Apple Mac vs PC

[Mandrake]

Split from Buying a 2nd hand Mac guide, this discussion is clearly nothing to do with buying a Mac. Admin.

I would question the line: "Because Macs tend to hold their value better than PCs do".

In a computer magazine (PC Authority) for October of 2003 for $1799 (AUD):

-Intel Pentium 4 2.8GHz
-80gb HD
-512mb DDR Ram
-19" CRT Monitor
-GeForce-4 MX-440 64MB
52x52x24 CD-RW
Windows XP Home
5.1 Channel Stereo Sound with Subwoofer
Modem+Lan+Floppy Drive
Multimedia Keyboard+Scroll Mouse

Compared to the Emac, which I found on Apple.com.au/Store with the following specifications, with a price of $1899 (AUD):

-17" CRT Display
-1GHz G4 Processor
-Super Drive
-ATi Radeon 7500 32MB
-Firewire and USB ports
-10/100 Networking Support
-256mb Ram
-80gb HD
-Mac OS X 10.3 "Pather"

There isn't much comparison, the monitors and hard disks are the same, but the P4 is 2.8ghz compared to 1ghz, and features double the memory, not leaving much room for comparison.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.6b) Gecko/20031117 Firebird/0.7+ (aebrahim)

[Antony]

I would question the line: "Because Macs tend to hold their value better than PCs do".

Mandrake,
The word is "hold." Macs do not that fast depreciation as in PCs.

...
There isn't much comparison, the monitors and hard disks are the same, but the P4 is 2.8ghz compared to 1ghz, and features double the memory, not leaving much room for comparison.

You need to watch the Apple Developer's Expo on QuickTime, the one about GHz Myth.
Mac G4 (and G5) are GigaFlops not GigaHertz. It's velocity engine, not just the clocks.

Plus all Macs machines are far better looking then PCs, you can just put a Mac in the corner and getting "ooh-and-ahh" from people.

Don't forget, Macs are really plug in and it really plays.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) (CK-SillyDog)

[Mandrake]

Upgradability? I don't believe the Mac has a longer life than any PC, really. I'd consider them even, people are still using old [upgraded] iMacs running OS X fine, but then again people with old Pentium 2s can upgrade fairly well too, companies make Slot-1 compatible CPUs that contain a 1.4Ghz Pentium 3, not a bad upgrade from an old 300-400mhz P2. One of those boards should hold at least half a gig of ram too, meaning it will run XP fine.

As for 'holding their value", a Mac from 5 years ago: an iMac with a 4gb HD and 64mb ram cannot run Apple's latest, and greatest, OS without having very poor performance. By the same token, a PC from 5 years ago, a 400mhz with 64mb of ram and a 4gb HD could not run Microsoft's Windows XP well at all. You would need to upgrade both the HD and memory in both computers, in order to run Mac OS X or Windows XP with good performance on either a Mac or PC.

I'm well aware of the difference in Mhz for Mhz, or Ghz for Ghz, Intel's own Itanium running at a meager 1.5Ghz is still MUCH faster than a 3.2ghz P4, despite the slower 'Ghz Rating', no questions asked. But, a 2.8Ghz P4 compared with a 1ghz G4 is not a real comparison, the G4 will just be beaten every time. That PC would also have a longer life span, as is, as it has double the memory.

Windows XP has great P&P support as well, compared to the first attempts at P&P in Windows 95.

AS for the looks, to me the looks of a computer don't matter at all, but if you really care about looks: You can customize a PCs looks until you are content with it. As for OS Customization: Windows XP wins there!

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.6b) Gecko/20031117 Firebird/0.7+ (aebrahim)

[Antony]

Macs can be upgraded.

Just check eBay, and check the price for 4 years old Mac and 4 years old PC, you will can which one holds its value better.

And yes, Windows XP now plugs in and plays, well done Microsoft, what a huge improvement from Windows 95, and steals almost every thing from Mac OS X. Starting from the long file name and 11-year-late copy of "Trash bin" idea. (Oaky, the 11 year delay was actually due to the patent.)

You hear people say "Wow! It's a Mac!"
You don't hear people say the similar thing for PCs.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) (CK-SillyDog)

[Mandrake]

Microsoft were far more innovative with Windows XP than Apple was with OS X.

Long file names? They were in Mac OS, but only to 25 characters, Microsoft implimented much longer file names in 95, and Apple waited until OS X before it included this feature. Apple's 'innovations' such as Alt+Tab application switching and fast user switching came straight from Windows XP.

The trash can idea is kind of pointless IMO, whether or not Microsoft copied it Apple - if I want to delete a file then I want it deleted, not merely moved somewhere else on my hardisk!

I never doubted that Macs can be upgraded, although they cannot be upgraded to the same extent as PCs, nor are they as easy to upgrade (Just look at that iMac upgrading guide!).

People do say "Wow, It's a Mac!" because there are only roughly 3% of people using a Mac, according to Google. Whereas over 90% of people use a Windows based PC. I end this with one last thought: If Mac's are so good, then why don't 90% of people own one?

