| Author | Thread |
|
|
11/22/2005 12:20:30 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by "Spazmo99":
I haven't noticed much, if any, difference in speed between my PowerMac G4 and my PIII 1.2GHz. |
Well, I think that's the point that's being made here. Sure, a G4 might compare to PIII 1.2GHz. But my two year old Toshiba laptop that I paid $1,400 for came with a PIV 2.4GHz processor and 512MB RAM. And that's just not something Apple can offer in that price range. I believe their equivalent to my notebook goes for like $3,999 or did at the time.
I have also had very little problems with my Toshiba. (They don't put as much crap on it as HPaq
Also, I know the claims of Macs. For a decade they've made major claims. And although I think their move to BSD for their OSX system was a very wise move, they can have downtime. There is less of a virus threat, but a wise Windows user seldom is infected. I was in a University that was exclusively Mac 10 yrs ago. The same claims were made about the new OS and PowerPC's, etc. And in truth, in said environment I saw nearly as many headaches as with PCs.
If you are considering a Mac I would wait a few months. A lot of rumors are circulating that new Intel-based Mac Laptops will debut around January/February.
WINDOWS
STRENGTHS:
- large application support
- strong business functionality software
- stronger development tools
- cheaper hardware platform (60% cost of competing Macinstosh hardware)
- system geared toward a two-button mouse concept
WEAKNESSES:
- more virus and spyware due to it's higher proliferation (90%+ are windows machines)
- not as uniform hardware standards
MACINTOSH
STRENGTHS:
- OSX built on BSD (a very strong Unix clone)
- higher reliability of hardware due to a single vendor system
- lower market saturation, fewer virus' are focused toward the Mac system
WEAKNESSES:
- less available software
- out-of-sync with most businesses
- single mouse button by default (sure you can buy a two-button mouse but we're talking about a laptop...who wants to tote a !@#$% mouse for just a second button)
- extremely high price/performance ratio
As for usability...this is really a personal preference. I in fact, find much of XP's systems and menu's more user-friendly than Mac. On the flip side...I find Mac's dialog windows much more informative and user-friendly than Windows.
Originally posted by "kyebosh":
Played on a few macs and found them really frustrating. |
Funny, I had a similar experience. I considered buying the 17" Mac Titanium notebook for photography. I went and toyed around with it and found the application interface extremely limiting and frustrating. For example, there were applications that I could not click on an "X" and close. I had to go to Finder, select application, then go back and select quit. That is like 4-5 clicks compared to "1". That to me, is a poor implementation. Now, many programs did have the default "X". And I was also bothered by having to click and hold the button down to access "options menu" - give me my two buttons. I don't think I can go Mac until they provide laptops with 2-buttons.
Originally posted by "lynnesite":
Originally posted by kyebosh:
There's still a lot less software designed for macs.
That's not been true since OS X got into its 3rd major release. |
Actually it is very true. Please show me the business applications? Major office applications? Database?
Originally posted by "lynnesite":
Speaking of megahertz, they are totally not comparable between processors. Search on "megahertz myth" for some poop about why. |
You're right...and guess which processor has slammed the PowerPC (and the Pentium IVs). AMD's Athlon64. In almost every test excelled both processors.
No worry, once Mac gets converted to x86 code and their agreement with Intel ends. They will allow Macintosh on AMD processors too.
Originally posted by "Chaszmyr":
The - side is you'd have to wait a while for software such as photoshop to run natively on Intel Macs |
Looks to be very minimal, I saw some preliminary and the performance penalty was extremely low. I believe they bought a company that developed a binary translator (very low-level) so it's minimal performance hit. Plus, OSX is built on BSD so most of it's core components and modules already run on x86 natively.
|
|
|
|
11/22/2005 01:02:10 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by theSaj:
Originally posted by "Spazmo99":
I haven't noticed much, if any, difference in speed between my PowerMac G4 and my PIII 1.2GHz. |
Well, I think that's the point that's being made here. Sure, a G4 might compare to PIII 1.2GHz. But my two year old Toshiba laptop that I paid $1,400 for came with a PIV 2.4GHz processor and 512MB RAM. And that's just not something Apple can offer in that price range. I believe their equivalent to my notebook goes for like $3,999 or did at the time.
