Dear God Why

Salanis wrote: Also notable that Macs are now entirely PC hardware underneath. So the distinctions are getting quite blurred.

this statement is even funnier when you go and find steve jobs and his boys on youtube saying how much better their non PC based processor was (g4 stuff)...

no one has mentioned how there are getting to be some legecy problems with those few that are still running powerPC stuff... a friend of mine can no longer use his tax software as it requires an intel processor... sucks as in his sense of false mac economy spent more to replace his macbook motherboard then I paid for my laptop about 2 years back... but he is def someone I would never recommend using anything but mac... it just fits him...

I prefer birds to cats AND dogs..

Seriously.. I think all the problems PCs have boil down to User error. in this respect Macs ARE better because they are more user friendly.

We have a "community" PC at work that people use to get on the internet and stuff... it is crashing every other week because somebody downloaded something they shouldn't have. I have never seen a computer that gets so infected so quickly. Not even the best antivirus programs can catch them all.

Me.. I NEVER use it. A couple of years ago somebody spread a rumor through our department that I was the one causing this (same) computer to slow down and crash because I used it to get to GRM. Ever since I heard that rumor.. I stopped using the machine. It still slows down and crashes... but at least they can't blame me

donalson wrote: this statement is even funnier when you go and find steve jobs and his boys on youtube saying how much better their non PC based processor was (g4 stuff)...

I loved reading the benchmark comparison tests in Mac magazine. The Mac-is-superior magazine basically found that a comparably priced PC (Alienware) had roughly twice the power of the G4 Mac on all tests across the board. Or was that the G3 that was the complete dog?

Salanis wrote: I have a problem with Macs! It's too darn difficult to take a couple year-old Mac and bring it up to spec with a couple new pieces of hardware. I can't take a cast off Mac and repurpose it for my uses. It's like a car going to the junkyard at 100k miles!

I've gotten 7 years and 2 whole system upgrades out of my 17" Powerbook without needing to change any hardware. OK, I added RAM to it in about 5 minutes and when the original harddrive took a dump after 4 years, I installed a bigger one in about 15 minutes.

The only reason I'm replacing it soon is that Apple (and, more importantly, 3rd party software) is abandoning support of the non-Intel Macs. I'll get another 3 years out of it at least as a general purpose surf-and-turf computer.

Do you like to tinker- get a PC. Do you want something to just use get a Mac. I have been an IT person for the last 12 years or so, worked on both kinds of machines. I perfer PCs because I like to tinker and am cheap.

Buy what you want/like/can afford and be happy. everyone else can go suck an egg.

As an aside, how are you "guys" going through computers so fast? I have a stack of P3 Toshiba laptops at home that work great and my main computer is a P4 HT Dell laptop that is at least 6 years old. Just curious.

Cats>Dogs

5 out of 6 ends are pointy.

I agree

The things I like about the mac laptops I have tried are:

1 - the magnetic power cord thingy - that's awesome
2 - the cd drive "slot" - I like not having a drawer slide out for the cd.

All the rest of it is marketing as far as I'm concerned. If I could get those two things on my PC I would be very happy.

Funny, I don't like that "slot" on the laptop. Reference first my problem of not registering a disk (although that was on a Mac Mini). Also used an older Macbook Pro at the school for a while, and I think the slot had gotten squished. It had trouble ejecting CD's. It would only get them about 1/2" out, and you had to grab the edge really quickly before it sucked the disk back in.

Why is it that I hear more about the Mac fanaticism from the opposition than from the fanatics themselves?

MitchellC wrote: Why is it that I hear more about the Mac fanaticism from the opposition than from the fanatics themselves?

That's the windows guys trying to compensate. Yeah, there are mac freaks out there, but there are windows freaks out there as well. Most mac users I know are just content knowing we made the best decision, for us, nobody else. I don't go around spouting unprompted computer advice just like when, upon seeing someone driving a cobalt I don't say "what, you couldn't find a big-wheel with a flat spot on it? That MIGHT be worse to drive." I just go on about my day.

Who would have though that a Mac/PC thread would go like this.

And for the record my cat acts like a dog which makes it better than either one.

Salanis wrote:

donalson wrote: this statement is even funnier when you go and find steve jobs and his boys on youtube saying how much better their non PC based processor was (g4 stuff)...

I loved reading the benchmark comparison tests in Mac magazine. The Mac-is-superior magazine basically found that a comparably priced PC (Alienware) had roughly twice the power of the G4 Mac on all tests across the board. Or was that the G3 that was the complete dog?

I like you, but you're not making a lot of sense on this thread. There were similar tests when the G4 came out (and later when the desktop G5 came out) that showed it being much more powerful than the latest PC hardware at the time. Toward the end of the powerpc's run, it was really lagging behind, especially in the laptops than never got the G5 chips. That had little to do with apple, of course, and everything to do with Motorola and IBM deciding they weren't interested in the consumer grade processor market anymore. They really were better for a long time until development was abandoned.

