Are Apple Computers really as good as it is hyped?

In My Humble Opinion
41

[QUOTE=featherlou]
The programme I need to run in Windows simply wouldn’t load in Crossover or Parallels (you could be right about the other issues, asterion - it is a graphics-heavy programme). I didn’t try MVWare Fusion (I didn’t know about it at the time, and after trying two virtualization programmes that didn’t work, I was done with that avenue).
[/QUOTE]
Ah. Okay, that makes sense. Fortunately, the software I’m looking at is available for Mac OS X.

(Nitpick: Crossover is not vertualisation software; it provides Windows services to programs without Windows being involved at all. As such, it’s only tested to work with a limited prange of programs, and specific vesions at that.

You can try other Woindows or even DOS programs with Crossover, but it’s pretty much hit and miss. I tried HP’s communication software for the HP48 calculator, which dates from the early nineties, and it didn’t work.

Parallels and Fusion are full virtualisation environments; they provide virtual machines on which you install Windows, then your desired Windows software. Not having used either, I don’t know the specs of the virtual machines; i’m not surprised if they don’t include high-end hardware.)

42

When OSX first came out, I said that if half of what was being said about it was true, it would be the greatest consumer OS ever. I was right on both counts.

As for the “under the hood” workings of the OS, my experience has been that the Mac (at least under OSX; I never used any of the earlier versions) is much more accessible. It’s a Unix system. Anything you can do on any other Unix system, you can do on a Mac, using the same techniques. For a lot of things, there are also Mac-specific techniques available which are easier for a non-techie to use, but you can always do things the Unix way if you so choose. It’s not the best choice if your primary interest in the computer is to fiddle around with the machine itself, but then, neither is Windows: If you want to fiddle around with the computer itself, then you want Linux (which can run on a PC, Mac, or just about anything else),

And it’s not just artsy-fartsy types who use Macs any more, either. I’m a physics grad student, in an office with a bunch of other grad students. Of the nine computers in the office, four are Macs, four are Linux, and only one is Windows. And when you go to conferences, seminars, or other presentation environments, the proportion favors Macs even more, since you never have to worry about them not working with the projection system, like you do with PCs.

43

I’ve also wondered about the whole “Macs for graphics” thing, as it doesn’t seem to make sense that one general-purpose computer couldn’t have proper software written for it. One thing that has come to my attention is the font rendering. Apple renders fonts in a way that preserves their shapes, making them closer to how they would look on print or when enlarged, but it looks a bit blurry. Windows uses a method that is sharper on a computer screen, but it distorts the shapes of the fonts at small sizes.

It’s discussed here:http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000884.html

When I got my Emac I was very frustrated at first by how blurry the text seemed. I can’t say if I like it; I didn’t have a choice but to get used to it. I don’t see why they can’t give the user a choice between the styles.

44

[QUOTE=Chronos]

As for the “under the hood” workings of the OS, my experience has been that the Mac (at least under OSX; I never used any of the earlier versions) is much more accessible. It’s a Unix system. Anything you can do on any other Unix system, you can do on a Mac, using the same techniques. For a lot of things, there are also Mac-specific techniques available which are easier for a non-techie to use, but you can always do things the Unix way if you so choose.
[/QUOTE]

And if you are a programmer, php, perl, python, and the rest of the entire gcc suite comes with it. The XCode IDE is a sweet program as well.

45

[QUOTE=McNew]
That may be true, but in the 9 years I’ve owned Macs, I’ve encountered a grand total of one. And- whaddaya know- it’s a Microsoft page.
[/QUOTE]

I’m posting this message on a G4 Mac that is over 7 years old. The page loaded fine for me (using Firefox).

46

[QUOTE=AHunter3]
…Macs stay in use longer, they stay viable as a person’s computer (or “number one best computer” for people who keep their old ones or keep multiples boxes up and running) for more years. The older computers will generally tend to run whatever the modern release of MacOS is, and do it adequately, up to 6-7 years after initial purchase.
[/QUOTE]

Seconded. I bought my Mac (400 MHz G4) in the summer of 2000, and am currently running the latest OS (10.4.10).

