Mac vs PC

[PearlJam]

***NO Bashing. Just Facts Please***

I would like to know from all you mac owners / lovers, etc. Why would i buy a mac instead of a pc, what benefits will i get?

IOW sell a mac to me

 

[PeterCH]

First of all, I'm not a Mac lover .

Benefits?

1. Quality components (including the case).
2. BEST Operating system for the desktop/notebook machine.
3. Applications which actually work and NEVER crash.
4. OS which NEVER crashes.
5. You can run Windoze if you want to.
6. You get your work done fast and you can even play native Mac games (DOOM3, Warcraft, Quake, FEAR, etc... (plus anything else you could play on Windoze if you use Bootcamp).

Bad points?

Aesthetics. If you don't like the Apple Mac look.
Nothing else really, since pricewise there isn't much of a difference
and you can install Windoze XP/Vista on a Mac and dual boot that
and run any Windoze app you need that way. Parallels lets you run
Windoze apps at the same time.

 

[supersunbird]

A Mac is a PC with fancy housing and a different OS...

 

[PearlJam]

What about performance per rand and upgradability?

I have never used a mac before, but if i look at specs it seems to be intel based nowadays. I know in the old days it was said that a mac outperforms a pc when it comes to creative things, ie. video, photo editing, etc. Is it still the case? Does the OS make a difference in performance of the components?

Is there a difference in XP peformance on a mac?

 

[bwana]

Why settle for just a PC?

 

[hj2k_x]

What about performance per rand and upgradability?

I have never used a mac before, but if i look at specs it seems to be intel based nowadays. I know in the old days it was said that a mac outperforms a pc when it comes to creative things, ie. video, photo editing, etc. Is it still the case? Does the OS make a difference in performance of the components?

And then there is the fact that you can run OS X on Intel machines now as well, albeit not as well as on MAC's themselves.

But that means it really does come down to personal taste really. Similar stats..

PC's are easier and way cheaper to ugrade and have more available parts both new and 2nd hand.

If I had like 15k to spend I still think I'd go PC than MAC...

 

[Skeptik]

What about performance per rand and upgradability?

I have never used a mac before, but if i look at specs it seems to be intel based nowadays. I know in the old days it was said that a mac outperforms a pc when it comes to creative things, ie. video, photo editing, etc. Is it still the case? Does the OS make a difference in performance of the components?

Is there a difference in XP peformance on a mac?

Which Mac were you thinking of? They are quite different when it comes to the innards. Most are pretty poor when it comes to graphics.

 

[PearlJam]

My feeling is also the i have better options with pc, that is why i need to try and understand why people are so happy with macs, other than hype. I am in the market now for a laptop and for the budget i can afford a macbook (entry level) or an Acer with quite good specs. I am just giving myself the opportunity with an open head to listen what the mac guys have to say to see if i will maybe give it a bash.

My opinion was that mac is so good because of the good marketing of apple. That is one thing nobody can say they are not good at. Now i want to know the facts instead of just what i always believed.

 

[PearlJam]

Which Mac were you thinking of? They are quite different when it comes to the innards. Most are pretty poor when it comes to graphics.

Although i have indicated that i look at the laptop, i am looking at it in general really, ie. if a mac cost R25 000 what performance can i expect vs a pc of R25 000.

 

[Paul_S]

The one thing that really sucks with Apple Macs is that unless you go for the high end models the onboard graphics is normally pathetic.
They may be perfect for unaccelerated graphics work like in Photoshop and desktop publishing apps but are totally useless for heavy 3D modeling apps or OpenGL games.

The higher end Apple Mac models tend to have better hardware accelerated onboard graphics chipsets but then when you look at their shocking price tag it doesn't make any sense. Rather buy two high end PC graphics cards and run them in SLI configuration for the same price.

Except for the OS all you're doing is paying through the nose for a brand name.

 

[hj2k_x]

The one thing that really sucks with Apple Macs is that unless you go for the high end models the onboard graphics is normally pathetic.
They may be perfect for unaccelerated graphics work like in Photoshop and desktop publishing apps but are totally useless for heavy 3D modeling apps or OpenGL games.

The higher end Apple Mac models tend to have better hardware accelerated onboard graphics chipsets but then when you look at their shocking price tag it doesn't make any sense. Rather buy two high end PC graphics cards and run them in SLI configuration for the same price.