Of course, now that macs essentially use PC hardware, they're no more or less upgradeable than windows PCs. I have swapped ram and HDs in my MBP. My dad's newer MBP can swap out the HD and RAM in about 5 minutes (mine requires a bit more involved disassembly). They have expresscard slots for expandability. I can't understand what more you'd need, or how PC laptops are any less proprietary or easier to upgrade.

As far as gaming goes, there are plenty of Mac users who are gamers. It shouldn't be very surprising, though, that they're mostly console gamers (self included). There's something to be said for standardized equipment that you know will work with anything you want to run on it, as opposed to a vast array of hardware options that may or may not work with your desired software :).

It also shouldn't be hard for a bunch of gearheads to understand the tactile and build quality advantages of apple's hardware. They use higher-spec pretty much everything compared to low-mid range PC laptops. Great feeling keyboards/trackpads, metal chassis that don't break or wear out like plastic, great displays, the magsafe connector, etc. Not that you can't find PCs that match them, but I haven't used an apple product yet that I felt like they cheaped out on.

And this isn't even getting into the OS/interface argument, which I feel is strongly in favor of the Mac, although I understand a lot of that is personal preference (hey, I'm sure some folks just LOVE idrive :)).

Rusted_Busted_Spit wrote: As an aside, how are you "guys" going through computers so fast? I have a stack of P3 Toshiba laptops at home that work great and my main computer is a P4 HT Dell laptop that is at least 6 years old. Just curious.

I wonder the same thing.. I usually go at least 5 years before upgrading..

It's all the same anymore. We run windows and MAC's at work. The MAC's constantly crash and get a nice blue screen and don't reboot. My windows desktop fires up every time-but is a slow turd due to the excessive enterprise antivirus and spyware.

My MACs at home work pretty much flawless. They are are ancient. Same with my PC's at home that I run Ubuntu and Windows on- that also run flawlessly.

I am running P4 3.0-3.2 GHz PC's (dell, hp) and G3 eMac, a G5 MAC pro tower. The annoying thing with the older MAC's is the lack of support. Which is easily remedied by installing a different OS. (ubuntu)

I also refuse to buy a new desktop, I like my free 10 year old junk that "doesn't work" or is "too slow" Kinda the same as my cars.... Hmmm.

rotard wrote: while(Cats>Dogs){--hell_temp; eval_Cats();}

Fixed that for you. My bird doesn't approve of cats.

MitchellC wrote: Why is it that I hear more about the Mac fanaticism from the opposition than from the fanatics themselves?

I think a lot of it goes back to those rather insulting "I'm a Mac .... And I'm a PC commercials". It's hard to argue that that level of snobbery did not represent the opinions that Apple had and wanted everyone else to have.

And my Mac loving girlfriend used to tell me how much better her $1500 iMac was than my $600 PC. Then she would need my help getting the graphics low enough on WoW to run fluidly, and trying to get her computer to recognize the printer hooked up to it.

Josh wrote: I like you, but you're not making a lot of sense on this thread. There were similar tests when the G4 came out (and later when the desktop G5 came out) that showed it being much more powerful than the latest PC hardware at the time. Toward the end of the powerpc's run, it was really lagging behind, especially in the laptops than never got the G5 chips. That had little to do with apple, of course, and everything to do with Motorola and IBM deciding they weren't interested in the consumer grade processor market anymore. They really were better for a long time until development was abandoned.

I don't remember the specific article. It would have been around 2004, probably. I remember it being in a copy of Macworld at my girlfriend's family's house. If I had the article, I'd bring it up. I found this one amusing because it was done by a Mac magazine, and the vaunted apple lost badly.

How you set up the benchmark is tough. Maybe a 3.0ghz G5 was faster than a 3.0ghz Intel of the time, but would cost a lot more. Does it make more sense to compare on rated numbers or cost? I'd say that's like comparing a Porsche to a Mustang because they have similar engine displacement. Well, the Porsche costs a lot more. It would make more sense to compare the Carerra to a similarly priced Corvette.

Josh wrote: It also shouldn't be hard for a bunch of gearheads to understand the tactile and build quality advantages of apple's hardware. They use higher-spec pretty much everything compared to low-mid range PC laptops. Great feeling keyboards/trackpads, metal chassis that don't break or wear out like plastic, great displays, the magsafe connector, etc. Not that you can't find PCs that match them, but I haven't used an apple product yet that I felt like they cheaped out on.

A computer's user interface extends beyond the operating system, and Apple does really well at providing the feel of a high quality product through the quality of the materials used for their products. Does everyone appreciate this? No, there are people who are driven more by specifications than by feel. This is completely okay, because there are many manufacturers who are willing to provide a less expensive product at the expense of quality of materials. However, Apple has proven that there is a huge market for a more upscale produce and they have capitalized on it.

