Mac or PC

[KissStephanie]

Re: Mac or PC: Mac OS X Wins Easily!

Yada yada yada, XP is hardly mediocre....

Yada, yada, yada, yes it is, painfully so, and Microsoft were aware of it. It was an improvement on ME, and it was reasonable for it's time, which was six long years ago, but even then it trailed Mac OS X Cheetah in most reviews.

Mac, Vista and XP all rated above Linux in that graph, yet various Linux OSs are supposed to be some of the best around. What do you have to say to all the Linux users?

Oh my goodness! Who on earth told you that Linux is a functional operating system? It doesn't do anything as the main part of a good operating system is the ability to able to run applications on it. It rightfully rates behind Mac OS X, and Vista, but probably should be ahead of XP, but at least with XP, applications (programs) can actually be used.

If all you've got is that XP is old, you're losing.

Who said that is all I have got? Of course an operating system that was released in 2001 shouldn't even be discussed due to it's age, but I certainly have more than that! Firstly there was a graph from a well respected and impartial reviewer that rated XP behind both Mac OS X and Vista, and secondly there were many links that were reviewing Winblows Vista that all claimed that it was an improvement on XP, even though it still rated well behind Mac OS X. Maybe you need to read some of these reviews before incorrectly claiming that it is "all I have got." You may actually learn something too.

And like RooBuoy said...just shows that you need pretty new things to keep you entertained.

It is almost impossible to have a discussion with someone that has no idea about computing in the year 2007. You sound like an old woman out of touch with these 'new fandangled computer thingies.' How on earth did you come up with "pretty new things" as a way to describe current features and technology?

There's probably not all that much difference between each new version that they put out unless you are really testing your computer's limits.

I just cannot believe the true difference between Winblows users and Mac users. Not only are Winblows users happy with a computing experience from the past, but they defend that view as well. Astonishing. The difference between Mac OS X Cheetah in 2001, and Mac OS X Leopard that will be released in October of 2007 is massive on every level, and Mac OS X Cheetah was rated higher than Winblows XP when it was released in 2001. Enough said.

Windows 98 will probably do most of the things that both Vista and the latest Mac release do.

Bahahahahahahahahahahaha! This is a joke ay? You really don't know much about this topic or current technology do you? What do you do on your computer? Play solitaire, send e-mail, and post on a message board? If so, then that would clearly explain your satisfaction with such old operating systems that date back up to 10 very long years!

But you don't use XP, how do you know?

Who said that I have not used Vista or XP? I certainly didn't. Making things up yet again are you? I said that I have never owned a Winblows PeeCee, but I have never said that I have not used them.

Are you an IT expert? How are you qualified to say Vista is a significant improvement? In fact how is XP broken? Please explain. At least I bothered to explain my Mac issues.

My profession is not only none of your business, but it is irrelevant. All you are trying to do is attack my credibility because I have supplied articles that support the Macintosh as a far superior platform to Winblows, while you have not supplied anything. Not even one from a pro-Winblows blog. If you want to know the significant amount of improvements that Microsoft needed to make to Vista in an attempt to meet the demands of 2007, and a failed attempt to catch up with Mac OS X, then why don't you read the reviews that I posted?

You have not at all explained your Mac issues either. If someone has a 1998 Apple iMac with a G3 PPC 266 MHz processor, and 64 MB of RAM while trying to run Mac OS X Tiger with 12 applications open, then of course it is going to struggle and the beach ball is going to spin. You have not explained anything.

Really, you work for them right?!

No, I'm actually simply stating a fact. The reviews that I posted last night show the gap between Mac OS X Tiger and Vista, and since each Mac OS X release has been rated as an improvement on the previous version, then it's quite fair to suggest that the gap will yet again be stretched when Mac OS X Leopard is released in October.

And how do you know the new OS will be better? Used it have you?

Firstly, Apple have not gone backwards once with the release of their operating systems, and secondly I have in fact seen and used the beta version of Leopard, and it is fantastic of course! Not that you would understand the requirements of the year 2007 from what you have stated of course. You can in fact read about some of the new features in Leopard here though if you want to, although I don't expect you to understand it. You may however qualify to download the beta version of it!

Everyone thought Vista was going to be super dooper fantastic...

