[colecovizion]

Sorry to post this, as I am aware there are other Mac Vs PC threads. The only problem is that the MacNN search doesn't allow me to put in words under 3 letters! So.. a new post.

I have both friends and colleges that are convinced that Dell is king, and that Windows is great or good enough. I need hard facts to convince otherwise, not ones like "its easier," because that can be very subjective. I am an avid Mac user, but with Windows XP and Dell, it can be hard to argue to someone who is technical. Also it is hard to argue with someone who doesn't edit movies or pictures. Please add your own experiences against Dell and for Mac. I've been on Mac so long it's hard to even know what is better anymore.

Here are some points that I find hard to argue:

* Networking - To me it's really crappy in 10.3
* Browser - IE is very fast/compatible (no tabs, but firebird has it)
* Plug n Play - A lot more devices work well with XP, it's harder to argue this anymore
* Games - Just a big loss on this one for the Macs
* Stability - Most of my Windows friends haven't encountered viruses or crashes
* Programming - Visual Studio, nuff said
* Price - Dell can get pretty low
* Market share - How can I argue that 95% of users are wrong? I typically get ... "if mac is so great then why do they only have 3% market share?"

Thanks very much for any help. The reason on the Apple "Switch" page are kinda lame. And with what I've seen and others have seen with Dell and Win XP, there might not be significant differences anymore. Heck, I can't argue that iTunes is only on the Mac...

[SMacTech]

Not this again! As a sys admin, I deal with XP, Windows 2000 server, 2003 server, RedHat, OS 9 and Mac OS X. I use OS X on my 450 cube instead of XP on a 2.6G Dell. But why not go to ars technica and go to the BattleFront.

[ibobunot]

Noooooooo not again.

[MacGorilla]

* Networking - To me it's really crappy in 10.3

Some people have reported problems but I haven't seen any. What are you your issues?

* Browser - IE is very fast/compatible (no tabs, but firebird has it)

The Mac has IE but Safari is far better, with tabs.

* Plug n Play - A lot more devices work well with XP, it's harder to argue this anymore

Hmmm...really? The Mac's plug and play is absolutely seemless. I never seen XP handle plug and play as good as the Mac.

* Games - Just a big loss on this one for the Macs

What games? we have all the top notch titles, Unreal, the Sims, Tom Clancy, Halo, etc.

* Stability - Most of my Windows friends haven't encountered viruses or crashes

I have heard the stability of XP is good but I haven't had a crash on my Mac in years. And they are lucky not to have gotten viruses. No virus worries here.

* Programming - Visual Studio, nuff said

XCode, nuff said. Even John Carmack loves XCode.

* Price - Dell can get pretty low

Yepper they can. You get what you pay for.

* Market share - How can I argue that 95% of users are wrong? I typically get ... "if mac is so great then why do they only have 3% market share?"

A Microsoft monoiopy has a lot to do with that, even with the settlement.

In short, you want a PC, get one but Macs are just so much more elegant, easy to use and fertile ground for creativity. I don't want to use my computer the way MS thinks I should, I want to use it the way I want without the OS getting the way. Thats why I use a Mac and why you should too.

[MacGorilla]

And I might add, it sounds you want a PC and you are trying to get us to talk you out of it. Sorry, ain't gonna happen. Get a PC, or don't. Its not rocket science,

[sushiism]

"Plug n Play - A lot more devices work well with XP, it's harder to argue this anymore"
depends, real plug and play is better on a mac, plug it in, and it works. Windows plug it in, restart maybe then it could work.

games? HAHA LOSS? **** no who wants to place those piles of ****, play a real game like Ikaruga like to see any of the counterstrike babies play anything that takes remotely any skill

[eyadams]

Apple still has the "switch" web pages that can provide general points - http://www.apple.com/switch/.

But to respond to your specific issues:

* Networking - To me it's really crappy in 10.3

This is highly subjective - I've not had any problems with it. But I don't have to connect to Windows network shares, which I've heard can be flakey. But if you're a Unix guru, OS X is light years ahead of XP - the command line tools let you check networking things that can't be done out of the box with Windows.

* Browser - IE is very fast/compatible (no tabs, but firebird has it)

IE on Windows, Safari on the Mac. Safari is fast, has all the necessary plug-ins (Flash, Shockwave, Java), and it has tabs.

* Plug n Play - A lot more devices work well with XP, it's harder to argue this anymore

Sure you can argue it. There are a lot more devices, but there's also a lot more crap. For example, I'm not particularly distressed that the KB Gear Jam MP3 player doesn't work with the Mac - it's a peice of junk. On the other hand, the best peripherals (including printers, scanners, digital cameras, and so on) work.

And they work out of the box, no fuss. On a Mac, 99% of the time its just plug it in and go; on a PC (at least in my experience) 99% of the time its plug it in, have the OS ask you where the drivers are, install the drivers, reboot (about 1/2 the time), and usually things work.

* Games - Just a big loss on this one for the Macs

Most of the best titles make it to the Mac, if occasionally quite a bit later (NOLF2 was particularly bad on this). But if you're buying a $2000 computer just to play games, you're getting hosed - buy an XBox or better yet a Playstation, where the games are better and more plentiful.

