PC or Mac?
 

Have always been a PC family, and it's time for an upgrade. What's your experience with the iMac versus PC? Any info appreciated - our biggest computer use is music, photos, video, and internet use. Thanks!

PC all the way.

you want to make media or just view it?

If you edit video, take lots of digital photos, or create music, Mac. No question.

If you only consume media, it depends on what your sources are.

The iApps (iMovie, iPhoto, iTunes, iDVD) along with GarageBand have no peer in the PC world. Maybe on an individual basis (ie there are some good web development apps and mp3 catalog applications), but nothing can match iMovie wrt editing video, and the seamless integration of the iApps is quite stunning. I can edit a video, pull in a song from my iTunes library, add some photos from my iPhoto library, then create a DVD.

Do you have experience with both? I'm just curious to know what you base your preference on.

Thanks! We saw the iMovie demonstration in the store today and it looked unbelievably simple. We do take tons of digital photos as well as videos, and would like to be able to manipulate and edit them.

Depends on what you want to do most...(which is....???) I'm a PC guy personally, but am being lured to the Mac side lately.

Nowdays, this is a no brainer: Mac intel, and you can run XP if you ever regret you bought a Mac...

Aurel

Mac.

The basic OS is very good. Extremely stable, far less "fiddling" than with Windows, excellent integrated search (Spotlight), convenience features (Expose, Widgets). Also far less problems with viruses, worms, spyware than Windows (in fact I've never had any such problems with OS X at all). I used to spend inordinate amounts of time fixing my PCs - clean installing Windows, etc - now I spend that time here on PP OT (hmm, a negative I guess).

The iLife applications are great - easy to use, work well together, basically best in class. I've mostly used iTunes and iPhoto, played with iMovie but am not a video buff. Safari is a very good browser.

Availability of other applications is very good. All the major apps are available for Mac (MS Office, Quicken, Photoshop, Firefox, etc). Almost all the major plugins are also. The only real exception is games, there are quite a few games for Mac but the PC gets them first.

Peripheral compatibility is good, sometimes you'll find office-oriented printers won't work so well w/ Mac. E.g. my dad just bought a Ricoh color laser all-in-one and is complaining some features don't work on his iMac. But H-P, Canon, Epson all support Mac well.

And now the Intel-based Macs make this really a no-brainer, just like Aurel said. You can install Apple's Boot Camp and dual boot into Windows XP, or you can install Parallels and switch between Mac and Windows on the fly.

my wife loves mac's
she uses both PC and mac's at work

pro's less steps to do many things
eazy simple to network
grafix and photo shop are faster and eazyer on mac's
never /seldom crashes or lost work/files

minus's COST and limited programs
mac's cost about 2x the same speed and power in a PC

Have worked with MAC's quite a bit, both of my Sisters and late Father had them. Just not my cup of tea and like PC's better.

Nostatic is correct that if you are doing video or media, MAC is the only way. Otherwise the options are a lot better for various programs with a PC.

For work? Unless you are in advertising/marketing, a PC is the only real choice. Most of the programs I use for work simply aren't availble for the Mac.

For home? I'd say its a toss up. If you're a gamer, PC, hands down. PC versions of games are out earlier, are usually better, and much of the better hardware for the latest games is only available for PCs. If you do media stuff, Mac.

Much of the "fiddling" with PCs I consider customization that just isn't possible on Macs. I work on PCs all day, I have two at home also.

We have had both. We have a PC right now. I wish we had gotten a Mac.
Mike

I have both.

The Mac is best for work. I use the Dell only for playing games.

I would disagree with that. There really isn't a significant difference in cost between like-equipped PCs and Macs. Of course if you're looking at the ultra-low end (sub $600 or so), there isn't a Mac priced to compete there.

Actually, there is. A Mac Mini costs $599, if you already have screen and keyboard.
And it will also run XP...

Aurel

Lockheed Missiles and Space used to be an all Mac shop until we were taken over by Martin and we switched to PCs and created a huge IT group to support and manage the PCs. Most of us would switch back in a heartbeat if given a chance. No chance for that with the huge infrastructure that the PC switch necessitated.

At home we have always used Macs, and I bought the Mac for home after experiencing a PC at work first.

Will not be your experiecne but with th IT group come weekly updates becasue of security problems with the Windows system software.

Go Mac. Even a good used Mac.

Unless you are a gamer. Then get the new intel based mac.

Simply not true. In the past part of the cost comparison issue was trying to compare PowerPC chips to Intel/AMD. Sure you can find a cheaper PC but then again I can go buy a Kia instead of a Hyundai instead of GMC instead of a Porsche instead of Ferrari. They are all cars, four wheels, internal combustion etc... but are they REALLY the same?

http://kurafire.net/log/archive/2006/04/25/debunking-the-price-myth-apple-vs-dell

The software thing is not true either. I've asked before, name one commercially available app that the average consumer needs that is not either cross platform (available for both) or does not have a comparable alternative. Last time someone reponded with "you can't get Computational Fluid Dynamics apps for Macs".

links to the non-existent Computational Fluid Dynamics apps for Macs.

http://aaac.larc.nasa.gov/tsab/tetruss/mac/

http://www.pointwise.com/gridgen/index.shtml

In terms of shear numbers of software available it's true, problem is most of it is crap. Maybe it's just me but I'd rather pick from a smaller pool of quality software than an ocean of garbage.

OSX is based on Berkely Unix. Probably the oldest most flexible operating system on the planet. You wanna fiddle? Just launch Terminal and you have all the power that you need to do whatever you want. Unless your idea of "cusomization" is changing the GUI then you're right, can't do it on a Mac but then again why would you want to.

Next someone will throw out the limited market share is why there are no Mac viruses. Anyone with an understanding of how operating systems work knows why that's bull. It's not impossible or even difficult to write a .nix virus. What's nearly impossible is to write a virus for a Mac that will actually be able to self replicate and spread.
In fact you'd have a near improbable chance of writing a Mac virus that makes it past the user account to infect the core OS.

Some educational reading.

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

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


Scott

At the very low end, complete PC systems do cost less. At the higher end, Macs range from roughly the same to +13% in the last study I found.

But when you add the cost of all the stuff you need for a PC, anti-virus stuff, any of the programs equivalent to the iLife programs that come for free on the Mac (assuming you want them): iDVD, iPhoto, GarageBand, iMovie HD, iWeb... the PC will be a lot more. And you spend a lot of time fiddling with a PC that you could be using to actually Do Stuff.

EDIT: The Mac Mini/low end PC comparison is closer than I thought. see
http://www.macworld.com/weblogs/editors/2005/01/miniapplesandoranges/index.php

Just remembered something.

I have been using my "original" installation of OSX on every Mac I've owned since OSX was released 6 or so years ago.

I started with the Beta, when the GM was released I just upgraded the Beta and so on with every minor update and major release. I've moved the entire disc image 6-7 times over the years, a combo of desktops and laptops.

I have never had to do a clean install and I've never had to reinstall any apps. I've had to re-enter some serial numbers but that's not a big deal.

With the Intel release I just used the built in migrator and every last bit of data was moved succesfully. It's been 3 months and I still have not found one thing that does not work.

Try that with Windows and it'll be screaming for drivers and dll's till your ears bleed.

Buncha smug Mac bigots.

Kinda reminds me of smug 911 drivers.

+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