Firstly, it is a significant improvement on the ancient technology of XP, but who said that Vista was going to be "super dooper fantastic?" Are you making things up yet again? Where do you get this info from? The articles that I read regarding the beta version of Vista before it was final were average at best.

You think newer = better. You assume that everyone should get the newest systems because, according to your treasured graph, they are better.

In the case of computer technology and features, of course newer is better. There has never been a case when computer technology has not improved in time.

You told me it was a joke if I think XP is better than Vista, and that Vista is clearly an improvement....therefore you must assume that Windows users should upgrade.

Vista is an absolute improvement on XP. No doubt about it. I don't think that XP users should upgrade to it though because it is not the best of course, but they should switch to a Mac as many are every day for the best experience of course. That said, if they all did, then who would us Mac users make fun of?

LOL

That's it? What's so funny? Maybe if I explain it again, you may actually have some input this time.

Where did I say that Mac OS X is bug free? Are you making things up again? Why is it that Winblows users see so many things in posts that were never written? The number of bugs that have been found in Mac OS X do not even slightly compare to the number found in both Windows XP and Windows Vista.

More Than One Thousand and Five Hundred Bugs Found in Windows XP Part 1

and...

More Than One Thousand and Five Hundred Bugs Found in Windows XP Part 2

and...

Long List of Windows Vista Bugs

If Microsoft had the extremely small number of bugs that has been found in Mac OS X, then they'd be doing a celebratory dance!

Hey I get it, you are married to this computer expert!

Ummm no, where did I say that? Are you making things up yet again? I understand that you like to make things up because it appears to be your preferred response.

I don't seem to have bugs in my XP either. Strange.

If you're only playing solitaire, sending e-mail, and posting on message boards as indicated by your satisfaction with such ancient technology and features, then you are probably unaware of the thousands that you currently have.

Ooooh...awards awards awards!

That's right! beaut isn't it!?!? Apple deserve every one of them as well too which further shows that their products are far superior to that of Microsoft and their hardware competitors. The only people that may possibly dismiss these awards are people that are pro-Winblows that are living in denial and refusing to accept the quality of the products that Apple produces.

I have explained some of my problems with Mac. Believe me, they exist.

No you haven't, and I don't believe you anyway. However, if you would like to share a detailed and in depth explanation, then I would be interested in reading it.

Apple is a brand that promotes themselves as the being the latest, coolest product. A trend.

A trend? Ha ha ha ha! Apple make the coolest, most innovative and best products for sure, but a trend does not last as long as they have. A trend does not create innovative products for as long as they have either.

Not only their iPod campaigns (which really are a shit mp3 player)

The biggest seliing and highest rated audio/video player is not shit of course, but the law of average says that one person is going to feel that way, and you must be it! Congratulations!

I mean what the heck is that one where Windows is all bulked up with all his programs and Mac isn't? Because Mac just "comes" with iTunes? Why, does iTunes not take up any space on a Mac? What's so good about iTunes that it's great that your computer comes with it? And why the hell does everyone need iTunes? I'd rather my computer come with Word. (BTW, what office program are you using to make all your documents?) What about the ads where the Windows guy gets all these crypted errors? Well, hey, I don't have those.

Oh my goodness! What on earth are you on about? Here you are ranting about Apple while virtually admitting at the same time that you have no idea about the Macintosh and the applications that come with it. Just because you don't use iTunes and only want Word, doesn't mean that others don't find it extremely important.

The same goes for other Apple software such as iPhoto, iMovie, GarageBand, iDVD, Aperture, QuickTime, Final Cut, Pages and Keynote etc. No wonder you are satisfied with an ancient operating system, because you don't do anything with it! It all makes sense now, and it's just as I had thought.

If you would like to know more about the crypted messages and many other errors that are experienced in Winblows, then there is an entire web site dedicated to it...

Windows Annoyances: Search For Thousands of Problems That Are Regularly Encountered in All Versions of Windows

I don't like things that insist they are the coolest product and that you're some kind of loser if you don't use it.

The thing is that not only are Apple products the coolest, but they are the best rated as I have shown previously in this thread. If you don't like it then stiff. Get used to it and accept it, and go and enjoy your ancient computer experience.