Except for the OS all you're doing is paying through the nose for a brand name.

Have to agree with that. The onboard 64MB gfx on the entry-level models are poor indeed.

 

[bwana]

I say get a PC.

The one thing that really sucks with Apple Macs is that unless you go for the high end models the onboard graphics is normally pathetic.

That's only the low end - iow the mini and macbook - everything else has dedicated graphics.

 

[hj2k_x]

I say get a PC.

Wow.

 

[Gnome]

1. Quality components (including the case).

Bha ha ha ha, LOL, good one!

2. BEST Operating system for the desktop/notebook machine.

Honestly that is a matter of opinion.

3. Applications which actually work and NEVER crash.

My lecturer has a Mac and I've seen a application crash, he was busy presenting a slide show and it crashed, apart from that it often happens that the slide show hot key's(completely random event, it works for 10min then suddenly stops) no longer work (IE frame forward, frame backward) and he has to resort to clicking up the menu each time to make it work.

4. OS which NEVER crashes.

Wow you certainly need to back that up with some evidence

6. You get your work done fast

Depends on what you're used too really

pricewise there isn't much of a difference

Last I checked they cost WAY more than you can build the average PC for.

 

[bwana]

My lecturer has a Mac and I've seen a application crash, he was busy presenting a slide show and it crashed, apart from that it often happens that the slide show hot key's(completely random event, it works for 10min then suddenly stops) no longer work (IE frame forward, frame backward) and he has to resort to clicking up the menu each time to make it work.

Let me guess - Microsoft's Powerpoint?

Wow you certainly need to back that up with some evidence

I'll attest to that - it's been so long since I had a kernel panic it might as well be never. A couple in 5+ years . . maybe not 'never' but close enough.

Last I checked they cost WAY more than you can build the average PC for.

Ok - but why settle for average? The mac's arent even targeted for that category. Lump them with the Dells, HP's, Sony's and other high end brands where they belong.

No offence but I think this thread is best served by people who've actually used the intel macs (no point talking about the ppc is there ). If someone recommended a car they'd never driven would you buy it? Nah - didnt think so

 

[Gnome]

Let me guess - Microsoft's Powerpoint?

Hmm not sure, he was using a Mac

No offence but I think this thread is best served by people who've actually used the intel macs (no point talking about the ppc is there ). If someone recommended a car they'd never driven would you buy it? Nah - didnt think so

I didn't say don't buy a Mac I'm just pointing out that it's not true that it never crashes. And I find it hard to believe that their hardware is better than PC's of the same price, they switched to x86 didn't they? Anyway I won't argue that they are more stable because of their exclusive hardware support but that is to be expected

 

[LandyMan]

Hmm not sure, he was using a Mac

Exactly ... so it could have been MS Powerpoint ... you know as in Office for Mac

 

[bwana]

Hmm not sure, he was using a Mac

so it could have been XP or Vista then or even Linux

I didn't say don't buy a Mac I'm just pointing out that it's not true that it never crashes. And I find it hard to believe that their hardware is better than PC's of the same price, they switched to x86 didn't they? Anyway I won't argue that they are more stable because of their exclusive hardware support but that is to be expected

I've never had a crash with Tiger or Panther.

 

[Gnome]

Exactly ... so it could have been MS Powerpoint ... you know as in Office for Mac

Oh, LOL well he's a IT professor and very anti-MS so I doubt it was anything MS but I'll take a look next time.

so it could have been XP or Vista then

LOL I'm semi blind (yes I'm near sighted ) BUT not that blind

I've never had a crash with Tiger or Panther.

So are you of the opinion that it's impossible for a Mac to crash?

 

[PearlJam]

OK, i see on the local apple site this machine:

Mac Pro R 20 053 (entry level)

Two 2GHz Dual-Core Intel Xeon
1GB (2 x 512MB)
250GB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s
NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GT 256MB (single-link DVI/dual-link DVI)
One 16x SuperDrive

Is 1gb ram in mac comparable to 1gb in a pc, performance wise?

This seems to be quite excessively priced. Is it safe to say the difference between this and a pc of the same standard (components) would be the OS, the "mac build quality", ???.

I'm am not a person that want to buy something just to be able to say i have brand X or Y. It is all about performance per rand for me, but i am willing to pay a premium for stability.