Apple Mac vs PC

[Antony]

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,

If you call that as an immense change (borrows codes for Win 2000 which was also from the very same company)What are you going to call the change from OS 9 to OS X, using a completely different codes, based on industry standard and not just based on it, but also make it even easier to use than their then current operating system?

Microsoft did this - and at the same kept the same great level of hardware support.

Still not as good as the seamlessly hardware support of Mac.

The XP interface was brand new at the time, and made it easier than ever to use Windows.

yeah, taking years to implement the easy-to-use from Mac OS.

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.

The first time you use your Mac, there's a nice and easy to follow getting started guide.
And the Windows' Start button? It is a stupid idea for novice users. Why? the very frist time they click "Start", there's no application in the 6 most frequent application list, instead an "All Programs" simply lead them to lots of where to get started folders and applications.

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.

In OS the Dock is there with many good application for users to get started. Applications bundled with Mac OS is a lot better than the ones come with Win XP.

How does this trash can make a GUI easier?

It's not just the Trash Can, but also many other methods from GUI (keyboard and mouse). So you don't need to move your hands out of the keyboard and mouse.

From my main PC I have monitor cables, network cable, monitor [power] cables, keyboard and mouse cables, power cables and the speaker cables, there is no mess behind the back of my computer here.

Well, we can count the cables... it takes time to tie them up.

Let's not forget that Mac's built-in speakers, although not as good as externals, but are far better PCs back in early days.

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

[Edward]

Interesting that Windows 98 still has that much of a market share, despite the lack of support for it...

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

[Mandrake]

Ed: That's how Microsoft makes money. By the majority of Windows 98 users have migrated to Windows XP, Longhorn comes out. Then the process starts all over. I don't expect to see much more drop of Win2ks market share, as it is mainly business OS, and there aren't that many compelling reasons to upgrade to XP from 2k for a business.

If you call that as an immense change (borrows codes for Win 2000 which was also from the very same company)What are you going to call the change from OS 9 to OS X, using a completely different codes, based on industry standard and not just based on it, but also make it even easier to use than their then current operating system?

Of course Microsoft will use there own code, why would they use UNIX or something when Windows 2000 is perfectly stable? Before XP we had Win2k and Me, one for businesses, one for the consumer. Me had the hardware support, but Win2k had all the reliability and security, now with XP - we have the security and reliability of Windows 2000, combined with the great hardware support of Windows 9x/Me. I can look at it your may with OS 9 to OS X, but I can look at it this way too: UNIX is not an industry standard, it is proprietary: Just like Windows. A real open source industry standard is Linux, make no mistake about it. XP is a good deal eaier to use than Windows 2000 or Me, even those they were already very easy to use.

Still not as good as the seamlessly hardware support of Mac.

XP has better hardware support han Mac OS, if we took every computer in the world - and try to install OS X and Windows XP on them all, Windows will install on many more than Mac OS will. Just like virtually every peripheral will work under Windows.

The first time you use your Mac, there's a nice and easy to follow getting started guide.
And the Windows' Start button? It is a stupid idea for novice users. Why? the very frist time they click "Start", there's no application in the 6 most frequent application list, instead an "All Programs" simply lead them to lots of where to get started folders and applications.

A getting started guide is not a replacement for a good, easy to use, GUI for beginners and professionals alike. XP also contains a tour/guide for first time users of XP to follow. When Windows XP is first installed, and loaded for the first time, Microsoft's own products (Or those installed by the OEM) appear in the Start Menu, along with the "All Programs" list, which is largely empty due to the fact that it is a clean install.

In OS the Dock is there with many good application for users to get started. Applications bundled with Mac OS is a lot better than the ones come with Win XP.

The dock and finder are essentially the Mac OS equivilant of the taskbar and start menu. Now I'll admit the applications bundled with 10.3 are better than the ones bundled with XP, but then again - panther is a few weeks old, XP is two years old. iTunes and Quicktime are ok applications, comparable to Windows Media Player, Safari is better than IE 6 (But then, until Safari was released, Mac OS came with IE!), I've not used "Mail", and iMovie is a ton better than MovieMaker, that's for sure. But most people will not just stick with the apps that come with there OS. But, Linux comes with the biggest range of applications with it, entire office suites, along with the likes of Evolution and Mozilla.

It's not just the Trash Can, but also many other methods from GUI (keyboard and mouse). So you don't need to move your hands out of the keyboard and mouse.

If I wish to eject a CD, you may be able to put it in a trash can on the desktop, or hit a button on the keyboard (My Internet keyboard can do all that) - but you still have to manually take the CD out of the drive and put it away, don't you?

Let's not forget that Mac's built-in speakers, although not as good as externals, but are far better PCs back in early days.

Most people now want good quality speakers, not inbuilt ones. That means if I purchase a new pair of speakers to go with a new Mac, I've paid for inbuilt speakers that I don't really need.