I don't really care if Apple and Google have been named the most innovative companies. What does Apple do for me that other companies do not?

Of course you don't care because you prefer to live in denial about the superior quality of Apple's products because you don't like their ads, and since you only want to use Word, then Apple offer you nothing, and the ancient technology of Winblows XP would suit you perfectly. If you actually wanted to use a computer, then that would be a different matter, but since you don't, then no wonder you are happy with XP!

Hey, who's the richest person in the world? Oh right, not the inventor of Macs...

Exactly! As I said yesterday, Microsoft do not care one bit about the quality of their products, but how many they sell. Money is all that matters to Microsoft, even if their ideas are copied from Apple. Microsoft are a marketing company, and their objective has always been to monopolise and sell, and not at all about their products or the need of it's users, and that is one of the reasons that so many are switching to the Mac.

Why is 6 years old ancient??

Because it is the computer industry where improvements are constantly made of course.

There are plenty of people using whatever the Mac OS is called that was released years ago, I bet you don't take issue with that!

Rubbish! It is reported that more than 75% of Mac users are running Tiger. The rest are still using Panther from 2003.

The fact that so many people continue to use XP shows that it stands the test of time.

Is that what you think? Ha ha ha! The actual fact of the matter is that Microsoft are not an innovative company. Windows XP has most definitely not at all stood the test of time, and it's just that Microsoft try to sell and ship the one product for as long as they can before they reluctantly feel that it's time to release something new.

When something new is released, it is full of bugs that need to be ironed out, and it is often a massive pain to make current applications run on the new operating system. The Macintosh is different where upgrading to a new release is simple and flawless.

What the hell is so innovative about Mac?? Please explain how the average user "experiences" "innovation" on their Mac. And how the XP (or Vista) user doesn't.

Oh for goodness sake, learn about it for yourself will you? I made it easy for you by posting links that last night that compares Mac OS X with Winblows Vista. Have you ever thought of starting there? You are debating something that you have just admitted that you don't even know anything about it. Unbelievable!

See, so far you've actually not discussed anything particular to either OS...all you've done is quote some computer expert and his graph!

What are you on about? You just constantly make things up all of the time! I have in fact discussed a number of reasons that the Macintosh is superior to Winblows, and I have shared sources to support it. Also, if someone is involved in this thread then it should be because they are knowledgeable about both operating systems, without any need to share every single positive feature about it. Do you have any idea how much typing it would take to explain every single reason that I love Mac OS X, and every single reason that I feel that Winblows is crap in comparison? You're dreaming.

I enjoy my "experience" on XP because the computer does everything I could possibly need it to.

Well of course you do since you want to use Word. I'm glad that you enjoy running that application!

I don't see how this makes me 'satisfied with mediocrity'. What about if I let bloody Quicktime get iTunes like it keeps asking me to? Will that make my computing a better experience?

That's because you don't do anything with your computer and that you know very little about them. I didn't know that for certain until I read this post of yours.

You make me laugh. Winblows. Haha.

I'm glad you like it. I like it too as it is very apt.

Winblows = childish name calling.

Ummm, no. It's an accurate description.

Satisfaction with XP = well, I get my work done without going on and on and on about how good the OS is.

Because you use Word, and you don't know the difference between the technology and the features of an operating system that was released in 2001 and an operating system that was released in 2007.

Come on, who has more cause not to have their opinion taken seriously?

Oh most definitely the one that is satisfied with ancient technology that has admitted they are happy with using one application.

 

[deeman12]

You guys really like your computers. Ive never seen anybody post this much for what they think is right.

 

[BomberGal]

Re: Mac or PC: Mac OS X Wins Easily!

a whole lot of shit

I'm reserving this spot for my reply tomorrow. I have real things to go and do, like science.

BTW, the post-doc in my lab is laughing that you think Linux is not a real operating system that you can't run applications on. See, he does a hell of a lot of complex programming and complex science and data analysis on his Ubuntu. Yeah, this requires...applications.

 

[KissStephanie]

Re: Mac or PC: Mac OS X Wins Easily!

You guys really like your computers. Ive never seen anybody post this much for what they think is right.

