Page 1 of 5

Mac vs PC

Posted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 4:59 am UTC
by Nintenman
After a quick search this thread has never been made mwahhahahahaha


So I start the war.

Mac or Windows? Linux isn't allowed :P

Re: Mac vs PC

Posted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 5:23 am UTC
by hotaru
mac ⊂ pc.

regarding mac vs. windows, it depends on the versions:
any version of windows > any pre-os x mac (except a/ux)
a/ux > any version of windows before windows 7
os x > any version of windows before windows 7
windows 7 > any mac

Re: Mac vs PC

Posted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 7:16 am UTC
by phillipsjk
hotaru wrote:os x > any version of windows before windows 7
windows 7 > any mac

I'm curious: why do you think Windows 7 is such an improvement? As far as I can tell, it is just an incremental release of Windows Vista. The major problems with Vista (besides the "features" that were kept for Windows 7) were solved in the first year.

As for not being allowed to chose Linux, I will have to think about it. Apple routinely acts more evil than Microsoft, but they have small enough market share to get away with it.

Didn't think of the A/UX option. Apple dropped that years ago (about when they moved to OSX, IIRC).

Maybe I should compare Apple II DOS with MS DOS from the same ti nevermind. "Windows" is specified; it would have to be a comparison of Windows 3.1 and system 6 or 7.

Re: Mac vs PC

Posted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 7:47 am UTC
by lulzfish
If I have to choose one of two vendor locked-in operating systems, I'd be choosing by available software.
And since there's not a OS X port of Team Fortress, and since Apple doesn't want me to run OS X anyway, I use Windows.

When I'm not in Linux.

And hotaru's first sentence is right. All Macintoshes are Personal Computers, and a good number of Personal Computers are Macintoshes.

Re: Mac vs PC

Posted: Sat Feb 27, 2010 9:01 am UTC
by hotaru
phillipsjk wrote:I'm curious: why do you think Windows 7 is such an improvement? As far as I can tell, it is just an incremental release of Windows Vista. The major problems with Vista (besides the "features" that were kept for Windows 7) were solved in the first year.

  • support for systems using multiple heterogeneous graphics cards from different vendors
  • the new taskbar
  • reduced uac prompts
  • improved globalization support
  • 30-bit and 48-bit graphics
  • option to disable internet explorer and windows media player
  • better performance

Re: Mac vs PC

Posted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 5:49 pm UTC
by steindor2
hotaru wrote:
phillipsjk wrote:I'm curious: why do you think Windows 7 is such an improvement? As far as I can tell, it is just an incremental release of Windows Vista. The major problems with Vista (besides the "features" that were kept for Windows 7) were solved in the first year.

  • support for systems using multiple heterogeneous graphics cards from different vendors
  • the new taskbar
  • reduced uac prompts
  • improved globalization support
  • 30-bit and 48-bit graphics
  • option to disable internet explorer and windows media player
  • better performance

so, it's basically a little less sucky verision of vista?
id still rather buy a mac.

Re: Mac vs PC

Posted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 6:18 pm UTC
by hotaru
steindor2 wrote:
hotaru wrote:
phillipsjk wrote:I'm curious: why do you think Windows 7 is such an improvement? As far as I can tell, it is just an incremental release of Windows Vista. The major problems with Vista (besides the "features" that were kept for Windows 7) were solved in the first year.

  • support for systems using multiple heterogeneous graphics cards from different vendors
  • the new taskbar
  • reduced uac prompts
  • improved globalization support
  • 30-bit and 48-bit graphics
  • option to disable internet explorer and windows media player
  • better performance

so, it's basically a little less sucky verision of vista?
id still rather buy a mac.

well, two of those are the things people complain about the most with vista (uac and performance)... and os x isn't really that great when it comes to performance.

Re: Mac vs PC

Posted: Wed Mar 03, 2010 9:39 pm UTC
by peanutdustbomb
No Linux makes this kind of broken, considering the crowd here.