I have also had very little problems with my Toshiba. (They don't put as much crap on it as HPaq
Also, I know the claims of Macs. For a decade they've made major claims. And although I think their move to BSD for their OSX system was a very wise move, they can have downtime. There is less of a virus threat, but a wise Windows user seldom is infected. I was in a University that was exclusively Mac 10 yrs ago. The same claims were made about the new OS and PowerPC's, etc. And in truth, in said environment I saw nearly as many headaches as with PCs.
If you are considering a Mac I would wait a few months. A lot of rumors are circulating that new Intel-based Mac Laptops will debut around January/February.
WINDOWS
STRENGTHS:
- large application support
- strong business functionality software
- stronger development tools
- cheaper hardware platform (60% cost of competing Macinstosh hardware)
- system geared toward a two-button mouse concept
WEAKNESSES:
- more virus and spyware due to it's higher proliferation (90%+ are windows machines)
- not as uniform hardware standards
MACINTOSH
STRENGTHS:
- OSX built on BSD (a very strong Unix clone)
- higher reliability of hardware due to a single vendor system
- lower market saturation, fewer virus' are focused toward the Mac system
WEAKNESSES:
- less available software
- out-of-sync with most businesses
- single mouse button by default (sure you can buy a two-button mouse but we're talking about a laptop...who wants to tote a !@#$% mouse for just a second button)
- extremely high price/performance ratio
As for usability...this is really a personal preference. I in fact, find much of XP's systems and menu's more user-friendly than Mac. On the flip side...I find Mac's dialog windows much more informative and user-friendly than Windows.
Originally posted by "kyebosh":
Played on a few macs and found them really frustrating. |
Funny, I had a similar experience. I considered buying the 17" Mac Titanium notebook for photography. I went and toyed around with it and found the application interface extremely limiting and frustrating. For example, there were applications that I could not click on an "X" and close. I had to go to Finder, select application, then go back and select quit. That is like 4-5 clicks compared to "1". That to me, is a poor implementation. Now, many programs did have the default "X". And I was also bothered by having to click and hold the button down to access "options menu" - give me my two buttons. I don't think I can go Mac until they provide laptops with 2-buttons.
Originally posted by "lynnesite":
Originally posted by kyebosh:
There's still a lot less software designed for macs.
That's not been true since OS X got into its 3rd major release. |
Actually it is very true. Please show me the business applications? Major office applications? Database?
Originally posted by "lynnesite":
Speaking of megahertz, they are totally not comparable between processors. Search on "megahertz myth" for some poop about why. |
You're right...and guess which processor has slammed the PowerPC (and the Pentium IVs). AMD's Athlon64. In almost every test excelled both processors.
No worry, once Mac gets converted to x86 code and their agreement with Intel ends. They will allow Macintosh on AMD processors too.
Originally posted by "Chaszmyr":
The - side is you'd have to wait a while for software such as photoshop to run natively on Intel Macs |
Looks to be very minimal, I saw some preliminary and the performance penalty was extremely low. I believe they bought a company that developed a binary translator (very low-level) so it's minimal performance hit. Plus, OSX is built on BSD so most of it's core components and modules already run on x86 natively. |
Sure, whatever you say..........
All I know is that to get my Windows machine to do the same thing as my Mac, I have a lot more hoops to jump through and it's always a huge PITA compared to getting the same thing done on my Mac.
I plug stuff into my Mac and it works.
Not so with my PC which has to hunt for drivers, pop up a dozen contradictory warnings/input requests, then reboot. BAH!
If you just want to do things with your computer, get a Mac. If you want to work on your computer, get a PC.
|
|
|
|
11/22/2005 01:04:58 PM · #28 |
lol very true
Message edited by author 2005-11-22 13:05:40.
|
|
|
|
11/22/2005 01:14:15 PM · #29 |
theSaj: I'm sure it depends what kind of big office software you're looking for, but my parents have run an ad-agency that's only used Macs for years. I can attest that there are some VERY significant business programs out there for Mac. I've personally used some pretty heavy duty database software--and there's networking software, publishing software, graphics software, accounting software, etc.
To the original poster: I've used a Mac for a little over 20 years. I think that they're fabulous--but they're what I'm used to. I've known people who switched from PC to Mac and loved it. But I think it is important that you test each one out.