I'm actually finished with it, and I won't be reading or adding anymore to it. I think it's pretty clear with the info that I supplied that Mac OS X is a superior OS than Vista, which is a better than XP. Here are some more to add to the four that I posted earlier in this thread that also all rate Mac OS X as a better operating system than Windows.

Top Tech News: Windows Gets a Long Overdue Facelift

"Vista is by far the most robust and visually appealing version of Windows yet. It's similar enough to its predecessor, Windows XP, to make the switch easy, but different enough to make the price almost bearable. That's not to suggest Vista's perfect or even as polished as Mac OS X."

ZDNet: Windows Vista Ultimate Review & Comparison

"Compared with Mac OS X 10.4, Windows Vista feels clunky and not very intuitive, almost as though it's still based on DOS (or at least the internal logic that made up DOS)."

MSNBC: Vista Will Not Rock Your World But It's An Improvement Over XP

"If you are a Macintosh user, the whole issue of which Windows you use is of no interest to you, and Vista really isn't going to change your mind. In fact, you'll have a field day noting things on Vista that have been in the Mac OS for years."

The Register: Windows Vista: Bugs and Confusion

"So, there's our first look at Vista. It does benefit from a lot of good ideas, many of them Apple's, of course, but good nevertheless. It simply doesn't work very well, unfortunately. There are serious problems with execution; it's not polished; it's not ready. It should not be on the market, and certainly not for the outrageous prices being charged."

Technology Review: Uninspiring Vista

"I was a Microsoft apologist, but 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."

The Great Mac OS X vs. Windows Showdown

"Winner: Mac OS X"

I'm reserving this spot for my reply tomorrow. I have real things to go and do, like science.

I don't care if you would rather be knitting, so don't even bother responding because we will only be going around and around anyway due to your choice to not accept Mac OS X as the superior platform despite tha many sources that I have supplied to support it.

Your post showed that you simply don't like Apple because of their advertisements. You have shown that you don't need or know anything about current technology because you only use Word on an ancient operating system, and most importantly, I have received two messages telling me that the information I supplied has helped them decide to get a Mac.

I have supplied many impartial sources that have all rated Mac OS X ahead of Vista which is ahead of XP. I have spent more than enough time on this now, and my my job here is done. I will not be returning to this thread, so respond whenever you like!

BTW, the post-doc in my lab is laughing that you think Linux is not a real operating system that you can't run applications on. See, he does a hell of a lot of complex programming and complex science and data analysis on his Ubuntu. Yeah, this requires...applications.

I don't believe you of course. I believe that you're sitting there all alone. But guess what? It is irrelevant anyway. That said, Linux was correctly rated in that graph in my opinion because there are very few applications for it, even though it's UNIX core makes it a better platform than XP. If Linux could run all of the applications that at least Mac OS X can, then it would be close to Vista in second place, but it doesn't, so it isn't. Since you only like to run only one application though, it may be perfect for you!

 

[viccles]

I think both Mac and PCs are good for different purposes. I could honestly not decide which I like better. I think both are equally as good

 

[BomberGal]

Re: Mac or PC: Mac OS X Wins Easily!

I
"Winner: Mac OS X"I don't care if you would rather be knitting, so don't even bother responding because we will only be going around and around anyway due to your choice to not accept Mac OS X as the superior platform despite tha many sources that I have supplied to support it.

Your post showed that you simply don't like Apple because of their advertisements. You have shown that you don't need or know anything about current technology because you only use Word on an ancient operating system, and most importantly, I have received two messages telling me that the information I supplied has helped them decide to get a Mac.

I have supplied many impartial sources that have all rated Mac OS X ahead of Vista which is ahead of XP. I have spent more than enough time on this now, and my my job here is done. I will not be returning to this thread, so respond whenever you like!

I don't believe you of course. I believe that you're sitting there all alone. But guess what? It is irrelevant anyway. That said, Linux was correctly rated in that graph in my opinion because there are very few applications for it, even though it's UNIX core makes it a better platform than XP. If Linux could run all of the applications that at least Mac OS X can, then it would be close to Vista in second place, but it doesn't, so it isn't. Since you only like to run only one application though, it may be perfect for you!

Giving up are we? Not surprising. Good on you about converting people to Macs, do I give a shit? No. See you haven't convinced anyone who knows anything about computers.

