PDA

View Full Version : PC vs. Mac


Trap-Eds
May 24th, 2009, 12:09 PM
I've been watching some PC vs. Mac commercials on YouTube, in British and American, and I was just wondering which one you guys think is better. I've been using Windows for most of my life, but I would like to try a current Mac just to see if it's really as great as they say.

Teh Blue Charzerd
May 24th, 2009, 12:31 PM
I've been watching some PC vs. Mac commercials on YouTube, in British and American, and I was just wondering which one you guys think is better. I've been using Windows for most of my life, but I would like to try a current Mac just to see if it's really as great as they say.

i had mac its not that bad.. but it cannot run .exe programs or files.. so in my opinion.. i think windows is batter.

Virtual Chatot
May 24th, 2009, 12:32 PM
Please god, not another one of these threads xD;

I'll just say the pros and cons of both, and let you choose...

[css-div="width: 300px;"]Mac OS X Pros[/css-div]
Very stable, won't see many crashes
Less Virus Prone to Macs ( But still capable of viruses, ,nonetheless )
Great at handling images and movies
I've never had it crash on me. Programs are handled differently on Mac, so if they do start to freeze, the entire Mac won't.
Easier interface. Just my opinion, but I find the Mac OS X interface cleaner and easier to find things than Windows.
Multitasking. Macs are better for power users.
Virtualization. Macs are great at using Virtual Machine technology.
Prettier Interface. OSX lives and breathes in beautiful graphics.
[css-div="width: 300px;"]Mac OS X Cons[/css-div]
Less Games Availible. The Mac Games list comes nowhere near to that of Windows. But it's not Mac's fault
To easy? Some people complain that Macs hold your hand the entire way through. But I don't see how this is a bad things unless you're a die hard command line geek.
Hardware. You can only legally run OSX on Apple hardware.
Price. Macs aren't cheap.
Harder to find programs. It is indeed hard to find programs for things you might easily find on Windows. Which is why Apple loads a bunch of basic software for basic computer use. ( Mail, Internet, IM, ect ).[css-div="width: 300px;"]Windows Pros[/css-div]
Programs. Windows has the majority of market share when it comes to operating systems. So, there's always going to be more programs for Windows.
Games. Again, Majority of Market Share means more games
Corporate use. Most corporations use Windows. Which means most programmers are going to be using windows.
Hardware. Windows, for the most part, can run on all hardware legally.
More customizable than Mac, thanks to hacking[css-div="width: 300px;"]Windows Cons[/css-div]
Very Virus Prone. Windows has, due to large market share and terrible security, the largest majority of viruses.
The interface is a bit outdated compared to Linux and Mac.
Not as pretty as Mac and Linux ( My opinon, but anyone who sees Compiz Fusion on Linux will agree with me )
Bloats after a while. Windows starts to bloat after a while, and if you're not consistently cleaning out your hard drive you're going to finding yourself with a really slow computer.

i had mac its not that bad.. but it cannot run .exe programs or files.. so in my opinion.. i think windows is batter.Ever heard of WINE or Crossover? They let you run the majority of .exe's on Mac. :|

templekeeper
May 24th, 2009, 01:00 PM
I've been faithful to Windows forever, but I've recently considered Mac...is it true that you can run Windows OS on a Mac, or did I pick that up incorrectly? Is it also true that any application for Windows can be made for Mac (I thought no before...)?

True Reign
May 24th, 2009, 01:16 PM
I've used a PC for my entire PC gaming career. It's great, fast, good graphics, I just love it altogether. However, I'm considering on getting a Mac (if they still have them when I'm eighteen) when I go off to college. This way it'll be easier for me to carry around and I heard from a friend that it's just better when your doing work for school.

twocows
May 24th, 2009, 01:30 PM
I've been faithful to Windows forever, but I've recently considered Mac...is it true that you can run Windows OS on a Mac, or did I pick that up incorrectly? Is it also true that any application for Windows can be made for Mac (I thought no before...)?
Boot Camp (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Boot_Camp_%28software%29&printable=yes) (dual-boot application for Macs)
VirtualBox (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=VirtualBox&printable=yes) (run pretty much any OS on any other OS)

PC versus Mac is the stupidest misnomer I've heard in a while. Macs are PCs; PC just stands for "Personal Computer." The way the commercials spin it, it's OS X versus Windows, which is equally as stupid; Boot Camp lets you run Windows on Mac hardware, and OSx86 lets you run OS X on any x86 computer.

