I don't recall any sharp learning curve.

Raskin allegedly invented the one-button mouse because he thought people would be too stupid to know which of three buttons to click. As an advanced systems user and a fairly intelligent individual, I view that less as intuitive and more as inconvenient and insulting. But then Macs do tend to hold your hands and make sure you don't hurt yourself while Windows gives you enough options that you can break your computer but at least have some control. Linux just expects you to have a great deal of free time but can achieve incredible results.

On a side note (and I'm not going to Google it) I thought I read somewhere that Raskin thought OS X was a step backwards.

Anyway, this article made me think of this thread:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/194686/hacker_says_microsoft_secure.html

I'm curious to see how Apple starts implementing additional security measures as they gain market share. I'm not sure I'm qualified to make a statement regarding this article's claims, but it'll be interesting to see if Apple maintains security as they become a more tempting target, or fall behind and have to play catch-up when some massive news story about them getting hacked somehow hits the headlines. (Proactive or reactive, basically)


----------



## Grofica

All i have to say is PC is the shizzy! I LOVE PC... MAC is the devil....

but pictures speak louder then words so here you go... enjoy ha ha ha ha :laughing:

_Friends dont let friends use apple products..._


----------



## PortlandRemodel

I've had about 40 Mac's including notebooks and towers and probably more PC's in my other businesses. Mac's are super user friendly and viruses are so rare I do not use any anti-virus and have no concerns. For notebooks, they are much faster than their PC counterparts and integration with applications, ME and backup is very cost effective. There is nothing like in the PC world. The computer I carry around is a mac book pro (with windows on boot camp)

But for database applications and other more specialized business software - especially for construction you can forget running them native on a Mac. I do have some computer tech's who use a Mac and only run windows on them because they are superior notebooks for the money. The cheap notebooks are really junk and should be avoided if you want to do anything but sit and watch them for an hour a day.

The windows server operating system (2003 Server and up) are fabulous and fast operating systems that unfortunately few small business owners get to use. For business applications, the server OS is faster than the mac OS and basically never crashes if you set it up right. My 2003 server hasn't gone down since 2003... (probably should not say that.... &*$#@)
www.portlandhomeremodeling.com


----------



## Durt Ferguson

I agree with Fox on this one. I have owned both Mac's and PC's, and am proficient with both (work as a SW/Computer engineer). I've never had a problem with either. One thing I will note is that a co-worker of mine had a chip (I don't recall which one, may have been integrated wireless) go on his Mac, and since it was the type where everything is built into the monitor, he would have needed to replace the entire thing if he wanted it to work right. While not uniquely a Mac issue, it is an issue you may run into with the everything-in-the-monitor setup. I used to have problems back in the day when I'd play online games, surf the web more, before anti-virus/internet protection SW was mainstream. Now I haven't had my PC (running XP) crash in the last couple years that I can remember. Most of these issues are brought on by the user, be it viral, poor maintenance, or just mistreating the equipment. If you keep your machine clean (meaning both keeping viruses and malware off it, as well as keeping the insides dust free), do the routine maintenance (have it defrag, scan, cleanup while you're sleeping), and just pay attention to what you're doing, you shouldn't have a problem. My wife's grandfather is 82 years old, and doesn't really know a thing about computers, and has managed to keep his Windows 98 box running great. I like both Mac and PC interfaces, I just think that a PC is a better value for your dollar, and are easier to fix.

Edit : Also, I think it is more difficult for an engineer or a DIY type person to keep a computer running well, since we feel the need to muck with everything


----------



## PortlandRemodel

Do you think that for casual use the Mac program integration through to ME is easier though? **If** someone adopts Apple programs they all work together in a way I haven't seen with any PC platform. My family can get things done with pictures, presentations, or about anything - so long as they stay in the Mac program environment. (without my help!)
www.portlandhomeremodeling.com


----------



## MagicalHome

Hehe, I love both of them. I use PC for my developing work, and Mac for my designing work, or entertainment ^^


----------



## PortlandRemodel

*v. iPad*

Does the iPad count as a Mac extension? I'm thinking with a MiFi it will be a real game changer by the end of the year if you've got good 3g Coverage. It will replace cel phones and be your GPS, and everything...:whistling2:
www.portlandhomeremodeling.com


----------



## TomB

I've had a desktop Mac for a few years and in my experience it's been great. I've had absolutely no problems or issues of any kind and the display is really nice compared to what I've seen of most PCs. My folks have had PCs for years and it seems like the problems are never ending. I'm no Apple fanboy but in my opinion Mac is the way to go. :thumbsup:

OT but related...this very issue makes me want an iPhone over an Android based smartphone. They just seem to be super smooth and problem free.

edit, I also have Microsoft Office for Mac and it's worked without problem. In years past that was a major stumbling block as the business world runs on Word, Excel, etc.


----------



## itguy08

Best thing I ever did was ditch Windows in 2002 for an iMac. I've never regretted it or looked back. Windows junk puts food on my table but I'd never use or recommend it. 

They are not overpriced for what you get as they don't compete on the $300 low end junk that you see advertised every week. They compare more to the "business class" lines from HP, Lenovo, Dell, etc. When you get to those lines the Mac is very price competitive.

What I love is that I don't have to worry about constant care and feeding. I move my mouse, the computer instantly wakes from sleep. I close the lid on my Macbook and the machine sleeps. I open it and within a few seconds it's ready to go. I reboot about every month when updates are there. I don't really worry about malware, the machine takes a beating with running Virtual machines, photo editing software, etc.

It's that reliability that is worth it 100% to me. Contrast that to the POS Dell I have from work that won't sleep/resume right, is built worse than a Harbor Freight tool, and just generally a junk machine. At least the HP I had before that was built good. But it still didn't work as well as the Mac WRT usability.

It's also the little things that make the Mac OS better to use and easier on the eyes. Virtual desktops, while available in Linux for years are a joy to use in OS X. Expose and Dashboard is light years ahead of Gadgets and Aero on Windows. And whoever designed Win 7 needs to be shot - the eye candy is cool but it is hard on the eyes and very distracting. Transparency is cool but really needs to be toned down when there is text to be read (title of the window). It's the little things Microsoft still doesn't get right after all these years.

That being said Apple is not infalable - I gave up my iPhone 3G and really dig my Droid X. It can do so much more than the iPhone and is quite a bit more customizable.


----------



## 95025

So now that I've read this discussion - even with all its fantastic information - I'm just as confused as when I started. Most of your discussions are over my head.

Here's my deal...

My wife wants a new laptop. Her IBM has crashed several times in the past couple months - and I mean completely crashed - due to malware, viruses, etc. And this is despite having what a techie said is THE best anti-virus software.

My Sony, on the other hand, has not had any problems. I run McAfee through our service provider.


Our kids all 3 have Macs, and swear by them. They think my wife & I are knobs for not having Macs ourselves. My wife is leaning toward wanting a Mac.


So... Would you recommend me wifey get a Mac for internet surfing, music, photos & editing, possibly some video editing and such? Is it worth the money?


----------



## itguy08

I would say yes - the Macs are worth every penny. I'd pick her up a 13" Macbook (the white one) - for $999 or so it is a great computer. They come with all your wife will need to manage videos, photos, music, etc. It will have no problems with photo or video editing and will last you a good long time. My wife has one of the first Intel Macbooks from 2006 or so and it's still going strong.

Apple doesn't compete in the low end space so that's why they seem expensive. But they are solid machines in the middle to upper price ranges. (Yes, PC's compete there too).

As far as AV software, every PC tech has their favorites: some love Norton, some love McAfee, some love AVG, etc. All of them have their faults and many let lots of malware through. At this time, there is no real malware for the Mac. What you do have is things you have to actively install. 

The good advice on all platforms is: Stay away from **** sites and pirated software.

Good luck and enjoy the Mac! :thumbsup:


----------



## 95025

Thanks ITGuy! I appreciate the professional advice!

I wonder if one of the problems in the Mac vs PC debate is that too many people are comparing $479 Dells to the $999 MacBook. It makes sense that that would NOT be a fair comparison.


We're actually leaning pretty heavily toward her getting a MacBook, partly because the bottom line is that it's what she wants. And sometimes what a woman _wants_ pretty much seals the deal. 


Thanks again!


----------



## Jim F

DrHicks said:


> Thanks ITGuy! I appreciate the professional advice!
> 
> I wonder if one of the problems in the Mac vs PC debate is that too many people are comparing $479 Dells to the $999 MacBook. It makes sense that that would NOT be a fair comparison.
> 
> 
> We're actually leaning pretty heavily toward her getting a MacBook, partly because the bottom line is that it's what she wants. And sometimes what a woman _wants_ pretty much seals the deal.
> 
> 
> Thanks again!


Let us know what she thinks about it once she gets it.