I actually made two posts outlining my problems with Macs, such as constant freezing and crashing. You ask for evidence, I tell you that it's happened to me, and you brush it off as a lie. Well, that's your problem. I have discussed this topic with a number of computer experts who all think Macs are "bullshit machines", quote unquote.

You supplied only a couple of sources...all from the same place. This won't convince me. Nothing will ever convince me. I have used PCs since I was 6, I have been using Macs for around the same period of time at school & uni, and I have never thought Mac was better. Why do you think PC has 90% of market share?

You have actually failed to address any of my points, and have also failed to outline any of your problems with Windows. I repeat, I have made two posts outlining my problems with Macs. I'll repeat it for a fourth time: constant freezing and crashing. They don't run the programs I like them to run. I also don't like their marketing, but that is not a reason not to get a Mac. I had long decided I preferred PCs before those campaigns began (for example, 2004 and 2005 I was almost exclusively using Macs). You haven't even told me why Macs might constantly crash, instead just telling me how superior Macs are. They were/are brand new Macs, looked just like one posted earlier in this thread. You know, now that I think about it, I can think of even more problems. They don't like certain pdfs. They don't like internet pages that are extremely long so they'll freeze while they load it. They don't like Powerpoint presentations that aren't in the same format a Mac likes. They don't even set Powerpoint up properly, instead putting buttons everywhere so you have to go change the default toolbars! If Macs are so superior, why do I have all these problems that I don't have with Windows?

You can't dismiss points in an argument that you don't like by saying "I don't believe you!" That's hilarious. I am here to tell you that I have a couple of very computer savvy people right here in my office, who also happen to be advanced in their relevant degrees (one a PhD, one a post-doc) and both are very big fans of Linux. Most software I have downloaded for my computer has offered a Linux version, and most certainly all the complex science programs we use will run on a Linux, whether that be a Windows version that is happy to run on Linux, or a Linux version. If you don't believe me, please look up: Phylip, BioEdit, PyMol, MolMol, ClustalW...or have a look at expasy.org, just about the biggest and most important online resource compilation for biologists. Countless programs....that run on Linux. Many of which I use on XP.

Another Linux expert I know would like to inform you that Macintosh is based on a Unix code, which is around 30 years old, and is far more ancient that current Windows technology. If you can quote one person and use that as evidence, I think me quoting a couple of people is far superior evidence.

What do I do on my computer? Yes, I send emails, use Word, play games. I run the above science programs. I do all sorts of data analysis, collate data, play with graphics (experimental results). I watch movies, download and listen to music. I do research. I make presentations and publications for my work. And run all sorts of programs found all over the internet for hobbies or whatever else. What else do you want me to do? Windows runs all of these with no problems whatsoever. Please tell me where I said I only run Word. In fact tell me where I even said I used Word before this post. You also didn't answer me with what software you use to make your documents. I sure hope it's not MS Word, Powerpoint, Publisher, or anything like that. Or OpenOffice, given what they are based on.

In summary, enjoy your Mac, it's one less annoying person ringing up the various PC helplines with stupid questions from people too stupid to figure out a PC

 

[Funkalicous]

Wow. Great debate! Not quite personal enough for my liking, but interesting nonetheless.

Although there's no way to sway me one way or the other. My line of work is multimedia, and as such I know XP and Mac OSX inside-out. I haven't used Vista enough to comment, although my first thoughts are that it looks a heck of a lot nicer. And IMO aesthetics are important. If they weren't, I'd be doing IT instead. So in a way, I think Microsoft are improving in their designs. At least 'Internet Explorer 7' is a definite improvement. If there's people out there with XP that use IE6 as their main browser, get IE7. It's well worth it.

From a professional POV, Mac OSX is better. It's cleaner, it's more organised, and it's more user-friendly. But don't mistake user-friendly with simplicity. XP is simpler because it lacks certain functions that Mac OSX has. Things like the dock, the dashboard, the ability to drag-n-drop between apps, and various shortcuts. XP doesn't have these things, and this makes it simpler, and thus easier too. But for the experienced user, you'll fly through your work a lot faster with Mac OSX. - This is why it's user-friendly.
What's great is, the user-friendliness doesn't just apply to high-level programs, but also utility programs. For an example, if you've got OSX Tiger, check out the Network Utility. I reckon the design around that is genius. - Saved my life plenty of times. Also because of the technical similarities between Mac and UNIX, a lot of website server software is easily intergrated through Mac OSX. - For instance you don't have to download a suitable terminal window as you do with XP. - It's instantly compatible.