Think of it as the Corvette vs. Everything Else argument. Yes, the Corvette outcompetes cars up to two, three times more expensive in performance, but many still prefer the driving experience of competitors. I can't get the image of Clarkson pushing in the rear bumper on the C6 Corvette as if it was made from water bottle plastic.

Myself? I can appreciate a Mac, but I'm currently typing on a Toshiba with Windows 7, an OS that has really impressed me. Without the competition from Apple, I really doubt that Windows 7 would be as good as it is.

I have been nursing my old windows laptop along for 7 ish years its been pretty solid, and I will continue to stick with it, but I have to say my wife's mac is pretty nice. Of course she doesn't have any problems spending a bunch of money on something that is simply stylish...

I think one of the things that separates the two is that the macs don't tend to come pre-loaded with as much "bloatware". I dread replacing my laptop because I know I will need to invest several hours in:
a) building my own system or
b) re-installing windows to get rid of all that pre-loaded crap that has thus far infested every new computer I have purchased.

MitchellC wrote: A computer's user interface extends beyond the operating system, and Apple does really well at providing the feel of a high quality product through the quality of the materials used for their products. Does everyone appreciate this? No, there are people who are driven more by specifications than by feel. This is completely okay, because there are many manufacturers who are willing to provide a less expensive product at the expense of quality of materials. However, Apple has proven that there is a huge market for a more upscale produce and they have capitalized on it.

Again, I don't actually like a lot of Apple's designs. They strike me as being designed by a styling department, not an ergonomics team. The basic $20 Logitech mouse is way more comfortable to me than anything that has ever worn an Apple logo. As stylish? No. As well put together? Probably. More functional, certainly. Similar situation with keyboards. We had a really pretty wireless apple keyboard. It sucked for usability.

Laptops are an exception. Their laptops are excellent. But for comparable price, I'm not sure the Macbooks are better than say IBM/Lenovo notebooks. The Mac wins on style, but the IBM wins on ergonomics. The IBM might even win on terms of toughness and longevity. My girlfriend refers to them as the Hilux of laptops. She had a coworker run over one in her car. The screen got a crack in it; everything else was fine.

EastCoastMojo wrote: The things I like about the mac laptops I have tried are: 1 - the magnetic power cord thingy - that's awesome 2 - the cd drive "slot" - I like not having a drawer slide out for the cd. All the rest of it is marketing as far as I'm concerned. If I could get those two things on my PC I would be very happy.

It is funny those are two of the most annoying things about Macs. I hate CD drive and power chord.

93EXCivic wrote: I hate CD drive and power chord.

How can you hate POWER CHORDS?!

Joey I'd put a Hahn's macaw up against most any cat smaller than a panther and not worry. Most of the ones I've met have no idea they aren't a full-sized macaw.

As for PC vs. Mac, I really think it's different strokes. I have no problem with the "Macs are for people who don't know how to use computers" argument. Some people don't want to have to know how stuff works, they just want it to work for them.

I like New Balance shoes. They just feel better on my feet than other shoes. For whatever reason, whatever microscopic idiosyncrasies they use to shape their shoes, they just feel better to my feet. I know there are other shoes out there that are just as well made, less expensive, and may last longer, but they don't fit MY feet as well. Don't make me walk in your shoes, no matter how well you like them.

Just for the record, I've been a Mac guy for 20+ years, although I've owned a few PCs along the way. My i7-powered MacBook Pro also has a partition to run Windows. The last seven issues of your favorite magazine have been largely built on a 3.06ghz i7-powered Hackintosh. I built it for under $2k and it benchmarks faster than anything you can get directly from Apple. It has been—by far—the most stable and powerful computer I've ever used. Steve Jobs may come in my house late one night and kill me, but until then I'll enjoy the best of both worlds with my favorite OS running on the best hardware I could find (which, tragically, Apple does not offer).

jg

JG Pasterjak wrote: I like New Balance shoes. They just feel better on my feet than other shoes. For whatever reason, whatever microscopic idiosyncrasies they use to shape their shoes, they just feel better to my feet. I know there are other shoes out there that are just as well made, less expensive, and may last longer, but they don't fit MY feet as well. Don't make me walk in your shoes, no matter how well you like them.

That's because white people like New Balance shoes: http://stuffwhitepeoplelike.com/2008/04/20/96-new-balance-shoes/

And running a Hackintosh is frickin' awesome.

JG Pasterjak wrote: I like New Balance shoes. They just feel better on my feet than other shoes. For whatever reason, whatever microscopic idiosyncrasies they use to shape their shoes, they just feel better to my feet. I know there are other shoes out there that are just as well made, less expensive, and may last longer, but they don't fit MY feet as well. Don't make me walk in your shoes, no matter how well you like them.

You have to try some Birkenstocks.