Apple Vs Microsoft

Fol20

I was wondering why apple are so relatively popular when they sell for twice the price of a microsoft pc.I dont see what the big deal is about apple when their operating system in my opinion isnt as good as it doesnt work with half the programs and secondly why would you pay more for it then.I wouldnt mind it so much if they were the same price but when there is such a price difference why would anyone buy them in comparison to vista/xp pcs.Does anyone know why they are popular??

showry

Ask anyone who's switched if they'd ever go back. They work.

Fol20

Yea but why are they so over priced

Bob the Builder

More streamlined operating experience, and a very good alternative to vista for people who hate microsoft.

Just appeals to other people really. I like them both. I must admit I love apple, but my swing is towards microsoft as thats the OS i grew up on and learnt all about.

also, a key apple feature is better backup storage mixed with anti-virus technology which is close to perfection....

Bob the Builder

windows is cheap because of competition, and more choice.
microsoft make the software - companies such as HP make the hardware

apple makes both the software and the hardware - no competition - also better hardware design

the best laptop vista runs on is a macbook pro. (and thats a fact - Believe it or not)

Setun

I got an MBP last october, and haven't looked back. Never really got on with windows, I kind of associate it with frustration - although that's just my experience with it. OSX is amazing, and there are a lot of mac only apps that I'd prefer to use than their windows counterparts. The software integration is fantastic also, very well designed in general.

So that's why I went mac

Keano

I've only ever used a mac for about 3 mins but I always like the look of the Mac icons et al.However, I have grown up with Windows so cannot see that changing in the near future but I would never rule out using a Mac.

AlmightyCushion

nevf wrote: »

the best laptop vista runs on is a macbook pro. (and thats a fact - Believe it or not)

No it's not.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/135062/apple_macbook_pro.html

The MacBook Pro's reign as fastest notebook ended on 10/25/2007

Also in that article they don't say what the spec was of the windows based laptops they compared it to. If they compare like for like (exact same spec) then that's fair enough. Saying that for the extra cost of that macbook pro you could get a similar specced laptop except include an ssd in the price which would give it an edge over the mac. So a similarly priced mac versus a similarly priced pc, the pc will more than likely win performance wise because it has a higher spec.


The reason I prefer windows is because it does everything I need. The vast amount of software in the world works with windows and that includes games. I know you can use bootcamp to use any windows application you need but I really don't fancy having to load up a second os every time I want to play a game or what ever.

I can't remember the last time I had a virus, a bit of common sense is all you need. As for crashes as above, I can't remember the last time it crashed on me.

The reason why I prefer non apple hardware is because with non apple hard ware you can get a simple pc that you put together for a few hundred quid fill it full of hard drives and use it as a downloading pc or spend a fortune and get a top of the range beast with tri sli, quad core, raided ssds and a buttload of ram. You can also do any of the millions of combinations of that in between. Plus it'll generally work out cheaper than a mac.

Standard Toaster

I see the whole Mac vs Microsoft argument as using different tools for the job at hand. (Unix & WinTel) They both have there pros and cons. I don't see the point of these MS vs Apple threads.

I'll hopefully be getting my very own MacBook/Pro at the next revision

mathias

apple makes both the software and the hardware - no competition - also better hardware design

The hardware eh ? Since when ?

Initially they were Motorola supplied , then IBM , now they are Intel based and run the same basic hardware as a PC.

Nowadays the only things distinguishing a mac is a superior screen ( usually S-IPS instead of TN ) and the OS.
The vast majority of the hardware is third party supplied and the only part of it Apple design is the casing.

Given that the OS is Unix based ( which accounts for 99% of its stability ) and similar Unix based OS's can be had for free , and the fact that the case is just bling , they are considerably overpriced.

The Apple Cinema screens are excellent indeed , but if you know what your looking for , namely an S-IPS panel , even they can be had for nearly half the price in the form of Dell Ultrasharps and similar monitors.

There is simply nothing substantial to be gained for the quite considerable extra money when buying Apple. A little bit of homework will get you the same thing for a lot less money.