I’ve done two hardware upgrades in that time–I added an 80 GB hard drive and 256 MB RAM about 3 years ago. (It came originally with a 10 GB hard drive and just 128 MB of RAM.)

I’ll probably keep this machine at least until it can no longer handle the latest OS*, and maybe another year or so after that. I figure I can probably keep this machine going for another 18 months or two years.

I used my previous Mac from 1990 to 2000.

*Update: This thread just prompted me to check out the requirements of the newest OS coming out in two weeks. Evidently, my machine will not support it. Hmmm–time to start thinking about a new Mac…

47

The same is true for Windows PCs, though. It is not compulsory to install Vista as soon as it comes out (and probably not wise to install it before at least Service Pack 3 :D).

The only people who need to worry about their PC’s specs these days are gamers (same would go for Macs, except that there are no Mac gamers) and multi-tasking business types who must have fourteen copies of PowerPoint running simultaneously (in which case the answer is more RAM, regardless of operating system). For the rest of us, a six-year-old computer does just fine, maybe with a little more RAM and disk space than it originally had. Again, regardless of the OS.

48

[QUOTE=robby]

*Update: This thread just prompted me to check out the requirements of the newest OS coming out in two weeks. Evidently, my machine will not support it. Hmmm–time to start thinking about a new Mac…
[/QUOTE]

Ahh… not so fast. There are always nice firmware cracks that someone will cook up. I’ve run 10.4 or so (at least 10.3, can’t remember) on a creamsicle 1st-gen iBook. It can be done.

Oh, unless you need enabling. In which case, oh my! You’d better look at some new models!

49

In this thread so far there have been several references to the old ‘Macs are better for media work’ claim, with (I’m glad to see) at least a few rebuttals.

A long time ago, it may certainly have been true that Macs were better than PCs for graphic design and related areas that required good visual display tools, such as page layout. But this is most definitely not true any longer.

Virtually all of my working life, I have been using computers for various kinds of media work… page layout, DTP, graphic design, music, video, multi-media presentations and so on. I have used a PC all the way, and have always managed to produce perfectly good results to a professional standard. I have, from time to time, tried using Macs. I don’t find them as intuitively friendly as people claim, and I think they offer a very dumbed down interface that is always trying to make decisions for you, instead of giving you control.

Obviously, it’s a very personal choice. But please let not have any more of this ‘media = gotta go Mac’ nonsense. If ever it was true, it hasn’t been true for at least a decade.

50

[QUOTE=ianzin]
In this thread so far there have been several references to the old ‘Macs are better for media work’ claim, with (I’m glad to see) at least a few rebuttals.
[/QUOTE]

[Computer Solution guy hat on]

One of the things that irritate the heck out of me in these debates is people equating software with hardware.

If you have Adobe Illustrator for mac or Adobe Illustrator for PC, its the same damn program. Software being equal, a $2000 PC will probably smoke a $2000 mac just because of price point competition in the hardware. All of the handwaving about interface feel is piddly stuff.

Superior color calibration? Huh? Might wanna let my print shop customers in on that, thay have their inks nailed on PC. Even when I was doing a color business card biz way back when, my copy of corel photopaint came with a target sheet. CPP knows what that sheet should look like in a perfect world, drop it on your scanner and load into calibration routine, calibration routine creates custom profile for scanner to compensate for subtle variations. Print copy of scanned target file, place back on scanner, CPP makes custom printer profile to adjust output to match, done, all devices now scan and print the same via CPP. I had zero color calibration problems after that till I got a new printer, repeat process, WYSIWYG restored. People who have ever actually paid for a copy of good graphics software know about this process.

A good graphics workstation is basically, fast CPU, tons of RAM, period. Hard drive space is almost irrelevant since projects will probably be archived once comepleted. Monster Graphics cards don’t matter in most cases unless you are working with skinned detailed 3d models on the fly, otherwise you are wasting all that GPU horespower on static images.

