Hard drives are commodities. That’s completely different from supporting different brands of motherboards, CPUs or video cards.
Photoshop, Illustrator and Quark simply haven’t been updated for the Intel Macs yet. You’re being a little disingenuous by implying that they will be slow like that forever.
And Apple switched to standard IDE drives and PC RAM freaking years ago, like a decade or more.
And this is different from a Mac how? It also seems like you’re forgetting a few steps on the PC side - downloading the latest security updates, installing antivirus and (for normal users) antispyware software, and so forth.
Wrong. They’ve never been. Apple’s advantage has always been that they both write the operating system and know and have control over what hardware they’re putting in their machines, not that they were all from the same manufacturer. Microsoft cannot claim that, nor can Dell.
Please show me a Mac OS X virus or spyware product, in the wild (not a proof of concept, an actual virus that is spreading).
What’s delicate about it?
I’m firmly in the “right tool for the job” camp, but:
It’s worth noting that most experts agree by now that the security of the Mac is due to a combination of two factors –
- the smaller install base/market share means that there is less attention paid to OSX as a target of attacks. Furthermore, by very nature viruses require a certain “critical mass” of possible machines to propagate.
- The fundamental security of a unix based system makes it harder for malware to affect the system. At the very least, the fact that users generally don’t run as root and that any significant change to the system requires the entry of the root password makes the system more “secure” in the context of the current threats. There is the possibility that Windows Vista may mirror some of these things.
So in any kind of rational argument (I know we’re out of GD), it’s meaningless to use either one of the above points on it’s own when talking about Mac security. As the install base grows, more attention is paid to it by hackers, crackers, and script kiddies. It is likely that as more people focus their bad intentions on the Mac, more vulnerablilities will be found, exploited, and propagated. But that doesn’t mean you can disregard #2. Likeways, vice versa.
I made no such implication. You’re just looking for an argument, buddy. I know those apps haven’t been optimized for the Intel processor YET. I’m talking about how it is NOW.
My point still stands
Again, I’m talking about a specific scenario, comparing Macs and PCs in my office. Windows & Office updates, service packs, antivirus apps & definitions, etc… are all installed automatically once connected to our network. I forget no steps.
Uh huh. Remember PowerPCs? I still have a few…use 'em as doorstops, and let me tell you, those machines were the hodge-podgiest <cough>Macs</cough> I’ve ever had the displeasure to be saddled with.
It’s purty, and requires tender loving care 
Care to clarify what you mean by this? Because Ivan Sutherland might be a bit surprised upon being notified about this particular factoid.
I’m not a tech guy. I like my computers to work and not have to think about them too much.
My switch to the Mac has been wonderful. I’ve never had a system crash, and programs rarely fail. Adware is nowhere to be found on here. I understand the IDIC of PC’s but life’s to short for me to learn about how my PC has an upgradable gigaflux capacator or whatever…and how it is so superior to my mac.
KISS philosophy for me I suppose…
I like my mac because it’s a complete package. I dislike my PC because it’s all bolt-on, add it yourself extras.
Eg. My lovely HP/Dell machines at work all have CD/DVD-ROM drives. Except they don’t actually include the software needed to play DVDs, because that costs extra :smack:
And that illustrates why there is no right answer to the PC vs Mac question. The fact that the PC isn’t a complete package gives one the freedom to customize the system, which some people want. But you prefer the completeness of your Macintosh.
Once upon time I was the biggest brand zealot. Of course, this was during the days of BBSes and the Commodore/Atari “debates” (flamewars) thereupon. Nowadays I’m far more pragmatic about things. My brand loyalty extends to companies who either a) Produce a quality product that best suits my needs, or b) Produce a product (of at least the best quality of the choices available) that supports all of the things I need it to be capable of doing.
That said, I’m a Windows person. Not because I necessarily like it better than this or that OS, but because it’s got everything I need to be able to do what I want to do, the way I want to do it. Though there might be alternatives for some, maybe even for most of the applications I use on a regular basis on, say, a Mac, that alone doesn’t give me a compelling reason to switch. The MacOS is certainly nice, I’ll give it that, and is probably even faster and more stable than XP – but to me support, variety and choice count for more than even that. If Macs ever get to the point where the’ve got an equal market share (or close to it) compared to Windows, and/or have the support, variety and choice that I require, then chances are I’d switch.