Jonathan

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

I can't remember the last time I had a virus, a bit of common sense is all you need.

I'm the same. But unfortunately there are people who just have total disregard for any warning boxes that pop up on the screen.
The reason windows gets a bad name is simply because there are many more viruses written for windows than for OSX so obviously windows is going to get a bad name when it is in the new about viruses more often

Overheal

I used macs in middle school - cant say i was ever a fan of the look of the windows or the single button interface. but playing around with the voice synthesizer was brilliant: microsoft sam does not compare.

AlmightyCushion

jmccrohan wrote: »

I'm the same. But unfortunately there are people who just have total disregard for any warning boxes that pop up on the screen.

Oh believe me I know, I know. I've had to fix my fair share of them for friends. Still osx actually has a considerable amount of security holes, it's just no one is exploiting them.

Overheal wrote: »

microsoft sam does not compare.

Say what you want about windows but microsoft sam is one of the best things to come out of microsoft. A few cans with a couple of mates and you can have hours of fun with that stupid robotic voice.

Nonmonotonic

mathias wrote: »

Given that the OS is Unix based ( which accounts for 99% of its stability ) and similar Unix based OS's can be had for free , and the fact that the case is just bling , they are considerably overpriced.

Can only be described as Open OS envy (see what I did there.........oh forget it!).

Right take that and that you cad!

setanta5

Ok My 2 cents. I use both.

For serious spreadsheet or database work, you can't do better than windows and Excel & Access in my opinion. But the fact is 90% of users of these applications will never need the functionality. For most users Iwork is enough and excel on the mac is almost identical to windows version.

I accept that Apple machines are expensive but that is simply because they don't make a cheap variant. Even a Macbook is what would be considered middle to high spec by other manufacturers. These are premium brand products and i think in price they compare favourably to Sony. You can get the spec for cheaper elsewhere, but its about the design package that you are paying for in terms of the hardware.

Also you need to consider the bundled software. You could pop your mac out of the box, be on the net, editing Video, recording music, cataloging your photos...whatever it is you do, without any real set up required. They also manage data transfer from previous machines seamlessly. Even a windows machine.

I actually run Vista on my MBP and it is more stable i find than my standalone PC. Possibly because all the drrivers were written by apple and provided by bootcamp, so i didn't have to source seperate drivers for graphics cards or whatever.

While someone here already pointed out, Apple does not manufacture their own machines (Who does these days?...except maybe dell and even they are only assemling pre-manufactured components) they do spec the machines with pre-defined components. And when you are in control of the software and the hardware spec, it makes for a more stable and user friendly experience. MS are always having to consider the multiple platforms that need to run their OS. Which means they need to make compromises.

Also while i accept OSX is based on Unix, i can't see how this can be a negative. You take essentially and open source OS, standardise it and make it "Just work" for the non unix users. This i think is how thhey can keep the cost down when compared to Windows.

Eccentric Toast

My opinion is that Macs are used for Photo,Music and Graphics editing for big companies and PC with Windows are more home friendly i personaly like both for home use i have a Dual boot of Mac and Vista

the_syco

Fol20 wrote: »

Yea but why are they so over priced

Apples: No competition. All the same systems. Tested to run on one system. Sold on one system. Upgrading is a b|tch.

Microsoft: built to run on many different chipsets, hardware, etc. It may work on one system but not another.

papu

No competition at all , Windows machines > apple machines.

Eccentric Toast

papu wrote: »

No competition at all , Windows machines > apple machines.

Windows havnt made many machines Apple do or are you comparing Apples OSs with Windows OSs in that they both have there pros and cons

Tar.Aldarion

There is no justification for the price of an apple machine. I've used macs and pcs all my life and prefer pcs. It's their stupid one click laptops and their stupid hold this and click, hold that and click. I also don't want to pay for a flashy unix, if I didn't like MS I would use linux.