With a clean OS load and used by people who don’t spend all day trading .mp3’s, cruising myspace and viewing porn, PC’s IME are rock stable plenty of my customers go for months at a time with no problems, the ones who have problems are the ones who like to tinker.

That said I also have 4 customers who are graphic design firms or printshops with a graphics dept. They have exactly 2 macs between them out of 14 machines total, neither are in use.

51

[QUOTE=drachillix]

Superior color calibration? Huh?
[/QUOTE]

Superior? I don’t know. Easy to set up and consistent? Yes. I’ve been PC all my life. Last year I got a MacBook Pro. This year I trashed my desktop and got a MacPro. Color management is implemented tightly into the OS and is a joy to work with. Graphic files look consistent across applications, even in the basic “Preview” mode it seems to read color space information. Is one able to use separate profiles on separate monitors on the PC? I know when I used XP, I was not able to use one monitor profile on my primary monitor and a second monitor profile on my secondary monitor. When I drag a photo from one monitor to another in Photoshop on a Mac, you could actually see it change color as it applies the new monitor’s profile. Perhaps things have changed and PCs have multi-monitor profiling support.

All I know is, subjectively, it’s been a lot less hassle for me to set up my color workflow, from digital capture, to processing, to printing, on the Mac than it has been for me on the PC. I profile my monitors and my printers/papers. For whatever reason, and I don’t know the technology behind it, I’ve had a much, much easier time dealing with color on the Mac. Like I said, I worked with PCs all my life up until last year. Once I got the Mac, I didn’t change a thing I do, but all my color woes have disappeared.

You obviously have your shop set up to a science, and I’m sure a large percentage of printers use PC and do perfectly fine. It’s just that from my experience, I got there much more quickly with the Mac. I will probably never a buy a Windows box again. I don’t see any reason to do so. It’s made my workflow faster and easier.

However, those are my experiences, and your mileage may certainly vary. I will never say that Macs are for everyone. They are just a tool, like any other, and it’s up to you to decide whether it’s the right tool for you. I have no loyalty.

52

[QUOTE=robby]
I’m posting this message on a G4 Mac that is over 7 years old. The page loaded fine for me (using Firefox).
[/QUOTE]

That’s a good point- it doesn’t load on Safari. Which, I imagine, is more Apple’s fault than Microsoft’s. If Firefox can run it, why not Safari?

53

[QUOTE=pulykamell]
Superior? I don’t know. Easy to set up and consistent? Yes. I’ve been PC all my life. Last year I got a MacBook Pro. This year I trashed my desktop and got a MacPro. Color management is implemented tightly into the OS and is a joy to work with. Graphic files look consistent across applications, even in the basic “Preview” mode it seems to read color space information. Is one able to use separate profiles on separate monitors on the PC? I know when I used XP, I was not able to use one monitor profile on my primary monitor and a second monitor profile on my secondary monitor.
[/QUOTE]
I don’t think Windows handles anything like that natively with any great depth or complexity, but some graphics card drivers support multiple colour profiles.

54

I think Macs are better for media simply because they “just work”, as has been mentioned before.

I’m a creative type who had to learn about computers as a necessary evil. I never really enjoyed it, but even back in high school I realized “traditional” illustrators were dying out, and I’d need to figure out how to scan, work PhotoShop, and make websites to make it in the “new creative” world.

Personally, I hated installing virus protection, running Spyware programs, using dozens of different programs to do things that should have been put into the OS in the first place, updating drivers, upgrading hardware… I wanted to sit in front of my computer and CREATE STUFF, not troubleshoot, calibrate, etc.

I wanted to CREATE, not constantly close those annoying bubbles that pop up that tell me my desktop is cluttered (no shit, I’m sitting here creating stuff and throwing it quickly on my desktop), or that the wireless network I’m on may not be secure, or that my virus protection is out of date, or that I’m low on memory… shit, I know I’m working on a computer but I don’t want it to FEEL like I’m working on a computer. I want to sit here and edit a video or color a drawing or make a website or record a song.

Yes, Macs are as good as hyped and worth every dime. I’ve seen places all over the internet price-comparing them to a comparable PC, and the “Mac tax” is either insignificant or non-existent, depending on whose report you’re reading.

