mattv2099

I am surfing this forum on a 2 year old macbook. 2ghz core 2 duo with 4 gb of ram.

I bought the macbook for using logic pro audio production and composition software. this mac is for my pro audio lust.

My 2004 PC sits next to me. I've played many a game on that machine. But I lost the desire to upgrade and now I rock an Xbox 360.

I do intend to build an uber gaming PC again some day. I also want another mac. Probably a mini.

__________________
Black Ops:
Prestige: 2
Rank: 46
Kills: 7,897
K/D: 1.90

Skuh

I've had several on Mac.

I use Mac and Pc. I have done for the past 20 years and in my experience there isn't one that is better than the other. I find certain things better on each platform.
If you like adapting your computer or playing games, a budget restriction, not wanting to be ripped of by a company that really doesn't give a stuff about it's own clients. Then PC is the way to go. There are many other things they excel at and for the same money a PC will almost always out perform a MAC (depends who builds it and what they use but if they are good company/self build).
On the other hand a Mac is much easier to maintain as Virus spyware malware etc are no real danger at the minute (Like I said earlier tho, viruses are out there just not a big threat). They are a lot more idiot proof if you do not have a lot of computer knowledge, and in my industry (graphics/print) they are by far the better option. The software has more bugs on PC (couldn't tell you why) and there is less compatability problems. This last point is partly because Macs are more prevalent. Anyway my point is there is not a right answer. It depends on preference and what you want it for. I have always liked both and any preference is specific to the task I want it for.

One more thing. The software available for PC greatly outnumbers that available to Macs.

happyxwalrus

If you do graphics, movies, you're a musician and record your music, or anything similar, you'll want a mac, and in my opinion, they're user-friendly. I have a PC. I don't like Vista, I use XP. If you don't do any of the above, you'll probably want a PC.

__________________

Dubbs

I would have to disagree with ABC on the editing statement.

Macs were designed for and by the artist. That is why Steve Jobs cares so much about design. Apple's in house editing software for videos and music, Final Cut , is way better then Sony Vega, and Pinnacle (sp). Also, ProTools for Mac is suppose to be great for live and studio editing for music.

I know that a lot of Hollywood movies use Apples (and Final Cut) to produce their movies. Napoleon Dynamite was edit using Final Cut.

Fandom Ruck

Any advantages a Mac has over PC is because of its operating system, which can be run on a PC with the correct hardware. Thus there is no reason to buy a Mac other than for its "style" & the fact its easier to set-up initially.

/thread

__________________

Olaf Vikingsson

This.

I'll have to add the fact that there isn't even much, if anything, about the OS that makes it inherently superior to Windows. The only reason for Macs being preferred by artists is the fact that Apple has essentially paid-off software developers to develop only for Macs. That's why you don't see Windows versions of Logic even when it's entirely possible.

__________________

Skuh

This
Didn't know it was still as prevalent but I know from the horses mouth that adobe still prioritise mac over pc.

Clock

Mac has a slightly superior OS, less chance of viruses, and it takes, literally, less than 2 minutes to set up initially. Most major software on OS X is first-party (Terminology?), which supposedly makes updating faster and easier.

Cheap customization of hardware on the Mac is nearly non-existent though, except for RAM.

I'm going to refrain from mentioning Bootcamp for some reason, my instinct just tells me to.

__________________

Olaf Vikingsson

Bootcamp is an emulator (correct me if I'm wrong). By nature, it's inefficient compared to the real thing.

All of the arguments that you've put forth are just common misconceptions. Macs are only reported to receive less viruses because nobody bothered to develop them for Macs since the userbase used to be so small. You'll find that things are quite different these days.

Setting up either OS takes absolutely no time at all either. The only thing that might have given you that idea is the fact that most Macs are set up when they leave the factory while Windows dealers generally don't put that much care into the sales process. You're confusing formatting and installing an OS to tweaking some display settings and w/e.

First-party software is software developed and/or QAed by the same team that developed the OS itself. Realistically, ony the QA process will normally be shared between OS and software but even then, the problems prevented PALE in comparison to the utility lost. I'm pretty sure that the average end user will see little to no difference in terms of how easy it is to install and update software, regardless of origin. Only specialists really need to delve out of the small pool of well-tested, well-used software that simply can not afford to malfunction in order to find specialised software for performing rare, possibly-complex tasks. This stands true on both platforms, with Windows' prevalence making things easier for the specialist developers on that platform due to the availability of QA and knowledge in general.

Simply put, if you get a Mac without needing certain bits of software for which Apple possesses exclusive licenses, you'd better be both filthy rich and incredibly lazy for anyone who knows what they're talking about to not think of you as an idiotic victim of consumerism.

__________________

Clock

The setup process reasoning was exactly that. I'm unsure of where to actually keep my iMac, so I turn it off, unplug it, move the thing, and plug it back in, so that's where I got the reason.

