Apple or PC?

[designerleather]

It is really apples and oranges. Macs are o.k., generally over priced, and are find for "users". PCs offer far more control, operability as well as most make the mistake of associating PC and windows, but you can run a great many other operating systems on PCs like Linux for example.

I had to laugh at one comment that called Macs superior computers, and referred to PCs if you only wanted to play games. How many software programming tools are out there for the Mac. Also, don't confuse scripting languages like "JavaScript" with actual programming languages that produced actual executables. Reason for more games on a PC, more software and programming languages to write the games for one, more open source and more expandability.

Then again, I have not bought a PC in over 15 years, Every few years I will build a new one from scratch, and as needed I will upgrade and swap out components to optimize my performance, never having to need the latest and greatest, but being able to by a much faster processor after it is no longer the new kid on the block.

Macs are definitely easier to use for a lot of people. It all depends on what your needs are.

 

[Elise1986]

well, the problem with most pcs is that the companies put components of a lot of different suppliers in one computer. that's what makes it unstable. i mean if you're capable of building your own pc and putting the ideal components together, good for you, but a lot of people don't have the knowledge

i agree that macs are over priced (especially the black macbook was far too expensive, you basically had to pay for the colour), but if you consider that they keep working for years ... i bought a macbook two years ago. and one of the main reasons i decided to buy a mac is the size of the macbook & the battery (mine lasts 4 hours).
i have to take my computer with me a lot of times. the mac is way more convenient to carry around than others. and other laptops with the same size and performance are more expensive than macbooks.

 

[silk skin paws]

I want to own a mac someday. The price is out of my budget. My desktop and laptop are pcs. I also heard macs are increasingly more susceptible to viruses since more and more people are switching to macs. More people =more trouble. I'm also interested in linux. It seems complicated because I'm not familiar with it.

 

[Les_Sucettes]

I had to laugh at one comment that called Macs superior computers, and referred to PCs if you only wanted to play games. How many software programming tools are out there for the Mac. Also, don't confuse scripting languages like "JavaScript" with actual programming languages that produced actual executables. Reason for more games on a PC, more software and programming languages to write the games for one, more open source and more expandability.
.

Give me one reason besides playing games, that i don't do, to buy a PC?

And Silk, Mac are virtually virus free at moment, their market although expanding is still a niche. I used Mac's all my life and I can safely say, I NEVER had a virus.

 

[silk skin paws]

Thanks for letting me know macs are still virus free. That's what I hate about pcs. There's new viruses every week

 

[designerleather]

Les_Sucettes - Already have. Writing programs. I could also expand that to having a career in the IT or software development field. My comment in rebuke to "Superior computers" is that Macs are more of an application platform. There are 90% more applications and custom software written for PC-based environments.

As for Macs and viruses... You can expect that to rise as well. The reason there are not as many viruses has nothing to do with Macs being safer, it does have to do with them being less of them out there.

A good analogy would be say crime in cities. You see a lot more gang crime in the cities... Lot more people business, etc... The burbs may be safer in general, but as those gangs spread out and see easy picking in the burbs, and a lot less hassle, those small town cops are over run and can't handle it.

And again, I have never said Macs aren't great for a lot of people. They are. But superior? Depends on the criteria. Part of my criteria:

Programming languages available (Write software vs Use Software)

Easily Upgradeable (For about $200 every two years I can DOUBLE my CPU speed) This is taking into account of buying 6 - 9 month old technology (i.e. not the absolute fastest chip, but the generation before) and about every 4 years having to upgrade the motherboard. That number has come down a bit... Earlier since chips were more expensive was probably more like $250 to $300. But all being said, my COMPLETE COST over 10 years, and never being more than say 16 months removed from the latest and greatest is around $2000. In Mac terms? That would be what? $8000?

Macs have their audience and well as a group of people they are more suited for.

Computers are tools. Nothing more. Nothing less.