And, if you have any students K-college in the house, remember to use them for their student discount! |
|
|
|
11/22/2005 07:31:54 PM · #30 |
| I have read every one of the posts to my original question and I look forward to reading more. I find it interesting that each of you either Mac or PC users are just as passionate about your preferece. The laptop I lost to Hurricane Wilma was a Toshiba laptop and ran on WinME, so as you can tell from that info I had it for awhile. My nephew has the 12' PowerbookG4 and I had an opportunity to test drive it this weekend. I'm still considering it but I'm also a little leary of a change. One thing I really liked about the Powerbook was the WiFi connection!!! I'm also looking at the Sony Vaio FJ170 and the Toshiba Qusimo (sp?) any opinions on those?? |
|
|
|
11/22/2005 07:50:08 PM · #31 |
I have used both apples and pc's for 15 years. They are both good platforms and they both take a certain knowledge.
I have a desktop 3.4 gig PC with windows xp that has all the latest gizmos on it and is my primary computer 70% of the time. It kicks a G5 in the butt for half the price.
I have a G4 powerbook with OS X for my travel computer and I use this for location work. Very nice. I have a limited number of programs (All the Adobe stuff, all my camera related crap, Microsoft office stuff etc) It was pretty expensive.
I bought my daughter a Dell when she went to college this year and, honestly, I would like that one too :-D
Sorry I couldn't take a side here to stir the pot :-/ |
|
|
|
11/22/2005 07:53:21 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by "Spazmo99":
I plug stuff into my Mac and it works. |
Somehow I truly doubt that. Very few people ever even open their Macs. And if you're referring to USB based devices?
Most of the one's I've plugged in have not needed drivers. Or, it's simply a matter of putting the CD in and then plugging it in...
But the difference is that I can go out and buy a $10 modem and perhaps have to fuss with drivers. Where for Mac you're dishing out $100. If I go out and buy a $50 USB unit it works fine.
Originally posted by "ladyhawk22":
I'm sure it depends what kind of big office software you're looking for, but my parents have run an ad-agency that's only used Macs for years. I can attest that there are some VERY significant business programs out there for Mac. |
Yes, yes, Mac is famed for it's one fame and glory in the business world. The whole desktop/graphi publishing. And Mac has added a nice boat with pro-audio sound as well. These are "niche specializations" and not common business software.
Common business software is your office productivity suites used in thousands of different types of businesses and not just a specific genre. That is where Mac trails far behind.
I was in a company that was totally Mac based. We used FileMakerPro. Mainly because the owner's son liked Mac. It probably cost the company 1/2 million a year lost productivity. And please, don't tell me about things connecting and instantly working and no problem. There were tons....
Originally posted by "dagaleaa":
One thing I really liked about the Powerbook was the WiFi connection!!!
|
Very few Windows laptops ship without WiFi these days. And those are usually $499-$599 units.
Dagaleaa, there is rhetoric and there is reality. I gave you some solid strengths and weaknesses of both platforms. Weigh which ones are most important to you.
I actually have a LOT of respect for Mac's (especially for their adoption of BSD for OSX and what seems to be a well executed move to Intel - they chose Intel over AMD because they have greater software resources to make it a smoother transition for their user base). I even looked into buying a Mac laptop. I personally decided that a $3,999 price tag for a 17" Powerbook with only a G4 was not worth it. Sure, it was 40% lighter than my P4 Toshiba with 17" screen. But I only paid $1450 for my Toshiba. I also felt there were additional user interface issues. (There are a fair number of hurdles going from Windows to Mac OS-X
|
|
|
|
11/22/2005 08:54:14 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by theSaj:
Originally posted by "Spazmo99":
I plug stuff into my Mac and it works. |
Somehow I truly doubt that. Very few people ever even open their Macs. And if you're referring to USB based devices?
Most of the one's I've plugged in have not needed drivers. Or, it's simply a matter of putting the CD in and then plugging it in...
But the difference is that I can go out and buy a $10 modem and perhaps have to fuss with drivers. Where for Mac you're dishing out $100. If I go out and buy a $50 USB unit it works fine.
|
No, I'm not just referring to USB devices. Though everytime I have plugged a USb drive into my PC, Windows has to go through some gyrations to recognize it. All I have to do on my Mac is plug it in and open it.
Hard drives, yes, internal ones, just as easy. much more so than the PC.
PCI cards, graphics cards too.
I guess you're one of the lucky few who has not had a Windows driver corrupt their whole system to the point where the only option is to reformat.