And again, there are more games, but there's more crap. I don't think anybody is upset the Daikatana didn't make it to the Mac.

* Stability - Most of my Windows friends haven't encountered viruses or crashes

You've really got two issues here -
stability and viruses. Most viruses on Windows don't cause stability problems - they attack web servers. The new MyDoom virus in particular is designed to infect computers, and then in February start a Denial of Service attack on the SCO group. And you're friends are very much in the minority on this one.

On stability, this is also a very subjective issue. Some people have stability problems with Windows, and some with OS X. Personally I've found both to be fairly stable.

* Programming - Visual Studio, nuff said

Visual Studio is nice - but so is Apple's Project Builder and Application Builder suite. Furthermore, if you're a Unix weenie, OS X is miles ahead of Windows, thanks to GCC and related tools. If you want to port a peice of Unix software (like Apache, the most popular web server on the planet), all you have to do is download it and compile. Open source software is just like that.

* Price - Dell can get pretty low

Yes - for stripped down machines. Comparable machines with comparable features (gigabit ethernet, Firewire cards, DVD burners, etc.) are close in price. For servers, Apple wipes the floor with Dell, primarily thanks to their significantly less expensive licensing terms for OS X Server versus Windows XP server.

* Market share - How can I argue that 95% of users are wrong? I typically get ... "if mac is so great then why do they only have 3% market share?"

Go with the comparison to automobiles. Currently Porche has less than 1% of the worldwide market, BMW has something like 2%, ditto Mercedes - yet they arguably make the best cars in the world. Even Toyota's market share in the United States is only 11%; Honda's is something like 8%. The point is that market share doesn't really tell you much about the quality of a product. At best it tells you that a manufacturer has hit a sweet spot between price and quality.

Finally, although you dismiss ease of use, it is something you can demonstrate. Expose is cool, and not built-in to XP. Furthermore, the two products that add it to XP don't do it as well - the little versions of windows don't continue to update when minimized.

Expose also shows off one of OS X's technical features that is light years ahead of Windows XP - multitasking. It's fairly easy under XP for a single process to make a machine complete unresponsive - Yahoo's Java-based games do that to my XP box at work all the time. But under OS X, things might get slower, but they never grind completely to a halt. This is especially true with dual processor machines, which OS X handles much better than Windows XP.

Still, you won't convince them of anything. Windows users (and XP users, for that matter) tend to view their choice of computer with the same ferver that people apply to religion and politics. No reasonable argument will convince them that they're wrong.

[Captain Maniac]

The tired old "Mac vs PC" debate again. Gawd, I remember this one back in the 80s! My take on all this is that whichever computer you choose is simply a matter of freedom of choice. I use a Mac because I want the best.

[mrmister]

I don't really understand how you could "have to" convince them--they have their thing, you have yours. And even a cursory read of Mac forums can find ample examples of the strengths and weaknesses of the Mac platform.

So I'd politely suggest you do your own research.

[colecovizion]

Thanks to everyone who has contributed so far. Again, I'm sorry to bring this subject up. Even after a casual search I wasn't able to find any information that I needed.

To MacGorrila -
I don't want a PC. I've had three Macs for the last 4 years and loved every one of them. 10.3 Windows networking is BS. Seems like I need IP addresses now to get onto a simple Windows workgroup.

-----------------
Special thanks to eyadams, very insightful. And yes the best game titles make it to the Mac, but I find they have big performance issues typically that are never addressed (i.e Halo, Sim City 4). I can play Sim City 4 on a 800mhz PC with a Geforce 2 and it runs better than my Powerbook 1.25 Radeon.

I guess overall what I'm trying to say is that there is no reason for the average joe (of which I am not) to go with Mac when they can get a similar feature set for a lower price. For the most part the Mac can merely meet most of the functionality of Windows (Office, Apps, Browsers), while rarely exceeding (such is the case with Expose). Where is the killer app for the Mac that most can agree on? For example, the User interface for the Mac used to be the big killer app. However, now the benefits have narrowed with XP.

To me, the bulk of the great things about the Mac are just nice things, not needed things. The only reason why I have a Mac is because I can afford these nice things. This goes along with the car analogy, a BMW is a nice thing, not a needed thing. Are there needed things that you can think of that aren't available on Windows?

BTW I'm not trying to get everyone into a frenzy, I just want the feedback to be as unbiased as possible.

[parsec_kadets]

Originally posted by colecovizion:
[B]* Networking - To me it's really crappy in 10.3

Sorry, but I just have to relate something that happened to me recently. The networking on my XP box at work just stopped working one day. It could see all the file shares on the network, but it couldn't get to the internet, access FTP servers (even locally), contact the DHCP server (even though it could ping it), or contact the DNS server. All of this was because the Winsock stuff got corrupted randomly. I had to delete registry entries and install TCP/IP on top of itself to get things working again. I've never heard of someone having to go through that much trouble on a Mac. Also, since disk journaling is now part of OS X, those files are VERY unlikely to get corrupted in the first place.