Also, 'it just works', 'think different', are nice slogans for saps. Everything works if you know how to use it, think different, more like please pay us lots of money to be cool. If something breaks in my pc, I can fix it, if it breaks in a mac, send it in to us and we'll make you pay, boy howdy! No, can't allow anybody else to fix it.

papu

Eccentric Toast wrote: »

Windows havnt made many machines Apple do or are you comparing Apples OSs with Windows OSs in that they both have there pros and cons

right but a windows based machine is WAY more versatile than a mac machine , in terms of hardware upgrades , software compatibility . as well as usually being a hell of a lot cheaper .

buying a mac is really buying into a cult. the cult of Mr jobbs.

sink

Tara Le d'Arion wrote: »

Also, 'it just works', 'think different', are nice slogans for saps.

Society against playstation?

Tar.Aldarion

http://www.skepticalanalysis.com/
http://www.saps.gov.za/

Take your pick.

Eccentric Toast

"the cult of Mr jobbs."
Lol

And Now both OSs nearly run on the same hardware orignaly Macs where better built but for some reason they switched to Intel and now have most of the same hardware in them but for Software and general UI windows is the way to go although Leopard does look cool
I dual boot Mac and Vista and Certain programs are easier to find on windows

challengemaster

A bit of common sense and it doesn't matter what OS you're using, but a bit more sense and you could save yourself a few hundred quid.

Doctor DooM

Dual booter here. Do some music stuff so the mac is awesome for that. Work in IT so I need to keep up on my windology.

cornbb

I've used both systems for years. I used Macs at work and at university for over two years before taking the plunge and buying a Macbook Pro, which I now use for music production, software development and general mucking about.

They are undoubtedly expensive machines. The cost of a Mac is definitely far more than the sum of its parts, so to speak, but people are willing to pay the premium for a high quality machine customised to work with a very elegant and powerful OS. Its worth noting that they hold their value extremely well compared to PCs though.

I hate Apple's smug "it just works" jargon but they do have a point. They do design like no-one else. One-buttoned mouses used to infuriate me, but in terms of usability Mac OS blows Windows out of the water after a short period of adjustment. I can achieve far more with my one-buttoned multitouch trackpad than I ever could with any trackpad on a Windows machine. Tap to click, tap with two fingers to right-click, drag with 2 fingers to scroll, swipe with 3 fingers to navigate the filesystem, "pinch" to zoom in and out. It might sound like a chore but once learned, its extremely fast and powerful. Keyboard shortcuts are universal and work across all applications, unlike Windows where various applications have different keystrokes to quit, hide, minimise etc. The OS and filesystem are fast, dynamic, secure and elegant compared to Windows. I run XP on a VM when I need to, which is rare, and it works seamlessly. Xcode (Apple's IDE) blows Visual Studio out of the water and developer support is far superior to that offered to Windows users by Microsoft.

I do balk at the prospect of buying into the smug "cult" of Apple, and I can think of nothing worse than being labelled a Mac fanboy. I do realise they have faults (e.g. the mighty mouse, which is a joke, limited upgradeability, the expense). But I can't deny that my Mac experience has been very positive, I think most people who make the switch have the same experience. Most people who dismiss Macs off-hand appear to be gamers, which is understandable, but that doesn't come into it at all for me.

Naikon

Stick with windows xp if you are a gamer who plays games not made by id software
or introversion along with the other small subset of Linux games.
WINE works, but is not as good as a native solution.

I might have gone with a Mac if it wasn't such a ripoff. Why pay for one when I can build a superior box running Linux for a hell of a lot less cash?
I like the fact my setup uses 120 megs of Ram as I type this(X server loaded too).
Development tools, games, mail clients, servers, everything in Linux is just a download away:D

OSX may be a Unix, but it is nowhere near as simple as Slackware which I use to customize the system and remove the bloat.
The only redeeming thing about OSX is the inclusion of a bash shell for scripting.

Linux ftw!:cool:

Naikon

SDooM wrote: »

Dual booter here. Do some music stuff so the mac is awesome for that. Work in IT so I need to keep up on my windology.