----------



## TomB

itguy08 said:


> That being said Apple is not infalable - I gave up my iPhone 3G and really dig my Droid X. It can do so much more than the iPhone and is quite a bit more customizable.


Interesting. I'm looking forward to test driving the new Droid alongside the new iPhone on Verizon. I currently have an original Droid and wondering which direction to go when I'm able to upgrade.


----------



## hyunelan2

For the $1000 price of a 13" Macbook, you can buy a new PC notebook, throw it away if/when you have a problem, and buy another new PC notebook and still be money ahead. For the small size of the Macbook, you could buy 3+ netbooks. My <$200 Acer Aspire One netbook that I bought for portability does an EXCELLENT job at whatever I've asked of it (though you have to be reasonable of your request: internet good, office fine, photos ok, beyond that it's a little underpowered). 

Macs are not horrible, and serve their purpose - but they are 60% marketing and 40% computer. 


(IT Manager for a city, +100 machines under my domain).


----------



## RedHelix

itguy08 said:


> They are not overpriced for what you get as they don't compete on the $300 low end junk that you see advertised every week. They compare more to the "business class" lines from HP, Lenovo, Dell, etc. When you get to those lines the Mac is very price competitive.


...I'm not one who usually accuses someone of having no idea what they are talking about.

BUT

-Macbooks are manufactured by the same company that makes Acer, Dell, Gateway, and HP computers in South Korea. 
-Even then, the cost of a MBP eclipses the cost of an equivalently-specced Lenovo Thinkpad or Dell Latitude. Also note that 'business-grade' Thinkpads have a 3x longer manufacturer warranty than a Macbook.

When you crack one of those glossy suckers open, you'll find all the same rebranded components inside as you would a cheap Dell; Hyinx, Foxconn and so forth. So, I routinely ask people to throw aside the "well my Mac runs great yadda yadda" anecdotal argument: If the manufacturer's warranty is 1 year - as is the case for the MBP and "$300 low end junk" - then it was designed to reliably run for 1 year. Period. 



Anyways.

Any IT expert worth their salt looks at a computer as nothing more than hardware on which to run an operating system. So, let's put aside the falsely perceived superiority of Mac hardware, because the 'core' of the Mac vs PC argument is this: When you spend the extra dough on a Mac, you are spending it on one thing and one thing only: The exclusivity of the operating system.

So if you like OSX, buy a Mac. If you've got work to do, buy Windows.


----------



## 95025

Well fellas, I think I know which way we're headed...

$500-$750 on a PC Laptop for an unhappy wife

or

$1000 on a MacBook for a_ very _happy wife.


Sorry to all you tech guys. You know computers, but I know my wife. Your opinions are irrelevant! :laughing:


Seriously though, reading this thread has been _very_ informative for me personally. I thank you!


----------



## itguy08

hyunelan2 said:


> For the $1000 price of a 13" Macbook, you can buy a new PC notebook, throw it away if/when you have a problem, and buy another new PC notebook and still be money ahead.


When you factor in the TIME you lost it's a loosing proposition. And then again if you shop the bottom of the barrel you usually get low grade components, slow RAM, low resolution screen, slow HD, etc...

I scored one of the Google CR-49 and it's a neat little machine. Way underpowered and while I like it for surfing the web and it does that great, you can tell it is underpowered. I'd hate to try to edit photos on it, even if it ran native software. And the keyboard is quite cramped. 

It's not marketing -the machines are good machines. Same reason I tell people to buy a mid level PC - you will get a better machine.


----------



## itguy08

RedHelix said:


> ...I'm not one who usually accuses someone of having no idea what they are talking about.
> 
> BUT
> 
> -Macbooks are manufactured by the same company that makes Acer, Dell, Gateway, and HP computers in South Korea.


And the same company that makes Lexus makes Toyota, Honda makes Acura, Mercedes makes Smart cars, etc.

The difference is the quality levels on all brands. You pay more for quality and while the Apple may use the "same parts", there is a difference in quality levels. And not to mention Apple does a lot of their own design.



> -Even then, the cost of a MBP eclipses the cost of an equivalently-specced Lenovo Thinkpad or Dell Latitude. Also note that 'business-grade' Thinkpads have a 3x longer manufacturer warranty than a Macbook.


Except that the Dell Latitude, optioned the same costs: $1,974 (Dell Latitude E6510) vs Apple's $1,999. The Macbook has a higher resolution screen, the Dell a better warranty.

A Lenovo T510 is about $1,809 and comes with a 1 year warranty.

Please note that I did remove the "discounts" as those vary widely and you can get "discounts" on Apple stuff - like Free software, printers, etc.

So I think you need to re-examine the notion Apple hardware is hugely expensive vs the others.

I have a Dell Precision M4500 that I get from work. It's a PILE OF JUNK. Build quality is abysmal, it's huge, runs hot and generally a cheap computer. I believe it costs $1300-1700 from Dell. My previous HP was light years better. And the quality of our Dells is junk as well. 2 guys have had to have theirs replaced vs 0 replacements in 3 years for our HP's.



> When you crack one of those glossy suckers open, you'll find all the same rebranded components inside as you would a cheap Dell; Hyinx, Foxconn and so forth.


Again, I deal with this stuff every day. There are various grades of components that each manufacturer uses. You could use the same argument for the $300 vs $2k PC laptops. After all they are the same parts, right?

Or I could run my company on desktop class hardware with a couple RAID cards. After all, it's the same parts so why deal with server class hardware? I know many companies do but it's not optimal.




> Any IT expert worth their salt looks at a computer as nothing more than hardware on which to run an operating system.


I've been in this business for a LONG time and you have to look at the whole TCO for the whole system and not pick and choose. That includes the whole package. The whole package with the Mac is better and more reliable and will have a lower TCO than a Windows machine.

Linux would have the Lowest TCO but a huge learning curve.


----------



## itguy08

DrHicks said:


> Well fellas, I think I know which way we're headed...
> 
> $500-$750 on a PC Laptop for an unhappy wife
> 
> or
> 
> $1000 on a MacBook for a_ very _happy wife.
> 
> 
> Sorry to all you tech guys. You know computers, but I know my wife. Your opinions are irrelevant! :laughing:
> 
> 
> Seriously though, reading this thread has been _very_ informative for me personally. I thank you!


Keeping the wife happy is priority #1 and if she wants a Mac, get her a Mac. You both will enjoy it and if you need any tips, let me know. One of the neatest things is that sleep mode works 100% of the time. Close the lid, the machine goes to sleep. Open it and it wakes nearly instantly. That makes using it a whole lot better and more productive!


----------



## 95025

itguy08 said:


> Keeping the wife happy is priority #1 and if she wants a Mac, get her a Mac. You both will enjoy it and if you need any tips, let me know. One of the neatest things is that sleep mode works 100% of the time. Close the lid, the machine goes to sleep. Open it and it wakes nearly instantly. That makes using it a whole lot better and more productive!


Thank you - and thanks for the help offer. Part of what scares me about getting a Mac is that I know absolutely nothing about them.

I know the Mac vs PC debate will rage on - and will do so without me. All I want is a computer to do what I want it to do. 

My wife works on a PC in her office all day every day. Spreadsheets, computer-generated mailings, etc. But at home she wants to be able to do some video & photo editing, etc. So the truth is, even if it costs a couple hundred dollars more for her to be happy, it's worth it.


----------



## RedHelix

Glad your wife likes the laptop, DrHicks. I'm not here to sway minds, so much as make sure people get accurate information. Hope you enjoy many years with it.

I can talk at length about laptop hardware in manufacturing (and I did, I edited it out because my post was getting tldr.) Instead I'll skip ahead to this: 



> Except that the Dell Latitude, optioned the same costs: $1,974 (Dell Latitude E6510) vs Apple's $1,999. The Macbook has a higher resolution screen, the Dell a better warranty.
> A Lenovo T510 is about $1,809 and comes with a 1 year warranty.


Your comparison has basically proven my point, because you failed to read the specs that actually matter.

The quoted Macbook has a mickey-mouse graphics card by comparison to the quoted Latitude, with half the video RAM. The Macbook also totes a Core i5 while the Dell packs a Core i7 with almost triple the L2 cache. These are not equivalent specs at all. Dedicated graphics processing in laptops is a very expensive feature, yet somehow the Dell has more GPU and CPU muscle at a lower price. AND the Dell has a longer warranty with 3 years parts/onsite.

Finally, you do have to spec up the Dell to 4GB to match the MBP's memory, but it comes to $1826, not $1974.

So you're essentially paying LESS for a more powerful proc, tripled warranty with onsite, and double the video RAM. The hard drive is smaller, yes, but upgrading still costs less than the price difference.



> Or I could run my company on desktop class hardware with a couple RAID cards. After all, it's the same parts so why deal with server class hardware? I know many companies do but it's not optimal.


