Apples out the Windows

[sajuukar]

I am beginning to get drawn in by the new iMacs. I don't want to like Macs, but I'm beginning to! Is there a mac version of homeworld?

I need convincing. Tell me why PCs are better than macs, or why Macs are cooler than PCs. What are the good and bad things about each? Is it okay to like macs?!?!

[Dukath]

http://www.lowendmac.com/meta/2k0525.html

http://rescomp.stanford.edu/inrooms/MacVsPC.html

http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,48964,00.html

try these links first before dropping another topic like this on the boards :)

[ceejayoz]

one thing's for sure... those iMacs definitely trump the PCs when it comes to the pretty factor :p

[SajuukCor]

PC = Games
Mac = Designing

I use G4 Macs for my graphic design stuff. If you disagree, try to edit a 1 Gig picture on a PC or find AAA games for Macs.

[senor_blob]

Ok, A....I mean Silver. I never thought it would come to this but, it did! Macs may look cool but the overall program is harder to learn, to my expiriance, crashes more, has less programs and games, is better for office use, better for server connections, and is more expensive than a pc. If you find Mac that is the same price as a PC, you'll see the that a PC has more for the same price.

[reki]

the overall program is harder to learn, crashes more..

frst is gonna hate me for omnislashing in a mac vs pc thread, but i just gotta say "LOL" to that last statement.

[frstkor13]

:cylon:

[senor_blob]

COLOR=crimson]I resent that remark! And those are only some ideas to say to Silver![/COLOR]

[SquidDNA]

I agree with SajuukCor's evaluation. Macs are better for design while PCs, if nothing else, have a much wider variety of games written for them.

Additionally, frst = bunny, and that's all I've got to say on the topic.

[Ressev]

frst = bunny? as in the cute an cuddly kind or are we equating him to the new iMac?

I like Macs better... if I did more music on a serious level I would re-invest into the Mac base. But, until then, PCs offer more flexibility (i.e. games and 'limited' music production).

[Frish]

the new iMac has every (readily available) PC trumped on looks, prolly speed too, but i like computers primarily for gameing . . . . . . . . .. . . therefore i will buy PC.

[Mac_Bug]

I use G4 Macs for my graphic design stuff. If you disagree, try to edit a 1 Gig picture on a PC

For the same price of that G4 of yours, I don't believe a pc at comparable prices will be behind in doing anything.


if I did more music on a serious level I would re-invest into the Mac base.

The Mac standard sound is hardly anything to brag about. Is there any program on the Mac for sound that there isn't any PC equivalents?


the new iMac has every (readily available) PC trumped on looks, prolly speed too

Repeat after me, 1 Ghz G4 proc = crap

[reki]

The Mac standard sound is hardly anything to brag about. Is there any program on the Mac for sound that there isn't any PC equivalents?

yep: protools. industry standard audio post software used by most professional audio firms, including the one I work for.

[Mac_Bug]

Interesting, so why aren't they making the exact same program for Windows or any other PC Operating system and make more money?

[F.A.]

i never actually had a mac but it seems to me that they are a real pain to upgrade? plz correct me if i'm wrong.

btw can you "build" your own mac or u just have to buy it from a retailer?

[Mac_Bug]

Dukath is Mac lover!

To clear any misunderstandings before we turn up the heat, I got my name playing Star Craft beta for Mac on G3s at school computer lab (the alternate was bitching teachers down at PC lab with piece of shit P200s). Imagine a classic Mac dialog box with a little bomb icon.

Notice in Dukath's links that compatibility with PC etc is touted as a 'feature' in Mac OS (which by the way hasn't worked up to as advertised to my experience)

Uh, notice Windows never did have compatibility with Mac files and floppies... why? There's no need for a PC user to :)

As for that crappy review of VirtualPC on wired, first Virtual PC runs like crap, second it sells nothing of Macs but rather the program itself. One could just as easily run VirtualPC for Windows, or even run A MAC EMULATOR.