 

[fritmayo]

And again, I have never said Macs aren't great for a lot of people. They are. But superior? Depends on the criteria. Part of my criteria:

Programming languages available (Write software vs Use Software)

Easily Upgradeable (For about $200 every two years I can DOUBLE my CPU speed) This is taking into account of buying 6 - 9 month old technology (i.e. not the absolute fastest chip, but the generation before) and about every 4 years having to upgrade the motherboard. That number has come down a bit...
Computers are tools. Nothing more. Nothing less.

sorry but you are clearly not the average computer user...

how many users programe stuff? 1%? 99% they just use software available.

how many computer users can just open their computer t and to locate where is installed the CPU? 5%?

so the number of people who care about to be able to "update" their computer's performance themselve is very low...

so, yeap mac are superior for 90% of users. free of virus, all programe already installed and easy to use for photo/video/music/web...

also i srongly disagree with your last sentence.
all cars are made to go from a point A to a point B, they can all do it...still, to do it in Jaguar makes a cooler comuting than do do it in an old Pontiac.

so consideing that computers are just tool, a cool beautifull tool like a mac, will always be better for me that an ugly PC, even if the ugly PC can do almost the same thing than the cool mac...

 

[designerleather]

^ LOL Thanks for the chuckle.

I find the car analogy a little off. Some might call it style over substance, but I like being able to run more software, upgrade without having to get rid of my machine. So by your example, I can trade in and upgrade my engine cheaply every couple of years while you have to buy a new car, as well as since your car had proprietary hardware, you have to pay upwards of 40% more for that privilege.

I would agree a Mac is like a Jaguar. They are generally overpriced. Lose their value quickly, and older ones are clunky and not worth saving. I would see the PC more like a Dodge Viper. Better performance. Far more upgrade options, and the people who buy them generally like to do their own to some extent of them because they like to have an understanding versus just turn the key.

I prefer to be selective and choosy. I like having more options than just picking for a few and prefer to have the "best of the best" where it matters. So if a new format of sound comes out... Harkening back to the days of 5.1 DTS and now 7.1, I like that I can just swap out my sound card and be able to pick and choose EXACTLY the one I want.

And for superiority... Given the workplace is still 90% or more of PCs, which skill set is most likely going to open more doorways for jobs?

 

[ElectricAlyce]

I hate discussions where I disagree with both parts >_<

I'm a mac-users, and I'd never go back. I'm using my machine for software, period. The only coding I do is web. I'm not interested in spending my time fixing stuff, finding compitable hardware that works flawlessly with eachother, installing a hundred third-party apps and drivers. Some people enjoy the 'fixing'-part of computing, and that's fine. Some want a car that drives with as little maintenance as possible, some enjoy the oil and the fixing and the screwdrivers. We're all different. I work as a graphic designer, and for me, mac is by far the best choice. It does what it's supposed to do, streamlines my workflow and make me work about twice as fast as I can on a PC.

Still, I do feel ashamed when I hear things like "so consideing that computers are just tool, a cool beautifull tool like a mac, will always be better for me that an ugly PC, even if the ugly PC can do almost the same thing than the cool mac...". The whole "cool"-factor of it. A mac is very well designed from a industrial design standpoint. Both externally and internally with the new unibodies, but it serves a purpose. It speaks about the values that you get for your money, it isn't what you pay for. If the only reason you'd buy a mac instead of a PC is "coolness" then I'd smack you and point you to a clothing store where your money earmarked "cool" would be better spent.

That said, I'll throw myself in here with some pro-mac arguments mr. leather

"The reason there are not as many viruses has nothing to do with Macs being safer"
This is partly true, but also a hundred per cent wrong. One of the reasons there are no viruses is the small marketshare, but the main reason it's safer is because it's built on UNIX, whereas Microsoft build their own swiss-cheese-inspired ****e so they can sell a new OS in a year or two with the disclaimer "oops, last one wasn't that good, we'll try again". That said, I do have high hopes for W7, looks like they put some more effort into it this time.

fritmayo also do have a point, saying you aren't the average computer user. Unless you work with programing/IT OR do a lot of gaming, upgrading hardware every other year is pointless and for most people not worth the hassle. A mac generally have a longer life-span, and is by far as expensive for what you get as the general conseption is.

"And for superiority... Given the workplace is still 90% or more of PCs, which skill set is most likely going to open more doorways for jobs?"
I don't think anyone who work in IT will choose a mac (exlusively. If I did I'd have a mac laptop for pleasure and a desktop PC for power and fixing) - beside that, most people know the basics good enough to quickly adjust. If you can't adjust to new things then you're not going to last in a computer-heavy work enviroment anyway. (Oh, and the "most people use it so it must be better"-mentality? Seriously?)