OS Market Share, According to Google (September 2003):

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.6b) Gecko/20031117 Firebird/0.7+ (aebrahim)

[Antony]

Microsoft were far more innovative with Windows XP than Apple was with OS X.

Of course, Microsoft had to put more bells and whistles. OS X was out before WinXP.
You can't deny that a number of designs in WinXP were actually copied from Aqua interface, of course not as pretty as in Aqua.

Apple's 'innovations' such as Alt+Tab application switching and fast user switching came straight from Windows XP.

Apple never calls + Tab as innovation.
In fact there's also + ' (switching windows within single application)

The trash can idea is kind of pointless IMO, whether or not Microsoft copied it Apple - if I want to delete a file then I want it deleted, not merely moved somewhere else on my hardisk!

We are comparing between operating systems. The Trash Can in Mac was far more useful than Windows' version. You drop a media (CD or floppy) to Trash Can to eject it!

People do say "Wow, It's a Mac!" because there are only roughly 3% of people using a Mac,

No, that's not the reason. People start saying "Wow! It's a Mac!" a lot more frequent since the introduction of iMacs, and specially the G4 Cube.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/85.7 (KHTML, like Gecko) Safari/85.5

[Andrew T.]

Although I use Macintosh computers infrequently, when I do I have long been impressed with their innovations, attractiveness, and ease-of-use. The G5 cube is one of the most impressive-looking computers I've seen. I must say, however, that I find dropping media to the trash can rather strange.

In Windows, Ctrl+Tab sometimes switched windows within a single application, in occasional instances like my old version of Microsoft Works.

Plug 'n Pray...er, Play, wasn't fun in Windows 95, but years ago I also used "Plug 'n Play"-compatible devices in DOS and Windows 3.1. That was no game either, although in the 16-bit world it was at least sometimes obvious of what to do in order to install drivers.

Finally, in response to the chart a couple of posts previous, I find it a little surprising how much Windows 95's OS market share has shrunk. Is this purely attributable to Microsoft's discontinue of support, and the fact that it is suspiciously absent from the published system requirements of every new piece of computer software?

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007

[Mandrake]

Yes, OS X was out before Windows XP. But Microsoft did not rush XP like Apple did with OS X - leaving out key features such as DVD and CD Writing, this is totally unacceptable IMO. Windows XP was all ready to go when launched, could run virtually any DOS or Windows application. Then, as for pricing: an upgrade version of XP Home is merely $99, compared to $129 for Panther. Then we consider that Apple releases updates virtually every year and each of these usually costs $129. Lets look at two scenarios: Joe Blow owns a Mac, he upgraded from OS 9 to OS X, and he will upgrade to every time Apple releases an update. Bob Jones owns a PC, he has Me, and upgraded to XP Home, then he will update to Longhorn Home Edition when it is released in 2005.

So, Joe Blow upgrades from OS 9 to OS X, to 10.1 (Free) to 10.2 to 10.3 to 10.4 (2004?) to 10.5 (2005?) - this means, if he pays $129 each time, he would have paid $645 to keep his Macintosh OS up to date.

Now Bob Jones upgrades to XP from Me, costs him $99. Then he upgrades to Longhorn Home in 2005 when it is released, it costs him another $99 - $645 compared to $198 to keep the OS up to date!.

If I recall, on old Macs with floppy disks, you need to use the Trash Can, as there was no eject button on the floppy disk. Although, if I wish to eject something, it's not difficult to hit the button on the cd-drive is it?

So Macs can look cool? So can PCs.
Check out that case.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.6b) Gecko/20031117 Firebird/0.7+ (aebrahim)

[DJGM]

That is definitely a snazzy looking PC . But then it IS a modded out PC. Macs don't exactly need
to be modded out to look good. They just look good by default! As for the CD ejecting issue . . .

Although, if I wish to eject something, it's not difficult to hit the button on the cd-drive is it?

Whenever a CD, DVD (or any other similar optical media) is inserted into a Mac running Mac OS X
(and Mac OS 9 for that matter) once the disc has been "mounted" by the OS, the CD/DVD drive
is automatically locked to prevent the disc being ejected if you were to accidentally touch the
open/close button on the CD/DVD drive. The disc cannot be taken out of the drive, until it is
ejected via the relevant option or button on the GUI, or command prompt if applicable.

But then it isn't just Macs that have this convenient feature. The same goes for Linux GUI's
such as KDE. AFAIK, the only mainstream OS that doesn't have this feature . . . is Windows.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC; en-US; rv:1.3.1) Gecko/20030621

[Antony]

Yes, OS X was out before Windows XP. But Microsoft did not rush XP like Apple did with OS X - leaving out key features such as DVD and CD Writing, this is totally unacceptable IMO.

They did not leave out core features, they just implemented them a little behind the release of first OS X.
OS X set a whole new standard and surprise of the stability and interface.
Windows XP did not.
Again, people say "Wow!" to the Aqua interface but not XP.