I don't dual boot, but I too am responsible for the winboxes at home when they start acting up.
Apparently, 90% of all client users use windows which is not a good sign.
Microsoft have held an illegal monopoly for far too long...

rogue-entity

jmccrohan wrote: »

The reason windows gets a bad name is simply because there are many more viruses written for windows than for OSX so obviously windows is going to get a bad name when it is in the new about viruses more often

And the fact that its overpriced*, bloated, less secure, less stable and used by a majority of computer users.. who quite frankly are not technically literate.

* It is cheap enough as an OEM copy, but when you want to buy a retail copy, or an upgrade copy, and its overpriced.

mathias wrote: »

The Apple Cinema screens are excellent indeed , but if you know what your looking for , namely an S-IPS panel , even they can be had for nearly half the price in the form of Dell Ultrasharps and similar monitors.

Now thats good to note.

papu wrote: »

No competition at all , Windows machines > apple machines.

Fanboy?

cornbb wrote: »

I've used both systems for years. I used Macs at work and at university for over two years before taking the plunge and buying a Macbook Pro, which I now use for music production, software development and general mucking about.

They are undoubtedly expensive machines. The cost of a Mac is definitely far more than the sum of its parts, so to speak, but people are willing to pay the premium for a high quality machine customised to work with a very elegant and powerful OS. Its worth noting that they hold their value extremely well compared to PCs though.

I hate Apple's smug "it just works" jargon but they do have a point. They do design like no-one else. One-buttoned mouses used to infuriate me, but in terms of usability Mac OS blows Windows out of the water after a short period of adjustment. I can achieve far more with my one-buttoned multitouch trackpad than I ever could with any trackpad on a Windows machine. Tap to click, tap with two fingers to right-click, drag with 2 fingers to scroll, swipe with 3 fingers to navigate the filesystem, "pinch" to zoom in and out. It might sound like a chore but once learned, its extremely fast and powerful. Keyboard shortcuts are universal and work across all applications, unlike Windows where various applications have different keystrokes to quit, hide, minimise etc. The OS and filesystem are fast, dynamic, secure and elegant compared to Windows. I run XP on a VM when I need to, which is rare, and it works seamlessly. Xcode (Apple's IDE) blows Visual Studio out of the water and developer support is far superior to that offered to Windows users by Microsoft.

I do balk at the prospect of buying into the smug "cult" of Apple, and I can think of nothing worse than being labelled a Mac fanboy. I do realise they have faults (e.g. the mighty mouse, which is a joke, limited upgradeability, the expense). But I can't deny that my Mac experience has been very positive, I think most people who make the switch have the same experience. Most people who dismiss Macs off-hand appear to be gamers, which is understandable, but that doesn't come into it at all for me.

Agreed

I have used both, and I still do. My desktop is an aging Dell that dual-boots XP Pro and Vista Ultimate, but my laptop, is a Macbook Pro running Tiger.
I prefer the mac, the one-buttoned-mouse thing has never bothered me. About the only things that does bother me, is Apple's keyboard, and its Superdrive:
Im sorry, Mr Jobs, but a UK Keyboard has the @ above the 2, and the \ next to the "z" key, and fcuk sake, why on Earth did you have to use a Matsu****a drive.. damn thing wont let me use VLC for multiregion DVD playback ¬_¬

Just to talk about the OS's. Apple's MacOS X blows windows out of the water IMO and to say its a bad OS just because popular games/applications dont run on it, is asinine. Popular games dont run on MacOS X because the gaming companies cant be bothered to use OpenGL instead of DirectX (which would make porting the games to both platforms childsplay).

papu

sorry this is apple vs Microsoft

Linux torvalds , monopolies and other such things arent mentioned in the header so dont go OT please :P

rogue-entity wrote: »

Fanboy?

lol reading your own post that statement is a bit hypocritical...
if you buy a windows based machine ,your far more versatile , youve got upgrades , modded drivers , overclocking , games , replaceable parts without voiding warranty.

