Author Topic: Mac versus Windows (Read 20562 times)

GSOgymrat · « **on:** January 15, 2007, 11:21:49 am »

I have a Toshiba laptop which is 7 years old. It still runs perfectly but cannot run Windows XP much less Vista. I would like to get a new laptop soon. Reviewers seem to love Macbook but my desktop, MP3 player etc are all Windows based and that's what I am used to. What do you guys who are knowledgeable about computers think? Macbook looks nice but it doesn't have a card reader and I take a lot of photos.

ACinKC · « **Reply #1 on:** January 15, 2007, 11:28:24 am »

Mac is a superior platform PERIOD. However, I just bought a new laptop and it was an HP. Everything I have bought over the past few years is windows based so it was easiest.

Apple really screwed the pooch by not licensing its software in the 80's!! I would LOVE to have a mac but I didnt get one.

You CAN run almost everything you have for the windows on a mac though.

there... that should clear it up.

Ann · « **Reply #2 on:** January 15, 2007, 11:40:50 am »

Quote from: ACinKC on January 15, 2007, 11:28:24 am

there... that should clear it up.

Clear as mud, mate, clear as mud.

Grinch · « **Reply #3 on:** January 15, 2007, 12:50:45 pm »

Unless you plan on playing very graphic intensive games I would recommend an Intel based Mac.
You can dual boot to Windows to make use of programs not ported to Mac.
I run Windows and Linux. My next Laptop will be a Mac. I've spent some time playing with it and really like it.
High end games with extensive video acceleration will not run on the Mac.

josenav · « **Reply #4 on:** January 15, 2007, 04:53:51 pm »

Hi!! if i had money i would buy the best of both worlds!

But since I'm poor, i stick with an emachines laptop, I'm running Windows and Linux(Kubuntu) too.

If you like windows, and know how to use it, besides you don't need extreme power, for graphics, video editing, gaming, Ill recommend a Laptop With Windows software. Toshiba is a really good brand! Maybe with an Intel Dual Core processor, or its equivalent on Amd(wich i prefer, Ive always been loyal to AMD).

Ive heard also of the option of running windows on a mac. Also the other way around, Running Mac OS on a PC, while Mac now uses Intel, it is easy to build a PC with Intel components and install Mac OS.

Miss Philicia · « **Reply #5 on:** January 15, 2007, 10:43:09 pm »

Mac all the way, baby! I used windows all during the 90's mostly but finally switched to a mac in 2001 and have NEVER EVER regretted it. I now have a iBook AND a an iMac.

GSO, I don't "get" your comment about the "card reader" -- that's a flash memory card thing? What is it you use, some kind of adaptor that plugs into your laptop? I take tons of pictures too and with a Mac almost all the drivers for various camera models already exist in the operating system, and the camera model you plug into the USB port is automatically detected and the photos are transferred into iPhoto, Apple's great photo imaging application which comes free with the computer.

Apple is totally worth the extra money IMHO though frankly I enjoy the iMac better than a laptop -- larger screen makes for better surfing, but if you need a laptop for business travel then you'll just have to get one. Also if you hold off until Spring the new OS X version will be out. Leopard

GSOgymrat · « **Reply #6 on:** January 16, 2007, 02:04:37 am »

Quote from: philly267 on January 15, 2007, 10:43:09 pm

GSO, I don't "get" your comment about the "card reader" -- that's a flash memory card thing? What is it you use, some kind of adaptor that plugs into your laptop?

Most non-Mac laptops have a flash/SD card reader where you pop the card out of your camera and put it into the computer. You don't have to worry about having a USB cable or whether your camera is charged.

Miss Philicia · « **Reply #7 on:** January 16, 2007, 02:48:55 am »

I'm sure that they sell flash card readers that plug into a USB port. I have cables for all sorts of peripherals so I've never contemplated being inconvenienced by using one for a camera as well.