If you're asking what hardware I use, I use non-Apple hardware. You can get something with equal or better specs to an Apple for cheaper pretty much anywhere.

If you're asking what OS I prefer, I'd answer nLited Windows XP and net-installed Fedora Linux. The nLited Windows XP is lightweight and runs my games like a charm. As for Fedora, which I use for everything else, the net install let me skip out on the bloatware that is GNOME and KDE (opted instead for openbox and pypanel, though I may switch to perlpanel instead), so I can run as many applications as I want and never get slowdowns.

I don't like OS X at all. It's pretty and has a few cool Apple applications (which cost way too much, in my opinion), but many games aren't made to run on it like they are for Windows, and Linux is just a better option for nearly anything else. I know quite a few people who use OS X, but I've just never felt the draw, myself.

donavannj
May 24th, 2009, 02:37 PM
Compare a Macbook's price to any other laptop with similar hardware capabilities. The Macbook is usually substantially more expensive, and is still almost always more expensive. Same goes for the desktop forms.

Zet
May 24th, 2009, 05:14 PM
Since these types of threads are going to keep popping up now and then, I guess I should just leave them open regardlessly if their is a thread to brag(unless of course it's like multiple OSes then I would close the thread)

Though if you ask me, I'd use a Mac for stuff like Photoshop, Soundbooth, surfing the web, etc mainly because the chances of a crash happening aren't very high as well as when the program doesn't respond. While I'd use Windows for gaming, messenging(gotta love msgplus <3) and just about everything else.

Though as what to use, It would probably be easier just to buy a Mac(OH-EM-GEE, Zet suggested something he doesn't really like) and get bootcamp so you can use Windows as well as using the Mac OS

Sk8_K1d
June 5th, 2009, 03:12 PM
I used windows for most my life up until beggining of this year when i got a macbook and i wont go back to windows XP and NEVER to Vista. Windows 7 though is pretty good but i prefer mac.

It is also very easy to run windows programs on a mac. You can run them at the same time as mac or start windows on your mac with bootcamp (similar to multi booting vista n xp or windows 7). I prefer to run both at the same time with VMware fusion. Even though windows runs a little slower, but i dont use many memory intensive applications on windows.

Silver
June 5th, 2009, 06:40 PM
Compare a Macbook's price to any other laptop with similar hardware capabilities. The Macbook is usually substantially more expensive, and is still almost always more expensive. Same goes for the desktop forms.
I have to say while this is generally true, if you get to the point of comparing a Mac Tower versus a PC/Windows of the same specs, the Mac generally will cost a significant amount less, however I have not done this comparison lately. This is also on the basis of buying the computer prebuilt, and not building one yourself.

Gerri Shin
June 5th, 2009, 07:24 PM
Well VC, summed up pretty well most of what people argue over in these threads, and I won't argue. There are things that each OS does better than the other. I myself prefer the Mac OS, just because I've almost never had to fight with it to get things done as I have in the past with Windows (My personal experience, your may be different)
the one thing that VC did hint on, but not explain entirely was the price. While you may pay more initially for a Mac, generally they tend to last longer and provide a much better resale value. If you look at currently available PC's that Have Windows as their main OS, you can almost expect for them to be out dated and not work as well as they should in 4 years. Now if I look at my PowerBook G4 which was purchased back in 2003, It still runs as well today as the base model computers that come with Vista Home basic. That same PowerBook G4 is also still highly sought on places like eBay where you still have to fork out about $300 for the same model in working order, I wish I could say the same for 6 year old Dells, Sonys, and Compaqs.