I don't know how much of this you guys will understand, but my point is, designers and web techies use Mac OSX with good reason. Its not just because it looks better. - Although that's true also. It's also interesting that Apple attract some very nice software for their OS. MacTheRipper is particularly useful. It allows users to backup their copywrite protected DVDs.

 

[BomberGal]

Wow. Great debate! Not quite personal enough for my liking, but interesting nonetheless.

Although there's no way to sway me one way or the other. My line of work is multimedia, and as such I know XP and Mac OSX inside-out. I haven't used Vista enough to comment, although my first thoughts are that it looks a heck of a lot nicer. And IMO aesthetics are important. If they weren't, I'd be doing IT instead. So in a way, I think Microsoft are improving in their designs. At least 'Internet Explorer 7' is a definite improvement. If there's people out there with XP that use IE6 as their main browser, get IE7. It's well worth it.

From a professional POV, Mac OSX is better. It's cleaner, it's more organised, and it's more user-friendly. But don't mistake user-friendly with simplicity. XP is simpler because it lacks certain functions that Mac OSX has. Things like the dock, the dashboard, the ability to drag-n-drop between apps, and various shortcuts. XP doesn't have these things, and this makes it simpler, and thus easier too. But for the experienced user, you'll fly through your work a lot faster with Mac OSX. - This is why it's user-friendly.
What's great is, the user-friendliness doesn't just apply to high-level programs, but also utility programs. For an example, if you've got OSX Tiger, check out the Network Utility. I reckon the design around that is genius. - Saved my life plenty of times. Also because of the technical similarities between Mac and UNIX, a lot of website server software is easily intergrated through Mac OSX. - For instance you don't have to download a suitable terminal window as you do with XP. - It's instantly compatible.

I don't know how much of this you guys will understand, but my point is, designers and web techies use Mac OSX with good reason. Its not just because it looks better. - Although that's true also. It's also interesting that Apple attract some very nice software for their OS. MacTheRipper is particularly useful. It allows users to backup their copywrite protected DVDs.

Hey, excellent post. A non-arrogant opinion from a Mac fan! Gotta be a first. Also the first post in this thread to actually list some of the real, everyday benefits of a Mac. I'm certainly not about to change, as I really love my PC too much, but thanks for the insight.

What is the drag-and-drop thing I keep hearing about...?

Anyway if you want to 'backup' your protected DVDs, there is plenty of excellent software out there for Windows too.

A word on Internet Explorer...wouldn't use it if you paid me, now that I've switched to Firefox and Opera (depending on the task). IE7 is better than IE6, but it still gets plagued with viruses, crashes easily, has problems when it gets a full cache, and has annoying toolbars everywhere (yes, you can get rid of them mostly, but it's not as easy as in other browsers). The popup blocker is also not overly effective. IE doesn't have the great speed dial features of Firefox and Opera. And Firefox has awesome add-ons.

Can we have a thread about Firefox?

 

[tandino]

Can we have a thread about Firefox?

Far be it for me to get a Bigfooty thread off topic, but I personally use a mixture of Firefox and Maxthon

Maxthon is good because it gives you benefits such as tabbed browsing, Undo for any tabs closed accidentally, the ability to save open tabs in case of system crash and so on without losing the compatibility of Internet Explorer.

 

[BomberGal]

Far be it for me to get a Bigfooty thread off topic, but I personally use a mixture of Firefox and Maxthon

Maxthon is good because it gives you benefits such as tabbed browsing, Undo for any tabs closed accidentally, the ability to save open tabs in case of system crash and so on without losing the compatibility of Internet Explorer.

Firefox can undo closed tabs too (In History). However have you used Opera? It's got similar features to Firefox, less addons, but many of these are standard features in Opera anyway. Tabbed browsing, undo closed tabs button, personal bars, speed dial features, handles images more like IE (one downside to Firefox is its jumping around when loading lots of pictures) - it's excellent.