Nonetheless, I consider PC to be the lesser of the two evils:

-Lower profile; PCs do not have a trademark look, thus they do not as readily brand the user from a distance.
-Cheaper. This is huge.

And my personal pet peeve:

-Windows does not just support two mouse buttons, but is specifically designed around the use of two mouse buttons. Perhaps Xzibit put it best: "Yo, dawg, I heard you like Macs, so we only put one pedal in your car." No thanks.

Re: Mac vs PC

Posted: Fri Mar 05, 2010 4:21 am UTC
by phlip
Nintenman wrote:After a quick search this thread has never been made mwahhahahahaha

You're not very good at searching.
And that's just the ones that mention macs in the title... there's also a handful of windows-vs-linux-specific threads.

Also relevant.

Re: Mac vs PC

Posted: Fri Mar 05, 2010 7:14 pm UTC
by hooktail154
I have had a Mac since system 9, I got it at age 5.
I have been using a Mac as my primary computer for my whole life, and have never noticed the performace issues that others claim exist.

I saw it mentioned earlier, but I wanted to let you know. Steam, the company that makes the platform for running Team Fortress, Half-Life 2, and Portal, has just showed off a beta version of their platform for mac.

PCs have always had major limitations, including the fact that Explorer (Internet and Windows) and Windows Media Player are so intwined in the system. Windows 7 fixes many issues, but Snow Leopard has unbeleivable multitasking and dynamic threading capabilities.

Besides, if really necessary, Windows could be run on a Mac. I would love to see a PC legally virtualize a current version of OS X.

Re: Mac vs PC

Posted: Fri Mar 05, 2010 7:45 pm UTC
by lulzfish
hooktail154 wrote:I would love to see a PC legally virtualize a current version of OS X.

I would too, but since Apple hates competition, they don't let other people run their OS.
So although I like some of their hardware and some of their software, I would rather not own a Macintosh, because of the legal douchetry Apple pulls with them.

Re: Mac vs PC

Posted: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:26 pm UTC
by bobjoesmith
Why do people worry so much about Mac vs. PC?
I mean theres multiple things. If you talk Windows vs. OSX, then I'd say Microsoft wins when Apple wins. Why? So I go, buy a brand new Mac. Then, what do I do? Promptly install a $200 Office Suite made by Microsoft. (yea... "buy") Then, I go and buy a copy of Windows XP to dual-boot with. Guess who just made $250 off selling a Mac?

But if talking about Macs vs. HP/Dell et al. then theres not much to discuss. Macs tend to be expensive, but easy to use. Theres a significant population that can't and probably won't be able to buy Macs because of economic reasons. However, you can pick up a cheap $300 Dell at your local grocery store. They take a different population. Its just that Mac users like to push it into PC users' faces, and the PC users are always expecting the Mac users to want done to them what they do onto others. (personally, BUILD UR OWN COMPUTERS... its not that hard... built a 12 piece lego set? its like that, but easier)

Im typing this using windows vista... which works fine for me except that my desktop doesnt show up anymore, and i have no start menu cause windows explorer went kablooey
on the other hand, if sys specs moved to Mac, price = up bagillion dollars

Re: Mac vs PC

Posted: Sun Mar 07, 2010 7:06 am UTC
by cjmcjmcjmcjm
bobjoesmith wrote:Why do people worry so much about Mac vs. PC?
I mean theres multiple things. If you talk Windows vs. OSX, then I'd say Microsoft wins when Apple wins. Why? So I go, buy a brand new Mac. Then, what do I do? Promptly install a $200 Office Suite made by Microsoft. (yea... "buy") Then, I go and buy a copy of Windows XP to dual-boot with. Guess who just made $250 off selling a Mac?

Why would you but office (2k8) for mac? It's not even 100% feature-compatible with office 2k7 (the new equation editor comes to mind). I made that mistake. I now wish I'd have saved $40 by buying the 500GB HDD and using OpenOffice instead of paying $130 for Office

Re: Mac vs PC

Posted: Wed Mar 10, 2010 8:00 am UTC
by argument.invalid
John once thought of buying a mac,
But then realized Apple fans are whack,
They continue to buy,
Anything with an "i",
Because intelligence is something they lack.