twocows
June 6th, 2009, 11:17 AM
I have to say while this is generally true, if you get to the point of comparing a Mac Tower versus a PC/Windows of the same specs, the Mac generally will cost a significant amount less, however I have not done this comparison lately. This is also on the basis of buying the computer prebuilt, and not building one yourself.
Never was true and never will be true. It's certainly not true at the moment. Just checking out Dell's site quick, you can make a decent computer for about $700 (they start around $400). Sony, makers of extremely overpriced equipment, seems to start at about $1000 (you can't customize Sony's stuff AFAIK). HP's computers start at about $300; if you want something that can play games, I'd say add another $300 to that figure. For the record, I hate all three of these companies.

All of these figures included monitors; if you already have one, jack the price down about $100. If you don't need something that plays games, you can take off the extra $300 I added to the starting prices for being gaming-capable (3GB RAM, 2.6 GHz or higher multi-core, mid-range graphics card).

iMacs start at $1200, and if you want something that can play today's games, add another $100 for the extra RAM. That's not including the mostly useless software that any of these companies will try to pawn off on you with their computers.

Bianca Paragon
June 7th, 2009, 04:28 AM
3GB RAM.
lolno

4GB. 4GB. Stop recommending silly specs, kthx :)

Serene Grace
June 7th, 2009, 04:54 AM
I've only ever used Macs at my school for Graphics and Music and I've got to say how much I prefer them to Windows. The sleek and slim design is superior to Windows, and any other PC. I'm sure most people must agree. Also, I really like the OS, Leopard. It's easy to use, innovative and very fast.

Once I get a place of my own, I'm definitely going to invest my money in a Mac rather than the Windows computer.

Kazukii
June 7th, 2009, 05:05 AM
Macs do look awesome but they're over priced. PC overall.

Serene Grace
June 7th, 2009, 05:10 AM
Macs do look awesome but they're over priced. PC overall.
A lot of people complain about the Mac price but I actually think It's worth what you're getting. Apple things do pay off despite the high price.

Eureka1
June 7th, 2009, 09:19 AM
lolno

4GB. 4GB. Stop recommending silly specs, kthx :)

eh, some people prefer 3GB of RAM on XP x86.

Why though, I've no idea. I run 4GB with it no problem.

Alinthea
June 7th, 2009, 09:26 AM
Meh.
I use to be very against Macs, now I like them.

I think I use to be against them because I didn't know how to use them! XD
Typical!

But I like them, they are very good at what they do.
I am going to get one soon hopefully and run Windows at the same time.
I can't remember what it is called, but you can run Windows on the Mac screen at the same time, instead of having to turn it off and boot in Windows.

The only reason, is a lot of my software has to be run on Windows ><

kevinkjb81
June 7th, 2009, 09:44 AM
ive had Wondows Vista since May 2007 and ive had about one crash per day since then. Compared to the macbook that i have that has only crashed once in a year.

the only downside i have towards mac is that its expensive.

Alinthea
June 7th, 2009, 09:46 AM
ive had Wondows Vista since May 2007 and ive had about one crash per day since then. Compared to the macbook that i have that has only crashed once in a year.

the only downside i have towards mac is that its expensive.
You have a Virus.
That isn't a problem with the OS!
Unless, you have configured the settings...
Or it is just too slow...

Eureka1
June 7th, 2009, 10:31 AM
Meh.
I use to be very against Macs, now I like them.

I think I use to be against them because I didn't know how to use them! XD
Typical!

Well that's one reason to hate something. :P

I find it too slow, I navigate around fast.

