[split] Mac vs. windows rants

[MMM]

considering the fact that Microsoft does not make the drivers for most of the hardware it supports we can not blame the OS or Microsoft for bad drivers

Yes you can, because microsoft DESIGNED their operating system to work that way! Mac OS X is not that way.

with a little time things usually become stable..otherwise people just learn to avoid that particular piece of hardware.

So what you're basically saying here is that sometimes it's NOT stable, and by then the person usually decides to avoid the hardware BUT ALSO by then the person would LOSE whatever they've invested in that piece of hardware. We could look at this another way and I think you said it best:

"OS X will always play nice with the hardware in your MAC because it was designed to work with that limited range of hardware."

Thanks for that

Bottom line: OS X does NOT have the same problems that windows does with drivers. OS X software works first time, everytime because OS X is rock solid and was engineered to be that way from the ground up

What's your point?

I would have thought that was obvious, but if you need it broken down into bit sized Reese's pieces then you'll need to read the full story that was linked to

Who says you have to run an Anti Virus?

ROFL

That's so ridiculous that I'm not even going to comment on it except to say that try running a PC without anti-virus software is foolish to say the least If you are suggesting that someone with a PC not use anti-virus software then that's just plain irresponsible.

Even if you do 'need' it...

Now you're just plain contradicting yourself Yes it's possible to get free anti-virus software BUT YOU STILL NEED TO USE IT. On a Mac you do NOT! We both know where this is leading. Should we list how many viruses were released for the PC in the last couple of years vs. the Mac? You guys always paint yourself into a corner and then you try to weasel out of it by 'theorizing' that 'all' computers are vulnerable. Key word "theorizing". IN THE REAL WORLD PC users have to worry about viruses. Mac users do NOT. This has been a thorn in the PC fanatics side for many years now. The PC zombies still can't accept that one simple fact. So go ahead - download (and try to trust) your freebee anti-virus software for your PC, Mac users don't have to download anything at all

I wouldn't let the idiots at Best Buy within twenty feet of my computer.

Either would I. The difference is that PC's have more problems than Macs so whether you take it someplace or not is not the issue, the issue is that windows gives people problems which then need to be addressed and fixed. Go ahead, try and say that windows is problem free, I dare ya From the moment that I unpackaged my Mac and set it up (two years ago) to this very moment posting this message - I have not had one single problem of ANY kind on our Mac! You may try to claim that you've had no problems with your PC, but the fly in your oinment is that we both know that everyone else using windows has not been that lucky

We know... according to 'you' it's all 'their fault'...

Of course then again, if they had a Mac then they wouldn't have any problems in the first place, and then they wouldn't have to worry about anyone 'blaming them' for their operating systems mistakes

Spyware/Malware should not be an issue for any responsible user.

Why do you always suggest that it's the 'persons' fault for all of these windows problems? That in itself is irresponsible. The fact is that windows is VULNERABLE to viruses, spyware and walware. Macs are not. 'nuff said

But you know mom doesn't call best buy when things go wrong, she calls me.

Thanks for subconsciously admitting that windows computers have problems. The reason she calls you is because she uses a PC. My mother hasn't called us once for any reason what-so-ever regarding any computer issue (and that includes setting it up) because she had the good sense to buy a Mac. She was shown both operating systems and fell in love with the ease of use of the Mac.

Now she doesn't have to be taught how to scan daily for viruses.

Now she doesn't have to learn how to scan for spyware.

Now she doesn't have to ask "what website do I download" this or that maintenance program at.

If your mother calls you about PC problems then that's your fault because you are the one giving her only half of the computer story. When you get your Mac laptop let her borrow it for a week and see if she doesn't ask you about how she can get a Mac too

If you are getting "reimbursed" the cost of an item, then you are being paid for it.

OK let's stop playing word games Do you not know what the word 'reimbursed' means? It does NOT mean that they make a profit! Some places (like Consumer Reports) pay for the item themselves and don't even accept reimbursement!

It is the same as if they GAVE you the item to test.

Oh really? So a videocard randomly coming off a store shelf is going to be the same as one that is TWEAKED to perfection like one that a manufacture can send the reviewer? That's just plain ignorant

If you give them a "bad" review, they may not pay for your next "toy".

That is just plain unfounded speculation on your part! If you disagree then PROVE IT by showing all of use here where your theory has ever happened. Unbiased links would certainly be nice

Oh and by the way, there are no men staring through your window, wearing long black trench coats, and just waiting for you to post that "proof" just so that they can come and get you

His view was different because he is a software developer. He has several products for sale - only for Windows.

Boy did you stick your foot in your mouth. What's that saying that goes "it is impossible for a man to be impartial over something for which he makes his living at." So this 'guy' MAKES A LIVING by ONLY developing windows software, and now you want us to believe that he can be fair and balanced? Talk about giving someone a laugh

They can't get the products they want using OSX!