The bottom line is do you want a crappy operating system (Vista) that fucks up all the time or one that's design is intuitive and actually works?

cubbybear · « **Reply #8 on:** January 16, 2007, 06:26:42 am »

If you want to limit yourself, I'd suggest you buy a Mac. I'm not a fan of bill gates or his software, but I'll buy xp/vista any day. My PC blitzes those cruddy iMacs with their dodgey windows emulator.

fondeveau · « **Reply #9 on:** January 16, 2007, 07:48:58 am »

Get A Mac, Get A Mac, Get A Mac!

I'm even happier with the intel-based MacBookPro which I recently got. There is also a program called Parallels which allows you to operate a virtual machine within Mac OS X. So, now I can run the one program that I have that does not have a Mac counterpart.

Visit a Compusa or an Apple Store and sit down and try out the Mac. Go to apple.com and you will find lots of information regarding digital photography, etc.

Review: Mac OS X Shines In Comparison With Windows Vista
http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=196800670&pgno=1&queryText=

GSOgymrat · « **Reply #10 on:** January 16, 2007, 08:21:26 am »

I haven't used a Mac in 12 years. What is it that people like so much better? Also, are there any web utilities or things that don't work on a Mac?

Grinch · « **Reply #11 on:** January 16, 2007, 09:04:32 am »

A little clarification:

You can't load OS-X (Mac) on any old intel based PC (Well you can, but if you're that deep into it you wouldn't be asking which is better. Hacking the OS is a big job.)

Dual booting to windows on the new Intel machines is not running a "Crappy emulator" any more. You are literally booting Windows in a dual boot configuration.

The new Macs still do not support Direct-X9, therefore high end games will not run.

Why Mac vs Windows? The latest OS (Leopard) is Linux based, very stable, and quite nice as far as it's GUI. (Graphic User Interface, the way your desk top looks and functions) The draw back is a lack of applications. If you need to integrate to MS Office AND you are not quite proficient at tweeking settings to make things work, consider Windows.

Mac is also quite a bit more expensive. The Mac IS however the platform of choice for photo and video editing. I know I said Mac doesn't run high end games because of video issues, the problem is the games make use of Direct x which Mac doesn't support.

Vista, The GUI looks much like Mac. I've been Beta testing it for some time and the latest and final (in theory) build is quite stable. The GUI is nice. It is however a resource hog. Unless you have a very high end system you can not turn on all the bells and whistles.

As a primary computer I still have to go with Windows simply because of the applications available. If Mac ever fixes the Direct X issue I'm dual booting Mac.

Until then..... well right this minute I'm looking at 3 monitors with 4 OS's. (KVM Switch)

Miss Philicia · « **Reply #12 on:** January 16, 2007, 12:52:11 pm »

Quote from: cubbybear on January 16, 2007, 06:26:42 am

If you want to limit yourself, I'd suggest you buy a Mac. I'm not a fan of bill gates or his software, but I'll buy xp/vista any day. My PC blitzes those cruddy iMacs with their dodgey windows emulator.

And you don't know what you're talking about. The new intel chips can run windows natively, it's not an emulation except for applications not yet ported which can run under Rosetta (for example Photoshop, though the intel beta is out I think).

The only thing I would advise anyone sticking with a wretched PC/Windows box is if they are a serious gamer. If that's you, stay with Windows. OS X rips everything else a new hole though.

Miss Philicia · « **Reply #13 on:** January 16, 2007, 01:00:45 pm »

Quote from: GSOgymrat on January 16, 2007, 08:21:26 am

I haven't used a Mac in 12 years. What is it that people like so much better? Also, are there any web utilities or things that don't work on a Mac?

It's just plain better designed. It's not as bloated as windows (evidently the new version of Vista has TWELVE ways to shut down your computer... why is this needed?) and all I can say is when you use the operating system and applications you SEE how intuitive it's put together. It's altogether a different computing experience. It's also plainly why Mac users are much more fanatic about their computers. Plus because it's the one computer company that designs BOTH the hardware AND the software everything is well integrated.