Serene Grace
June 7th, 2009, 10:42 AM
Well that's one reason to hate something. :P

I find it too slow, I navigate around fast.
What do you find to slow? Windows? If It's windows then I assure you that Macs are way faster.

twocows
June 7th, 2009, 12:39 PM
lolno

4GB. 4GB. Stop recommending silly specs, kthx :)
First of all, that was a minimum value; if you want more, go ahead. However, make sure you have fun with your extra 256 megs that you'll get from having 4GB, as 32-bit Windows can't recognize much past that (and 64-bit Windows is just bad). It's not worth it for the price.

Bianca Paragon
June 7th, 2009, 03:38 PM
64-bit Windows is just bad
Everybody can now henceforth ignore everything this user says; it's pretty obvious he's got no clue :)

Alinthea
June 7th, 2009, 04:00 PM
Everybody can now henceforth ignore everything this user says; it's pretty obvious he's got no clue :)
Lol. That is a little harsh.
However, saying that. 64 > 32 IMO...

Sweet Candace
June 7th, 2009, 04:34 PM
Windows. I've been using Windows ever since we got our old computer. We have Macs at my school, but I like Windows better.

machinegun777
June 7th, 2009, 05:12 PM
I like the PC better, mainly because many computer programs don't work on the Mac.

Zet
June 7th, 2009, 11:48 PM
A lot of people complain about the Mac price but I actually think It's worth what you're getting. Apple things do pay off despite the high price.
Macs are really worth less than a Windows computer(check the vids on the apple said, steve even mentions it)
What do you find to slow? Windows? If It's windows then I assure you that Macs are way faster.
read the post, Macs are slow for him

twocows
June 8th, 2009, 12:55 AM
Everybody can now henceforth ignore everything this user says; it's pretty obvious he's got no clue :)
I used 64-bit Windows on one of my computers for two years (primarily because it had 4GB of RAM and I actually wanted to utilize it). The amount of trouble I had compared to 32-bit Windows (which already has its share of problems) was ridiculous. I understand the need to transition to 64-bit OSes, but I stand by my comment that the 64-bit Windows scene is, at the very least, less than desirable.

22sa
June 8th, 2009, 01:18 AM
Mac is way more reliable for me. But yes, less applications and games. However, my macbook can run windows and make up for all that : P

Archer
June 10th, 2009, 04:11 AM
Okay, why do people insist on premoting OSX and then go on to say "I want to get one for Christmas"? I think you can see what I mean. I don't have much experience with OSX, so I'm not going to make a judgement on it as opposed to Windows, although Linux actually covers several of the "Mac Pros" that were listed, without several of the cons. It really depends on the person. Personal taste and needs.

Silver
June 10th, 2009, 12:04 PM
Never was true and never will be true. It's certainly not true at the moment. Just checking out Dell's site quick, you can make a decent computer for about $700 (they start around $400). Sony, makers of extremely overpriced equipment, seems to start at about $1000 (you can't customize Sony's stuff AFAIK). HP's computers start at about $300; if you want something that can play games, I'd say add another $300 to that figure. For the record, I hate all three of these companies.

All of these figures included monitors; if you already have one, jack the price down about $100. If you don't need something that plays games, you can take off the extra $300 I added to the starting prices for being gaming-capable (3GB RAM, 2.6 GHz or higher multi-core, mid-range graphics card).

iMacs start at $1200, and if you want something that can play today's games, add another $100 for the extra RAM. That's not including the mostly useless software that any of these companies will try to pawn off on you with their computers.

Might I direct you to this article: http://www.macworld.com/article/52381/2006/08/macproprice.html

Archer
June 11th, 2009, 12:31 AM
Just a suggestion, you really want to use more recent stuff when trying to get a point across. That article is well over 3 years old.

As of this post, from the Australian online stores, I can get the standard Macbook for $1,599.
With the same specs (2.13 GHz Core2 Duo, 2 GB RAM, 160 GB HDD, etc), I can get a Dell Inspiron for $749. And that has a bigger screen, too.

I'm no Mac hater, but you may want to check before you go referring to old articles, m'kay? :D

lol, the top of the line Mac Pro with every option upgraded would set me back ~$36,000 AUD. I know no-one would do that, but.... lol.