* Plug n Play - A lot more devices work well with XP, it's harder to argue this anymore

And yet I still had problems today when trying to use a USB 2.0 video capture device. Microsoft released the USB 2.0 drivers, but after rebooting Windows didn't bother to check to see if one of the previously unrecognized hardware items could benefit from the new drivers. I had to uninstall the device and reboot to get it working. At least when updates are released for OS X the system will check to see what benefits from the update.

* Games - Just a big loss on this one for the Macs

The only game that I actually enjoyed for the PC that wasn't available on the Mac was Counter Strike. Name a game that's immensely popular that isn't out for the Mac, or will be soon. The only ones I can think of, and this is a stretch, are the Tycoon games. And only half of those are decent. Try playing Airport Tycoon 2 and you'll see what I mean. *shudders*

* Stability - Most of my Windows friends haven't encountered viruses or crashes

Ok, well my PowerBook had an uptime of 37 days before I had to restart for the recent security and Airport updates. I haven't seen a PC do that in awhile.

* Programming - Visual Studio, nuff said

I have news for you, Visual Studio is just ok. I have plenty of complaints about it.

The remaining two issues I think have been addressed pretty well already.

[bergy]

There are a lot of things in this world that are "good enough". But there is a place for beauty, elegance, logic, aesthetics, creativity, on and on and on ....

The Mac is not competing with the lower end user experience ... it is a standard in itself which is recognized by those with "eyes" to see. If you don't " see" it don't bother getting it. That''s why 95% of most thing in life are "good enough". The 5% is where we get our inspiration, joy, and direction. In the personal computing world, the Mac represents this experience. Thank God for Apple.
I have a mac and pc at home.
I could not stand to look at a Windows display for more than a few minutes, whereas I can do the most mundane things on my Mac and enjoy myself. You can't force someone to recognize these things, but to me "good enough" doesn't cut it. I want to reward and encourage brilliance and I'm willing to pay a few extra bucks for it.

[GaelDesign]

colecovizion,

You sound like you need some convincing yourself. Why are you trying to get other people to buy a Mac when the reasons for YOU to buy a Mac are very slim?

My reasons to buy a Mac:

#1 Reason: Microsoft is a gross company. Yes, that's the word, gross. Everything they do is geared towards controlling everything in the world. They want to control your PC, TV, car, Internet access, file protocols, online music, home video (yes, they're trying to license their WMA crap to the DVD bigwigs -- a Microsoft-powered DVD won't be long in coming if MS gets its way), even your identity! (Passport and related technologies...) And, now, your watch as well ( ). No one company should have this much power. Not MS, not Apple, not Sun, not Oracle, not Sony, not Dell, not nobody. So I've chosen to "opt-out". I refuse to live in a Microsoft world. The only money I will ever give MS is for Mac software. It sends a message to The Powers That Be that people still care about choice.

#2 Reason: Most PC hardware is ugly and cheap. I have no idea why Dell is so popular because its stuff is crap. Believe me. I have a friend who used to work in an office full of Dell notebooks, and they were constantly falling apart. More recently, because of a merger, everyone switched to IBM ThinkPads, and, while they're still ugly, they at least work reasonably well. But just about everyone there agrees that an Apple notebook would be the way to go if the company's custom software could run well on it.

#3 Reason: Apple innovates, Microsoft copies. This happens again and again. To give credit where credit is due, Microsoft has come up with some good ideas. Its .NET framework is actually pretty good. But, basically, MS makes lackluster products. Windows XP is decent, nothing more. It's not pretty, it's not well-designed (from a low-level engineering point-of-view), and it's missing lots of features that us OS X users take for granted -- many of which are due to OS X's Unix underpinnings. It's so cool to be able to, with a few downloads and a few simple clicks, have an Apache/MySQL/PHP installation that works flawlessly. I even compiled and installed PHP 5 on my G5 for testing and new Web app development purposes. With the help of Fink, it was easy.

Apple's file manager, Finder, is superior (labels, column view, spring-loaded folders, customizable sidebar, etc.), the Dock is superior (the Windows taskbar is badly implemented), the filesystem layout is superior, the bundled lifestyle apps are WAY superior (and don't tell me your friends don't at least take digital photos!), the workflow of the UI is superior, the attractiveness of most OS X apps is superior -- even the user community is superior. There are some great Mac geeks out there, and the amount of energy folks and small companies put into "aftermarket" products and community sites is amazing. For instance, only days (hours?) after the announcement of GarageBand, several sites sprung up for sharing and discussion GarageBand compositions. Wow. And the number of companies selling cool accessories for the Mac and the iPod is staggering. Even if some of these products also work on PCs, that's really just due to the fact that they're using open standards like USB. Basically, most cool accessory companies are DIRECTLY INFLUENCED by Apple's award-winning industrial design.

#4 Reason: Apple is a more open company. Apple uses (and gives away) open source software in a number of places. But even more importantly, Apple uses open standards and open formats wherever possible. Most Apple apps these days use XML for their storage medium. Preference data is often stored in XML. Rendezvous is a great open-source networking technology. AAC is part of the MPEG-4 open standard -- compare that with the proprietary WMA format (yes I know, the iTMS Protected AAC format is proprietary, but the AAC files average users create are not). Most protocols and services are based on standard Unix specifications, making interoperability with Linux and most other OSes out there easy. You have to download and probably purchase tons of crap to be able to do that with Windows.