Jobs was pretty successful up until the IBM PC took off. Compaq started off the clone industry, much to IBM's dismay. I wonder how many companies tried to make Apple clones at the time. In any case, PC went on an open architecture while Apple remained closed and proprietary. While PCs florished with cheaper costs and widely available selections, Apple more or less held on to its own market in the education and various other professional spots. A closed architecture, with Apple being the only guy on the block selling it and deciding exactly what to package and what their customer receive, has worked off as a trade off. Mac OS has been criticized for certain things (IE multi tasking), but up until a few years ago they were still comparable with PCs. A lot of Mac users gets a headache when it comes to DOS(reminder, Microsoft isn't the only one on the block making OS for PCs), call it the AOL of computers if you will, user friendliness was something Macs have always dominated, even though some criticizes Windows for catering to the lowest common denominator. I recall the time when I debated with my hardcore Mac loving friend who grew up on it regarding Pentium II and the G3 Processor.

So yesterday though.

Today the fastest G4 processor pales in comparison with the fastest available PC processors. And dollar for dollar you can build a PC that perform just as good if not better. Sure the new iMac looks cool, but beyond that?

Placed next to PC OEMs at your local CompUSA, Jobs earned his keep. But for any power users, a Mac can't do the job alone. Though if one shoudl consider oneself a power user, we'd use whatever the best for the job and forget this whole PC vs Mac crap.

Some argue that had Apple opened itself up, or perhaps finished their project to port Mac OS to PCs, they would've been in a better position. Perhaps. But for better or worse, Jobs is selling a complete package, and only by having that complete package is Apple floating at all.

(searches for Mac vs PC gif)

[frstkor13]

Hey after this can we argue about how Chevy is better than Ford?

[reki]

so why aren't they making the exact same program for Windows or any other PC Operating system and make more money?
protools is made by avid, who have traditionally built a specialised mac-based video/film editing platform - they have recently extended the avid os to pc, but in a lower-end form. its not really an issue of marketing to pc users for this kind of software to get more people installing it - you're talking about dedicated systems - not really something that you use for games or word processing etc as well. just to give you an idea, protools costs about US$10,000 for the software & cards & Avid ranges from about US$10,000 -> $50,000. the price of the mac or pc to run it on kinda becomes a little insignificant when you're talking those numbers. the reason why avid (and other editing systems like media 100) initially went with the mac platform is probably related to the stability of a dedicated platform. macs have always had a much greater reputation for stability than windows in the past because the OS is written by the hardware manufacturer which would cut out alot of compatibility issues for the software manufacturers.


i never actually had a mac but it seems to me that they are a real pain to upgrade? plz correct me if i'm wrong.
no, you're not really wrong - they are an expensive system to upgrade.
btw can you "build" your own mac or u just have to buy it from a retailer? you pretty much have to buy it from a retailer.


the appeal of the mac (and for many pc users: the failing) is the dedicated platform. this is fast becoming less of an issue now that windows is supporting such a large driver library, but things like drivers & compatibility & resource conflicts etc have never been an issue for macs. the one company constructs the hardware and the OS & everything works when its installed first time. i suppose this is the reason that many higher-end application companies jumped on board a decade or so ago: they wanted to know what system their software would be loaded onto & how it would perform.

more recently, with the OSX vs WinXP thing - its becoming more and more difficult to tell one machine from another. you can even skin your windows to look like a mac and most people probably couldnt tell the difference.

now it really kinda comes down to what software/hardware is available for what platform. many of the high-end professional multimedia apps are still only available for mac, so thats what people use. all graphic designers seem to swear by macintosh as well, although i have no idea why. i use a mac for video/film editing and have a preference for it doing this kind of work. i use a pc for most other things because its cheap and has all the games to play. not really many issues beyond that.

[Rent-a-Zilla]

If you want a Mac, buy a Mac.

My only problem with Macs is all the myths surrounding them (reliability, ease-of-use, better at Photoshop etc); the only one that stands up to scrutiny is the exclusive application one, but that only applies to a minority of users.

I still have two Amigas (A500 & an A1200) and I used to have an Acorn machine (RISC-Os was fab), so I'm no stranger to idiosynchratic technology (at least those systems had default mice with more than one &@#%ing button!). At that time, PCs were still in 386 land and Windows 3.1 was barely adequate. However, when the DX4s came along (followed by Pentium) with win95 and Doom it really was game over for the Betamax Boys (the technology might have been better, but no-one was using it). When I went to Uni in Sep '95, there was not a Mac in sight.

Macs may be pretty (I don't like the Imac) and fulfil the ethical requirements of the anti-MS brigade, but imho anyone who buys one is missing out.

I guess they are easier to use, but only if you a PC as a reference. They still break, and therefore you still need some knowledge to fix them. The idea of a maintenance free computer is the biggest myth of all. The only computer that my parents would ever get to grips with would be a console like thing with applications on giant catridges and smart-media type storage.

