+1 to use the winduhs software you can't live without. Take a look at the MacBook. I love mine.

Mac all the way. Far more elegant and trouble free for any application I use. No virus. No spam. Clean and intuitive design. Porsche versus Hummer = Apple versus PC.

Mac.

Hmmm...I wonder if Mac would cut Pelican members a deal if we did a group buy for Macbooks or Macbook Pros. :)

Another vote for the MAC. After being a staunch wintel guy for years I finally made the switch in 2002 and never looked back. There isn't a piece of software on my PC that I wasn't able to get for my MAC and the Audio/video capabilities leave the PC in the dust. I would recommend the MAC hands down.

Thanks a lot everyone! This is really helpful information, and confirms what we were already thinking. :)

Re: PC or Mac?
 

I've used Mac since the first year, 1984, and prefer it over the PC. I have both here at the house, using PC laptops and one PC tower. MacOS is still the most elegant operating system, though Windows XT Pro is the best version of Windows so far, it's still pretty rough around the edges in comparison. MascOS is just more integrated and smoother in use. Typically, when manipulating digital photos, what will take 5 steps on a PC will take one on a Mac.

Our machines are:
1. Mac Mirror Drive Door G4, dual 1.4mhz processors.
2. HP PC with 3ghz Pentium 4
3. Compaq Evo N800c laptops, of which we've acquired 3 or 4 (one new, several used for spares) with 2.4ghz Pentium 4 processor.

All have maxed out ram, and fairly large hard drives, I'm a believer in having as much of these low cost peripherals as you can buy.

My youngest brother, involved in graphics production professionally, has always had at least one Mac; my other brother and then my sister switched to Mac from PC over the last two years.

Best of luck with your decision.

I have run my office on Macs for 15 years using proprietary software. No IT budget. No IT expenses. When we have had networking or printing issues, I can sort it out myself in minutes. There is also one new PC on the network for accessing a hospital database that is not Mac friendly. That PC has been an endless source of trouble for me. I replaced it with a Mac Mini with dual Intel processors and I'm accessing the hospital network using Parallels. Flawlesssly.

Managing my music, photos and creating video is a breeze on a Mac.

Here's my plan:

iMac for main home computer, e-mail, web, finances, media. Network with my current PC (will do complete hard drive wipe and clean install of windows) for gaming only.

Ta-Da!! Best of both worlds and my wife can surf the net while I play games...no more arguments.

That is basically what we have. The Dell XPS PC is used for just games, has the pedals and wheels and etc connected, is kept off the Internet unless need to download something. The iMac is used for everything else. We don't even network the two, no reason to bother. (But I have a Thinkpad PC laptop too, use it for work.)

The only reason to network would be because I play mostly online games, so I would need access to the broadband. I guess I could just buy a router, does that require you to network the two systems? I'm not a networking savvy person...

Wireless networking is a breeze with both Mac and PC (if they are running XP) They will work together on any 802.11 network. (Airport, Linksys, whatever...)

Re: Re: PC or Mac?
 

But Pat, what does Lou Rockwell think?

It's spelled Lew Tech...

Don't blaspheme the almighty Rockwell dude....

PC all the way for me for what i want it to do.

I have not had any of the 4 Win XP systems at home crash and my kids are banging on them all day playing games on the web. Occasional slow downs from spyware but that is not an OS issue.

Re: Re: Re: PC or Mac?
 

He thinks I'm a very smart puppy.:D

Actually, spyware, malware and viruses ARE indeed OS issues.

I thought it was those damm pesky ad companies sticking stuff into my PC w/o consent. How is the OS involved ;)

Do Macs not have no Spyware or Virus issues or are not as targeted due to the lower installed base?

you can argue installed base, or you can argue the core OS isn't as inherently flawed. I'd agure both.

Because Microsoft stuck so many backdoors into their system, for various reasons, and Apple did not.

MacOS is 100's of times more resistant to intrusions of all kinds than Windows.

Alf, we both know you have a reason to be biased here.

Answer is, because the OS is flawed and allows it to happen.

Read below, the first is written by computer security consultant, published author, teacher at Washington U and columnist Scott Granneman.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/10/06/linux_vs_windows_viruses/

http://lists.apple.com/archives/fed-talk/2004/Nov/msg00018.html

Now also ask yourself a question.

Why do virus writers do what they do? Answer is varied, cause mayhem, they have an axe to grind, their mother never told them she loved them etc...

One basic common theme is simply to prove that they can. It's ALL about the challenge.

Theirs is a very strange culture. They are highly intelligent and highly competitive individuals. They are accutely aware of the huge monetary and emotional damage that they cause but they continue to do it. They just don't give a s**t about you or me or anyone else, it's about earning respect in their community, gettin their props.

I for one do not believe that none, NOT A SINGLE ONE of these people has no motivation whatsoever to be the first one to do something that everyone is saying can't be done?

Lack of installed base is simply a convenient answer and is plain silly when you take the time to understand and appreciate the technological challenge involved AND the psychology of those involved.

Scott