Have you even gone in an Apple store and used OS X for a half hour or so? The two systems are like night and day -- take someone with you to the store to show you how to use it. Just toying with it yourself won't show you but so much, or make sure you get someone that works at the store that will take the time to show you more than a 3 minute demo.

What "web utilities" are you talking about? The good thing about the Mac community is the plethora of 3-rd party developers, much of it free or very low cost. Check out www.macupdate.com to see what I mean.

fearless · « **Reply #14 on:** January 16, 2007, 06:26:24 pm »

Macs are way overrated. Yes, they look sexy and they have a certain status among the 'elites'. If you can afford it, and are interested in your image/status, go for a mac. If you are frugal and practical, go for a pc.

They tend to be the standard for designers, artists etc, but i just don't buy the it's more intuitive line anymore.
I've used both all my life, pc's at work and a mac at home (till the ex and I split). Way back in the old days, there was a lot of difference - working on a pc you used to have to remember strings of commands to do anything - remember, :\dos, or whatever it was just to get your pc kicking over. the mace interface already used different windows etc and could run multiple applications, and a mouse. But once Windows was developed, the distinction started to blur and imho they are very similar these days, unless you are an artist/designer running specialist programs.

One advantage of Macs is they tend to escape most viruses, but my banks internet site cannot be used with a Mac - they can't bea arsed developing it for such a small number of potential users (you may not have that problem in the US though, where the market of mac users would be that much bigger).

In my experience, Macs, actually freeze up a lot more, but I think most would disagree with that.

josenav · « **Reply #15 on:** January 16, 2007, 06:31:43 pm »

Quote from: fearless on January 16, 2007, 06:26:24 pm

In my experience, Macs, actually freeze up a lot more, but I think most would disagree with that.

My girlfriend used macs while on university, and she says the same, that they freeze a lot more than pc`s.

Miss Philicia · « **Reply #16 on:** January 16, 2007, 07:07:02 pm »

fearless, you're talking out of your ass. Macs haven't "froze" much since OS 9 which was what -- 6 years ago? What system were you using?

I was ALWAYS having to reboot on Windows. I might have to do it once a year on my iMac. If anything freezes it's one application, and it's quite easy to shut that one application down. Unless they've changed something in XP it seems when something freezes it chokes the entire system.

Anyway, I don't work for Apple and I'm not a salesman. But I find it funny when Windows users try to discuss Macs with only a peripheral amount of experience using them.

fondeveau · « **Reply #17 on:** January 16, 2007, 10:02:29 pm »

Darned right! I worked for years in programming in a windows environment and providing technical support in a corporation. In my business, we used machines and endured virus', spywre, XP freezing up, network security issues, etc. Then one day I bought a mac....and life was beautiful once again...then I bought another....and another...while its true you can pick up a low-end pc for $300, when you actually buy comparably equipped machines, the mac actually turns out to be cheaper. Then start adding up buying software for windows. By the time, you add all your time and trouble, the mac is clearly the better buy.

Eldon · « **Reply #18 on:** January 16, 2007, 10:04:49 pm »

With a Windows based PC you have more flexability.

fondeveau · « **Reply #19 on:** January 16, 2007, 10:07:47 pm »

Flexibility as to what?

Eldon · « **Reply #20 on:** January 16, 2007, 10:17:23 pm »

Software.

fondeveau · « **Reply #21 on:** January 16, 2007, 10:23:26 pm »

I suppose if variety of crappy software is flexibility....

Miss Philicia · « **Reply #22 on:** January 16, 2007, 10:25:23 pm »

Eldon, what software do you want that you can't find on a Mac. I'll find it for you. The only thing as I stated previously is if you are a gamer not all of those come out for the Mac platform.

Otherwise this argument about lack of applications on a Mac is pure repeated bile by ignorant Windozzzz users.

