Well, Macs are immune to most viruses because most viruses are written for Windows. Doesn't mean you shouldn't have anti-virus software loaded. I sometimes find PC viruses in emails from Windows using friends and they thank me for letting them know about them.
I am always amazed at the people who claim that MAC computers are overpriced when comparing them to what they can build themselves. That is such a skewed viewpoint and is true ignorance. Please take a quality vendor like Dell and spec out a comparable unit and then make comments. The comments like some of the above are absurd. It is like saying that such and such restaurant is overpriced because I can cook a hot dog at home for less. The Apple is a system that has finely tuned drivers and code written specifically for the chips that Apple uses no Heinz 57 stuff.
FWIW I spec'd out a Dell workstation with a quad Xeon, Windows 7 Ultimate and similar hardware list as the Apple MAC PRO. Guess what? Dell was more!
I own both PC and MAC's. The PC's that just run Onyx for my printers and nothing else have worked flawlessly for several years.
The ones that have had mixed duty and internet are regularly having problems. No problems at all except for a hard drive failure on any of my 4 MAC's doing mixed duty. I know several people with Windows that have configured their system for easy OS reinstall because they need to from time to time. I have a G3 for my drum scanner that has NEVER had anything done to it except more ram. I have a 4yr old G5 that has been given to my wife which has never had problems other than running out of hard drive. My laptop and MacPro are pretty new so there is not enough time to comment on longevity.
PC users frequently buy newer computers because the old ones are slow and "worn out" what a joke. The OS is screwed up which is why most PC users buy new computers. MAC users regularly run OSX on G4's and G5's that have just had regular updates.
I prefer the OSX interface to the windows interface as I can do numerous tasks more easily and like the workflow. That part is opinion however the new 27" iMac is a steal. The screen alone is worth 80% of the price. Please don't tell me about some POS tv monitor that someone said they like. I have been down that road and only have pity on the poor souls that try to use a crap monitor.
....Anyone who is into computers will tell you that Dell is not the once somewhat reliable retailer they used to be. I don't know why people keep using them as a reference.
The benefits and advantages of a Macintosh are considerable. I've been using Macs since they were first introduced (1984) and have used MS-based PCs as well. When I was a Senior Project Designer for AOL, I worked on both platforms (it was mandatory). The PCs gave us nothing but heartache.
Macs were designed as graphics machines from Day One. (They were also designed for networking from Day One, but that's another story). The underlying technology and coding of any Macintosh is graphics-based, and the entire infrastructure from that point on to what you see on your screen is graphics-based. This is abundantly evidenced by the fact that you can process fairly large TIFF or JPEG files on a Macintosh that was designed ten years ago or is even much older. It will run slower than a newer Mac, but you can still handle these files without a crash or freeze so as you have sufficient RAM (1GB or more).
PCs are designed to emulate a graphics structure. Windows and everything else Microsoft has done since Windows are graphics interfaces, but that does not make for a graphics BASED machine. Way down deep, they are still IBM-based PCs with much of the instabilities and conflicts that are almost inherent in a PC. I imagine PCs are improving in this respect, but I also imagine they are still quite a way off from the rock-solid stability of a Mac.
My wife worked on a PC up to about a year ago. She practically tore her hair out each and every day working with her machine ... fighting crashes, stalls, freezes, odd prompts, haphazard filing, file naming and searching, etc. I bought her a Mac Mini and she has not had one problem since.
I also have yet to see a single PC designed by any manufacturer that is as well thought out and put together as the Macintosh computers. The industrial design of the Macs is second to none as is the fit and finish. Apple service and support is exceptional. You pay more for all this, that's no surprise. But in the long run you will consider it money well spent.
I have not had a single problem with any Macintosh I have ever owned since 1984, and I have owned at least a half dozen configurations including Powerbooks. I only recently (last week!) sold my Mac 7300, a workhorse of a machine designed and built in 1997. It runs and works as new and easily processes any TIFF or JPEG file on my current Mac ... including 150MB upsized files from my Canon 5D II. I have never known a Mac user who has experienced the frustrations that PC users experience, and I have never known a PC user who switched to Mac who has ever gone back to a PC.
"PCs are designed to emulate a graphics structure. Windows and everything else Microsoft has done since Windows are graphics interfaces, but that does not make for a graphics BASED machine."
What does that even MEAN!?
As people have mentioned, the Macs are more or less the same parts these days. The only reason Macs don't have a lot of the same problems as PCs is because they don't have infinite hardware configurations like PCs do. They can develop for a very limited set of hardware to ensure it works optimally.