its basically freedom , i would hate to ever own a mac , or any type of enclosed system that wouldnt let me do what I want to do with it , i buy a dell system , i want a bitchin fast GFX , fine , i swap out the gfx and i game on... this is UNHEARD of for macs , you get maybe 2 or 3 choices and thats it.

i want to build a pc? fine , can you build a mac , technically yes , but it IS illegal to run an apple based OS on anything that didnt come from the apple factory , and im just waiting for psystar to get sued.

seriously removing a right mouse button is just plain stupid , its another reason that macs dont appeal to me , everything is done for design value and not practicality , oooOoooOo you can swipe and stuff , ive seen people do it , it's all attention seeking BS that the macboys are so fond of..
shortcuts are throughout windows aswell ctrl+c , and ctrl+v work in ANY program so dont give the scattered excuse , theres literally millions of programs for windows and to tie all of those together is something even the regime of apple couldn't manage


yes i hate macs.

people who buy macs as an accessory can get bent.


if games worked on apple machines , it really would not be different than now , if your a true Machead you can get games to work with a bit of hacking and slashing , but usually the system is powerful enough to run anything more demanding that photoshop , pairing a 3 grand octocore system with a 50 euro ATI 2600 is utter stupidity...

Naikon

Sorry, I have a tendency to go OT when these type of threads pop up:o

Naikon

rogue-entity wrote: »

Popular games dont run on MacOS X because the gaming companies cant be bothered to use OpenGL instead of DirectX (which would make porting the games to both platforms childsplay).

This is the Mac's biggest Achilles heel as far as I am concerned.
While there should be more games that use an OpenGL API, most companies
simply don't see the point in porting to a *nix platform because of limited market share.

OpenGL games always run better aswell:pac:

Naikon

papu wrote: »

pairing a 3 grand octocore system with a 50 euro ATI 2600 is utter stupidity...

Not if you want it as a database server:D

papu

Naikon wrote: »

This is the Mac's biggest Achilles heel as far as I am concerned.
While there should be more games that use an OpenGL API, most companies
simply don't see the point in porting to a *nix platform because of limited market share. OpenGL games always run better aswell:pac:

openGL will never become a standard , because console games run a variant of DX and so its easier to port onto pc , also I havent seen an OpenGL game look as good as crysis . Steam is basically keeping pc gaming allive , and vavle code their games in DX , as do EA.

papu

Naikon wrote: »

Not if you want it as a database server:D

oh im sorry , but for that 2.5 grand , you get 320gigs of space , not all of room to database , for 2.5 grand you could build a raid array of over 10 terabytes , and a quad core system , apple try to leach into so many areas of the market , that they fall short at each.

lol omg 8 cores , most programs dont even use 2 effectively , hell OSX isnt even multicore optimized , its coming in the next Service pack , Snow leopard.. which isnt free either , another way to milk the hapless customers

Naikon

papu wrote: »

openGL will never become a standard , because console games run a variant of DX and so its easier to port onto pc , also I havent seen an OpenGL game look as good as crysis . Steam is basically keeping pc gaming allive , and vavle code their games in DX , as do EA.

The Xbox is the only console that runs on a DX codebase.

Naikon

papu wrote: »

oh im sorry , but for that 2.5 grand , you get 320gigs of space , not all of room to database , for 2.5 grand you could build a raid array of over 10 terabytes , and a quad core system , apple try to leach into so many areas of the market , that they fall short at each.

lol omg 8 cores , most programs dont even use 2 effectively , hell OSX isnt even multicore optimized , its coming in the next Service pack , Snow leopard.. which isnt free either , another way to milk the hapless customers

I know, I was just being a bit sarcastic:)
Also, this will look better than Crysis(subjectivity aside).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=219ohJZd8dI

papu

i know the xbox is the only one that runs dx like api , but the fact still is that microsoft owns Xbox , microsoft owns windows? exclusive Ps3 games like MGS arent coming to pc anyway , where as games like halo , and GOW , and assasins creed do.... also , crysis is out now , when Rage comes out we shall see , what the news crytek game looks like