Re: Mac vs PC

Posted: Thu Mar 11, 2010 7:05 am UTC
by cjmcjmcjmcjm
argument.invalid wrote:John once thought of buying a mac,
But then realized Apple fans are whack,
They continue to buy,
Anything with an "i",
Because intelligence is something they lack.

That's why I got a MBP. No "i" in the name!

Re: Mac vs PC

Posted: Thu Mar 11, 2010 8:31 am UTC
by lulzfish
cjmcjmcjmcjm wrote:
argument.invalid wrote:John once thought of buying a mac,
But then realized Apple fans are whack,
They continue to buy,
Anything with an "i",
Because intelligence is something they lack.

That's why I got a MBP. No "i" in the name!

I want a MacBook, but with a cooler name, no glowing logo, and without me paying for an OS that I hate.
Sadly, system76 doesn't seem to make those, but I'm sure they have their top researchers working on it already.

Unless I'm mistaken, MacBooks have the screen flush with the screen bezel, right? So you can actually clean the screen instead of pushing dirt into a corner of the bezel. I want features like that in other laptops.

Re: Mac vs PC

Posted: Thu Mar 11, 2010 1:11 pm UTC
by Stay_Puft_marshmallows
As a partisan desktop user, Windows.

Because incremental upgrades are cheap, continuity is nice, my smaller hard drive and my monitor have been serving valiantly since 2003, and whenever I find my computer is no longer cutting the mustard, getting it back up to nearly top-of-the-line (defined this most recent time as "playing mass effect 2 at max settings without any hint of chug") never costs more than $300.

That being said, if I were going to defect to the heathen ranks of laptop users, I probably would go mac (if I could afford it). The build it yourself factor is the only reason I'm a windows guy.

Re: Mac vs PC

Posted: Thu Mar 11, 2010 11:18 pm UTC
by CorruptUser
To me, Steve Jobs is far more sinister than Bill Gates (or whoever is the face of microsoft these days).

For now, M = Microsoft OR Gates, A = Apple OR Jobs

M: Pretends to have a great product
A: Rather than pretend to have a great product, launches giant smear campaign against non-macs

M: Rented out Hawaiian island for marriage
A: Bribed officials to get a new liver

M: Won't reveal source code to non-microsoft programmers, making it partially guesswork to program
A: All new iPhone apps must be approved by Apple

M: Packages IE with the OS's
A: Automatically downloads programs without your knowledge

M: Tends to be vulnerable to viruses
A: Never holds data worth stealing

M: Windows users aren't experts with computers
A: To say nothing of Mac users (Appleheads? Macinites? iDudes/iDames? iDitz?)

M: Can be used on almost any computer
A: Macs only

M: Made a half-way decent game system, but HALO is the only reason you would consider buying over SONY/Nintendo
A: Plays even fewer games

M: Costs a lot to customize
A: Can't customize

M: Many different manufacturers dependent on Microsoft's good graces
A: Ever try to get a non-AT&T iPhone?

And most importantly:
M: Hated by nearly everyone for doing what all other companies would do
A: Loved by nearly everyone for doing exactly the same.

To be loved while doing bad things is the purest form of evil.

Re: Mac vs PC

Posted: Fri Mar 12, 2010 12:55 am UTC
by lulzfish
CorruptUser wrote:M: Windows users aren't experts with computers
A: To say nothing of Mac users (Appleheads? Macinites? iDudes/iDames? iDitz?)

This is a generalization. A lot of people are good with computers but use Windows to play games or because they're crazy, and some Linux users buy Macs for the same POSIX stuff with a better interface.
CorruptUser wrote:M: Can be used on almost any computer
A: Macs only

Yes, this is annoying. And yet apparently OS X even occasionally has bugs on their native Apple hardware.
CorruptUser wrote:M: Made a half-way decent game system, but HALO is the only reason you would consider buying over SONY/Nintendo
A: Plays even fewer games

I don't blame Apple for this. Macs and even Linux computers are entirely capable of playing games, but due to low popularity, the games tend to be either open-source or independent games that need all the players they can get. Sony and Nintendo are even worse than Microsoft and Apple as they refuse to even make systems you can program.