Sure, anything you can do on a Mac you can do on a PC. But for me, the Mac feels like computer-y, and is an absolute joy and pleasure to work with (yes, WITH, not ON).

55

[QUOTE=Mangetout]
I don’t think Windows handles anything like that natively with any great depth or complexity, but some graphics card drivers support multiple colour profiles.
[/QUOTE]

And I don’t see how Windows could handle such a thing natively anyway. The reason Macs “just work” is because Apple has basically complete control over the hardware and software. I can use individual profiles for my dual-monitor setup because it’s handled in the graphics card driver and software. I don’t bother because I’m not doing tasks like graphics editing. Heck, most of the time I’m using the second monitor as a full-screen display for my TV card. But I can and have done it.

56

[QUOTE=asterion]
And I don’t see how Windows could handle such a thing natively anyway.
[/QUOTE]
I guess it would be possible for Windows to dictate the configured colour profile settings and for the graphics driver and card to merely obey, but that amounts to Microsoft creating fully-featured drivers for other people’s hardware - a job to which the manufacturers are - in theory - better suited.
So yes, it’s because the hardware and OS don’t come as a tightly-bundled package.

57

[QUOTE=wasson]
Personally, I hated installing virus protection, running Spyware programs, using dozens of different programs to do things that should have been put into the OS in the first place, updating drivers, upgrading hardware… I wanted to sit in front of my computer and CREATE STUFF, not troubleshoot, calibrate, etc.
[/QUOTE]

An off the shelf mass market PC has none of those problems. I fully understand the value of O/s imedded color calibration, problem is, apps can still vary from that and can still require that calibration since no two video cards, scanners, monitors, etc are exactly alike. Even though the machine may be apple spec top to bottom, a printer and or scanner can still be completely done by a 3rd party whos compliance to apple specs can be spotty at best.

58

[QUOTE=drachillix]
An off the shelf mass market PC has none of those problems. I fully understand the value of O/s imedded color calibration, problem is, apps can still vary from that and can still require that calibration since no two video cards, scanners, monitors, etc are exactly alike. Even though the machine may be apple spec top to bottom, a printer and or scanner can still be completely done by a 3rd party whos compliance to apple specs can be spotty at best.
[/QUOTE]

An “off the shelf mass market PC” still has many problems I don’t wish to encounter.

I set up my dad’s Dell. The first thing I had to do was register a ton of stuff, then I had to delete a ton of the trial software that’s installed to lower the costs. Then I had to update a bunch of drivers, get the latest version of the virus protection, then the latest version of the Spyware software. I had to register those, too. I had to click through a bunch of balloons that welcomed me to my new computer, and would I like a tour? I’ve got unused icons on my desktop. My computer may not be secure. Are you sure you want to delete that? You’re POSITIVE you want to uninstall AOL? Then I had to set up the printer, but Windows doesn’t support those drivers. Are you SURE you want to install drivers that aren’t Windows certified genuine advantaged signed drivers? Be sure to register your software or Windows will assume you’re a pirate and not send you out updates… what’s that program called? Genuine Advantage or something?

None of this even begins to mention all the mess of wires everywhere. Yikes.

My MacBook took about 5 minutes from getting it out of the box to surfing the net. No annoying pop-ups, warning, un-installs, “Genuine Advantage” security checks, it just worked. It gave me a whole lot of time back in my life to CREATE stuff.

I have nothing against PCs or PC users… that’s your decision and it doesn’t affect me. But the above is why I choose, and will always choose, Mac computers. They let me do stuff rather than force me to do stuff.

59

[QUOTE=Yookeroo]
Spyware & viruses are largely a non-issue in the Mac world. That’s got to be a huge plus.
[/QUOTE]

This is mostly a result of its market share, IMO. Practicing security through obscurity is not a sound basis for a good computing.

60

[QUOTE=Belrix]
This is mostly a result of its market share, IMO.
[/QUOTE]
Well, that and the fact that the root account is not enabled by default.