Eldon · « **Reply #23 on:** January 16, 2007, 10:25:54 pm »

It all depends at how you look at it. There are more software applications available than it is with MAC.

Miss Philicia · « **Reply #24 on:** January 16, 2007, 10:27:20 pm »

Quote from: fondeveau on January 16, 2007, 10:23:26 pm

I suppose if variety of crappy software is flexibility....

Indeed. Quantity is not quality. How flexible is something when you have to reboot five times and spend half a day fighting adware and security holes in IE?

Miss Philicia · « **Reply #25 on:** January 16, 2007, 10:28:24 pm »

Quote from: Eldon on January 16, 2007, 10:25:54 pm

It all depends at how you look at it. There are more software applications available than it is with MAC.

Is it too unreasonable to ask that you be more specific?

fondeveau · « **Reply #26 on:** January 16, 2007, 10:28:43 pm »

How many word processors do you need....how many spreadsheets...how many databases...I think you would be surprised at what is available for the mac - I have one specialized program that is only available for windows, but with the new macs it doesn't matter - you can run windows programs on the mac.

Eldon · « **Reply #27 on:** January 16, 2007, 10:34:22 pm »

Thus there was the invention of a cross platform. However, the answer to the original question as far as PERFORMANCE is concerned...MAC is it.

Miss Philicia · « **Reply #28 on:** January 16, 2007, 10:37:20 pm »

Most windows users don't even realize that there's an entire division at Microsoft that makes applications native to OS X

http://www.microsoft.com/mac/products/office2004/office2004.aspx?pid=office2004

The version of Outlook that they make for Macs (Entourage) is actually WAY better in design the Outlook, even though Microsoft makes both of them. Hilarious.

Eldon · « **Reply #29 on:** January 16, 2007, 10:41:52 pm »

The coding is different.

Miss Philicia · « **Reply #30 on:** January 16, 2007, 10:48:43 pm »

duh, honey

Eldon · « **Reply #31 on:** January 16, 2007, 10:56:54 pm »

Very much so. I did not mean it that way either.

Queen Tokelove · « **Reply #32 on:** January 16, 2007, 11:28:11 pm »

Just an outsider, throwing in her 2 cents. I understand that people like Windows for their own reasons like people like Mac for theirs.....to each their own...there really is no need for this thread to become ugly...I have never used a Mac nor do I know anything about it, if I get the opportunity, I would try it out.

David_CA · « **Reply #33 on:** January 16, 2007, 11:50:15 pm »

I wouldn't have a Mac... unless you gave it to me. I have tons of of PC software, so why buy an overprice Mac so I can run what was designed for a pc? My current (D610) and previous (C610) Dell notebooks ran flawlessly. I went around 94 days without rebooting the C610 once... just as a test. PC's may have been unstable back in the early 90's, but not today, unless you've got a lemon or super cheapo, off-brand model. I support 8 (Windows-based) servers and around 30 notebooks and desktops (all Dells) at work and almost never have a hardware problem (maybe 4 in 6 years) and can't remember the last software issue we had. Also, Mac software may be available (so are parts for old Porsche 911's), but not nearly as accessible as software for PC's.

David

chadnla · « **Reply #34 on:** January 16, 2007, 11:58:37 pm »

definately a mac. bought an iMac last summer and love it. OS X operating system is much more advanced than anything MS has put out. no reboots...no viruses (at least not yet)..computer boots up in less than 1 min...no windows lock ups...advanced file finder...bluetooth

apple is just so good at creating things that make life simpler and a MAC is a hell of a lot simpler than a PC.

yours truly, the MAC daddy

(ok, well not daddy)

fearless · « **Reply #35 on:** January 17, 2007, 12:22:27 am »

hey Philly,

I was using OS 9 - it is 5 years ago that I broke up with my ex. It froze constantly.
But, I was not a 'peripheral' user as you suggest. We had a mac for 10 years, matey. I know both systems quite well.
I just don't buy the line that Macs are simpler, more intuitive. My ex and I used to fight like cat and dog about it, but my experience was that they are pretty much one and the same. He's a graphick designer mind you, and it is the standard for that sort of stuff, as I said, but for me and what I wanted to do, very little diff.