Luckily, OS X is getting Source Engine 'soon', which hopefully means some hackers will find a way to use the OS X port on Linux, and avoid the DirectX -> OpenGL translation used in WINE.

Re: Mac vs PC

Posted: Fri Mar 12, 2010 3:11 am UTC
by cjmcjmcjmcjm
Stay_Puft_marshmallows wrote:As a partisan desktop user, Windows.

Because incremental upgrades are cheap, continuity is nice, my smaller hard drive and my monitor have been serving valiantly since 2003, and whenever I find my computer is no longer cutting the mustard, getting it back up to nearly top-of-the-line (defined this most recent time as "playing mass effect 2 at max settings without any hint of chug") never costs more than $300.

That being said, if I were going to defect to the heathen ranks of laptop users, I probably would go mac (if I could afford it). The build it yourself factor is the only reason I'm a windows guy.

Same here. If I'm getting a big ol' desktop computer, I'm buying a big tower that allows me easy access to the internals and plenty of cooling fans, not an all-in-one computer or some space-saving thing. That leaves me with the Mac Pro, an overpriced line that Apple doesn't give enough love, and a wide range of (theoretically much cheaper) other computer configurations. However, I haven't found a non-Apple laptop that I really loved. The MBP feels engineered, not thrown together to meet a price point. Plus, they have the multi-touch trackpad.

Re: Mac vs PC

Posted: Fri Mar 12, 2010 5:04 am UTC
by Stay_Puft_marshmallows
CorruptUser wrote:To me, Steve Jobs is far more sinister than Bill Gates (or whoever is the face of microsoft these days).

For now, M = Microsoft OR Gates, A = Apple OR Jobs

M: Pretends to have a great product
A: Rather than pretend to have a great product, launches giant smear campaign against non-macs

M: Rented out Hawaiian island for marriage
A: Bribed officials to get a new liver

M: Won't reveal source code to non-microsoft programmers, making it partially guesswork to program
A: All new iPhone apps must be approved by Apple

M: Packages IE with the OS's
A: Automatically downloads programs without your knowledge

M: Tends to be vulnerable to viruses
A: Never holds data worth stealing

M: Windows users aren't experts with computers
A: To say nothing of Mac users (Appleheads? Macinites? iDudes/iDames? iDitz?)

M: Can be used on almost any computer
A: Macs only

M: Made a half-way decent game system, but HALO is the only reason you would consider buying over SONY/Nintendo
A: Plays even fewer games

M: Costs a lot to customize
A: Can't customize

M: Many different manufacturers dependent on Microsoft's good graces
A: Ever try to get a non-AT&T iPhone?

And most importantly:
M: Hated by nearly everyone for doing what all other companies would do
A: Loved by nearly everyone for doing exactly the same.

To be loved while doing bad things is the purest form of evil.


I'd dial it back a bit, but I agree in principle: Apple has sold a slick, good-guy image despite pulling several stark examples of corporate bullshit (new version in 6 months? Utter lack of transparency?), it's all really well encapsulated in the tv ads. Mac as a guy is presented as kind, laid-back, wants to be friends with PC, would never say anything bad about him... which is exactly the opposite of what apple's actually doing by making the ads.

Gates, on the other hand... His foundation does really incredible things. So... it's like he was a ruthless dick for a good cause.

Re: Mac vs PC

Posted: Sat Mar 13, 2010 7:53 am UTC
by cjmcjmcjmcjm
They're both businessmen, why does anyone expect different? At least Apple makes laptops that feel engineered, not thrown together to meet a price point.