Also, OS X is a very well-engineered, modular OS. You can dig way down into the guts of the OS and replace or remove all kinds of components. Unlike Windows, everything isn't all "integrated" into itself. iPhoto is a standalone app. System Preferences is a standalone app. The Finder and Dock are somewhat integrated, but even they can be replaced. Even Safari is a standalone app (although the WebKit rendering engine is a system framework). In Windows, you have to hack things right and left to gain control over the OS, and Windows is amazingly easy to break -- which is one reason why its so full of holes and security risks.

---

Just to touch on a few of the points (?) you brought up in your original message, yes, you can argue that 95% of users are wrong. Why not argue that? How many people shop at Food 4 Less compared to Whole Foods? Are people going to say that high-quality, organic produce is inferior or the same as factory-farmed, polluted, irradiated, and ill-bred cheap produce you get at some crap supermarket? Is a Stradivarius violin no better than some Japanese student violin? If you could afford a Stradivarius, would you not buy it because "not many people have one"???

Popularity (or lack of it) is one of stupidest reasons to like or dislike something on the planet. I have a cartoon on my fridge that I'm very fond of. It shows two buildings next to each other, with a sign on each one:

Trashy Schlock for the Simple-Minded
Quality Products for People with Taste

Guess which building has the huge line to get in?

Then there's price, to which I say: who the **** cares? Get something which works well and won't break the bank and leave it at that. Apple's prices are just fine, period. End of story.

Your browser argument is nonsense. IE is not the fastest browser, nor is it the most compatible. It is full of CSS rendering errors, can't display PNG with alpha channel images properly, and is missing tons of Web functionality. If you're going to say that Firebird can be used for tabs, then, uh, don't you know that Firebird runs on OS X too? Or Camino. Or just use Safari, one of the best browsers out there at the moment. And I should know -- I'm a professional Web developer with years of experience.

I'm sorry, but if you really think that there are no longer any significant differences between a Dell computer running XP and an Apple computer running OS X, then...you obviously know very little about computers. And that's a fact which cannot be denied.

Regards,

Jared

[kovacs]

Originally posted by colecovizion:

* Market share - How can I argue that 95% of users are wrong? I typically get ... "if mac is so great then why do they only have 3% market share?"

DOS Computers, manufactured by millions of companies, are by far the most popular, with about 70 million machines in use worldwide. Macintosh fans, on the other hand, may note that cockroaches are far more numerous than humans, and that numbers alone do not denote a higher life form."

[colecovizion]

Thanks for the detailed responses (esp Jared):

I guess I am guilty of changing the topic a little mid way through. So, sorry for the confusion. I just wanted to play devil's advocate because I knew other people would ask me those same questions.

Jared, man I completely forgot about some of those things in OSX that I take for granted. I hopped on my friends WinXP and it was a mess. I think I've been having too much fun on my Mac to even think PC lately.

Thanks to everyone for their responses.

[GaelDesign]

Hey, colecovizion, if you actually enjoyed reading my rant, then I must say that I'm very impressed! It's refreshing to find someone who can actually participate in a good dicussion and not start trolling. I know I was a bit harsh myself, and I hate it when I get like that, but I just felt that I really needed to address some of your assumptions for the discussion which I disagreed with.

I guess you now realize that, despite the best of intentions, the "there's not much difference, is there?" comment about Mac vs. PC pushes a lot of buttons for some of us. And the funny thing is that I'm actually a Switcher. I used PCs (running Windows, Linux, and BeOS) for ages before switching to the Mac & OS X almost 3 years ago. I switched because of a huge number of very important (to me, anyway) reasons, only a few of which I brought up in my previous post.

Anyway, thanks for your measured reply, and, again, I do apologize if I was a bit overbearing in my response.

Jared

[mitchell_pgh]

At work, every time I request a Mac, I have to go through the standard "Why do you need a Mac" and "Couldn't we switch you over to a PC" discussion.

My answer is "Over the last three years... how many service requests have I made?" They say "I don't know" And I answer "Zero"

[Detrius]

Originally posted by colecovizion:

* Market share - How can I argue that 95% of users are wrong? I typically get ... "if mac is so great then why do they only have 3% market share?"

You know, people with IQs between 70 and 130 have a 95% market share too. Personally, that really just freaks me out that so many people have such low IQs. If someone with an IQ of 140 or 150 or 160 were to go up against this 95% in a logical discussion, the person with the higher IQ would be more likely to be right... not the 95% of people that had a differing opinion.

Why do we only have a 3% market share? We're the people with IQ's over 130.

Okay, not really. You get the point though. You can't just rely on majority opinion.

Most people live in China. Does that mean you should too?

[alphasubzero949]

I'm involved in a Mac vs PC debate myself and no matter what I argue this person is convinced that his box running Mandrake is better than anything Apple could ever come up with:

"I don't understand people that think Macs are better for "creative" work. WHY? Apparantly these people have never used the latest and greatest PC hardware...which is lightyears ahead of Apple's hardware in terms of raw performance. My computer is faster...more versitile...and cheaper. On top of that I can emulate Apple hardware and run OSX if I wanted to...I just see absolutely no reason to do so. Just because I got a Ferrari at a Civic price and you got a Civic at a Ferrari price doesn't mean my car isn't better than yours.