Having programmed for consoles, PC, and a great handful of mobile devices (read: everything from iPhone to old school Nokia S30s) I can tell you that optimizing something to run on infinite combinations of hardware is hella difficult. The Wii may have a lot of issue when programming for it, but at least I know that if I wrote it for one Wii it is about 99.9% likely to work on another Wii.
From a photoshop standpoint, I find that the keyboard shortcuts on the Mac are more ergonomic because of the placement of the keys. I'm sure this could be resolved by doing some sort of third party keyboard, or making other shortcuts. However, I am a lot faster with the keyboard shortcuts on the standard mac keyboard.
The key bindings could be solved if they allowed you to remap to a more Mac like layout. Replace the use of the windows/context menu keys to be more like the Mac buttons.
veroman wrote:
PCs are designed to emulate a graphics structure. Windows and everything else Microsoft has done since Windows are graphics interfaces, but that does not make for a graphics BASED machine. Way down deep, they are still IBM-based PCs with much of the instabilities and conflicts that are almost inherent in a PC. I imagine PCs are improving in this respect, but I also imagine they are still quite a way off from the rock-solid stability of a Mac.
This makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Posts like this are why people should avoid internet forums when trying to make informed decisions about Mac v PC.
"designed to emulate a graphics structure"? "graphics based machine"? What does this even mean? If you recall the PowerPC chip used in Macs was jointly owned by IBM. For a while, IBM was making chips for Apple and Windows computers alike. Now, both PCs and Macs use Intel chips, so there is nothing "inherent" about the instability and "conflicts" in PCs. The instability is a function of the integration between the hardware and the operating system.
I want to repeatedly bang my head on a table after reading some of these posts !
mdude85 wrote:
This makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Posts like this are why people should avoid internet forums when trying to make informed decisions about Mac v PC.
"designed to emulate a graphics structure"? "graphics based machine"? What does this even mean? If you recall the PowerPC chip used in Macs was jointly owned by IBM. For a while, IBM was making chips for Apple and Windows computers alike. Now, both PCs and Macs use Intel chips, so there is nothing "inherent" about the instability and "conflicts" in PCs. The instability is a function of the integration between the hardware and the operating system.
I want to repeatedly bang my head on a table after reading some of these posts ! ...Show more →
People who are too stupid to use a PC should buy a Mac. These include the folks who can't get through the day without contracting a plague of viruses and spyware (during the short time that their machines actually run, which can't be much due to those innumerable and inevitable crashes and lockups). Numerous and frequent lost files plus ergonomic issues—not to mention the embarrassment of just awful fit and finish—add injury to insult for those doomed to using the lowly, inferior PC.
David Baldwin wrote:
"I imagine PCs are improving in this respect, but I also imagine they are still quite a way off from the rock-solid stability of a Mac."
imagine?
Yes ... "imagine." I don't use a Windows PC. The only one I've recently had experience with is my wife's former PC. Horrible machine. I have no idea if things have improved or not. I hope they have.
Ha Ha Ha Ha..... I love this........very amusing listening to the Mac-ies trying to justify why they pay so much more.......I have nothing against ether OS.....choose what every you like..... But this is really amusing......I`ll be back each day for my daily chuckle........thanks guys....
mdude85 wrote:
This makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Posts like this are why people should avoid internet forums when trying to make informed decisions about Mac v PC.
Yeah, stupid beyond belief, even in an Mac v PC debate.
The rubbish that some Mac people roll out to justify buying overpriced hardware is amazing.
ajkessler wrote:
This might actually not be such an issue. I've heard that this "delay" may actually be due to staggering demand. Who knows though.
The iMac is a pretty good deal, considering you get a decent computer and a decent monitor for a decent price. Plus, they look pretty nice, have a small footprint, and have a cool little apple logo that lights up
For $2k, roughly what you'll spend for a decently equipped 27", you could get an equally decent monitor (probably better: not a fan of the glass covered screens) and a far better computer. You won't get any of the bundled software, most of which you'll likely not use, and it will be uglier, and you'll have to build it yourself. But, you'll be able to upgraded it very easily, and it will smoke the iMac in terms of performance.
It's all about priorities and how much time you want to invest....Show more →
It's a very big issue. When people get blacklisted (not allowed to make a return unless they go in store) for returning 3-4 imacs because ALL of them have screen quality issues then that's a problem... has nothing to do with demand, has everything to do with quality control. It's like Toyota and their freakin' floor mats. Apple doesn't admit to a clear problem they have so the customers suffer. My house is mixed BTW. MB pro, 2 iphones, mac mini, 2 PCs.
?