Miss Philicia · « **Reply #36 on:** January 17, 2007, 12:58:05 am »

Quote from: David_NC

Also, Mac software may be available (so are parts for old Porsche 911's), but not nearly as accessible as software for PC's.

David

define what you mean by "accessible" as it makes no sense

Miss Philicia · « **Reply #37 on:** January 17, 2007, 12:59:28 am »

Quote from: chadnla

OS X operating system is much more advanced than anything MS has put out.

that's because Microsoft inevitably COPIES features that show up on OS X years earlier

oh, and wait until you all switch to Vista. I guarantee you it will be Complaint City.

Miss Philicia · « **Reply #38 on:** January 17, 2007, 01:04:11 am »

Quote from: fearless on January 17, 2007, 12:22:27 am

hey Philly,

I was using OS 9 - it is 5 years ago that I broke up with my ex. It froze constantly.
But, I was not a 'peripheral' user as you suggest. We had a mac for 10 years, matey. I know both systems quite well.
I just don't buy the line that Macs are simpler, more intuitive. My ex and I used to fight like cat and dog about it, but my experience was that they are pretty much one and the same. He's a graphick designer mind you, and it is the standard for that sort of stuff, as I said, but for me and what I wanted to do, very little diff.

like I said, that was OS 9, not OS X; the system was done FROM SCRATCH for X, it wasn't just an upgrade so yeah I still stand by my comment that you don't know what you're talking about. That system came out in 1999 and when Steve Jobs returned to Apple he threw that sucky system out the window. So no, you do not know "both systems" really well if you don't know OS X. You don't know what you're talking about and that's been my basic point.

Darkfiber · « **Reply #39 on:** January 17, 2007, 04:50:54 am »

You can run both, Windows and Mac OSX on a Mac in native mode using the boot camp option.

You simply select windows or OSX during the startup procedure and you are running the respective OS in native (not emulated) mode.

http://www.apple.com/macosx/bootcamp/

The other way around it´s much more complicated (if you want to run Mac OSX on a Windows computer), and only emulated.

If you can pay the additional few bucks, go for a mac. Then you have the best of the two worlds.

Hope this helps!

Darkfiber

David_CA · « **Reply #40 on:** January 17, 2007, 05:48:30 am »

Quote from: philly267 on January 17, 2007, 12:58:05 am

define what you mean by "accessible" as it makes no sense

From www.dictionary.com.... obtainable; attainable

GSOgymrat · « **Reply #41 on:** January 17, 2007, 06:02:13 am »

I'm obviously going to need to go to an Apple store and get a salesperson to show me why a Mac is better than a PC. I have to say I have not had problems with my Sony desktop running Windows XP crashing. My laptop with Windows ME definitely gives me the Blue Screen of Death at times.

David_CA · « **Reply #42 on:** January 17, 2007, 06:26:24 am »

Quote from: GSOgymrat on January 17, 2007, 06:02:13 am

I'm obviously going to need to go to an Apple store and get a salesperson to show me why a Mac is better than a PC. I have to say I have not had problems with my Sony desktop running Windows XP crashing. My laptop with Windows ME definitely gives me the Blue Screen of Death at times.

Windows Me was probably the buggiest OS ever. I would have upgraded that to Win 2000 or XP LONG before now. It's also nice to have a variety of companies to choose from (PC's). The price range is better for PC's, too. The best part of using a PC, though, is watching Mac users get all defensive and their panties in a knot when you say a PC is superior!