Just because you use a Mac doesn't make you an expert. In fact your proven complete lack of knowledge only goes to show how big of a poser you really are. For one you obviously know nothing about what you BS about around here. Tell me why your "Mac" is better for "graphics" and "creative work". This may have been the case a few years ago...but now it's just simply untrue. People say crap like, "I've used Macs for graphics and they're fast!!&!&!&!!" That's great dumbass...but my PC is even faster and I guarantee it. I'm not saying it isn't fast...I'm just saying PC technology has advanced much further and is FASTER.

People keep saying, "speed doesn't matter". Sure it does...that's just stupid. If you can render something in half the time it makes you more efficient...THAT'S THE POINT. There's not 1 single thing that makes a Mac better for "graphics"...I mean come on...where do people get this? Probably from ignorant people like "THE COMPUTER PROFESSIONAL"

How it "feels" using the computer? What the hell are you talking about? And like I said...if you can't live without the pretty OSX shell...you can install the Debian OSX release and you're good to go. It will "feel" exactly the same...boring."


"He has not loaded up a PC and a Mac next to each other and scrolled up and down an identical PDF document to test the "speed" of the systems. Not only is this the dumbest and most irrelevant test I've ever heard of...not only would the P4 (that's well over a year old) blow it away even if he did do this...he has not done it. If he has...then he's absolutely pathetic.

A single Athlon FX will render twice as fast as the fastest dual G5 on the market right now...and don't even get me started on quad Opteron configurations. He can scroll up and down those PDF documents ALL he wants but when it comes right down to it there's no competition. I don't care what anyone's past experience is with Macs and PCs...properly configured, a new PC WILL blow the Mac away in EVERY category for less money. If that's not the case for some of you then your machines were not properly configured or you were using mismatched hardware."

"That's the beauty of a PC...I can tweak my box if I want. I've never spent more than a few minutes configuring my hardware settings the way I want them. OS X is a great OS...but I've never had a single problem with any of my Linux distros...EVER. I rarely run Windows since most of my Windows apps port over flawlessly to the new Mandrake. When I do run Windows I have no problems. If you are too dumb to keep your Windows install clean then I can understand why you hate Windows. Incompetent people can make even great products function poorly -- I see this all the time and obviously this is the case with you."

"I'm setting people straight that are serious about buying a new computer. The other "creative Mac people" post false information over and over and after I correct them on it they get defensive and an argument breaks out.

The last thing I want to see is some poor guy waste $3000 on a machine when he could have gotten a better machine for $1500."


Sigh...of course everyone else jumped onto the anti-Mac bandwagon.

(The original thread is in a hidden forum)

[GaelDesign]

Wow, what an arrogant fellow. I wouldn't even know where to begin arguing with him, so I don't think I'd even dare.

I'm a creative professional. And I spent $3000 on a new Dual G5. Gee, I guess that means I'm an idiot.

Jared, the Creative Idiot

P. S. What in the hell does "feel" mean? Huh?
Is this guy on the level? Try: I like the way this computer looks and behaves. Look and feel. Ever hear of that? Duh....

[Link]

It really depends on the user.

I know a retired programmer, he uses FreeBSD 100% of the time on his midend servers and would love to get a mac (right now he's getting a next box just for the fun of it)...

I myself fall into a similar boat. The one thing that attracted me to the mac platform was the unix based OS, and it's just phenomenal; OS X to this point in time fufills my needs perfectly, not only is it's UI scheme better than most every OS I've seen but I can run PC apps, mac apps, and X11 apps simulatenously.

Otherwise I'd be using a sparcstation or sgi box right now. 'nuff said.

[mbryda]

Not going to get into it, but if you need a PC, definitely don't get a Dell. They have rightfully so earned the nickaname Hell. Do yourself a favor and get anything but a POS Dell.

Other than that, the Mac is clearly better as most have already pointed out, so I won't rehash that.

[ryaxnb]

http://www.xvsxp.com and the forums
http://bbs.xvsxp.com

[ryaxnb]

Originally posted by colecovizion:

* Networking - To me it's really crappy in 10.3
* Browser - IE is very fast/compatible (no tabs, but firebird has it)
* Plug n Play - A lot more devices work well with XP, it's harder to argue this anymore
* Games - Just a big loss on this one for the Macs
* Stability - Most of my Windows friends haven't encountered viruses or crashes
* Programming - Visual Studio, nuff said
* Price - Dell can get pretty low
* Market share - How can I argue that 95% of users are wrong? I typically get ... "if mac is so great then why do they only have 3% market share?"

Thanks very much for any help. The reason on the Apple "Switch" page are kinda lame. And with what I've seen and others have seen with Dell and Win XP, there might not be significant differences anymore. Heck, I can't argue that iTunes is only on the Mac...

Networking: No. It's better then Windows in many cases.
Browser: Are you kidding??!!? IE is the worst browser on the planet. No pop-up blocking or tabs or type-ahead find or good favorites management or good toolbar management.