With Macs, the phone modem is built in. I think it's the same with most PC's too, unless you're on a truly Jurassic system.
The same hardware, My DSL modem for example, works effortlessly with the Mac, yet requires 4 CD's and maybe 45minutes of installation crap to work on my PC.
I plugged my USB printer into my PC, Windows wanted to install drivers, which I neeeded from the CD or via download. Plug the same printer into my Mac, click print.
Doubt all you want, but I know what my experience has been. You can pontificate here as well, but just like your convoluted thoughts won't justify theft, they won't make me endorse PC's as easy to use, when they are anything but.
As I said earlier, if you want to do work with your computer, get a Mac. If you want to work on your computer, get a PC. |
|
|
|
11/22/2005 09:25:48 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
The same hardware, My DSL modem for example, works effortlessly with the Mac, yet requires 4 CD's and maybe 45minutes of installation crap to work on my PC. |
strange, is this some sort of crazy internal dsl modem? DSL connections generally connect through 10/100 nic cards which are often built into the motherboard of a pc and are installed with the initial motherboard drivers.
|
|
|
|
11/22/2005 09:26:12 PM · #35 |
| I heard that with the Intel based Macs you could dual boot both Mac OS and Windows. I don't know how true that will be with the final release, but OS X has been run on a PC or two. |
|
|
|
11/22/2005 09:33:35 PM · #36 |
MAC or PC? Lets hope this doesn't get out of hand.
From an administrator's point of view,
Some misconceptions about both platforms are:
Misconceptions on MACs:
1. they dont crash (dare bet your money on this?)
2. they are easy to use (I still think their mouse designs are crap)
3. dont need upgrades (I administer 30+ MACs in an advertising agency, they NEED upgrades as much as PCs)
Misconceptions on Windows:
1. they crash a lot (Win98 yes, but WinXP is a solid one)
2. they are hard to use (there is a good reason why it is dominating like 90% of the computer systems in use today)
3. they need upgrade often (unless you are a gaming freak who wants the best)
4. prone to virus (imagine you have 10000 window machines and only 1 Mac at home, who do you think more likely will get a virus hit someday? of course the bigger number, duh)
I personally feel that Window based machines are easier to deal with in case of problems. OK, maybe the MAC isnt getting as much defense from me, but they really are a bitch to setup in a networked environment. Overall, I also find Window machines easier to configure and get it to work the way I wanted them to.
Message edited by author 2005-11-22 21:36:27.
|
|
|
|
11/22/2005 09:47:01 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by kyebosh:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
The same hardware, My DSL modem for example, works effortlessly with the Mac, yet requires 4 CD's and maybe 45minutes of installation crap to work on my PC. |
strange, is this some sort of crazy internal dsl modem? DSL connections generally connect through 10/100 nic cards which are often built into the motherboard of a pc and are installed with the initial motherboard drivers. |
No, it's a standalone device that connects to the computer via the 10/100 nic card which is built into both the Mac and the PC.
With the Mac, I open the browser and it offers to setup my connection given my userID and password. Done. Works flawlessly.
With the PC, I have to install a bunch of stuff, then go into network connections and fiddle around with the settings to get it to work. |
|
|
|
11/22/2005 09:48:01 PM · #38 |
Originally posted by simonsez:
I personally feel that Window based machines are easier to deal with in case of problems. OK, maybe the MAC isnt getting as much defense from me, but they really are a bitch to setup in a networked environment. Overall, I also find Window machines easier to configure and get it to work the way I wanted them to. |
And that's exactly what I find the opposite: a PC is fine once it's set up and configured to do what you want, but as soon as you change anything or if something goes wrong (especially with the network), it's much harder to find and fix the problem.
I've used both at work (on the same network) since about 1991 ... it's been a pretty consistent pattern over that time.
But once you have them configured and working, there's little difference between them. |
|
|
|
11/22/2005 09:51:58 PM · #39 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by kyebosh:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
The same hardware, My DSL modem for example, works effortlessly with the Mac, yet requires 4 CD's and maybe 45minutes of installation crap to work on my PC. |
strange, is this some sort of crazy internal dsl modem? DSL connections generally connect through 10/100 nic cards which are often built into the motherboard of a pc and are installed with the initial motherboard drivers. |
No, it's a standalone device that connects to the computer via the 10/100 nic card which is built into both the Mac and the PC.