It's sad to see that most Apple vs PC-debates all end in a fight between two extreme opposites. One that works with coding, is well above average interested in hardware preformance and having the lastest equipment - and the other who just want something that is really cool and easy to use. Most people fall in between, and there are pros and cons for both - and it's up to each to see their own needs and what will be right for them.

 

[Les_Sucettes]

^ LOL Thanks for the chuckle.


I would agree a Mac is like a Jaguar. They are generally overpriced. Lose their value quickly, and older ones are clunky and not worth saving.

And for superiority... Given the workplace is still 90% or more of PCs, which skill set is most likely going to open more doorways for jobs?

That's where you get it all wrong,that's not true all. Mac's are ALWAYS worth MUCH more money than pc's in the long term. And I speak from experience. And they last for a lifetime, perfectly operational. That's exactly why they can justify the price. You actually touched the point where PC's always but always have absolutely no chance with Macs. Even faulty Macs, make good money...I'm actually surprised someone that seems to know so much about computers can say something like this.Sorry I've heard many pro-pc arguments but this one no one ever dared to use.

I never met anyone that doesn't Know how to operate a PC at a basic level, although I know bunch of people that do not know how to handle a Mac, Knowing the Mac operational system is always a plus.

Every example that you gave in the other posts are about very specific things and work related, and let's not even go there because then we have to talk jobs that work exclusively with macs. You simply cannot work in certain areas without full Knowledge of Macs. Mac operator not long ago was actually a specific profession.

Mac's are amazing computers, when you go to a store and buy one, you are safe in the knowledge that you have in your hands a superior machine. Just like that. You do not need to touch it.Absolutely nothing. It's almost flawless.

 

[designerleather]

As a former UNIX programmer (I used to work on and support DG-UNIX systems) I can tell you that the statement which I have seen written is not accurate. UNIX does have some nice advantages.

Now I won't disagree that part of Microsoft's problems are not its fault, it is, but it is not so much Windows as it is IE. for the most part. I can still remember back with an early version of IE that a Boston Globe reporter named Hiawatha Bray was writing raves about what you could do with IE. I wrote to him, told him he needed more experience before writing and if he wanted to visit a web page I created just for him, it would reformat his hard drive. Ahhh The days of early ActiveX.

Supportively, Netscape users are far less susceptible to viruses.

Additionally another of the great sources of viruses are Bittorrents. And again, since most bit torrents regarding software are PC, that is where a fair amount of viruses enter the system.

Regarding Unix, how many people use UNIX as their OS for desktops or laptops? That number is even smaller than MACs. Most Unix installations are for file and other types of servers. Viruses generally come from external contact, a web page, installing software downloaded, opening an email attachment... most UNIX systems may be servers along which the app bounces across, but it is the desktop in which it is opened. Unix also had some of the first viruses out there.

As for the built in security that you refer to, do you know what it is? It is that in most Unix systems, access to anything is limited. This can generally be a pain in the neck, and pre-internet, say Windows 3.11, one of the reasons it was designed as such was to make it easier to use and isolate the users from having to deal with such issues. Hence why windows was so vulnerable in the Windows 95/98/XP age. By the same token, many Unix systems are equally vulnerable because security ultimately falls upon a user, and users on Unix workstations can make themselves just as vulnerable.

But back to my way back original point. Macs can be great for a lot of people? Superior? In ease of use? I would agree there. In power? That can be debatable. In upgradeability? PC wins there hands down. I have not even gotten into OVERCLOCKED CPUs (That is taking a 2.0 MHz CPU and actually getting 2.5 Mhz performance out of this) Think of this as basically making 2 minutes worth of tweaks and all of a sudden you turn your 200 HP car into a 250 HP car.

If you value ease of use, many people will like macs.
If you value control and versatility, many people will gravitate to the PC

Which is superior? Perspective and need, as in anything else, will play the biggest role.

 

[designerleather]

That's where you get it all wrong,that's not true all. Mac's are ALWAYS worth MUCH more money than pc's in the long term.

Hmmm. You missed my point. I can DOUBLE my processing speed every 2 years or so for around $200 by replacing my CPU, and every 5 years replacing my motherboard. That is something that you cannot do in a Mac.

Now your Mac may run fine as it ages, but my PC will always get FASTER and FASTER.