RapidRod · « **Reply #43 on:** January 17, 2007, 06:41:07 am »

I use a PC and I always buy something that I can fix, replace or upgrade easily. There are some computers I wouldn't touch. I won't buy a computer that has all it cards embedded into the motherboard. I want the sound card, dial up modem, video card, eithernet cards all separate of the mother board. I use XP professional and I like it a lot.

Nadine · « **Reply #44 on:** January 17, 2007, 07:37:27 am »

Quote from: David_NC on January 17, 2007, 06:26:24 am

Windows Me was probably the buggiest OS ever.

I definitely agree with David, Windows Me was the worst! I have had my Dell with Windows XP for 2 years now, not a bit of trouble
My daughter has an Apple laptop, she just loves it. I just can't get used to the simplicity of it

Miss Philicia · « **Reply #45 on:** January 17, 2007, 04:43:23 pm »

Quote from: David_NC on January 17, 2007, 05:48:30 am

From www.dictionary.com.... obtainable; attainable

Still doesn't make your comment any more sensible

fondeveau · « **Reply #46 on:** January 17, 2007, 08:02:48 pm »

Review: “Uninspiring Vista” - http://www.technologyreview.com/Infotech/17992/page1/
Erika Jonietz writes for Technology Review, “Ironically, playing around with Vista for more than a month has done what years of experience and exhortations from Mac-loving friends could not: it has converted me into a Mac fan.”

Miss Philicia · « **Reply #47 on:** January 17, 2007, 09:56:53 pm »

*chuckles heartily*

Oh, and did you see the Q4 Mac US market growth report of 31% vs. 3% for the PC market. Why are all of these obviously brainwashed people switching???

GSOgymrat · « **Reply #48 on:** January 18, 2007, 02:42:41 am »

The review says "many electronic gadgets such as PDAs and MP3 players can only be synched with a computer running Windows." If that is true I'm going to have to stick with Windows because I love my MP3 player and I don't want to have to buy an iPod.

Miss Philicia · « **Reply #49 on:** January 18, 2007, 03:18:50 am »

PDA's that run palm software are easy to sync with a Mac. I own a Treo and everything's configured through Apple's built-in iSync application.

I don't know what kind of MP3 player you have but if it's not compatible outside of windows then I guess that's a deciding point.

manchesteruk · « **Reply #50 on:** January 18, 2007, 05:14:33 pm »

It's got to be windows for me. I work in IT and we have around 50 macs and over 200 PC's. I spend more time fixing the macs than the PC's go figure! Also putting mac's onto a network produces laughable results there are several messageboards on the internet devoted completely to the bizzare problems caused. Not to mention if you buy anything from apple you are paying 10-15% more than you should anyway because of the amount they spend on marketing to make them look coooool!

chadnla · « **Reply #51 on:** January 18, 2007, 08:40:51 pm »

i will say that i have had a better experience with MAC than PC. but i will admit one of the reasons i purchased an 20" iMac was the design. i mean having the disk drive inside the monitor is an incredible idea. no CPU to take up space, just a sleek modernistic design (which is my style). what also sold me was the entertainment factor..iLife, built-in cam, etc.

believe me it wasn't a quick decision. i went back and forth for 6mos before i moved forward with my MAC purchase. sure its more expensive on the surface, but my previous PC got some nasty viruses and ultimately crashed. can that happen with a MAC? possibly but hasn't yet for the most part. too me, that was a huge factor. it's been 7 mos now and i've never had to run a virus program or buy one for that matter.

so i guess you really need to test drive both, figure out what you would really use and maybe talk to MAC users. in addition, the MAC community seems to be quite helpful and when i needed questions answered there are tons of MAC forum websites to help you out.

bottom line, i haven't had this much fun with a computer since my first one many moons ago.

good luck in whatever you decide, but i'm not going to throw stones or nasty comments either way

GSOgymrat · « **Reply #52 on:** February 04, 2007, 10:03:43 pm »