And we don't need to update to every latest operating system whenever its released. Certainly not me. I don't even install all patches when its out.
Still using iTunes 3.0.1 for my OS X, not the latest 4.0.x.
Still using Windows Media Player 8 for my XP, not 9.

If I recall, on old Macs with floppy disks, you need to use the Trash Can, as there was no eject button on the floppy disk. Although, if I wish to eject something, it's not difficult to hit the button on the cd-drive is it?

Thank you for bring up the ejecting issue.
It once again proves that Mac OS' interface (GUI) really works unlike Windows/PCs.

It's a convenient feature. Trash Can is not the only way to eject, there are many other methods, including from keyboard.
Speaking of Mac keyboards, the power botton (triangle, in older Macs) really works. A few companies tried to implement this into Windows keyboard, but requires lots of configruation, and not a good result.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) (CK-SillyDog)

[Mandrake]

Ah, this 'feature' had be stumped for two hours on Solaris a while ago! I was working at a command prompt trying to install Orcale 9i Database on my Sun machine, and I tried for AGES to eject the CD, to insert the next Oracle cd - the problem? I hadn't dismounted the first CD. Kind of like try to pull a rug out from under you, whilst you are standing on it!

I'd agree that the PC is certainly modded out to look good, and that Macs do look good to begin with, but really - I'm happy with my boring looking PC. But IF I want a cool PC, then I would get a modded out case to begin with.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.6b) Gecko/20031117 Firebird/0.7+ (aebrahim)

[Antony]

Ah, this 'feature' had be stumped for two hours on Solaris a while ago!

See, OS X is the most popular UNIX-based *sold* worldwide, and it really plays well. It is in fact the easiest UNIX (or Linux) based operating system to print documents out from printer. Even from Terminals.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) (CK-SillyDog)

[Mandrake]

Apple left out core features of an OS on the launch of OSX, just to get it out before Windows XP, no doubt about it. Then people had to wait for OS X 10.1 just to get an OS that was actually worth using.

Windows XP did set a new standard of stability and interface, more so than OS X. Since Windows XP was a more a consumer release as opposed to a buisness release, it was a massive change from the previous consumer OS, Windows ME. From an OS that randomly crashed, to the stability of the Windows 2000 core is an immense change, Microsoft did this - and at the same kept the same great level of hardware support. The XP interface was brand new at the time, and made it easier than ever to use Windows. Just take a brand new install of OS X and compare it with a new install of Windows XP. In OS X there is no real starting point, people are asking "What do I do here?" on XP people logically, just click the "start" button - they are presented with everything they need to get started straight away. Want to use the Internet? No problems, just click on Internet Explorer (and download Mozilla!), want to listen to your music? Just click on Media Player, no problems. The XP interface is bright, colourful and easy to use, what more could one ask for? If for some reason, people didn't like this - they could switch to the classic theme, giving the appearance of previous versions of Windows. Or just jump on the Internet and download one of the 1000s of themes for free download.

It's common knowledge that critical updates to Windows should be applied straight away, and your machine should have a firewall.

How does this trash can make a GUI easier? From the keyboard - I have an Internet keyboard, The buttons on it work perfectly under XP, all I had to was install the driver. Put a CD in the drive, double click on something, that's it! I didn't even have to reboot. The button on my keyboard worked perfectly from the first time I used it to power on my new PC, before any software had been installed.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.6b) Gecko/20031117 Firebird/0.7+ (aebrahim)

[Antony]

Let me show you some pictures...


And now, presenting the iMac.

People don't just say "Wow! It's a Mac!" because of small market share, but for some damn good reasons.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/85.7 (KHTML, like Gecko) Safari/85.5

[Mandrake]

That is a lot of cables, but that is because the owner of that PC had not sorted out the cables properly. From my main PC I have monitor cables, network cable, monitor cables, keyboard and mouse cables, power cables and the speaker cables, there is no mess behind the back of my computer here. But, hey, no doubt about it - the iMac was an ingenious design. The mouse plugging into the keyboard is a good idea, but not a Mac only feature, my Sun Workstation does this too.

I'd love to see how hard it is to get inside that Mac for a quick upgrade, as opposed to a simple PC tower box.

Again, I don't doubt that OS X is the most popular UNIX distrobution, or that it is the easiest to use. But, Mac OS X is THE ONLY Unix distro designed for end users. AIX, IRIX, Solaris etc are not intended for an end-user at all. Installing Oracle 9i database on a Sun Workstation isn't a task an end-user would likely be performing, either. As for Linux, it is a good deal easier to use than the likes of Solaris, but the typical distro like Fedora Core or SuSE is not as easy to use as Windows or Mac OS, I agree. I've not tried Xandros or Lindows, but they are supposed to be just as easy as using Windows or OS X.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.6b) Gecko/20031117 Firebird/0.7+ (aebrahim)