This is really just by way of saying that what system/OS you choose is (or should be) entirely dependant upon what you want and need to get out of it. And since a considerable amount of time, effort and money will go into your purchase, your best bet is to research the kind of software (and hardware) that’s available for each platform based upon what you want to do on it and go from there. Fielding opinions is always good – for any major or important purchase I like reading reviews and people’s real-world experiences and opinions on the products before committing to it. It gives me a much broader sense of what the product is like before I sink my money into it. Computers should be no different.
I don’t buy this argument. You can customize a Mac. You just don’t have to, because they come with most of what you need already. But if you want to use something other than what Apple provides, you can do so just as easily as on a PC.
Am I special or what? Seriously since Windows 2000 came-out I may have seen 2-3 BSOD’s in that time. Yes pre windows 2000 (Win95->ME) there were issues, but once NT 4.0 came out things improved immensely.
My Windows PC’s never lock-up. I have 5 machines running at home, my Windows NT Server 4.0 domain controller has been running for flawlessly for 6 months without a re-boot (it would be longer but I had to cut the power to my fuse panel to add a new circuit). I do some pretty weird sh!t with my PC’s as well.
I built all of my PC’s from components I specifically chose for maximum performance. I put the parts together, install the OS, update the drivers and I’m on my way. My machine is setup exactly the way I want it.
I could buy a Dell or a HP, remove it from the box, do a Windows update and I’m on my way as well.
Are you Mac users trying to tell me you never have to update device drivers? The main reason for companies releasing new drivers for devices is for performance improvement and extra features.
And Mac people try to tell me that doing video and picture editing is so much easier and better on a Mac, WTF? They’re using Adobe Premier and Photoshop. Hey those run on a Wintel platform too, did you know that? I don’t know maybe mac users get confused when they get a mouse with more than 1 button on it.
Oh yeah I also read recently that Mac’s currently have less than 5% of PC market, so guess which platform gets the lion share of applications developed for it?
Nobody will mock you for owning PC, they will for owning a Mac.
MtM
And PC owners (like yourself) get all huffy and emotional over a piece of metal…seriously man take it easy.
I’ve been a Mac user since the days when it wasn’t much of a contest.
A PC’s screen looked like this:
A:\
…while a Mac’s screen looked like this
Back then there were valid reasons for Mac users’ contempt for the PC!
But the Microsoft operating systems have evolved. I still think the modern MacOS is a fundamentally better environment, but so much of that is subtle and subjective. On the Mac message boards, lots of “switchers” come in asking how to get rid of some of the Mac-specific behaviors that are among the reasons I think the MacOS is better, or to implement Windows behaviors that I consider the Mac to be fortunately not a normal participant in – so clearly a lot of it has to do with what you are used to.
There have been some attempts to move away from subjectivity. Some research has been done into total cost of ownership, and some into efficiency at performing identical or comparable tasks. Being a Mac user who reads Mac-centric message boards, the material I run across probably skews towards supporting the superiority of the Mac; keeping that disclaimer in mind, all the research I’ve seen does indicate that a Mac is, on average, cheaper in the long run (total cost of ownership), and that the average user is more efficient (can do the same tasks quicker and with more accuracy in the MacOS environment).
Today’s Macintosh is, of course, a PC (i.e., a machine that will boot the Microsoft operating systems and the PC forms of Unix, natively and not in emulation), and a pretty good one at that. An Apple Macintosh currently booted into XP doesn’t exhibit many of the features that one would point to in arguing in favor of a Mac, while simultaneously NOT exhibiting shortcomings that one might point out when arguing against a Mac in favor of a PC – that does sort of confuse things a bit! If this were reciprocal (i.e, you could boot your Alienware or Sony or Dell into OS X at will), the question would neatly divide into two mostly untied questions: “Apple-Mac or Dell or Gateway or Toshiba or etc?” and “MacOS X or Windows XP or Slackware or etc?”