Problem with that is the the hardware you'll find in halfway-decent servers do not share any part similarities with desktops. Desktop motherboards typically don't have redundant power supply connectors, multiple NICs, 8+ DIMM banks and multiple Xeon-compatible proc sockets.

Frankly, you can't compare a Dell Desktop to, say, an HP Blade. There's no comparison to make.

Low-end ATX servers, though, sure.


----------



## itguy08

RedHelix said:


> Your comparison has basically proven my point, because you failed to read the specs that actually matter.


No, I matched them spec for spec.



> The quoted Macbook has a mickey-mouse graphics card by comparison to the quoted Latitude, with half the video RAM. The Macbook also totes a Core i5 while the Dell packs a Core i7 with almost triple the L2 cache. These are not equivalent specs at all. Dedicated graphics processing in laptops is a very expensive feature, yet somehow the Dell has more GPU and CPU muscle at a lower price. AND the Dell has a longer warranty with 3 years parts/onsite.


Please put your bias aside and look at the *FACTS*. The Latitude E6510 comes standard with a core i3, not a i7. I spec'ed it with an i5. You can see the system in the PDF.

Attached is the exact system I spec'ed out. It's as close to the Macbook Pro as you can get. 

*I suggest you set aside your biases before making incorrect assumptions. *



> Low-end ATX servers, though, sure.


No comment....


----------



## itguy08

DrHicks said:


> Thank you - and thanks for the help offer. Part of what scares me about getting a Mac is that I know absolutely nothing about them.


If you live near an Apple store they do have free training. Other than that it's not that hard to make the switch and if you have any questions just shoot me a PM or start another thread.


----------



## RedHelix

itguy08 said:


> No, I matched them spec for spec.
> 
> 
> 
> Please put your bias aside and look at the *FACTS*. The Latitude E6510 comes standard with a core i3, not a i7. I spec'ed it with an i5. You can see the system in the PDF.
> 
> Attached is the exact system I spec'ed out. It's as close to the Macbook Pro as you can get.
> 
> *I suggest you set aside your biases before making incorrect assumptions. *


Below: E6510 Premium, starting price $1681. Customized with 3GB additional memory, bringing total to $1826.

Compare this against the Apple MC372LL/A, which is $1999 on the Apple store and has weaker specs as described in my previous post.

And yes, even though you can find that model MBP discounted on Amazon for about the same price as this Dell, *it still has a weaker proc, lousier warranty and half the video RAM.*










The funniest part? Even the resolution on the Dell's screen is higher. (1600x900 vs 1440x900.) You got that wrong too. 

The bottom line:
$1826 Dell = Core i7 @ 6MB L3 cache, 4GB RAM, NVS3100M w/ 512MB (G310M-based), 1600x900 resolution, 3 year parts/onsite labor warranty
$1999 MBP = Core i5 @ 3MB L3 cache, 4GB RAM, GT330M w/ 256MB, 1440x900 resolution, 1 year parts/dropoff warranty

Questions?


----------



## hyunelan2

Let's not rely on Dell to be a price benchmark - they are a bit ridiculous in their custom built pricing.

From what I've found on the Apple site, a 15" Macbook Pro comes with the following:
2.4GHz Intel Core i5
4GB 1066MHz DDR3 memory
320GB SATA 5400 rpm hard disk
15" screen
DVD+/-R Superdrive
SD Card Slot
Built-in Battery
GeForce GT 330M with 256MB graphics memory
$1,799



Better example:
HP ProBook 6450b WZ305UT
*2.66GHz* Intel Core i5
4GB *1333MHz* DDR3
320GB *7200rpm* hard disk
*15.6"* screen
DVD Super Multi drive
*7-in-1* media card reader
6-cell LiON battery (*removable*)
ATI Mobility Radeon HD 540v with *512 MB* graphics memory
*$1,199.99* http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=6671662&CatId=4939



lower-end competitive Example:
HP ProBook 4520s WZ263UT 
2.4GHz Intel Core i5
4GB 1066MHz DDR3 memory
*500GB* SATA *7200rpm* hard disk
*15.6"* screen
DVD+/-R Super Multi
*6-in-one* Media Card reader
6-cell LiON battery (*removable*)
*$799.99* http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=6449905&CatId=4938


----------



## RedHelix

I agree. I was just correcting itguy's - frankly - insane example with the E6510.

With other brands and pre-builds, yes, the price differential becomes even more obvious. A couple of years ago you could buy high-end Asus laptops for about 60% of an equivalently specced MBP. 

I make it a point to mention Asus because at the time, their warranty was 2 years, and the first year covered accidental damage with guaranteed 7-day turnaround.

Examples like that should make any rational person unreceptive to claims that the added cost of Macs is in build quality.


----------



## itguy08

Insane? Funny, I included a PDF of the complete specs from the Dell site and the one you included was not even a close comparison snippet..... Yours has a smaller HD (250GB vs 320GB, probably smaller battery, no webcam, etc.)

I'm sure if you dig long and hard enough on Dell or HP's website you will find machines that are cheaper and that are more expensive. 

The point is the Apples are comparable in price to a mid-level business class machine from a major vendor. Maybe a little more expensive but there is a reason for that.

You think they are expensive, they are not. Nobody's going to change your mind. I think they are not. My mind is not going to change until I can go to Dell, HP, Lenovo and get something similar very much cheaper. 

To the OP: get what your wife likes and wants. If you need help, shoot me a PM. *The Mac is better built, and more reliable than any PC machine.* This can be backed up by Consumer Reports, PC Magazine, and a few others where Apple has rated #1 in service and support. Most who have tried both never go back to a PC. 

I'm pretty much done with this thread - these pi$$ing matches go nowhere and solve nothing.


----------



## RedHelix

I don't know how many ways you need to be shown that you're wrong, but please by all means feel free to excuse yourself from the conversation.


----------



## itguy08

I don't have the time nor do I care to spend the time on Dell's, HP's, or Lenovo's website to prove you wrong time and time again, like I have done... The only difference is I have compared them as close as you can get, feature by feature and you have not. You have not even provided complete screen shots to the "superior" systems. 

So if you want to think you "won", go ahead. I don't care - I've been around this business for a long time and have experience on ALL platforms (DOS, Win, Linux, and OS X), did the hardware repair thing, etc. I stand by my comparisons and assessments 100%.


----------



## Einhorn_B

*Mac!*

PCs and Macs are both amazing operating systems. 
They are both just very different.
For an office working on a network that has a lot of media that needs to be transferred freely, PCs are a great way to go.
It's more of a business solution for the big guy.

If you want something that is user friendly, then you need a MAC!
No ifs, ands or buts about it. 
There has only been one recorded virus to ever penetrate a mac and that was from the number 1 security programmer against viruses.
He is a smart guy.
Any Mac computer will come equipped with a great deal of memory and ram.
The files and games are larger on a Mac, but the operating interface of Mac 10 is amongst the best in the world for any electronic.
The monitors on a Mac are even better than the flat screen TV you may have at home.
I do not sell Macs nor have I ever worked for the company.
They are just great operating systems.


Ben
www.unknownworlds.com
http://www.youtube.com/unknownworlds


----------



## hyunelan2

itguy08 said:


> I don't have the time nor do I care to spend the time on Dell's, HP's, or Lenovo's website to prove you wrong time and time again, like I have done... The only difference is I have compared them as close as you can get, feature by feature and you have not. You have not even provided complete screen shots to the "superior" systems.


I know this post was not directed at me, but what about the 2 HP notebooks I provided links to? Both of those are similar to slightly superior to the MBP, at less cost.



> Maybe a little more expensive but there is a reason for that.


Yes, Advertising/marketing costs and a "prestige" premium. A Lexus ES does not cost $15K more than a Camry because it costs that much more to make. It, like Apple, targets itself to be a "luxury good" that adds percentage ponits to the margin of the product. 



Einhorn_B said:


> The monitors on a Mac are even better than the flat screen TV you may have at home.


Most computer monitors - even older ones, are going to be better than 90% of the TVs on the market. Mac does have nice displays, but that's not because of Apple. LG makes the majority of Macs displays, along with many other companies LCD products.



I don't hate macs, I just disagree that they are "superior" in any way at a similar price point.