Stability? Is this guy a troll (No offense, I just got a little angry?) They may not have encountered viruses but - they're lucky. It's likely they will get them soon. Viruses on Windows are so very popular. And if they don't it's likely that they spent a ton of money and time tuning firewalls and AntiVirus programs - remind them of that.

Programming? Can they afford Visual Studio? Xcode blows Windows free/low-cost tools out of the water IMHO.

Market share. Tell them that 90% (10% of users are using macs) are wrong. And remind them that because PCs are cheaper, people want them. Even if they're not a better value, some can't afford Macs.

[sushiism]

"I don't understand people that think Macs are better for "creative" work. WHY?"
you dont understand its nothing to do with speed this is what pc kids always think its about speed, i couldnt give a crap about how fast my machine is, it depends how well its interface deals with my workflow.
+windows still to this day doesnt have a decent colour management system like apples colorsync
+windows colour pallette(the thing you select colours with, just before anyone goes "OMFG MY PC CAN DO 3554COLOURES AT 454545 by ^&676 REZ BAYBEE") is pathetic next to the osx ones
+better use of icons
+better window management with expose
+less shitty mdi windows, haha pc photoshop has to take up your whole screen to be of any use, mac photoshop doesnt do that
just things like these and tonnes more make it better for creative work, i dont give a **** which is faster my work isnt about being fast.

" On top of that I can emulate Apple hardware and run OSX if I wanted to."
no you couldnt theres not powerpc emulator for x86 yet, and osx only runs on powerpc macs, best you can emulate is os8.1 i think

oh and jesus christ anyone who calls the machine they do work on a box should not be taken seriously

[Back up 15 and punt]

Originally posted by alphasubzero949:
I'm involved in a Mac vs PC debate myself and no matter what I argue this person is convinced that his box running Mandrake is better than anything Apple could ever come up with:

"I don't understand people that think Macs are better for "creative" work. WHY? Apparantly these people have never used the latest and greatest PC hardware...which is lightyears ahead of Apple's hardware in terms of raw performance. My computer is faster...more versitile...and cheaper. On top of that I can emulate Apple hardware and run OSX if I wanted to...I just see absolutely no reason to do so. Just because I got a Ferrari at a Civic price and you got a Civic at a Ferrari price doesn't mean my car isn't better than yours.

Just because you use a Mac doesn't make you an expert. In fact your proven complete lack of knowledge only goes to show how big of a poser you really are. For one you obviously know nothing about what you BS about around here. Tell me why your "Mac" is better for "graphics" and "creative work". This may have been the case a few years ago...but now it's just simply untrue. People say crap like, "I've used Macs for graphics and they're fast!!&!&!&!!" That's great dumbass...but my PC is even faster and I guarantee it. I'm not saying it isn't fast...I'm just saying PC technology has advanced much further and is FASTER.

People keep saying, "speed doesn't matter". Sure it does...that's just stupid. If you can render something in half the time it makes you more efficient...THAT'S THE POINT. There's not 1 single thing that makes a Mac better for "graphics"...I mean come on...where do people get this? Probably from ignorant people like "THE COMPUTER PROFESSIONAL"

How it "feels" using the computer? What the hell are you talking about? And like I said...if you can't live without the pretty OSX shell...you can install the Debian OSX release and you're good to go. It will "feel" exactly the same...boring."


"He has not loaded up a PC and a Mac next to each other and scrolled up and down an identical PDF document to test the "speed" of the systems. Not only is this the dumbest and most irrelevant test I've ever heard of...not only would the P4 (that's well over a year old) blow it away even if he did do this...he has not done it. If he has...then he's absolutely pathetic.

A single Athlon FX will render twice as fast as the fastest dual G5 on the market right now...and don't even get me started on quad Opteron configurations. He can scroll up and down those PDF documents ALL he wants but when it comes right down to it there's no competition. I don't care what anyone's past experience is with Macs and PCs...properly configured, a new PC WILL blow the Mac away in EVERY category for less money. If that's not the case for some of you then your machines were not properly configured or you were using mismatched hardware."

"That's the beauty of a PC...I can tweak my box if I want. I've never spent more than a few minutes configuring my hardware settings the way I want them. OS X is a great OS...but I've never had a single problem with any of my Linux distros...EVER. I rarely run Windows since most of my Windows apps port over flawlessly to the new Mandrake. When I do run Windows I have no problems. If you are too dumb to keep your Windows install clean then I can understand why you hate Windows. Incompetent people can make even great products function poorly -- I see this all the time and obviously this is the case with you."

"I'm setting people straight that are serious about buying a new computer. The other "creative Mac people" post false information over and over and after I correct them on it they get defensive and an argument breaks out.

The last thing I want to see is some poor guy waste $3000 on a machine when he could have gotten a better machine for $1500."


Sigh...of course everyone else jumped onto the anti-Mac bandwagon.

(The original thread is in a hidden forum)

Lets get a few facts straight. First of all Apple hasn't even come close to using the full power of their G5 systems. They are running a 32 bit operating system on 64 bit hardware. Besides Consumer reports just came out a short time ago and said that the single processor G5 box was the fatest machine that had ever seen but they couldn't justify the cost.