After much research I decided to get a HP Pavilion laptop with Vista. I seriously considered a Macbook but didn't make the switch because:
1) A Macbook with 2 gig RAM and 120 hard drive would have cost $1675, which is more than I wanted to spend
2) My beloved MP3 player would not work with it without installing Windows, another $250
3) It doesn't have any expresscard slot and I may want to get wireless broadband

My HP has a 14" display and weighs 5 lbs, which is the size I wanted. It has a AMD Turion 64 X2 processor, 120 hard drive and all the typical bells and whistles for $750 after rebates. I got an extra gig of RAM for $99. If I wasn't already invested in Windows-based products I might have spent the money on a Mac but for my purposes I'm very happy with this laptop.

fondeveau · « **Reply #53 on:** February 04, 2007, 10:23:41 pm »

Wimp! LOL - well, I'm sure you will be happy with your 'puter.

Boo Radley · « **Reply #54 on:** February 05, 2007, 10:08:31 am »

I'm not gonna argue mac vs. pc because that horse is a can of glue. It's subjective. You might as well discuss religion.

I echo fearless's belief the Mac's OS is no more "intuitive" than Windows or another other gui or OS. You must learn how to use each one before becoming anywhere near proficient. The Mac OS is not intuitive -- I mean, dragging a disk to the trash to expel it from the drive? And yes, I've used OS X.

Some people like Macs, others like Windows (or are pretty much forced to deal with them as the biggest player in the monopolistic PC industry), LINUX, whatever. Rarely does anyone change his/her preference unless forced to. I used Mandrake LINUX for several years and would love to go back but getting all the crap (MP3 players, drives, bluetooth crap, etc. to run under LINUX would be more of a challenge than I am currently able to tackle (without going berserk and smashing everything to bits)).

Boo

RapidRod · « **Reply #55 on:** February 05, 2007, 10:30:30 am »

Fighting with a PC running windows in bull crap. Set your updates to automatic and not worry about it. If you can't operate a simple system as windows, you might as well shut the computer down and forget about it. If you have a freeze, no need to shut down and reboot as in earlier windows, but then again I went to DeVry.

aztecan · « **Reply #56 on:** February 05, 2007, 11:58:07 am »

My first computer was an IBM. To use it, I learned Fortran IV. I used to buy punchcards by the case.

I now have an e-Mac at home. Love it. I use a PC at work. I get by with it and haven't had too many problems, but then I don't do much but work-related business on it either.

It's like sex, while some things are more fun than others, use what you have at hand and enjoy.

HUGS,

Mark

David_CA · « **Reply #57 on:** February 05, 2007, 03:11:14 pm »

I think a lot of the 'instability' problems with PC's / Windows that Mac users talk about is that PC's can be assembled by any company or individual. That's what I used to do at my previous job. A well assembled PC from quality components is not cheap, but people want cheap. They'll buy that $299 pc with 90 days of warranty and wonder why it lacks quality. A Mac is not a clone and Apple can easily monitor quality control. When you consider the all the manufacturers of motherboard, video cards, network cards, video capture cards, etc, is it any wonder that a PC can suffer from some reliability or stability issues? There is certainly a greater number of options of PC configurations than Mac configurations.

At work, we use higher-end Dell notebooks, desktops, and servers. We have a standard configuration that is incredibly stable. These systems are so reliable that I buy them as surplus when they're replaced and re-sell them. After a few dozen, I did have one with a bad floppy.

As Boo said, neither are really all that intuitive. Some people think Macs are cool, some don't like Bill Gates, and some want compatibility with the majority of software produced. That's really the only difference I can see between Macs and PC's of recent vintage.

David

Boo Radley · « **Reply #58 on:** February 05, 2007, 03:31:31 pm »

I'm veering off-topic here but tough. It seemed germane at the time.

When I managed a UNIX based library system one of the daily tasks dictated by the vendor was a physical reboot. While supporting others' personal computers over the years it finally dawned on me to reboot as the first tactic with almost any type of problem (unless it appeared data might be lost) since many times the problem is resolved (at least initially...) after rebooting.