----------



## RedHelix

itguy08 said:


> So if you want to think you "won", go ahead. I don't care - I've been around this business for a long time and have experience on ALL platforms (DOS, Win, Linux, and OS X), did the hardware repair thing, etc. I stand by my comparisons and assessments 100%.
> 
> 
> 
> Spare us the conceit, nobody's out here to win. My objective is simply to prevent the propagation of terrible advice. Any electrician would flip out if they saw someone instructing a newbie to use #14 on a 20a breaker, and the situation here is no different.
> 
> I think what you're failing to understand is that it's indeed universally accepted that more muscle can be had per-dollar on Windows-based systems than with Macs. And, despite your anecdotal experience, the reliability is pretty much the same with mid to high-range PCs... if not better.
> 
> This has been shown to you to the best of both mine and others people's willingness. In regards to having insufficient screenshots... JFGI. We are not here to do your homework for you.
> 
> Moving on: Complaining about not having a spec-to-spec lineup is a pretty dumb argument, because it's already been one-upped: We've shown you numerous examples Macs being sold more expensively than PCs with *better* specs and *better* warranties. What counterpoint do you think you have, exactly?
> 
> Finally:
> For the last time, sizing up seniority doesn't do you any good. I would not be qualified for my job if I wasn't an expert in multiple areas of IT. I've climbed the career ladder from PC repair to NOCs and you don't see me running my mouth about it. I'm not sure what makes you think your credentials are so distinctive.
Click to expand...


----------



## 95025

Okay now, if you kids can quit bickering long enough I'm going to tell you what we did. 


She got the MacBook Pro for $1199. There were several features that we thought we well worth the extra $200.


She's very happy. I only hope that translates into me being very happy, very soon. Ehemmm... :yes:


----------



## RedHelix

I'm glad she likes it; hope you enjoy many years with it.

My only objective is to ensure that anyone else who comes across this thread doesn't get bad information. 

The overall point is that if you want a Mac, get a Mac. Enjoy it. Just expect to pay more for the same hardware.


----------



## poppameth

For anyone interested, http://www.hackintosh.com/
Build your own MAC for a fraction of the cost.


----------



## itguy08

DrHicks said:


> Okay now, if you kids can quit bickering long enough I'm going to tell you what we did.
> 
> 
> She got the MacBook Pro for $1199. There were several features that we thought we well worth the extra $200.
> 
> 
> She's very happy. I only hope that translates into me being very happy, very soon. Ehemmm... :yes:


I'm done arguing since neither one of us see the point the other is trying to make. And neither of us seem to be willing to explore the possibility that the other is correct on some level. We both put up examples to prove the point and I'm done with fruitless conversations. We'll have to agree to disagree.

Is everything were the same as some would like us to believe we'd all own Harbor Freight tools, drive the cheapest Kia we could buy. After all, they are all cars and tools right?

* The important thing is that you and your wife are happy with your purchase.* That's all that counts in the end. * Enjoy! *


----------



## tpolk

you mean I got the wrong tools and car  oh crap


----------



## injvstice

There isn't much different between Mac hardware and pc, they are all made from same components by the same Chinese companies near Shenzhen. Industrial design is the only differentiator.

I do agree that apple puts less crapware on their computers out of the box. This is a drawback for the PC buyers (not really Microsoft fault but computer manufacturer faault), especially those not savvy enough to reformat and reinstall a clean copy of windows. That is the first ting I usually do.

I use Linux, windows, and OSx. I am ome of the few people who think that the apple ui may be cute but needlessly restrictive. I cannot use an apple for more than five minutes without opening a command line and just typing in commands.

But then again I do the same thing on windows.


----------



## alongston

I love my mac. I too got sick of the PC crashing constantly. I haven't encountered that yet with my mac. They are considerably more expensive, but if you work with pictures, movies, music or games, they are definitely the way to go.


----------



## Rhizando

Its all about preference.


----------



## Synon

alongston said:


> I love my mac. I too got sick of the PC crashing constantly. I haven't encountered that yet with my mac. They are considerably more expensive, but if you work with pictures, movies, music or games, they are definitely the way to go.



Games? That's one of the main reasons I will never buy a mac, I've never heard of any company making a game for it. 

I think the whole pictures and video editing thing used to be true in the past, but that's now leftover marketing hype from long long ago. Both system use the same software these days and Win7 typically runs faster on 64-bit hardware than the Mac OS. 

That's great that you are experiencing less crashing though!


----------



## itguy08

I thought this thread was done but....



Synon said:


> Games? That's one of the main reasons I will never buy a mac, I've never heard of any company making a game for it.


Are you kidding me? Seriously? Steam has a Mac version of their games engine and it powers quite a few games:
http://store.steampowered.com/browse/mac
Call of Duty is available for the Mac.

There are tons of games for the Mac.



> I think the whole pictures and video editing thing used to be true in the past, but that's now leftover marketing hype from long long ago. Both system use the same software these days and Win7 typically runs faster on 64-bit hardware than the Mac OS.


Doubtful on the running thing. The Mac OS is quite a bit more capable than Windows 7... And the iLife suite is much better than the stuff that comes with Win 7.

And, here's an interesting story about hardware (in short, it's not all the same):

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/government/more-epic-fails-involving-acer-this-is-not-a-new-story/10263
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/perlow/ac...-your-lemons-and-fix-your-lousy-support/16746

In short, it may say Intel inside or whatever but there are huge levels of quality in the components. IOW you get what you pay for.


----------



## Synon

itguy08 said:


> There are tons of games for the Mac.


 I'm not saying there *aren't* any Mac games, but you have to admit the selection is a LOT thinner than the PC. It's great that companies like Valve are porting their services to Mac, but that's just thing, they always seem to start on PC and might get ported to Mac but that isn't a guarantee. Why not get a machine that is pretty much guaranteed to play every big title? I have nothing against Mac's, but when 90% of the market is Windows based it's pretty obvious who game developers are going to cater towards. It's got nothing to do with one being better than the other, it's a simple fact of where money can be made.



itguy08 said:


> Doubtful on the running thing. The Mac OS is quite a bit more capable than Windows 7... And the iLife suite is much better than the stuff that comes with Win 7.


"Capable" is a pretty vague word, could you elaborate? Here are some fairly recent gaming benchmarks, if macworld says Win7 puts out higher frame rates then there is nothing to be doubtful of. 

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=linux_windows_part3&num=5
http://www.macworld.com/article/155124/2010/11/mac_windows_graphics.html

And iLife looks useful, but I'll stick to my Adobe products. 



itguy08 said:


> And, here's an interesting story about hardware (in short, it's not all the same):


I never claimed it was the same, but an article about ****ty Acer monitors isn't exactly a strong case against Windows. I could just as easily plug it into a Mac, but that doesn't make OS X a bad choice when it goes out does it? Of course not!

Maybe the higher price is partly due to higher quality components, but I think a lot of it has to do with market branding as well. People will pay a premium to not be "mainstream", but that doesn't make it better in a measurable way.


----------



## itguy08

Synon said:


> I'm not saying there *aren't* any Mac games, but you have to admit the selection is a LOT thinner than the PC. It's great that companies like Valve are porting their services to Mac, but that's just thing, they always seem to start on PC and might get ported to Mac but that isn't a guarantee. Why not get a machine that is pretty much guaranteed to play every big title? I have nothing against Mac's, but when 90% of the market is Windows based it's pretty obvious who game developers are going to cater towards. It's got nothing to do with one being better than the other, it's a simple fact of where money can be made.


Sure the selection is thinner than Windows but there are games from big name studios. And there are games from smaller studios too. I'm sure there are enough games to keep people happy. I don't game on my computer and prefer to do so on the big screen so it doesn't matter to me either way.



> "Capable" is a pretty vague word, could you elaborate? Here are some fairly recent gaming benchmarks, if macworld says Win7 puts out higher frame rates then there is nothing to be doubtful of.


That is only for games. It's pretty well known that DirectX is a great gaming platform. It had better be - MS has been playing with it for what, 10-12 years now. OpenGL is a more flexible platform (Win, OSX and Linux) but is a little slower.

The rest of the systems are close in performance.

OS X has the advantage in:
Rock solid operation (sleep/wake on my Macbook for 30+ days)
Native PDF Creation from every app (great for sharing files)
Better memory management (although win 7 steps up to the plate)
Easier on the eyes (the windows with it's glass-like effects is hard on the eyes)
Integration
Integrated automatic backup
Ease of administration (no registry, just plain config files)
Security (still more secure than Windows)




> And iLife looks useful, but I'll stick to my Adobe products.


I love my Photoshop but iLife is great for the home user. Aperture is also great for those of us that want more. As is Lightroom.



> Maybe the higher price is partly due to higher quality components, but I think a lot of it has to do with market branding as well. People will pay a premium to not be "mainstream", but that doesn't make it better in a measurable way.


The fact of the matter is if you spec out a similar HP, Lenovo, Dell, or Sony you pay just about as much for a Mac. Last time I looked it was only a $100 or so difference. Apple doesn't play in the bottom feeder market and probably never will. There is a quality difference between all the lines a manufacturer offers. Apple chooses to not compete in the cheap junk pile and that's a good thing. You know when you buy an Apple you will get a decent quality machine at a decent price.


----------



## Synon

*shrug* Like I said, for gamers there are no compelling reasons to buy a Mac over a PC. 

I agree that Windows is seriously lacking good content organization software.