Naikon

papu wrote: »

when Rage comes out we shall see , what the news crytek game looks like

Fair is fair:D

cornbb

papu wrote: »

lol reading your own post that statement is a bit hypocritical...
if you buy a windows based machine ,your far more versatile , youve got upgrades , modded drivers , overclocking , games , replaceable parts without voiding warranty.

its basically freedom , i would hate to ever own a mac , or any type of enclosed system that wouldnt let me do what I want to do with it , i buy a dell system , i want a bitchin fast GFX , fine , i swap out the gfx and i game on... this is UNHEARD of for macs , you get maybe 2 or 3 choices and thats it.

i want to build a pc? fine , can you build a mac , technically yes , but it IS illegal to run an apple based OS on anything that didnt come from the apple factory , and im just waiting for psystar to get sued.

seriously removing a right mouse button is just plain stupid , its another reason that macs dont appeal to me , everything is done for design value and not practicality , oooOoooOo you can swipe and stuff , ive seen people do it , it's all attention seeking BS that the macboys are so fond of..
shortcuts are throughout windows aswell ctrl+c , and ctrl+v work in ANY program so dont give the scattered excuse , theres literally millions of programs for windows and to tie all of those together is something even the regime of apple couldn't manage


yes i hate macs.

people who buy macs as an accessory can get bent.


if games worked on apple machines , it really would not be different than now , if your a true Machead you can get games to work with a bit of hacking and slashing , but usually the system is powerful enough to run anything more demanding that photoshop , pairing a 3 grand octocore system with a 50 euro ATI 2600 is utter stupidity...

papu wrote: »

oh im sorry , but for that 2.5 grand , you get 320gigs of space , not all of room to database , for 2.5 grand you could build a raid array of over 10 terabytes , and a quad core system , apple try to leach into so many areas of the market , that they fall short at each.

lol omg 8 cores , most programs dont even use 2 effectively , hell OSX isnt even multicore optimized , its coming in the next Service pack , Snow leopard.. which isnt free either , another way to milk the hapless customers

Wow, I thought Mac fanboys were bad...

You obviously have no idea what a typical Mac Pro user uses those machines for. Typically video editors using Final Cut Pro or audio producers using Logic. Considering the PC equivalents of these programs are respectively Avid and Pro Tools, both of which require proprietary hardware, the economics of using a Mac suddenly become obvious. These machines are also extensively used for 3D rendering, this is where 8 cores come in handy. No one gives a rats-ass about video cards except for gamers (or video editors, who use professional decks anyway). You are clearly blind to the potential uses of these machines beyond gaming. If you knew how elegant and stable Apple's CoreAudio architecture is compared to Windows' audio stack, for example, you might gain a bit of perspective.

As for keyboard shortcuts, it goes far beyond ctrl-x/c/v. As I said in my previous post, which you conveniently chose to ignore, the shortcuts to quit, close windows, hide and minimise are universal, unlike in Windows.

As for "right mouse buttons", they were never removed, they were never there in the first place. They have been implemented in the form of the Mighty Mouse and multitouch touchpads. If the best you can do to counter this is "lol omg oooOoooOo you can swipe and stuff" then don't bother, it just looks ridiculous.

I'm not a Mac fanboy, as I said I use both systems regularly, I recognise the benefits and flaws of both. Your gamer-centric viewpoint will naturally put you off Macs, but your unwillingness to recognise the benefits for other users, as well as your uninformed vitriol about them, well, it just speaks for itself really.

papu

windows tab , really using a windows machine there hit alt+ space , hitting r or n or x then restores , minimizes , or closes.... that works in ALL windows pograms , and most games that can full screen and window mode.

i know what mac pros are used for , i used to be a member or young irish filmmakers here , they have 2 mac pros , and 2 macbook pros , and using them is a pain..the mac book pro wiped the storage disk (citidisk) while half ways into a shoot on a film which caused allot of grief. they are far from perfect

don't get me wrong im not a windows fanboy , i'm a pc fanboy , i build , upgrade and mod , the easiest and most versatile o's to install is windows .