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

[DJGM]

UNIX is not an industry standard, it is proprietary: Just like Windows.

Sorry, you're wrong. UNIX is actually a standard . . .



Whereas Windows is essentially a 32 bit extension and a graphical shell for a 16 bit
patch to an 8 bit operating system originally coded for a 4 bit microprocessor,
written by a 2 bit company that can't stand 1 bit of competition!

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

[Mandrake]

I stand corrected. But UNIX is certainly not open source like Linux, otherwise SCO wouldn't be in court with IBM! Presumabley, Apple had to purchase a UNIX licencese from SCO, though. One could also think: Apple's own OS isn't good enough, so they use UNIX.

Whereas Windows is essentially a 32 bit extension and a graphical shell for a 16 bit
patch to an 8 bit operating system originally coded for a 4 bit microprocessor,
written by a 2 bit company that can't stand 1 bit of competition!

lol. Windows NT/2K/XP are all full 32bit operating systems, unlike Windows 9x and ME, and there dos underpinnings.

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

[Antony]

I stand corrected.

No. Linux is just a popular version of UNIX-like operating system.

But UNIX is certainly not open source like Linux,

So? Good products not necessary from open source.
(Okay, I know someone is going to start arguing that open source is good or blah blah. Please use another thread for open source debate.)

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

[Mandrake]

Lots of open source stuff is good, Mozilla for example. But there is no need to discuss that here. Linux maybe UNIX like, but it contains no UNIX code, and is totally open source under the GPL.

So, if UNIX is closed source, like Windows, I don't believe that it is industry standards, or open or anything. I do agree that Darwin is open source, but not all of OS X is open source. Not that I argue that this is a bad thing, companies do need to make money off products.

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

[Antony]

Mac OS X = the world's most stable and powerful operating system code base + the world's most user-friendly graphic user interface.

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

[Mandrake]

Mac OS X = the world's most stable and powerful operating system code base + the world's most user-friendly graphic user interface.

This is very disputed. Windows XP and Server 2003 are just as stable and powerful as a UNIX codebase. If the UNIX code were that great, UNIX server sales wouldn't be going down, would they? Windows Server 2003 and Linux servers are increasing in popularity whilst UNIX is losing popularity. I've not used the likes of Lindows, or Mac OS X for extended periods of time - but I'm sure we can all agree Lindows and the likes, Mac OS X and Windows are all easy to use, and have good GUIs.

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

[Josh]

I have read most of this thread and find it very interesting.

As for longity of PCs Vs. Macs, I can't really say who lasts longer due to the fact that I've had my PC for two years now and my Mac for about a month now.

When It comes to Luna Vs. Aqua, I think Aqua is the champ when It comes to UI friendlyness and design.

I chose a Mac for many reasons. I wanted the stabilty of a UNIX desktop. I had concidered GNU/Linux, but I am not impressed with it as a desktop. I tried Mac OS X and have fell in love. OS X offers the stablity of UNIX with a rebust desktop.

UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007

[Antony]

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.

Well, back in late 80's and 90's, you can't boot up your computer from your PC keyboard. Still, some configureation in BIOS is required, and usually require some special (a.k.a. expensive) keyboard.
Still, Macs set the feature for PCs to follow.

And the hardward in Mac is of course a lot better than PCs, one thing for sure, you can't switch on and shut down your computer from monitor. You can easily do that with Apple Displays (the ones with ADC connectors).

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

[Mandrake]

My keyboard cost $14 (AU), not exactly a huge ammount to pay for a keyboard. Of course, if one wants really good hardware, there are no better keyboards and mice than the new Microsoft ones!

Why would I want to turn on my PC from it's display unit? The button on the the keyboard or box does that fine. In the case of the iMac, turning it on from the box and display unit is the same thing.

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

[Antony]

Of course, if one wants really good hardware, there are no better keyboards and mice than the new Microsoft ones!

You are wrong there, the good keyboards and mice are from Logitech, not Microsoft.

Why would I want to turn on my PC from it's display unit? The button on the the keyboard or box does that fine. In the case of the iMac, turning it on from the box and display unit is the same thing.

Convenience, and a smart idea.
So people can put their beautiful PowerMac under the desk, if they want to have larger desk space.
Also, the monitor is where you are looking at, in quite a few situations you just want to see things being displayed, no (or minimal) interacting with computer is required.

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

[Antony]

Let's make some comparison, shall we?

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

And the Mac,

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

[Mandrake]

Alright, lets compare.



Makes that Mac look terrible, if you ask me!

I could argue for ages about peripherals, but I'll just say that I choose Microsoft peripherals, you choose Logitech peripherals.

Alright, so if I wish to put my PC under the desk, I can still use the button on my keyboard to boot i up, meaning my eyes never leave my monitor.

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