Zet
June 11th, 2009, 04:34 AM
Just a suggestion, you really want to use more recent stuff when trying to get a point across. That article is well over 3 years old.

As of this post, from the Australian online stores, I can get the standard Macbook for $1,599.
With the same specs (2.13 GHz Core2 Duo, 2 GB RAM, 160 GB HDD, etc), I can get a Dell Inspiron for $749. And that has a bigger screen, too.

I'm no Mac hater, but you may want to check before you go referring to old articles, m'kay? :D

lol, the top of the line Mac Pro with every option upgraded would set me back ~$36,000 AUD. I know no-one would do that, but.... lol.
You have to remember that Apple's "love" costs an extra $1000+ for the machine itself and per part/upgrade ;3

Silver
June 13th, 2009, 05:35 PM
Just a suggestion, you really want to use more recent stuff when trying to get a point across. That article is well over 3 years old.

As of this post, from the Australian online stores, I can get the standard Macbook for $1,599.
With the same specs (2.13 GHz Core2 Duo, 2 GB RAM, 160 GB HDD, etc), I can get a Dell Inspiron for $749. And that has a bigger screen, too.

I'm no Mac hater, but you may want to check before you go referring to old articles, m'kay? :D

lol, the top of the line Mac Pro with every option upgraded would set me back ~$36,000 AUD. I know no-one would do that, but.... lol.
I had said that I hadn't done the comparison anytime recently. The article was merely a reply in response to the 'Never has been true, and never will be true' statement. The article was also the one which I was thinking of when writing my original post.

Also, in response to your comment on the full upgraded mac pro cost, yes I've done that and it's fun to see how much it would cost, but no reasonable person would spend that much on a computer, I believe that also includes HD monitors x2 and servers, something that the general populace wouldn't need. But I dunno.

twocows
June 13th, 2009, 06:47 PM
I had said that I hadn't done the comparison anytime recently. The article was merely a reply in response to the 'Never has been true, and never will be true' statement. The article was also the one which I was thinking of when writing my original post.

Also, in response to your comment on the full upgraded mac pro cost, yes I've done that and it's fun to see how much it would cost, but no reasonable person would spend that much on a computer, I believe that also includes HD monitors x2 and servers, something that the general populace wouldn't need. But I dunno.
To be fair, this article referenced one of Dell's pointlessly higher-priced computers. You could always get one of their lower-tier computers with similar specs for less (I know, I checked back when I bought mine).

Archer
June 13th, 2009, 11:12 PM
Also, in response to your comment on the full upgraded mac pro cost, yes I've done that and it's fun to see how much it would cost, but no reasonable person would spend that much on a computer, I believe that also includes HD monitors x2 and servers, something that the general populace wouldn't need. But I dunno.

Oh yeah, no-one in their right mind would need that, but I did mention it was just for teh lulz.

I think we can still agree that Apple hardware is usually more expensive than it's other counterparts.

Norcinu
June 13th, 2009, 11:16 PM
Windows is the superior system ;9 Hands down, case closed!

*braces for any impact*

Cornelius
June 17th, 2009, 10:23 PM
While the Macintosh comes with the Adobe Suite, a group of advance image-edditing programs that I enjoy using, the Macintosh is far too expensive for me, and I've only ever used Windows as personal computers my whole life.

Rukario
June 17th, 2009, 10:36 PM
While the Macintosh comes with the Adobe Suite, a group of advance image-edditing programs that I enjoy using, the Macintosh is far too expensive for me, and I've only ever used Windows as personal computers my whole life.

macs do NOT come with the adobe suite.. the adobe suite is $300 - 2500 depending on version.

Zet
June 18th, 2009, 12:36 AM
While the Macintosh comes with the Adobe Suite, a group of advance image-edditing programs that I enjoy using, the Macintosh is far too expensive for me, and I've only ever used Windows as personal computers my whole life.
if this was true, the current cheapest iMac would cost at least $8,000(AUD >.>)