I do have to question the validity of your last paragraph though. 
http://files.macbidouille.com/mbv2/news/news_11_09/laptop-reliability.png

Apply doesn't make junk, but they are still just average and nothing special when it comes to reliability. 

I also found this by another gentleman who speced out a MBP and a Dell XPS about a week ago -



> Genuine Windows® 7 Home Premium, 64bit, English
> 2nd generation Intel® Core™ i7-2720QM processor 2.20 GHz with Turbo Boost 2.0 up to 3.30 GHz (Vs. Intel core i7 2.0 GHz, etc. in basic MBP 15")
> NVIDIA® GeForce® GT 525M 1GB graphics with Optimus (Vs. AMD 256 MB)
> 4GB Shared Dual Channel DDR3 Memory (same)
> 500GB 7200 RPM SATA Hard Drive (Vs. 500 Gb 5400 rpm)
> 1 Year Basic Service Plan (same)
> 15.6 FHD B+RGLED TL (1920x1080) and Skype-Certified 2.0MP HD Webcam (Vs. 1440-900)
> 8X Tray Load CD/DVD Burner (Dual Layer DVD+/-R Drive) (same)
> Intel® Centrino® Wireless-N 1030 & Bluetooth 3.0 (vs. Bluetooth 2.1 EDR)
> 92 WHr 9-cell Lithium Ion Primary Battery (same 9 cell, duration not specified)
> Backlit Keyboard - English (same)
> JBL 2.1 Speakers with Waves Maxx Audio 3 (probably similar)
> DataSafe 2.0 Online Backup 2GB for 1 year (vs. nothing in MBP)
> Integrated 10/100/1000 Network Card (similar if not same)
> 
> The price tag on the DELL computer is $1329. The price tag in the basic MBP is $1799. We are talking of $470 difference. You don't have aluminum casing and multitouch trackpad, but you have a similar or better processor, a way better GPU and a way better screen with full HD resolution. Just for the most prominent specs. By adding a 7200 rpm HDD and a HD screen to the MBP (GPU cannot be customized in entry level MBP), the difference raises up to $670. I don't think that aluminum casing and multitouch track pad are worth almost $700 (actually they are not because the difference between the plastic MB and the much powerful 13" aluminum MBP is not even that).


That's quite a bit more than $100 difference and for inferior hardware. If you've had a different experience I'd like to know what your comparing it against.


----------



## Ironlight

I think it's important to point out that there are HD screens and there are HD screens. The quality of displays on Apple laptops is heads and shoulders above what you see from any PC manufacturer aside from their luxury offerings. And that is true for other components as well. True, many of their componnts are equivalent...or in fact are the identical hardware, but not all of them. So you can't really compare specs that way.

I work with both PCs and Macs and have for the last 27 years. They both have their pros and cons, their strengths and weaknesses. When you pay more for a Mac you are not only paying for the hardware but you are paying for the design, the ergonomics, the support, and the OS. The whole is greater than the sum of the parts and trying to compare spec sheets side by side is a generally pointless exercise. 

I have a PC desktop in my office that I built from the ground up. Boots to the desktop in seconds, has two video cards, 10 gigs of ram and five hardrives. I adore it. But my wife and two daughters all have Macbooks, and there is no way in hell I would have it any other way. It keeps me from being the technical helpdesk in my own home. 

The right tool for the right job applies to computers as much as to everything else.


----------



## Jim F

injvstice said:


> I do agree that apple puts less crapware on their computers out of the box. This is a drawback for the PC buyers (not really Microsoft fault but computer manufacturer faault), especially those not savvy enough to reformat and reinstall a clean copy of windows. That is the first ting I usually do.


How do you reformat and reinstall a clean copy of windows? Is this difficult? Where would one find instructions to do this?


----------



## poppameth

http://www.tweakguides.com

Look at the free version of the tweaking companion for your version of Windows. It covers just about anything you want to know, including fresh installation. 
You can also opt to just cleanup all the junk that comes on a store bought PC with tools like PC Decrapifier, but it can be a chore figuring out what needs to stay and what can go.


----------



## Firehead

Ok. I have to weigh in on this. My wife just received a brand new macbook air last week from her work. I played with it and yes, it is beautiful, yes, it is light, yes it is silent and yes, it ran great when browsing the web or reading emails. However, today she tried to make a power point project with it and when she went to change the size of a graph on one of the slides it froze up on her. FROZE UP. I thought this was a near impossibility of Macs! She had a macbook about 6 years ago and it had more problems than the Dell that I owned at the time. When I played around with the macbook air I thought, okay, maybe they have gotten better. NOT. This is the second macbook we have owned. I just don't get the koolaid the ifans drink. I really really don't. The GUI is great. The hardware design is beautiful. But more reliable? no. Easier to use. no. big learning curve if you are coming from PC. Really expensive for what you get. YES... 

Maybe I am just unlucky. But then I think of my brother who works in an Apple store and is a huge fanboy. He has had a $6,000 tricked out 17" MBP for a few years. One second he is tell you of the awesomeness of Mac, the next he is listing all the problems he has had with his MBP. Bad screen. Bad HDD. Faulty video hardware. Those are the three I can remember. Maybe that premium price is to cover the inevitable expense of the "free" repairs. I dunno. I don't get the koolaid...


----------



## Firehead

Leah Frances said:


> DH bought me a MacBook Air when he broke my old IBM.
> 
> Love it. Love it. Love it.
> 
> In 18 months it's crashed maybe three times.
> - It always works.
> - It's always fast.
> - I've never had to de-frag, anti-virus, or undo anything.
> 
> Love it. Will never go back. Am saving my pennies for a Mac desktop.


See? koolaid. My Dell laptop has not crashed. Ever. I mean ever. And I've had ito for 5 years. How can anyone Love love love a computer that crashes 3 times in a year and a half?!? That's lost data, lost time, lost money. Koolaid I tells ya!


----------



## Red Squirrel

Macs are like vtech kids toys. they do what they're made for, not more, no less, you can't customize or do anything special to it. PCs are more customizable, you can put Windows, Linux, whatever you want, customize it by adding more hardware, etc.... all that at half the price. I'll take a PC any time!


----------



## iamrfixit

I can't get past the 5 years with no crashes. This mythical computer has xp or vista and has never crashed; has it ever been turned on? It must be that you are just such a smooth operator? I operate PC's every day that only run one very expensive system operations software. These have never even been connected to the internet. I find your statement laughable.

Let me think isn't powerpoint a microsoft product?

I have xp, Win 7 and two versions of OSX on my macbook pro and can boot directly into any of the four. Just a short jaunt out on google and you will find many people running different flavors of Linux on theirs. How much upgrading do you really do to any laptop? With external ports I can add about anything I would want. Basically the same hard drives, disk drives and memory are used in either. Many systems have had processor upgrades available, the tower models have always been able to accept standard expansion cards.

You do realize many people have even built their own macs with off the shelf PC parts? They are called hackintosh; go ahead click the link, I'll do the work.

You are right, they do cost more up front. As with most anything speed, weight and size come with a price. Sleek, light, thin with extended battery life costs money, they are not for everyone. People pay more for options all the time, are they fools because they prefer leather seats instead of vinyl? Vinyl does the same job holding the seat together, in fact your greasy cheeseburger will even wipe off of vinyl easier. Why would anyone want a Ford Mustang instead of a Ford Fusion, you arrive the same either way.

Now while you go update your virus definitions, scan for malware, download the latest problem prevention, or figure out why you need to reinstall your system software every 6 months I have work to do.


----------



## dapperdraker

I move to mac since 2 years ago and never get back to windows again. I still touch windows sometimes, but it only if i need to run a software that only has win version, otherwise I use only mac for all my daily task since then


----------



## 06Honda

Up until this past July I have only used window based pcs. Well theres no going back now, love the MacPro 13" laptop. No cons to mention, its awesome. A whole new world is being discovered.


----------



## RedHelix

I think there's really no 'versus' to be discussed since the Mac and so-called "PC" (they are both PCs, FYI,) are designed with different functions in mind.

For most home-based use-cases, I'd even go so far as to say that OSX is perfectly sufficient. 

That said... if there's only one thing I have to say to the Mac camp, it is this:

IT professionals refer to Apple technology as a "walled garden." Meaning, it is beautiful and pretty and in perfect harmony and whatnot, but you are within the confines of one vendor's product. 

Want to install new apps on your iPhone? Go to the App store. Do you need something that's not listed? Too bad!
Want to use your iPad on a big screen? Plug it in, and hope your monitor supports that particular resolution. Not working? Too bad!
Record something on your Sony Handicam, and you want to sync it in iTunes? Good luck buddy!
Buy a new thumb drive that uses encryption, only to find out it doesn't work on the Mac? Too bad!