Besides, this whole discussion is ridiculous. It's not just Mac v. PC, it's Apple's computers vs. other IBM PC-compatible computers. Besides, there are simply too many computers in the "PC" category to make a good comparison

/shortrant

Re: Mac vs PC

Posted: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:49 pm UTC
by duckshirt
I don't really think Bill Gates was that bad, he was at least the programmer-type... Steve Ballmer (the current CEO) is responsible for the more shady things they've done. I will agree that Apple is every bit as "shady;" I think it's Microsoft's size that makes their actions more effective and makes it harder for them to get away with stuff...

Re: Mac vs PC

Posted: Tue Mar 16, 2010 6:16 pm UTC
by JamesMusicus
Mac... Every... single... time...

On my previous windows computers, I've either had to spend 9 hours for a download (hardwired) or on my vista machine: it blocked me (the ADMIN) from doing anything... I cant even open word documents, now I have a mac, and all my problems are solved... though I may be biased thanks to garageband. :mrgreen:

*Edit: and gestures... gestures make my day :)

Re: Mac vs PC

Posted: Tue Mar 16, 2010 6:42 pm UTC
by lulzfish
JamesMusicus wrote:On my previous windows computers, I've either had to spend 9 hours for a download (hardwired)

Download of what?
Why?
You didn't even finish the

Re: Mac vs PC

Posted: Wed Mar 17, 2010 2:22 am UTC
by math1337
JamesMusicus wrote:Mac... Every... single... time...

On my previous windows computers, I've either had to spend 9 hours for a download (hardwired) or on my vista machine: it blocked me (the ADMIN) from doing anything... I cant even open word documents, now I have a mac, and all my problems are solved... though I may be biased thanks to garageband. :mrgreen:

*Edit: and gestures... gestures make my day :)


It sounds more like a virus blocked you doing anything. What were you downloading again? Oh, right "Urgent_files.doc.exe".

I guess gestures may be helpful, but I am still alive without them.

Re: Mac vs PC

Posted: Thu Mar 18, 2010 4:34 am UTC
by phillipsjk
Well, when "helping" somebody with their Vista installation, I found the UAC "Split Token" feature confusing: Admin isn't Administrator anymore; administrator is a normal user...most the time. I have since decided to never help fix NT 6.x systems.

Re: Mac vs PC

Posted: Mon Apr 05, 2010 10:39 am UTC
by Fin Archangel
JamesMusicus wrote:Mac... Every... single... time...

On my previous windows computers, I've either had to spend 9 hours for a download (hardwired) or on my vista machine: it blocked me (the ADMIN) from doing anything... I cant even open word documents, now I have a mac, and all my problems are solved... though I may be biased thanks to garageband. :mrgreen:

*Edit: and gestures... gestures make my day :)


Correct me if I'm wrong, but if you're having trouble opening a .doc document on a Windows it's not Windows' problem.

Re: Mac vs PC

Posted: Tue Apr 06, 2010 1:24 pm UTC
by extrablue
WHO WAS THE IDIOT WHO THOUGHT PUTTING THE BUTTON TO OPEN AND CLOSE THE CD DRAWER ON THE KEYBOARD AND NOT ON THE DRAWER ITSELF WAS A GOOD IDEA!!!
that really bugs me to no end.

Re: Mac vs PC

Posted: Wed Apr 07, 2010 3:59 am UTC
by cjmcjmcjmcjm
extrablue wrote:WHO WAS THE IDIOT WHO THOUGHT PUTTING THE BUTTON TO OPEN AND CLOSE THE CD DRAWER ON THE KEYBOARD AND NOT ON THE DRAWER ITSELF WAS A GOOD IDEA!!!
that really bugs me to no end.

Or the whole idea of slot-loading disk drives, for that matter. I'd like the option to boot a nonstandard disc should the need arise

Re: Mac vs PC

Posted: Wed Apr 07, 2010 7:45 pm UTC
by J the Ninja
extrablue wrote:WHO WAS THE IDIOT WHO THOUGHT PUTTING THE BUTTON TO OPEN AND CLOSE THE CD DRAWER ON THE KEYBOARD AND NOT ON THE DRAWER ITSELF WAS A GOOD IDEA!!!
that really bugs me to no end.