And yes Mac's due require a higher outlay of cash. But I'll tell you something right now. PC users replace their machine every 18 to 24 months while Mac user generally wait 3 to 5 years. I have a brother in law that works for Microsoft and he buys a new Dell every year. Not because he wants to but because he has to. Yes he gets a discount but he easily has spent more money in the past 3 years on his Dells that I spent on the dual processor G4. Due the math and you figure out who is spending more money. If that doesn't say anything about reliability and stability then I am at a loss of what others are thinking.

Finally there is this issue of market percentage. The facts and figure do not account for the number of actual users in the market place. Those numbers only address new purchases. If a study was done to figure out just who was using what, I would bet that Apples percentage would be much higher than 3 to 5 percent everybody likes to quote.

One last little note. Maybe you would like to explain why Microsoft has decided to use a PowerPC chip in their next game box.

[ryju]

Originally posted by bergy:
There are a lot of things in this world that are "good enough". But there is a place for beauty, elegance, logic, aesthetics, creativity, on and on and on ....

The Mac is not competing with the lower end user experience ... it is a standard in itself which is recognized by those with "eyes" to see. If you don't " see" it don't bother getting it. That''s why 95% of most thing in life are "good enough". The 5% is where we get our inspiration, joy, and direction. In the personal computing world, the Mac represents this experience. Thank God for Apple.
I have a mac and pc at home.
I could not stand to look at a Windows display for more than a few minutes, whereas I can do the most mundane things on my Mac and enjoy myself. You can't force someone to recognize these things, but to me "good enough" doesn't cut it. I want to reward and encourage brilliance and I'm willing to pay a few extra bucks for it.

That is probably the greatest thing I've ever heard in response to these arguments. Wow.

[mitchell_pgh]

Originally posted by ryju:
That is probably the greatest thing I've ever heard in response to these arguments. Wow.

Why the Mac is better is a subjective thing... I can piece out all of the components of a Mac and it won't add up perfectly to that of a PC. I will admit that (even though it's MUCH better then it once was).

When you walk through a art gallery, some painting are more expensive then others. They all consist of paint, canvas and a frame, but value is given to some over others. It's not objective. You will never hear "Know what would make that piece better... MORE PAINT".

To most people, the canvas, paint and frame are good enough. I would rather work with a piece of art.

I like sunny days over cloudy days. Technically speaking, it shouldn't make a difference.

[alphasubzero949]

Originally posted by Back up 15 and punt:
Lets get a few facts straight. First of all Apple hasn't even come close to using the full power of their G5 systems. They are running a 32 bit operating system on 64 bit hardware. Besides Consumer reports just came out a short time ago and said that the single processor G5 box was the fatest machine that had ever seen but they couldn't justify the cost.

This is exactly what the guy used against me. Because Panther is still a 32-bit system, he thinks it's a waste to go out and spend $3000 on a 64-bit comp that has "no software" to take advantage of it.


I mentioned most of the things already repeated in this thread only to be shot down every single time with remarks such as the ones I quoted in my earlier post.

[Back up 15 and punt]

Originally posted by alphasubzero949:
This is exactly what the guy used against me. Because Panther is still a 32-bit system, he thinks it's a waste to go out and spend $3000 on a 64-bit comp that has "no software" to take advantage of it.


I mentioned most of the things already repeated in this thread only to be shot down every single time with remarks such as the ones I quoted in my earlier post.

Ask him if he wants an AMD or Titanium processor, both of which are 64 bit, instead of a G5. His argument doesn't hold wait since he will spend a whole lot more money in the next 3 years than the typical Mac user. By the way maybe he can explain why so many people at JPL use Macs?

[sniffer]

I am an avid Mac user, but with Windows XP and Dell, it can be hard to argue to someone who is technical.

Duh.. Dell and Apple are pretty much equal priced. At least that's what I found after comparing an entry iMac and a BTO Dell around here.
Seriously, it sounds like you prefer Macs, but are you really trying to convince your self or is it this dude? I am really starting to get fed up with this Mac-vs-PC discussion. It seems like it's always the PC users tries to provoke it, so why bother (feeding the trolls) honestly?

[mitchell_pgh]

I would say that Dell does offer less expensive computers, but people need to realize that they are cookie cutter computers. If you piece them out, the Mac is usually 5% - 10% more expensive. Many of the very low end systems don't have Firewire and various other pieces that we have come to take for granted.

The reason most tech people freak out is because there is no way to "build" a G5 from the ground up. Usually people can piece a computer system together for much less then a manufactured computer. To those people, I usually say "well, how many computer systems have you built". They usually lie and say "a bunch".

Those are usually the friends that constantly have issues with their computers.

I wouldn't go on a rant with the guy. He probably is stringing you along. Most of the people that I evangelize are people that don't know anything about computers or only have limited exposure to Windows.

Apple could come out with a 5Ghz G5 iBook for $999 and a 1600 x 2600 res screen and 2 GB of memory standard and we still wouldn't get people to move over.

[Brass]

Originally posted by colecovizion:
To me, the bulk of the great things about the Mac are just nice things, not needed things. The only reason why I have a Mac is because I can afford these nice things. This goes along with the car analogy, a BMW is a nice thing, not a needed thing. Are there needed things that you can think of that aren't available on Windows?