Now if you are talking about reselling and old Mac.. Why? Oh yes... That is because people can't afford a new one. So they are buying old and slow when I am talking just replacing 1 to 2 components every couple of years.

I can buy or build a PC today, spend easily $1000 less than a MAC, and make MAJOR upgrades every 18 months and 6 to 7 years from now only start to approach what it would have cost me for a MAC that not only is 7 years old, but is 7 years slower.

 

[designerleather]

LOL... This thread has gotten WAY too serious...

You got your chocolate in my peanut butter...

 

[fritmayo]

If you value ease of use, many people will like macs.
If you value control and versatility, many people will gravitate to the PC

Which is superior? Perspective and need, as in anything else, will play the biggest role.

and here we are where? on a fashion forum, hardly a forum of computer specialist.
So, why in this topic to put in advance some PC advantadge which obviously exist but which are clearly not the adventadges that most readers of this topic are looking for in a computer...?
You have clearly valid points, but as i told you, here we are mostly just average computer users, not the kind ready to open the machine every few weeks to install something new in...

 

[*k.a.t.e*]

^ Exactly. I bought a mac because it looked nice. Does that make it superior to a PC in my eyes? Yes. Do I care what's inside it? Not really. Like most people here I imagine, I use my macbook for email/internet and maybe the odd bit of DVD watching or basic photoshopping....which 95% of computers are capable of. A mac just does it so much more nicely.

Not sure I'd want to upgrade my 'CPU'....even if I did know what it was.

 

[ElectricAlyce]

LOL... This thread has gotten WAY too serious...

You got your chocolate in my peanut butter...

Na-uh, you got peanut butter all 'round my chocolate!

"Hmmm. You missed my point. I can DOUBLE my processing speed every 2 years or so for around $200 by replacing my CPU, and every 5 years replacing my motherboard."

Yeahokey, but that said, why would you change it if you don't need it? Not everyone needs 2TB and 2x4 GHz and 16 GB RAM, so it's only an issue for those who need lots of hardware-force. If you do, then mac isn't your cuppa no matter how you see it (unless your filthy rich and can buy a maxed-out Mac Pro. Would cost you about as much as a car, but you'd have a computer for a lifetime).

Also, I'm pretty shure most mac-people on this forum uses laptops and not desktops. In which case a mac should be a better choice no matter what, right?)

 

[designerleather]

In terms of processing speed and why...

What does the future hold? How long does it take for me to process a filter on a 200MB image? Same goes for video editing.

Alvin Tofler wrote an interesting book called future shock which is about the acceleration of technology. Some very interesting analogies, but I can also recall back when I first started writing web pages, which was pre-Netscape for the NCSA browser called Mosaic things were quite simple. Then came Netscape and started having to write two pages, one that supported images and one that was text only.

All this and having to dial in on a 2400 baud modem and was screaming fast when finally up to a 9600 or a 14.4.

That was a mere 15 years ago.

Take a machine from just 5 years ago, and you are looking at single core just around 2 Ghz.

Now todays 3 Ghz CPUs may not seem like much more, except they are quad core, and are like having 4 3Ghz CPUs.

Will people today with Blu-Ray and HD becoming so prevalent be satisfied with 640x480 video? As an example... Intel's new I7 chip is 60% faster than the fastest dual core chip when it comes to processing HD video. (40 fps versus 25 fps)

Likewise... Just look at our world of movies... In the 70s it was VHS and Betamax... it wasn't until the late 90s that DVDs were prevalent, and only took about 6 years for DVD to surpass VHS. VHS officially stopped pre-recorded content in 2008. Blu-Ray and HD DVD really only became available around 2006, but closer to 2007 and is quickly surplanting DVD

Can your Mac of 7 years ago play Blu-Ray discs? Plop in a new video card and whomp, a PC can.

You want to try running Adobe Photoshop CS4 on a 7 year old machine?

Software is and always will be bloat ware. It was not so long ago that applications fit on a single Floppy Disc, then dozens, then single CDs, and now multiple DVDs.

What lies in the future? 3D video, real 3D video is a possibility. For the Fashionistas out there... Imagine being able to watch a runway show and then doing a 360 around the model and zooming in.