In terms of software, I can see a discernible improvement over some of the software on PC since Apple, at least according to their software video, puts a lot of effort into making sure the main software that comes with the computer is as intuitive and stable as possible. It's good, but not multifold better than PC software like they're portraying it. I have to agree also on the lack of people developing for OS X, in terms of games, almost nobody remakes the games from scratch, although a breakthrough was found that allows games to be run with some wrappers, namely "Cider", "Wineskin", and "CXZ". However, those need the actual game to be installed, which requires the use of an emulator, making the porting redundant.

Oh, and OS X Snow Leopard was worth $29 USD and not a penny more for how menial the improvements were. Look and laugh.
new features in sl derp


Also, as for Bootcamp, it's more than an emulator, you actually partition some of the HDD and fully install the actual operating system onto that partition. On startup, you hold the option key and select which partition you want to use. As long as you know what you're doing, it's pretty hard to fuck up. I have yet to do that though, since I have to find a functioning Windows XP/7 disk to play some of the games that were either not ported or Aspyr did a shitty job porting.

Last thing, I agree on the last statement, my definition for Macs at one point was "Proof that you used to be rich. Used to.".

__________________

Olaf Vikingsson

Didn't realise that you meant the unit itself in terms of setup.

The problem with raising stability as an issue is the way in which people fall under the impression of Macs being more stable in the first place. Here it is in a nutshell...

"Oh, hey. This five year-old Dell prebuilt is starting to piss me off. I haven't reformatted, defragged it or even done an active virus scan once but it should still serve me better!"

*Spends $1k on brand-new iMac*

"I R NEVER BUYING WINDOWS AGAIN"

Therein lies the problem. Unfortunately for consumers, most don't realise that their fellows know jack shit about computers and have no right to be evaluating their purchases whatsoever. Word spreads and rumours set in.

Good call on the Bootcamp thing btw. I was going off an explanation that one of the techies from my college gave me. Just read up on it properly.

__________________

Cloud

Exactly what happened, a friend bought one when all he does is watch dvds and use it to type up coursework, use the internet and maybe a little bit of Photoshop and thinks they are the greatest shit ever.

Definitely a wise choice...

__________________

Fandom Ruck

Its the basis for Mac's entire marketing campaign. That, and computer illiterate people generally assume that if something costs more it must be better.

__________________

pantstofry

I have a mac and love its user-friendliness because im a computernub.

o and my daddy paid for it

umad (yeah i know no pc owner here would be jealous, no flamezorz plz)

yeah honestly i know that windows has a multitude of advantages, im not here going MAC R BETTER N EASY. imo the interface is better (IMO IMO IMO) in terms of looks.

IN MY FUCKING OPINION

iMac Girl

I would have to respectfully disagree. I have been using and building my own PC's for many years starting out with the Tandy TRS 80, various flavours of the Commodore line starting with the Vic 20, Vic 64 and so on. I've also spent a good amount of money building my own high end gaming PC's, finally switching to Mac's.

Both computing systems have their merits. What I didn't like about PC's is that while PC manufactures produce very good machines they have to rely on Microsoft to produce a bug free OS including drivers. Additionally PC software manufacturers must produce software that will not only conform and work on a Microsoft OS, but also work with the many different flavours of PC's and the different hardware components that goes into each make of PC.

Mac's typically don't suffer the same difficulties. They build their own computers and hardware, design and install their own OS and drivers and hold software producers to rigid specs where they must use Mac Drivers which equals no blue screens of death etc.

To say that Mac's don't have their faults would be naive of me or anyone else, but the thing is they simply work great. My iMac 27" Core 4 has been running 24/7 since Jan 2010 and hasn't crashed.

__________________

Fandom Ruck

There is nothing stopping someone from buying the same hardware as a Mac for a PC & installing the Mac OS onto it. It will be stable & you can upgrade the hardware with the money you save.

And there is always Linux...

They just get the Grey Screen of Death instead.

But yes, with a Mac you're paying for simplicity.

__________________

Olaf Vikingsson

There is nothing stopping you from using a tiny range of tried and tested hardware/driver combos on Windows systems, essentially imitating the compatibility vs versatility tradeoff that you'd see on a Mac.

__________________

Clock

It could be just me, but I have defragged, reformated, and run virus scans that come up clean on the hard drive in my PC multiple times, and yet lots of the software and, in rare cases, the hardware is still a little unstable. Some of it crashes remarkably frequently compared to the software on my iMac. It's not a very old PC either, got it in 2008. But on the other hand, the ones that crash have a widely known reputation for instability (Photo Gallery, WMM, MS Office '07, and IE).

However, while some Mac software might be stable, some of it is a bit poorly made (Counter-intuitive or slow, iMovie '09 most prominently), and dealing with that is about as irritating as dealing with unstable software.

Point is, OS X, in my experience, is a little more stable, but occasionally, some software has large enough flaws that it's... this sounds somewhat idiotic to me... balanced out.

Consumers knowing fuck all though, all I can say is "Welcome to the 21st Century".

I feel like I missed something for some reason.

__________________