With the Mac, I open the browser and it offers to setup my connection given my userID and password. Done. Works flawlessly.
With the PC, I have to install a bunch of stuff, then go into network connections and fiddle around with the settings to get it to work. |
We have a similar thing with our cable modem, but what that was installed the guy did it for us. We simply bought a hub and a wireless roughter, and now we can support many computers easily with almost no effort. Especially for the wireless.
|
|
|
|
11/22/2005 09:59:12 PM · #40 |
go mac, you will save a fortune in virus repair, crashes and they are just better : )
I have had a few ibooks and powerbook..and a g5 love em all |
|
|
|
11/22/2005 10:00:43 PM · #41 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
And that's exactly what I find the opposite: a PC is fine once it's set up and configured to do what you want, but as soon as you change anything or if something goes wrong (especially with the network), it's much harder to find and fix the problem.
I've used both at work (on the same network) since about 1991 ... it's been a pretty consistent pattern over that time.
But once you have them configured and working, there's little difference between them. |
Man! you really must share you secret! :) but you are right, once they are configured, they work the same.
Prior to OSX upgrade, we even big headaches trying to patch up all the MACs (OS 8, 9) to the same VLAN, else they would not communicate with each other. With OSX upgraded, the G4s now can detect each other on the same network regardless, but it is still buggy as to sometimes they wont "communicate" thru applytalk eventho they can see each other.
|
|
|
|
11/22/2005 10:03:13 PM · #42 |
but I guess if someone's gonna use the MAC as a PC, then I see no harm trying especially if he/she has got the money to spend on it.
I'm leaning more towards the windows platform for its cheaper hardware. No worries of spyware or viruses since I've got mirror images of the entire disk on DVD :) I use Symantec Ghost. Also, I find the built-in WindowsXP rollback feature (Restore) useful.
|
|
|
|
11/24/2005 11:04:30 AM · #43 |
I like this quote from today's David Pogue's article in the NY Times:
EVERYWHERE you look, the electronics industry seems to be playing its own mutant variations of limbo. But the question isn't "How low can you go?" At Dell, it's "How cheap can you go?" At Apple, it's "How cool can you go?" And at Microsoft's Windows division, it's "How slow can you go?" |
|
|
|
11/24/2005 11:12:04 AM · #44 |
Originally posted by simonsez:
Prior to OSX upgrade, we even big headaches trying to patch up all the MACs (OS 8, 9) to the same VLAN, else they would not communicate with each other. With OSX upgraded, the G4s now can detect each other on the same network regardless, but it is still buggy as to sometimes they wont "communicate" thru applytalk eventho they can see each other. |
OS X is no friend of mine ... on our work LAN we have:
Mac G4/OS X
Mac G4/OS 9.2
Mac G4/OS 9.2/AppleShare IP Server
Mac G3/OS 8.6
Power Computing Mac Clone/OS 7.5.3
Compaq P4/Windows 2000
Dell (?)/Windows 2000 Server
We occasionally connect a Mac iBook or PowerBook as well.
They pretty much all see/interact with each other using ordinary file-sharing over Ethernet, and also with Timbuktu (remote-control software). I routinely control Macs from PCs and vice versa. |
|
|
|
11/24/2005 12:05:52 PM · #45 |
Ah, the Mac/PC religious war rises again. Most of the basics have been covered in this thread. Only thing I would add is for the dollar, you will get more with the PC (processor power, flexibility in software offerings, etc). The Mac is a wonderful platform and I have nothing bad to say about it. I would think about this decision like you do camera equipment. If you are a Canon user and you want to go to Nikon, you will have to invest in all the Nikon supported accessories as well (lenses, etc), so add that into your budget. For me, I am too heavily invested in Windows software to make the transition. I did buy a MiniMac for my wife to use (and for me to play around with and see what this Mac religion was all about). After a many months of using it, I'm not totally sold, it's very nice an easy to use, but not worth the $$'s. However, I have been using PC's for 16 years, so all the PITA stuff people complain about is just second nature stuff for me and not an issue or inconvenience.
Message edited by author 2005-11-24 12:07:14. |
|
|
|
11/24/2005 12:14:42 PM · #46 |
Macs and PCs both suck! If I didn't make my living with the damn things I'd throw 'em all away.
|
|