btw you missed adobe premier pro , a production grade editing suite ,it will work on anything you throw it on, as will avid.

cornbb

papu wrote: »

windows tab , really using a windows machine there hit alt+ space , hitting r or n or x then restores , minimizes , or closes.... that works in ALL windows pograms , and most games that can full screen and window mode.

i know what mac pros are used for , i used to be a member or young irish filmmakers here , they have 2 mac pros , and 2 macbook pros , and using them is a pain..the mac book pro wiped the storage disk (citidisk) while half ways into a shoot on a film which caused allot of grief. they are far from perfect

don't get me wrong im not a windows fanboy , i'm a pc fanboy , i build , upgrade and mod , the easiest and most versatile o's to install is windows .

btw you missed adobe premier pro , a production grade editing suite ,it will work on anything you throw it on, as will avid.

Fair enough, if you've had a bad experience with Mac machines I can see how that would put you off. In usability terms, though, I still think there's no beating OS X after using it for a few years.

I can totally understand the desire to self-build and mod. I ran Ubuntu Studio for over a year, I loved the ability to tweak it to death, but after spending too many late nights trying to get my soundcards to work the way I wanted I threw the towel in, I figured life was too short.

I disagree that Windows is easier to use or install. Perhaps it is more versatile in ways, but the fact that Windows can now be natively run on Apple hardware, hassle-free, is another huge +1 for Macs, from my POV.

papu

fair enough , vista installs in 15 mins , about the time it takes to make and drink a cup of tea , after that all that needs to be done is intall drivers like GFX and peripherals.

you still missed the part where windows has cross program shortcuts , alt space , alt f4 to close , windows L to lock ,

and also buying a mac to run windows is the worst idea ive ever heard , its having your shiny cake and eating it , you can install OSx on pc( although its illegal) , save you a bundle of money and its fully upgradeable..

Tar.Aldarion

I wouldn't site a multi touch trackpad as an advatage as pcs/microsoft os' can do that to, I just really don't want it. It's annoying.

papu

Tara Le d'Arion wrote: »

I wouldn't site a multi touch trackpad as an advatage as pcs/microsoft os' can do that to, I just really don't want it. It's annoying.

yeah laptop touchpads are annoying no matter how much wikki wikki you can do on them , a nice mouse with side back and forward buttons TBH...

rogue-entity

papu wrote: »

if you buy a windows based machine ,your far more versatile...

... and thankfully not stuck with using Windows either.

papu wrote: »

its basically freedom , i would hate to ever own a mac , or any type of enclosed system that wouldnt let me do what I want to do with it , i buy a dell system , i want a bitchin fast GFX , fine , i swap out the gfx and i game on... this is UNHEARD of for macs , you get maybe 2 or 3 choices and thats it.

How ironic you mention Dell, a company notorious for building proprietary systems on the same vein as Apple. Go back a few years, could you even get a Dell system with an AMD AthlonXP? Nope, because Dell have proprietary motherboards that only supported a limited range of Intel processors, and you couldnt replace the motherboard, because Dell dont use ATX cases (not sure if that changed).

Naikon wrote: »

This is the Mac's biggest Achilles heel as far as I am concerned.
While there should be more games that use an OpenGL API, most companies
simply don't see the point in porting to a *nix platform because of limited market share.

OpenGL games always run better aswell:pac:

OpenGL is part of Windows as well, and it wouldnt effect their target market if they did develop their games with OpenGL in mind. OpenGL isnt a Unix platform.

papu wrote: »

openGL will never become a standard , because console games run a variant of DX and so its easier to port onto pc , also I havent seen an OpenGL game look as good as crysis . Steam is basically keeping pc gaming allive , and vavle code their games in DX , as do EA.

Console games

cornbb wrote: »

Wow, I thought Mac fanboys were bad...