This works both ways. There is nothing that Windows has that Mac OS X doesn't that is needed.

So, the result is that both systems have what's needed. Why would you choose the one that's not "nice"?

If you need the machine to have built in sound network, firewire, DVD, etc, then you'll probably find the Mac doesn't really cost much more to buy. And most research has found that Windows machines cost a lot more to maintain, and that people using Windows machines get less work done (and therefore cost the company more).

[colecovizion]

Well thanks for still replying to this, I thought this thread would be dead by now. For those wondering, no I'm not a troll, I'm not trying to provoke you. Fortunately, I feel some great stuff ended up coming from this thread that I didn't expect, so I'm glad I came here to ask.

After searching around some more I did end up finding that xvsxp site. I thought it was the best unbiased comparison I've seen between the two OSs. Knowing both X and XP pretty well, I felt it touched on both the good and the bad accurately.

Thanks for an insightful discussion.

[Scarpa]

Coming in late to this discussion, but I think I have something important to say.

The OS wars are over. Anyone who tries to argue that you should use "the One True Platform" (whatever it may be), has totally missed the point.

All platforms - OSX, Windows, Linux have the capability to provide basic computing function for both business and home users. Web browsing, email and Office apps are pretty much normalized across all platforms.

That said, your biggest differentiating factor will be the Experience. And honestly, that is totally subjective and is ENTIRELY up to the person who is purchasing the computer.

My Mom? OSX. I got tired of troubleshooting her WindowsME (the horror) computer over the phone, sold her on an iMac and now she's full on apple junkie complete with iPod and iTMS addiction.

Geek/tinkerer? Linux. For the person who loves to mess with their machine it doesn't get better than linux.

Business professional? Windows. There's nothing out there that replaces Visio and MS Project. I know lots of people who can't live without those programs, I'd never recommend a Mac to them.

Myself? haha All of the above. I have a Powerbook that I use for work at home, using RDP to login to my work servers over DSL. I have an XP machine on my desk at work. I have a Linux box in my office serving up a crappy website and samba for my home network. I just bought a tiny PC that I intend to use for gaming and VS.NET development for work.

So.. the answer is your classic engineer's reply.. "It Depends"

[GaelDesign]

Originally posted by Scarpa:
The OS wars are over. Anyone who tries to argue that you should use "the One True Platform" (whatever it may be), has totally missed the point.

Well, no, I don't agree with that whatsoever. The Mac is simply a better platform than your average WinTel PC, and OS X is a superior OS compared to Windows for a huge number of technical and design choice reasons. Unlike perhaps for you, a computer isn't just a "tool" for me, any more than a paintbrush or a camera is a "tool" for an artist. It's part of my life! Most of the creative work I do is via the computer, so I HAVE to use something that is beautiful, fun, and functional in an intelligent and logical way. The Mac is all of those things, a PC is not. Therefore, it is my duty to, when asked, give reasons why I think the Mac platform is better than PC. I don't know if I've helped anyone to switch personally, but if someone asks for my option on the matter, you can be d**m sure I'll give it!

Jared

[rhogue islander]

I say buy a quality KVM switch and use both.

I realize this is not practical for everyone, but in my case I have some 3D apps for which I have no mac version and I like to do some gaming as well. I end up buying most of my games in PC form, as there are more available and at lower cost as well. Having a PC also helps me satisfy my urges to tinker, as they are completely modular and relatively cheap to upgrade.

The vast majority of my computing time, however, I spend on my Dual G5. It is such a sweet machine, the built in applications are awesome (unlike the vast majority of windows bundled apps), and everything is easier to use and looks far better to boot. I find that macs are still superior when it comes to balancing multi tasking loads too.

[Scarpa]

Originally posted by GaelDesign:
Unlike perhaps for you, a computer isn't just a "tool" for me, any more than a paintbrush or a camera is a "tool" for an artist. It's part of my life! Most of the creative work I do is via the computer, so I HAVE to use something that is beautiful, fun, and functional in an intelligent and logical way.

Just because you're an artist doesn't mean the tools of your trade aren't tools. Yes, a paintbrush or camera is a tool too.

Besides, I think you proved my point, which was directly following what you quoted, where I said the deciding factor is "the Experience."

In short, we agree but you don't think we do.

[Macanoid]

I've noticed a lot of people/companies/governments are actually moving away from Microsoft - there's a real shift in IT at the moment. Starting small, but it will have significant implications. I'm currently busy putting the finishing touches to my site where (amongst other things) you can find the relevant information that back-up these claims.

10464.net

[GaelDesign]

Originally posted by Scarpa:
Just because you're an artist doesn't mean the tools of your trade aren't tools. Yes, a paintbrush or camera is a tool too.

Well try telling any pro photographer that all cameras are much the same and people should just pick any old one that suits 'em, and you'll get your head chewed off. When it comes to his instrument/camera/brush/lathe/forge/etc., an artist can be incredibly particular!

Some products are quality, some products are garbage. That's true in any industry. The thing is, not many people seem to be able to tell the different when it comes to computers.

Jared