Since it is NOT reciprocal, the question becomes: “Apple Macintosh, with MacOS X and (optionally) Windows XP and (optionally) other PC operating systems? or some other hardware, with Windows XP and/or other PC operating systems but no MacOS X capability?”
Well, if you definitely want MacOS X, the answer’s obvious. If you want a very inexpensive computer for a few non-intensive, simple tasks, and don’t care what OS it runs — or specifically want an OS other than MacOS X — I think the answer is almost as obvious.
If you want a midrange-on-up well-built computer for a variety of constantly-changing tasks and need some processing oomph behind some of them, the answer is far from obvious no matter what your OS choice is: the Macintosh is a solid entry that’s well-priced and performs admirably under any OS, and its ability to run MacOS X, even if you don’t expect to use that as your primary OS, is a solidly useful feature that could come in useful in a variety of situations.
Be that as it may, there are a lot of nice PCs out there and Windows XP is far crisper and more elegant than its MS predecessors.
There’s a book floating around called Mac: The Naked Truth or some such, and in it, the author, who used to publish a Mac-specific magazine for graphic arts professionals, reprints letters to the mag from people who are obviously PC users trying to woo people to their side: “Don’t get me wrong, I love my Apple Mac, but I gotta say, a Compaq Presario I saw the other day had more memory, a faster processor,…”
So apparently there are people with nothing better to do in their lives than read a magazine about a computer they don’t use, and write fake letters for the readers.
Can you purchase a system case, motherboard, video card, hard drive, etc. and build your own Mac? I don’t think so, and this is what I meant by customize a PC.
If you like the idea of not being able to use your computer for various lengths of time periodically because of viruses, spyware, bugs and assorted nastiness, get a PC.
If you want a computer to get things done, get a Mac.
There’s a whole industry of people recommending people buy Macs so they can keep their jobs fixing them nonstop. Talk about job security. These are the last people you want to listen to when it comes to purchasing decisions.
You also don’t want to listen to people who make blanket statements about the platform they don’t use that make it appear as though his messages of doom and gloom are a certainty with the only question being when.
I have had exactly two virii whle using Windows XP. Only one of them forced any downtime out of me, and that was about 10 minutes while I booted into safe mode and ran the removal tool. (This was the W32.Blaster Worm from a couple years back) The other virus was dormant and quarantined in an archive that was never executed.
That’s not to say you can’t get them. I’m savvy enough that I’m quite familiar with how to protect myself – usually by not doing things like indiscriminately viewing/executing E-Mail attachments – and if you’re not then you maybe more prone to virii and the like.
Crashes? If it wasn’t caused by my own brain farts then I have seen very few BSODs in my time with WinXP. The first occurred the first time I installed XP and was a direct result of upgrading over WinME and the driver conflict issues over real mode device drivers (which was a known issue at the time). The second time was this past fall and seemed to result from the fact that the installation of XP on my newly build system was picking up the wrong hardware abstraction layer (picking single-core HAL when it should have picked a multiprocessor HAL). Fixing that baffled me for a bit (never encountered a HAL issue before) but I sussed it out with some help and it’s worked great ever since.
Having worked as a PC technician I can say with a certain amount of confidence that the vast majority of people who complain that their system is acting up for “absolutely no reason” are, in fact, the very reason that it’s acting up. All things being equal, I suspect this also holds true for Mac techs, too, the average computer user doing as they tend to do.
Not that I’m saying you shouldn’t get a Mac – get what works best for you. Just don’t put too much stock in what those have to say whose zealousness exceeds their impartiality, myself included.
This is very true. If you’re savvy on the PC, and don’t click indiscriminately on attachments or go to dubious websites, then you will live happily spyware- and virus-free.
However - let’s take the case of the person who is not that savvy, and can easily be fooled into clicking on attachments. Or even the case of the person who is usually careful, but can be fooled sometimes. That person will be less of a risk of a virus with a Macintosh. In general, running the MacOS, you are less at risk of viruses than with Windows.
Well that’s odd. All of our PCs come straight from Dell with the DVD burner software preinstalled.
I agree with you 100% here.