Far fetched? Perhaps. Though the new Holographic discs are being worked on that hold 500 GB of information. This is equivalent to 20 Blu-Ray discs (There are some 50 GB blu-ray discs out there... most are 25)

So can your Mac from 6 years ago play Blu-Ray discs? My PC can. In fact the Mac of 6 years ago probably did not even come with a DVD player. My swapped out video card was around $80 from New-Egg and Blu-Ray player that also plays HD as well was $140 and some change.

And as I have stated... Macs are great for a lot of people, they have a core of areas which they shine.

Price is not one of them. Upgradeability is not one of them either. Speed may not be a factor to many, but I have seen, especially over the last 5 years that being able to do things faster makes my life easier and more efficient. I have also shown how simply I have done something like adding Blu-ray to a machine that is 6 years old and a PC. Now that is COOL!

It may not seem like an advantage to many, but what ever new technology that comes our way, more than likely I will be able to swap out or add a few components to my PC where others will have to buy a new Mac.

 

[fritmayo]

In terms of processing speed and why...

What does the future hold? How long does it take for me to process a filter on a 200MB image? Same goes for video editing.

Alvin Tofler wrote an interesting book called future shock which is about the acceleration of technology.

It may not seem like an advantage to many, but what ever new technology that comes our way, more than likely I will be able to swap out or add a few components to my PC where others will have to buy a new Mac.

many people will not follow you there, here it is far more than tecnology, we are near philosophy...
there are people in the computer industry who are completly against that "need of speed". The success of the netbooks, which are basically slow and crap, shows well that for many people a very very basic computer is all what they need.
Talking about photos, you play with 200mb pictures, great, but most people nowadays just look photo on screens, and a 200ko pictures is perfect for that...so dont mix what people actualy needs, and whaht the industries make them believe they need....

Anyway , why anyone would want to keep a mac 7 years, every few years they make a new design cooler than the one before, personaly i change every 2-3 years. For 1000-1500$, you have a very capable mac that that i have never needed to add anything in before to buy a new one.
is a budget of 1000-1500$ for 3 years seems really that high? i dont think so, and i think that's what most people using an imac or a macbook spend, so i ve never seen the lightly lower price of a pc as something as something significant.

 

[designerleather]

^ Definitely agree with you on many counts

This whole wirey tangent started because of the description "Superior." LOL

In the end, it is very subjective. I would whole-heartily agree that most people could actually even get along with one of those $200 PCs that they make for trying to get computers to everyone.

And cost wise, from the figures you have given, you have spent twice as much if not more over a given period. You quote $1000 - $1500 every two to three years, it would be rare that I spend more than $500 in upgrades in the period. Nothing wrong with that. Just a difference in values and perspectives.

While in general I would agree with your assessment and the industry pushing speed, I am also aware of the technology changes and requirements. It was not so long ago when people would chastise me and say I was overspending for my cable modem, yet try going back to dial up. I also have been fortunate enough to be around technology both over periods of time as well as stepping back in time and when you work on a newer machine and then go back onto a slower machine, the difference is substantial. Why do I pay for speed? Because the faster something gets done, that is more time left to me.

It is a difference in philosophy. No doubt about it.

 

[seahorseinstripe]

i think this will be a never ending discussion
i am sure the choice would be based on personal preference and needs.

when i was in high school i don't need much of a computer and if i need them only for typing at words and excel, and i can only afford a PC by that time which is sufficient for me

but as i go to college majoring in visual communication, i am more comfortable in using apple because of the color calibration is more compatible to paper printing.
and also i can't lie if i say the product design of an apple is more appealing to me and to my future clients to represent myself as a designer

but yeah if i'm working a lot with programs and 3d i would most likely use a PC because it's more compatible to my field

and honestly i've been using mac for nearly 10 years and i an so used of the system, of how easy it is to do everything myself from adding a memory, installing software, burning datas in dvd
and when i got my hand around pc, i just don't know how to use it anymore, i'm no longer familiar with the system.

i also remember my first ibook, it was the white one, the 1st gen after the ibook clamshell, it only got 10gb hard drive (can u imagine living with 10 gb hard drive nowadays )
and i use it sooo much, i open lots of applications, photoshop, browser, yahoo messenger, freehand, illustrator and my work getting slow. when i check my hard disk it only got less than 5mb left on the system! and amazingly it can still run LOL
that's what make my heart fall deeply with the engine at that time