For typical home use, most peoples' needs are satisfied: Printing, email, web browsing, etc. But once you get outside of 'la la land' and into business computing, most of Apple's products are functionally useless. That's where Windows screams ahead of OSX, and that's why Windows runs in bazillions of places where OSX can't. 
Ever see those new digital signs in shopping malls that play back video? Windows. 
Self-checkout machines? Windows.
Half of the video signs in Times Square? Yup, Windows.

If you're not cut out for a complex system like Windows, that's fine. It is harder to fly a 747 than a 2-seat Piper. It's harder to find the blade on a 20-piece multitool than a little swiss army knife.

But to come back to my original point: It does not make sense to compare these things. The intended function is different!


----------



## poppameth

I'm interested to see what will happen now that Steve-O is gone. I think he was the great majority of Apple's driving force.


----------



## Ironlight

RedHelix said:


> IT professionals refer to Apple technology as a "walled garden." Meaning, it is beautiful and pretty and in perfect harmony and whatnot, but you are within the confines of one vendor's product.


That is true of their iOS products. It is not true of their PC products running OSX, such as their laptops and desktops.



RedHelix said:


> But once you get outside of 'la la land' and into business computing, most of Apple's products are functionally useless. That's where Windows screams ahead of OSX, and that's why Windows runs in bazillions of places where OSX can't.
> Ever see those new digital signs in shopping malls that play back video? Windows.
> Self-checkout machines? Windows.
> Half of the video signs in Times Square? Yup, Windows.


That's just plain not true. OSX is based on Unix and in fact you can drop into the Unix shell from the GUI and then you working on a system developed for corporate use that puts Windows to shame on many levels. I've worked in the software development industry, developing systems for major corporations for over 20 years and there are plenty of highly technical, scientific, creative, and other industries that use Macs extensively. Yes some specialized software is PC only, but the reverse is true as well.

Much of what you cite in terms of non-PC devices running windows, such as point of service systems and displays are PC centric because it has been easier to develop hardware drivers for Windows and because the hardware is cheaper. But that is a legacy issue and you already see that changing quite quickly.

For the record, I split time between the PC I built from scratch and my Mac laptop. To say one is fundamentally "better" than the other is just plain silly. They are largely equivalent, each with their own strengths and weaknesses but not really that far a part in the grand scheme of things.


----------



## RedHelix

Ironlight said:


> That is true of their iOS products. It is not true of their PC products running OSX, such as their laptops and desktops.


So I can install OSX on my Lenovo laptop, then?

(That's a rhetorical question; the answer is no.)



> That's just plain not true. OSX is based on Unix and in fact you can drop into the Unix shell from the GUI and then you working on a system developed for corporate use that puts Windows to shame on many levels.


I don't mean to come off as patronizing, but seriously, what are you talking about? Having access to a bash prompt does not automatically make an operating system relevant for corporate use; otherwise Linux would have routed Windows an awfully long time ago. 

Further, I take issue with claiming OSX sports any kind of advantage because it's "Unix-based", whatever that means. Sure, OSX is a stripped down, barebones spinoff of FreeBSD - one of my favorite operating systems - but the only major similarities are the "Mach half" of it's hybrid kernel and some familiar bash commands. 

So here's a question: Even if a Unix-like shell made an OS relevant in business, wouldn't I have to be high as a kite to choose OSX? Why would I lock my hardware and software into Apple when I can use Ubuntu, Fedora, etc for a whopping $0, or buy cheap Red Hat Enterprise licenses with support contracts?



> I've worked in the software development industry, developing systems for major corporations for over 20 years and there are plenty of highly technical, scientific, creative, and other industries that use Macs extensively. Yes some specialized software is PC only, but the reverse is true as well.


Of course there's loads of Mac-only software out there, I wouldn't try to argue otherwise. What I will point out, though, is 99.999% of the time, using Apple hardware is not a wise/economical decision for large corporations - particularly when you have the option to go with Mac or PC for the software required in the use-case. (CS 5.5, for example.) 

Application virtualization (my area of expertise) is changing this, but only because it makes it easier to run Windows and Windows apps on a Mac.

For server hardware, though, forget about it. Apple's been getting laughed out of datacenters for years, and the story hasn't changed. Nor will it.



> Much of what you cite in terms of non-PC devices running windows, such as point of service systems and displays are PC centric because it has been easier to develop hardware drivers for Windows and because the hardware is cheaper. But that is a legacy issue and you already see that changing quite quickly.


None of this is even remotely accurate.

Displays/Service machines/etc usually take two paths: Windows Embedded Edition, or some basic distro/spinoff of Linux.

So without going into too much detail, the explanation is a lot simpler than you're making it out to be: Apple has never created an operating system purpose-built for single-use applications, like an ATM or a self-checkout. Microsoft has, and *nix just lends itself to it.


----------



## rusty baker

poppameth said:


> I'm interested to see what will happen now that Steve-O is gone. I think he was the great majority of Apple's driving force.


Wasn't Wozniak the programmer and creator of the Apple and Jobs the marketer? Why does Jobs get all the credit?


----------



## poppameth

rusty baker said:


> Wasn't Wozniak the programmer and creator of the Apple and Jobs the marketer? Why does Jobs get all the credit?


Because the marketing is what sells it. I'm not saying they can't develop a decent product, they've just lost the "face" of Apple.


----------



## cscpianoman

*Ah the apple vs pc conundrum*

The ardent followers of each come out and state they have the best. I personally use Windows, but I tell people get what you want and can afford because in the end, there really isn't much difference between them.

1) User interface: Apple followers will swear up and down their interface is easier to use and the fact of the matter is, it is all opinion. If you like the Mac user interface go for it, if not there is Windows, Linux, Unix or DOS for that matter. Choose what is right for you

2) Hardware: Apple and PC use the exact same components. Same intel chips, southbridge, northbridge, hard drives and memory. They can also use the same display because there are only a few manufacters for displays, hard drives and processors. The only difference is in how they are made. Apple does a great job with constructing a solid laptop with the aluminum base in the MacBook pros. PCs can use the aluminum or magenesium alloy and can have similar properties, but you can find cheap plastic cases too. It depends on what you need and the price you are willing to pay.

3) Macs get Malware too and by Apple's own confession recommends Antivirus software. Remember MacDefender? In the IT world there is such a thing as zero day viruses, which means antivirus software does not have the signatures to recognize an attack. For those who have a Mac and claim the feel safe and secure, how will you know if your computer is compromised? Most malware writers now adays are not stupid enough to crash the computer. They are there for your personal information. I love how apple.com states Macs don't get PC viruses, well of course, they don't get PC viruses, PC viruses are written for PCs. They do, however, get Mac Viruses.

4) PCs and Macs have similar programs and you can find alternatives where ever you go. Shoot Macs can run Windows if you want

5) No company has a monopoly on virtue. Everyone calls microsoft evil and apple the great saint. Fact of the matter is Apple loves to litigate and even sue school districts because they have an Apple logo. How about the first "iphone?" It was actually a product made by Cisco. Apple litigated and negotiated til they had rights to it. The first "ipod" was actually a counter that sat on the back of a pinball machine. Apple sued that company to have the name changed.

So, in essence. Choose the one that works for you. This is a debate just like Chevy vs Ford. Each have their strengths and weaknesses and you can't compare one product's strengths to the other product's weaknesses. It shows a clear bias and creates lots and lots of confusion. 

<steps off soap box and takes a deep breath and a glass of water/>


----------



## user1007

Through the years, I have probably purchased as many Apple machines as PCs, especially back in the days when there was a difference in user interfaces and Macs probably had a distinct advantage for designers. I always felt Apple was holding me hostage though. I had to buy their parts or deal with their arrogant service people when I could buy components for PCs and put them in myself. And then of course the software was significantly more expensive too. 

Some years ago I forced a major transition from Apple based video editing equipment in use by my staff. There was moaning and groaning at first but the adjustment period was very short and I was able to deliver them a phenomenal editing capability with Windows components for a fraction of what something like the AVID and Apple world would have cost. 

I would never own an Apple product because the company epitomizes the concept of intellectual property theft. For example, Apple had nothing to do with invention of the mouse. It came out of Xerox PARC labs. Jobs and all taught an entire generation or two it is just fine to steal music. If you own the player, anything you can make work on it is free game.

And Apple products were unjustifiably expensive to start. And they do break to the point one place I ran had to have an extra because only two of three worked at any given time. And security? The Apple OS has been the first to be hacked in the international competition for almost five years now. So much for the arrogance. You actually do not see so many ads boasting about security advantages any more. 

I will give credit to the company with coming up with some beautiful industrial design and forcing some issues on that front. And no doubt whether with stolen mice or whatever the company forced issues of user friendliness that probably would not have happened without is influence. And I do understand its loyal following. I am happy to say I am not part of the throng. Had to laugh at a tongue and cheek ad for the new Apple iCooker. It showed a crockpot with an Apple logo and basically suggested Appleheads would buy anything with an Apple logo on it.