.....but....but....it looks better that way....

Seriously, that is reason for the slot-loading notebook drives and stripping the faceplates from the desktop drives. And it DOES look wayy better that way. Not sure it's worth the trouble, but it most certainly looks better that way.

Re: Mac vs PC

Posted: Wed Apr 14, 2010 2:11 am UTC
by eljitto
the price bothers me.

you pay $500 (on average) extra for, basically, Linux more compatible with programs.

all those, however, owrk on PC's, which are upgradeable and can play games (and don't say Steam Beta, that's only select SOurce Gmaes, which isn't a 10th of my Games Library)

Re: Mac vs PC

Posted: Wed Apr 14, 2010 2:44 am UTC
by J the Ninja
eljitto wrote:the price bothers me.

you pay $500 (on average) extra for, basically, Linux BSD more compatible with programs.

with a few show-stopping exceptions, all those, however, work on PC's, which are upgradeable and can play games (and don't say Steam Beta, that's only select Source Games, which isn't a 10th of my Games Library)


FTFY

Not quite "All programs". Maybe all the ones you need.

Re: Mac vs PC

Posted: Fri Apr 16, 2010 1:07 am UTC
by eljitto
J the Ninja wrote:
eljitto wrote:the price bothers me.

you pay $500 (on average) extra for, basically, Linux BSD more compatible with programs.

with a few show-stopping exceptions, all those, however, work on PC's, which are upgradeable and can play games (and don't say Steam Beta, that's only select Source Games, which isn't a 10th of my Games Library)


FTFY

Not quite "All programs". Maybe all the ones you need.


well, the majority of people who get mac pros will be using Photoshop or such apps, which, i admit, run faster on macs.

however, if you can have a 12-threaded processor (i7-980x) in your PC, it will make up for the performance difference.

and i didn't mean apps in their exclusivity, i meant their function.

Re: Mac vs PC

Posted: Fri Apr 16, 2010 6:33 am UTC
by Kaelri
I know I'm hardly the first to say it, but with me, the biggest sticking point is the dock. I've thought about this for a long time, I've read many articles about it, and argued with twice as many Mac owners. It's difficult to organize my thoughts about the issue, because the things I see as the dock's "flaws" are so tightly integrated with many of the Mac's more general "flaws," but I think the best way is to explain the basic thing that I can do with Windows/taskbar, but cannot do on a Mac: I can see any window with one look, and switch to it with one click. The Mac's ability to meet this basic desire can be buried underneath numerous of layers of extra steps.

I'll assume that the dock is not auto-hiding, and that the icons are left-aligned and unmagnified in order to keep the size and position of each icon consistent. That much, at least, I can determine according to my preferences. I'm also apt to remove all permanent shortcuts to non-running applications and files, so they're not mixed in with things that actually exist.

But even with this careful planning, a few hurdles remain.

First, I may need to move my mouse away from what I'm working on in order to hover over the icons, revealing their titles. Otherwise, I may be unable to differentiate between two icons with similar (e.g. document thumbnail) or even identical (e.g. folder) appearances.

Second, no matter how many or how few windows I'm working with, I am forced to access them through the application icon. This means either clicking through the icon's context menu, which is invisible by default, or switching directly to the "app" and then visually scanning for the individual window that I'm looking for, assuming it's not obscured by the arrangement of my desktop.

In Windows, it is impossible for me to "lose" a window, either behind another window, or off the side of the screen. I can always still see it in the taskbar. On a Mac, we have the third hurdle: I run the risk of literally forgetting that a window exists unless I explicitly seek it out, using the app context menu. For those keeping score, we're up to a hypothetical scenario which requires me to 1) actively identify a dock icon, 2) click it, and then, discovering that the desired window has been obscured, 3) return to the dock icon and use the context menu, or else rearrange the app windows by hand 'til I find it.