Has anyone ever dealt with an operating system that doesn't need to be refreshed by a regular reboot? I know some people swear their particular LINUX (or other, but certainly not Windoze!!) OS runs for 3 months without a glitch but personally I am skeptical.

Please discuss amongst yourselves. I apologize again for hijacking...

Boo

David_CA · « **Reply #59 on:** February 05, 2007, 03:47:59 pm »

Quote from: Boo Radley on February 05, 2007, 03:31:31 pm

Has anyone ever dealt with an operating system that doesn't need to be refreshed by a regular reboot? I know some people swear their particular LINUX (or other, but certainly not Windoze!!) OS runs for 3 months without a glitch but personally I am skeptical.

Actually, yes, and it's with Windows 2000 on a Dell Latitude C610 (84 days but I installed some software that required a reboot), Windows XP on a Latitude D610 (about 9 weeks, again, installed updates), Server 2003 (many, many months; only when I install an update), and Win XP on my Optiplex 270 at work (about 4 months). I just installed Service Pack 2 on it around Thanksgiving 'cause I wanted to see how long before it needed a reboot but wanted the security updates that require SP2. So, it certainly CAN be Windows.

David

budndallastx · « **Reply #60 on:** February 05, 2007, 03:48:45 pm »

Guys -
This is one of those "no-win" topics. Macs and PC's have their pluses (and minuses). Neither is perfect.

Let's just agree on one thing, the guy in the Mac commercial is a cutie !!

http://patrickmccarron.com/images/applead.png

Boo Radley · « **Reply #61 on:** February 05, 2007, 04:22:32 pm »

Quote from: David_NC on February 05, 2007, 03:47:59 pm

Actually, yes, and it's with Windows 2000 on a Dell Latitude C610 (84 days but I installed some software that required a reboot), Windows XP on a Latitude D610 (about 9 weeks, again, installed updates), Server 2003 (many, many months; only when I install an update), and Win XP on my Optiplex 270 at work (about 4 months). I just installed Service Pack 2 on it around Thanksgiving 'cause I wanted to see how long before it needed a reboot but wanted the security updates that require SP2. So, it certainly CAN be Windows.

David

You just installed SP2? You are conservative! I have to admit that running Windows Server 2000 and 2003 was relatively pain-free and daily reboots were not required. My experience with every one from Windows 3.1 to NT to 2000 to XP was that, at least for me, the machine was noticeably sluggish as time wore on and rebooting improved performance. There were also regular system-wide problems that made rebooting necessary but maybe it was the cheap library vendor software we used, probably ported from a DOS 3.1 platform. I certainly have no reason to doubt you so my inference is you have good ju-ju with MS software.

Boo

David_CA · « **Reply #62 on:** February 06, 2007, 04:09:44 pm »

Quote from: Boo Radley on February 05, 2007, 04:22:32 pm

You just installed SP2? You are conservative! I have to admit that running Windows Server 2000 and 2003 was relatively pain-free and daily reboots were not required. My experience with every one from Windows 3.1 to NT to 2000 to XP was that, at least for me, the machine was noticeably sluggish as time wore on and rebooting improved performance. There were also regular system-wide problems that made rebooting necessary but maybe it was the cheap library vendor software we used, probably ported from a DOS 3.1 platform. I certainly have no reason to doubt you so my inference is you have good ju-ju with MS software.

Boo

Not so much conservative but I didn't want to reboot! I keep so many IE windows open continuously, including these forums (10 open at the moment) plus Outlook (for work email), Outlook Express (for personal email), and a few work apps. Of all our systems, I think the NT 4.0's were probably the most stable. Positive PC / Microsoft karma is good when one works in IT!

David

Forums Index

Welcome

Author Topic: Mac versus Windows (Read 20562 times)