----------



## raylo32

Agree... Apple provides limited functionality (for example, devices w/o SD card slots... are you kidding me????) that have ridiculous limits and controls on everything. They make sense for someone that needs a dead simple device IF they are willing to buy into (figuratively and literally) what Apple wants them to have... and pay high $$ for the priveledge. Otherwise it is a style thing for some as in it is what all the cool kids get. If you aspire to that then Apple is for you.


----------



## itguy08

raylo32 said:


> Agree... Apple provides limited functionality (for example, devices w/o SD card slots... are you kidding me????) that have ridiculous limits and controls on everything. They make sense for someone that needs a dead simple device IF they are willing to buy into (figuratively and literally) what Apple wants them to have... and pay high $$ for the priveledge. Otherwise it is a style thing for some as in it is what all the cool kids get. If you aspire to that then Apple is for you.



Except Google is abandoning SD cards on the new Nexus phones. And Motorola is abandoning removable batteries on the Droid Razr. So the functionality is going on other stuff too. Google has also removed apps from the store under pressure from carriers. (Tethering apps.)

And I have a Droid X. Gave up my iPhone 3g for it. It's a POS and so is Android. It was good in the beginning. Decent phone and OK os. Nowhere near as polished as iOS. But it had potential; it was serviceable and had features my iPhone wouldn't have. Now a year and a half later:

1. Vibrate motor died.
2. Gingerbread upgrade is horrible. Phone will reboot playing MP3's at random times. Phone will reboot when it feels like. Phone is sluggish.
3. Google services seem disconnected and not fully baked.
4. Phone has a horrible E-mail client. I use MailDroid as the stock app doesn't work with IMAP worth a [email protected]
5. WiFi has always been a joke and unreliable (over 2 Droid X's)
6. 3G hotspot works when it feels like it (2 DX's)
7. Phone is overall sluggish.
8. Battery life went from OK to abysmal.

Most of these things are probably a result of Gingerbread. But I am doubtful I'll see Ice Cream Sandwich on this phone and there is no way to go back to the previous OS.

Contrast that to my iPhone 3g that I sold to a coworker last year. He's still using it and it works fine. He's got no complaints.

I can't wait until the iPhone 5 so I can get rid of the POS that is the Droid X and Android.

Neither is better than the other; just different ways of doing things.


----------



## itguy08

Lots of *BS* in this post....



RedHelix said:


> IT professionals refer to Apple technology as a "walled garden." Meaning, it is beautiful and pretty and in perfect harmony and whatnot, but you are within the confines of one vendor's product.


Funny, "walled gardens" are usually the best when reliability and availability are concerned. It's why mainframes, HP/UX, AIX, etc are used when reliability and availability are paramount. It's why companies will standardize on, say Cisco gear instead of, say HP, Cisco, and others. 

Funny how the "walled garden" is bad for PC's but OK for netcomm, telecom, etc....

Not to mention companies will tie themselves to * the most expensive part - the software (Windows)* so they are not tied to a hardware vendor. Makes 0 sense. Let's tie ourselves to a software company (Microsoft) so we can use anyone's hardware. But they forget that hitching to one vendor in the hardware space is just as bad as hitching to a hardware vendor. It's often the software that has the highest support costs and Windows has about the highest support costs out there.



> Want to install new apps on your iPhone? Go to the App store. Do you need something that's not listed? Too bad!


Except Apple lets companies write and distribute their own apps.

Here you go:
http://www.apple.com/iphone/business/apps/in-house/



> Want to use your iPad on a big screen? Plug it in, and hope your monitor supports that particular resolution. Not working? Too bad!


Cause 720p and/or 1080i/p are that hard to support. 



> Record something on your Sony Handicam, and you want to sync it in iTunes? Good luck buddy!


Ok, you got me there. You have to import it to iMovie then send it to iTunes. But you probably want to edit it anyway and that's where iMovie is used. Works fine and even works with AVCHD cameras and D8/DV cameras. 



> Buy a new thumb drive that uses encryption, only to find out it doesn't work on the Mac? Too bad!


You should be reading the boxes. There are those that support encryption and Macs. Or use TrueCrypt which is cross platform - Mac, PC, and Linux.



> Ever see those new digital signs in shopping malls that play back video? Windows.


Yeah and the BSOD's on them are all over the Web. 



> Self-checkout machines? Windows.
> Half of the video signs in Times Square? Yup, Windows.
> 
> If you're not cut out for a complex system like Windows, that's fine.


The reason for that is because Windows machines are cheaper. You can get a $100 Atom box that will run some low rez screen on Times Square (those while big are low resolution). Same for the other stuff. You can purpose build a dirt cheap Windows box but the software is still the same old POS known as Windows. 

And a lot of that stuff is migrating to Linux. They get better reliability, lower support costs, and have the wide hardware support like Windows. 

You have your opinions but a lot of it is just BS and not facts at all.


----------



## raylo32

What bothers me about Apple:

- You have to do things the way they want you to do them. No SD card slot? Might I not want to transfer some pics from a digital SLR to my phone on a trip to e-mail? Sorry.

- No Flash player? We all know the world is going to HTML5 but why haven't Apple users been able to view the majority of web video for years? Sorry again.

- Convince eveyone that they need "apps" even of all they do is connect to a web page. Used to be called a bookmark, now an app??

- Stupid Apple advertising that says you aren't cool if you don't partake. One of the first lessons I learnt as a child was to not use or buy into that crap line of thinking.

- I keep hearing from Applenistas that look, the other guys are starting to do the same things. If so, that just means Apple has managed to dumb down the user population and lower expectations.... not a good thing. But who can blame them when they can save $10 per unit mfg costs by elimintaing a SD card slot that anyone coming from Apple has no idea how to use.

I will not be assimilated!


----------



## Ironlight

raylo32 said:


> What bothers me about Apple:
> 
> - You have to do things the way they want you to do them. No SD card slot? Might I not want to transfer some pics from a digital SLR to my phone on a trip to e-mail? Sorry.


Get an SD card reader and plug it in. Yes you can buy any number of PC machines that are tricked out like swiss army knives. If Apple thought that it was important to their buyers, they would put it in. After all, they actively court the home user market and the video/photo market.



raylo32 said:


> - No Flash player? We all know the world is going to HTML5 but why haven't Apple users been able to view the majority of web video for years? Sorry again.


Well given the fact that Adobe just ceased development of mobile Flash it's now a moot point. And Apple users on laptop and desktops never had a problem viewing Flash. It was only mobile devices. Jobs had a very well articulated reason for it so I'll let him answer your specific question as to why:

http://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughts-on-flash/



raylo32 said:


> - Convince eveyone that they need "apps" even of all they do is connect to a web page. Used to be called a bookmark, now an app??


I don't follow you. I have an iPhone...using the native browser I can bookmark any site and then call it up later from a list of bookmarks, OR I can turn the bookmark into a tile on the "desktop". I don't need an app to view a site. If a third party developer creates an app for viewing certain message boards, like this one, to optimize it for using the site on a small screen that's between them and the user. I can still use a browser to view any site I please.



raylo32 said:


> - Stupid Apple advertising that says you aren't cool if you don't partake. One of the first lessons I learnt as a child was to not use or buy into that crap line of thinking.


Apple advertising is certainly aspirational, there is no doubt about that. But then again so is advertising for virtually every other consumer technology product that I can think of. If you don't buy a product because you don't like their ads I think you are sort of cutting off your nose to spite your face.



raylo32 said:


> - I keep hearing from Applenistas that look, the other guys are starting to do the same things. If so, that just means Apple has managed to dumb down the user population and lower expectations.... not a good thing.


When I figure out what the hell this even means maybe I'll come back and comment on it.



raylo32 said:


> I will not be assimilated!


You already have been. :whistling2:

As I said before, I'm no Apple fanboy. But I find it amusing when people rail mightily against the company and it's products for minor and irrelevant, or flat-out misperceived grievances.


----------



## raylo32

Not to get into all that other stuff which I find utterly unconvincing... but why should I have to "go buy a plug in SD card reader?". That's the other thing I hear from Appleheads... you can do <whatever> this other way... that just happens to be a total kludge and usually involves shoveling more $ to Apple.... just to substitute and work around something that should be there in the first place. Ridiculous.

Assimilated... me? Somewhat but not quite the same. Maybe in terms of OS but plenty of different mfgs to choose from to get hardware configured the way I want. Not just what 3 or 4 guys in Cupertino say I need.



Ironlight said:


> Get an SD card reader and plug it in. Yes you can buy any number of PC machines that are tricked out like swiss army knives. If Apple thought that it was important to their buyers, they would put it in. After all, they actively court the home user market and the video/photo market. =quote]


----------



## itguy08

raylo32 said:


> - You have to do things the way they want you to do them. No SD card slot? Might I not want to transfer some pics from a digital SLR to my phone on a trip to e-mail? Sorry.