 

[tamxxx]

Mac because it takes up less space

 

[deeman12]

Farout, whenever i restart my computer, the bloody toolbar doesnt come up, i restart it because whenever i open a the killers file it all goes. Its really frustrating.

 

[Milkman]

I have both a Mac and PC. As people have said, for games PC. For everything else, Mac.

Yes Macs are more expensive, but if you can afford it, it's well worth it. The OS is far superior to Windows. Never had a virus. It's never crashed. Easier and more fun to use.

I'm guessing most people who advise you to get a PC, simply have never used a Mac. There's no other explanation really.

 

[viccles]

I have both a Mac and PC. As people have said, for games PC. For everything else, Mac.

Yes Macs are more expensive, but if you can afford it, it's well worth it. The OS is far superior to Windows. Never had a virus. It's never crashed. Easier and more fun to use.

I'm guessing most people who advise you to get a PC, simply have never used a Mac. There's no other explanation really.

Good sum up there

 

[carntheroos4eva]

PC. You can't go past a PC when you want to play games and go on the net.

 

[Boltcutter]

I use both. Any heavy graphic work or video production I use the mac, it's just a case of learning alt click as opposed to ctrl click for keyboard shortcuts

 

[Im The Gun]

Whats this no virus bullshit people sprout off. Macs get plenty of viruses.

Not too sure where you heard that but you need a fact checker.

At work we have 17 macs all on the internet and all on demo in the showroom and none of them have ever got a virus.

Hasn't been a virus in over 4 years on OSX, yet you can get a virus within 30 seconds of being online on windows.

 

[Im The Gun]

I have both a Mac and PC. As people have said, for games PC. For everything else, Mac.

Yes Macs are more expensive, but if you can afford it, it's well worth it. The OS is far superior to Windows. Never had a virus. It's never crashed. Easier and more fun to use.

I'm guessing most people who advise you to get a PC, simply have never used a Mac. There's no other explanation really.

The reason behind that is because Apple has better parts.
The video cards are the best on the market at the time of release, the hard drives are the best and fastest & RAM (never buy off apple, walk into a store and buy it) is the best RAM.

 

[JLC]

I am thinking of buying a mac and will probably buy online from the apple website.

Are you saying that the RAM on the Apple website is more expensive than the shops ?

I am leaning towards just getting everything in one go.

jlc

 

[Im The Gun]

I am thinking of buying a mac and will probably buy online from the apple website.

Are you saying that the RAM on the Apple website is more expensive than the shops ?

I am leaning towards just getting everything in one go.

jlc

Look on the Apple Online Store
macbook pro upgrade to 4GB is $1090, I do that upgrade for $600 plus $100 off the computer.

Its the same RAM in fact we buy it from Apple.
Plus you don't have to wait for it if its in stock (apple are having stock issues at the moment online & in stores with the notebooks).

 

[JLC]

I would like to get an IMac (the desktop ones).

I am thinking of 24 inch, 500 gig upgrade and updating ram as well, perhaps extending the warranty and not 100% sure on additional software.

So i take it you own/run a business that sells Macs ?

jlc

 

[Im The Gun]

I would like to get an IMac (the desktop ones).

I am thinking of 24 inch, 500 gig upgrade and updating ram as well, perhaps extending the warranty and not 100% sure on additional software.

So i take it you own/run a business that sells Macs ?

jlc

Work in a apple reseller store.

CTO's take about 10 working days, but we do the RAM instore, cheaper ad they come quicker

 

[BomberGal]

The reason behind that is because Apple has better parts.
The video cards are the best on the market at the time of release, the hard drives are the best and fastest & RAM (never buy off apple, walk into a store and buy it) is the best RAM.

They are more expensive because you are paying for the brand. Ever noticed the price of iPods?

My computer had all the latest parts at its time of release, and it's a PC laptop. I am yet to find any hardware on the Mac site that my laptop doesn't have - or the equivalent latest when looking at time of release.

tamxxx, less space how?

I just spent the last week at a conference where Macs were used to make the presentations. It should be noted that during each 2 hour session, the Macs froze or crashed at least once. Very uncomfortable silences during a professional international conference...