There is one saving grace: Exposé. I can use this to immediately view all windows which haven't been minimized. However, I see this as analogous to Windows' Alt+Tab and Win+Tab features: useful as a utility, not as a primary window manager. Especially given the random placement of windows, the relative difficulty of visually distinguishing thumbnails, and, like the dock, the lack of labels. It also fails the one-glance requirement, since I have actively invoke it, and doing so obscures whatever I was previously working on until Exposé is dismissed. It's not a solution.

Fourth hurdle: some of these methods fail if a window has been "minimized." The Mac's minimizing behavior is actually more like putting something in Windows' system tray: the window fails to appear when I switch to its app directly, and is excluded from Exposé. The only place it appears - ironically enough - is the dock. Yes, the only individual windows that the dock ever shows are the ones that I wanted to hide from view. And of course they're not actually grouped with their parent app, but rather off to the right.

Now, I like this ability on principle, and I actually think Windows should let you freely move windows over to the tray and back. The problem is that this appears to be the only convenient way of removing an individual Mac window from view. The only other way is to switch to it and then hide it using Command-H, and I'm actually not sure if it's still directly accessible from the dock/Exposé if I do so. Between this and the lack of a proper Maximize function, I can't help but imagine the Mac environment as a terribly messy one, full of distracting windows that can't be concealed without duping the primary task manager. Ultimately, even if I'm willing to swallow these pills, the only consistent way to switch to a particular window is to 1) actively identify the dock icon of its associated application, 2) open its context menu to determine the windows available from that app, and finally, 3) click the menu item.

With Windows? I look at it, and I click it. That's it. Doesn't matter if the window is minimized. Doesn't matter if all the windows are minimized. Doesn't matter how they're stacked or which is on top of which. It's just there, whenever I need it, instantly.

(Full disclosure: most of my knowledge of the Mac paradigm comes from Google research and discussion with Mac users. I've only had brief opportunities to use OS X myself. If I'm wrong about the details, please do correct me.)

Re: Mac vs PC

Posted: Sun Jul 11, 2010 5:01 am UTC
by demian
Leaving aside my irrational hate towards Apple.I have to say,i would choose MAC as the better one.But,this requieres me to revise my definition of "better". More secure? Apple,of course. More Beautyful ? Apple.
Better for the common user?...well,that would be windows,saddly. It has more programs avaliable,more peopple using it,more games.Anyway,I'm perfectly happy with my old XP to try W7 (besides,i don't have a machine with more than 3GB RAM).

Re: Mac vs PC

Posted: Sun Jul 11, 2010 5:55 am UTC
by cjmcjmcjmcjm
demian wrote:Leaving aside my irrational hate towards Apple.I have to say,i would choose MAC as the better one.But,this requieres me to revise my definition of "better". More secure? Apple,of course. More Beautyful ? Apple.
Better for the common user?...well,that would be windows,saddly. It has more programs avaliable,more peopple using it,more games.Anyway,I'm perfectly happy with my old XP to try W7 (besides,i don't have a machine with more than 3GB RAM).

I'd say that out of the box, Apple products are much easier to use. No driver configuration if the OEM F'd up and no uninstalling of 30 gigs of junkware. Also, Steam for Mac

Re: Mac vs PC

Posted: Wed Jul 14, 2010 7:51 am UTC
by Iceman
They way you discover people on the internet have Macs:

Them: Oh, that didn't send/work/open/play/load properly for me.

Me: Oh, are you on a Mac or something?

Them: Ya

Me: Get a real computer

Them: It is, it does everything a PC does and better

Me: Then why'd it just fail to send/work/open/play/load etc...?

Them: Oh well, except that. I LOVE YOU STEEEEVE!

Re: Mac vs PC

Posted: Wed Jul 14, 2010 8:12 pm UTC
by Berengal
What are you sending that can't be opened on a mac anyway? Have some standards, don't use proprietary formats.

Re: Mac vs PC

Posted: Wed Jul 14, 2010 9:06 pm UTC
by cjmcjmcjmcjm
Berengal wrote:What are you sending that can't be opened on a mac anyway? Have some standards, don't use proprietary formats.

This. How would you like it if I sent you a DMG compressed in a SIT?