[reki]

interesting that you should mention amigas actually, zilla. speaking of editing, the first real nonlinear editing platform was on an amiga & my first job in the industry was building an excellent turnkey nonlinear editing system (called DraCo) on an amiga based platform.

now those are stable computers - no shutdown preparation.. just turn it off an on at the switch whenever you like ;) i used to go to these amiga shows with all these geeky guys and their souped up machines. shame they kinda stopped supporting them - that was a good platform.

[Dukath]

actuallty, i'm not really that pro-mac

i do use both a pc and a mac but those 3 links were just the first 3 that appeared on the following search on google: "why are macs better than pc" :)

At the moment i use pc for games and mac for work/icq/email just because i can safely open mails without having to install 97 virusscanners and firewalls

People aren't interested in hacking macs and/or writing virusses for them :) There are a few things why i like mac better, then others why i like pc better.

I guess it really depends on the user.

[sajuukar]

I have also heared from a Mac Fanatic (They are scary people, at least the one I know... no offence intended to anyone) that 800 MHz on a Mac is actually the equivilant to 1.XGHz on a PC. Fact or Fiction?

[Rent-a-Zilla]

There is some truth in that.

An AMD Athlon XP1800 can outperform a 1.8Ghz Pentium4, even though the actual clock speed of the Athlon XP1800 is 'only' 1.53Ghz. Because of its different architecture, the AMP XP cpu does more 'work' per clock cycle than a P4. AMD's XP ratings use the P4 as a reference, i.e an XP2200 is intended to be equivalent of a 2.2Ghz P4 (the benchmarks suggest that these ratings are quite conservative - AMD are thinking about future versions of the P4 based on a smaller, cooler, faster core).

G4 clock speeds are not AMD or Intel equivalent (different architecture again). An 800Mhz G4 will outperform similarly clocked AMD or Intel chips, but I don't know how big the difference is.

[SajuukCor]

The way they process data is also important. PCs pulls and sends data like this:

- - - - - - - -

Eight things of information per pull/send. Macs are like this

- - - -

Four things. Disadvantage? No. If the PC needed to send only two things, it will still send them in the eight set. But for the Mac it can send data faster since it uses a four set. It would take twice as long to send the info on a PC.

Plus the G4 has a Gigaflop processor which make it a supercomputer (it's the amount of floating points the computer can process; ie. you need a supercomputer to count all the stars in the sky or all the grains of sand on the beach)

[Mac_Bug]

k SajuukCor where the hell did you get that from

[ADUN]

I never have and never will find macs useful, My cousine has one, Its extreemly hard to controll with one mouse button, the interphase is hard to work out, the little happy face trademark gets annoying eventually, those macs seem only good for those who like tiny keyboards and having slow hard drives,processors and whatever else packed into the monitor, AND having to play games that were out for the pc 5 years earlyer.

[Mac_Bug]

Mac_Bug(16:17 PM) :
buy yourself a mac and get a life!
Green 3(16:17 PM) :
a mac?
wtf

crackhead

[SajuukCor]

k SajuukCor where the hell did you get that from

I read alot :D

I already knew about the Gigaflops, but I forget where I got the processing data though... somewhere online.

[Mac_Bug]

Frstkor plz share with us why mac is better

http://members.shaw.ca/jianfuwang/flameapple.gif

[littlegreencube]

Originally posted by Mac_Bug
Frstkor plz share with us why mac is better

http://members.shaw.ca/jianfuwang/flameapple.gif

Mac, Macs may not be better but let a 1GHz G4 (btw I laff at thee, it does NOT suck k) vs a 1GHz Intel Pentium III. I think the results will be pretty similar. Buying a Mac is not just buying a comp - to quote the guru, it's a way of life. :D

[Mac_Bug]

Macs may not be better but let a 1GHz G4 (btw I laff at thee, it does NOT suck k) vs a 1GHz Intel Pentium III. I think the results will be pretty similar.

This is why I have 2 Ghz Athlon and you have 1 Ghz G4

[ADUN]

Originally posted by Mac_Bug


This is why I have 2 Ghz Athlon and you have 1 Ghz G4

HAHA I got a P4 2.2ghz (22 000 Mhz)

not really, im saving my money for the 3ghz when intel decides to let it loose, or whatevers out by the time in the distant future, when computers stop geting soo damn better soo damn fast.