Fanboys are bad, now matter who they are..
Playstation2/3 V Xbox/360
MacOS V Windows V Linux
IPB V vBulletin
etc

papu wrote: »

don't get me wrong im not a windows fanboy , i'm a pc fanboy , i build , upgrade and mod , the easiest and most versatile o's to install is windows .

btw you missed adobe premier pro , a production grade editing suite ,it will work on anything you throw it on, as will avid.

And yet your thread was about Windows, not PC's
And I would argue that Linux is a more versatile OS, given you can customise it 8-ways from Sunday.

And Adobe's software is available on both PCs and Macs.. and if you want to talk overpriced and overhyped products... Adobe makes Apple seem cheap.

AlmightyCushion

rogue-entity wrote: »

How ironic you mention Dell, a company notorious for building proprietary systems on the same vein as Apple. Go back a few years, could you even get a Dell system with an AMD AthlonXP? Nope, because Dell have proprietary motherboards that only supported a limited range of Intel processors

That's the same with all motherboards. If I buy a socket 775 motherboard, it will only support a limited range of intel motherboards.

rogue-entity wrote: »

and you couldnt replace the motherboard, because Dell dont use ATX cases (not sure if that changed).

As far as I know, they did use btx case designs which was another standard just nowhere near as popular as atx. Their power supplies still couldn't be swapped out with a non dell power supply without butchering your case.

papu

rogue-entity wrote: »

... and thankfully not stuck with using Windows either.


How ironic you mention Dell, a company notorious for building proprietary systems on the same vein as Apple. Go back a few years, could you even get a Dell system with an AMD AthlonXP? Nope, because Dell have proprietary motherboards that only supported a limited range of Intel processors, and you couldnt replace the motherboard, because Dell dont use ATX cases (not sure if that changed).

dell xp's now use ATX cases mobo's and Psu's , BTX was introduced by INTEL as a standard , as it helps airflow and cooling , because of this a dell P4 can survive with 1!!! fan , and a psu fan. thats not dells fault , intel offers Huge discounts dell , which was in fact investigated , now dell offer AMD aswell , choice is good , where are apples AMD computers? oh snap my bad...

rogue-entity wrote: »

OpenGL is part of Windows as well, and it wouldnt effect their target market if they did develop their games with OpenGL in mind. OpenGL isnt a Unix platform.

lol games arent developed for pc anymore , their developed ON THE PC for consoles , mainly XBOX360 , which uses a variant of DX , said before..

rogue-entity wrote: »

And yet your thread was about Windows, not PC's
And I would argue that Linux is a more versatile OS, given you can customise it 8-ways from Sunday.

Apple Vs Microsoft start another thread and we can argue about fish if you want..

rogue-entity wrote: »

And Adobe's software is available on both PCs and Macs.. and if you want to talk overpriced and overhyped products... Adobe makes Apple seem cheap.

i have no beef with adobe , i use after effects and abode premier pro , much more user friendly than FCP.
Adobe photoshop wil not be supported as 64bit version on mac , which means it cant use more than 3.2gigs , ie for huge HD Photoshots (gigapixel project) the graphical 8 core monster is outclassed by a windows machine running 16 gigs of ram.

Setun

papu wrote: »

seriously removing a right mouse button is just plain stupid , its another reason that macs dont appeal to me , everything is done for design value and not practicality , oooOoooOo you can swipe and stuff , ive seen people do it , it's all attention seeking BS that the macboys are so fond of..

Did Steve Jobs assault your family or something? Jesus...

papu wrote: »

yes i hate macs.

No shit.

papu wrote: »

people who buy macs as an accessory can get bent.

Again, you sound insane. You have pissed and moaned about mac fanboys, and not one mac 'fanboy' has raved on this thread the way you are now. Grow up and accept that people use different OS to suit their needs. True, some people may buy a macbook to match their iPod, or just to take it out in college to be trendy, but many people but it because they like it. It is a matter of preference.

Anti

Windows vista 64bit, 87days uptime...

If you know what your doing vista/xp is just as good or even better then OSX or any other OS out there.

And i dont know why people are talking about hardware, neither Microsoft or Apple make any pc/laptop hardware really.