The new laptops and iMacs do come with SD slots. The 13" Air, 13", 15" Macbook Pros, and all iMacs all have SD card slots in them. 

But for me, who's DSLR has a Compact Flash an SD slot is pointless. Or if you shoot Sony who, IIRC still uses Memory stick. Or if you use microSD and forgot your adapter. I *always* carry a reader. Cheapo no-name that works with all card slots and OS X. 




> - No Flash player? We all know the world is going to HTML5 but why haven't Apple users been able to view the majority of web video for years? Sorry again.


I have it on my Droid X. It's useless. If the video is not "optimized for mobile" you get slow performance and a touch UI that doesn't work quite right. Even Adobe is abandoning it.



> - Stupid Apple advertising that says you aren't cool if you don't partake. One of the first lessons I learnt as a child was to not use or buy into that crap line of thinking.


No different than Toyota's recent "Trade up" ads where they say "trade up" from a Ford, Hyundai, Chevy, etc. to a 'Yota. No different than BMW selling "The Ultiamte Driving Experience" or Bose with their Waveradio.

If you like the product, buy it. And Apple's more recent ads seem to be focused on the stuff you can do with it rather than the "smugness".


----------



## rusty baker

Mac is good for those who like them, but the average computer user doesn't need anything that expensive.


----------



## rossfingal

I've used both of them.
They both work. I like "PC" compatible; because, they're so easy to upgrade/
build, run multiple OS systems.
Ways around hardware/software conflicts.

RF

(And the cost!)


----------



## Ironlight

I'm evenly divided. My main machine is a tower PC desktop that I put together myself. I certainly appreciated the flexibility to build what I wanted from an almost endless spectrum of parts from NewEgg. And the fact that the result worked reasonably well and required only a modicum of tweaking and optimization is in truth nothing short of a miracle of standardization.

That said, my wife and kids use Macs. I got tired of playing PC support for all of them and transitioned them to Macs some time ago. And it was the best thing I ever did. It's amazing how Macs "just work" in so many ways. I have been using my wife previous Macbook as she got one from work, and the thing has been running for over a year without ever turning it off. It has not crashed, it has not locked up. Nothing. And while it took me over an hour to get my PC to find the HP laserprinter on our home network, the Macs find it without a problem. The list of similar "ease of use" experiences is pretty long.

My point is, I'm pretty "vendor neutral". I think anyone who finds Apple in someway "irritating" or "annoying" has some issues with the company that have nothing to do with their products or technology. Apple wants to sell computers and product design is always a compromise. If slapping a $5 card reader into their machines is going to sell them more machines then they would do it. I'm fairly certain they don't leave out functionality just to spite their customers.

I will admit to hating going into Apple stores. We have four of them around me and I avoid them like the plague...not because of the products..it's fun to go into the stores. It's the bizarre fandom thing that goes on in them. Makes the hair on the back of my neck stand on end.


----------



## maryjane23

IMHO, Mac's are pretty and nice if you can afford them. I don't think they're worth the money you have to pay for the little light-up apple, but hey, whatever floats your boat.
It's easy to find a good deal on a PC laptop. Desktop PC's are great because you can build them yourself, which saves you money and you get exactly what you want.
Just my opinion!


----------



## maryjane23

rusty baker said:


> mac is good for those who like them, but the average computer user doesn't need anything that expensive.


this^


----------



## kymira

rusty baker said:


> Mac is good for those who like them, but the average computer user doesn't need anything that expensive.


I agree. 

I used to have a powerbook when I was in collage, It was lent to us by the school. We primarily used it for Final Cut Pro and other Editing applications. 
I say If you can afford it and/or need it for work...do it.

But if not, stick to a PC.


----------



## user1007

Kiddos,

I grew up with this, in Silicon Valley, and remain the same age as Gates and the departed Jobs. It is hard to believe but their was no "software" in the early days. Everything was hardware driven and if you have not noticed the paradigm shift, it is swinging back that direction. 

The first computer assigned me for almost exclusive use was a thing called ADAM from Logical Machine Corporation. It cost mortals that had to buy one $42,000 or so and was the size of a desk. Nice keyboard, greenish CRT monitor as I remember and disc storage platters about 18 feet in diameter. The machine programming language was total natural language and you could make the thing do just about anything. 

Jobs and Woz were still in Palo Alto garages. Gates was talking about packaged software from Albuquerque but nobody was taking him seriously. I think big blue was marching folks in blue suits with ties and perky bows out to custom program, at near machine level, your system 34 for much more than what ADAM cost.

Jobs was not the first person to suggest if you make apps cheap enough, people will not steal them. The holding company for Logical bought the first retail computer chain in this country and was the first dealer to suit Apple. There was a movement, for a time, when we expected printed manuals for nice software from operating system on to special stuff was bundled for $20-40.

Now? Apple or PC? I am honest and buy and maintain licenses. Because, yes, it comforts me to know $2400 I pay covers the assumption I will duplicated and distribute it. Nonsense. 

My current computer set-up as is nice as they come for laptop situations. Windows. AMD, not Intel chipped. Most everything loaded on it is open source software and works with that matching clients who have Apple and Linux stuff. I backup encrypted to a cloud. I have used the DVD drive like twice since I have had this. 

Nearest Apple machine that does half what I ask this to do was three times the price. And then I find myself held hostage to parts. It really is like a dogmatic religion. You have to be it all without question if you go with Apple.

My cell phone is cheap Chinese but cute. If I run it through a washing machine I will not cry that I am out $400 and stuck with 18 months on a contract. And, I know you can get iPhones on other than AT&T network now but that was the worst wireless carrier in the country for a time.

I pay $55/month for everything including free music downloads. My stupid little thing is also a music player. I only get 1,000 talk minutes but the device is Skype capable so I use it with my also, no contract, 4G hot spot.

You have to decide what devices fit you. I don't need name brand crap to look cool. Technology for me will always be about sheet metal screwed together black boxes. What I am willing to pay for design over that is personal choice.

I don't see evolutionary design changes in Apple products WOW enough to justify the cost.


----------



## raylo32

That is one of my hobbies, too. Gotta love NewEgg... they are sort of the Amazon of PC parts. Order the stuff, and a couple days later it's here. Assemble it in less than an hour and good to go. Quality parts makes great PCs and every one I have built is still running (one 24/7 for security cam and HTPC duty) except one I built last Chrsitmas for my nephew. He managed to spill a beer into it and killed the video card. :-/

Really good to be able to customize like my main tower for gaming and general use... very powerful with a substantial video card. Then the HTPC built for low power requirements and 24/7 operation with Intel onboad CPU graphics... draws like 40 watts total whilst running the cam software, maybe a bit more streaming HD video. Easy to build something that precisely suits the need.




Ironlight said:


> I'm evenly divided. My main machine is a tower PC desktop that I put together myself. I certainly appreciated the flexibility to build what I wanted from an almost endless spectrum of parts from NewEgg. And the fact that the result worked reasonably well and required only a modicum of tweaking and optimization is in truth nothing short of a miracle of standardization.


----------



## itguy08

In all seriousness, those that are saying Macs are too expensive, what did you pay for your computer? Everyone likes to point to the $300 specials but few use them. Outside of those that built your own, how much do you pay for a laptop or desktop? When people ask me for a computer I say get a Mac or if you must go Windows, bypass the low end and spend about $7-1000 on a machine. The more expensive Windows machines are built a little better, have better specs, and parts, etc. 

For a tinkerer, sure, the PC will give you limitless options. I was "That guy" a while ago. But I grew tired of the endless tweaking, obsessing over CPU, RAM speed, video card, and the constant upkeep of Windows. In 2002 I plopped $1900 for an iMac (top of the line). Never looked back. I plop my $$ down, walk out with an Apple and am good for 3-6 years. I'm using one of the original unibody Macbook Pro's (2008) and have no intention of a new computer for a while. The wife is still on an original 1st gen dual core white Macbook (2006). Probably get her something next year. Not because the machine is dead but because it looks like hell, the battery is dead, hd is almost full, and it will be 6 years old....

Giving up on the PC "hobby" and junk meant more time doing stuff around the house, more time with the wife, and no more PC support for me. All of which is a good thing since I deal with Windows' BS all day for my day job.


----------



## raylo32

If you haven't done this for awhile you might be surprised how little tinkering is required. Honestly the most time consuming part if you aren't current is getting up to speed on the CPU and socket differences so you can pick compatible mobos and memory. Having done that, everything just plain works. You can tinker if you want but not necessary at all. Most of the Windows issues you cite are caused by all the crap that mfgs load onto their PCs. DIY all you have on the desktop when you start up is a recycle bin icon. Pretty refreshing.




itguy08 said:


> For a tinkerer, sure, the PC will give you limitless options. I was "That guy" a while ago..


----------