This is just plain ignorant We can do MORE on our Mac then we can on our PC! Anyone who believes that the Macs of today are like the Macs of yester-year are living in the dark. Now only are the programs available, but most of them are included for FREE. You've also conveniently forgotten about the fact that Macs can run BOTH OS X AND windows. You can't say that about your PC

 

[Dragonlair]

This is just plain ignorant We can do MORE on our Mac then we can on our PC! Anyone who believes that the Macs of today are like the Macs of yester-year are living in the dark. Now only are the programs available, but most of them are included for FREE. You've also conveniently forgotten about the fact that Macs can run BOTH OS X AND windows. You can't say that about your PC
Reply With Quote

If you are running Windows on a Mac, you are running Windows - PERIOD! There are products that are not available for the Mac because Mac development tools are not there. I can name one entire series of games (VERY good ones at that) that can run on the Mac only with a Windows Simulator or by Windows on Mac. It's still Windows that must be used. These games are not free although Shareware versions are available. True, games are not critical and you can (most likely) do without them.

There are niche areas that are NOT free on any platform except for small simple cases. For example, there are quite a few products on the market for home users to create their own cross-stitch patterns. The most popular product in the US (and possibly the world) is NOT available for Mac OS (if you insist that you can run Windows on a Mac). I do not believe the next two or three products are available for Mac OS either.

Please check them if you care. I'm referring to PCStitch, PatternMaker and EasyCross. All have free viewers available if you want to try them on a Mac!

Without doing any extensive research, I am fairly confident in stating that this is NOT the only situation like this.

You act as if everything you need to do on the Mac is free and comes with it. That is NOT true!!!!!

 

[Zachery]

Please read what is written, and not just what you want to read CDarklock. The article clearly states that this is European pricing. Even if you wanted to use the U.S. figures the same basic point still applies. Anyone can still pay a little more and get the Mac mini WITH the top of the line OS X operating system AND a loads of other really good software included. But let's look at this still another way - operating system to operating system as you would say:

Windows top of the line vista:

• Retail: $399.99
• Needs constant defraging: Yes.
• Viruses: Yes.
• Driver problems: Yes
• Root Kits: Yes.
• Spyware: Yes.
• Plug and pray problems: Yes.
• Only runs windows: Yes.

Mac top of the line OS X:

• Retail: $129.99
• Needs constant defraging: No.
• Viruses: No.
• Driver problems: No.
• Root Kits: No.
• Spyware: No.
• Plug and pray problems: No.
• Only runs windows: No. Runs both windows and OS X.

Summery: Pay 4 times as much with windows and always worry about viruses, defragging, spyware, root kits, drivers, plug and pray, and just only be able to use it on a PC OR pay 1/4 the windows price and don't worry about viruses, defragging, spyware, root kits, drivers, plug and pray, and also be able to use both windows AND OS X with it. Now with those facts in hand only a moron is going to chose windows. Plus you have to consider what I like to call "the microsoft revolving door". Upgrades to windows are typically as much as $400.00 each time you upgrade. So if you chose to stay with windows you'll end up paying more later too. With Mac OS X you just pay a very reasonable 129.00 to upgrade to their top of the line OS (actually it's even less if you go to amazon and 'pre' pay for the upgrades they usually just cost around 70.00). 400.00 vs. 129.00 (or 70.00). Pay a little more and get a Mac mini PLUS loads of other top shelf full version (not just starter probrams like windows throws in) programs in the deal!

Seems like a easy choice to me. LOL

Hmm, a friend sent me a link and i felt like i needed to reply. First this

Windows top of the line vista:

• Retail: $399.99
• Needs constant defraging: Yes.
• Viruses: Yes.
• Driver problems: Yes
• Root Kits: Yes.
• Spyware: Yes.
• Plug and pray problems: Yes.
• Only runs windows: Yes.

Is FUD, nothing more, nothing less.

Now to the fun part. Lets desect everything from the next list.


Mac top of the line OS X: Fixed: Only one version, however if you want any new features and updates, be prepared to spend more money.

• Retail: $129.99 (Per verison, per year, per install, unless you buy a family pack)
• Needs constant defraging: No. False, _every_ time you install a program, update, etc, it does an "optimize" which is a nicer word than defrag, but is the same thing.
• Viruses: No. False, it gets them from time to time, but not nearly as much as a Windows (version) does, I still account this to its vastly limited install base.
• Driver problems: No. True, but only because Apple controls what hardware you do and do not use with your mac
• Root Kits: No. False, anything that is based on BSD/*Nix can and has been, just because its not common place doesn't mean it doesnt happen
• Spyware: No.
• Plug and pray problems No comment.
• Only runs windows: No. Runs both windows and OS X. No, OSX runs OSX, OSX can emulate, via ANOTHER program, Windows. But OSX does not run Windws, and Windows does not run OSX either unless its via an emualtion.

I can honestly say in the 11 years I've been working at my own computers I've had 3, count them 3 virus, all due to my STUPIDITY. In the last 5 years i've not had a single virus, or spyware install. Believe or not I dont even use Firefox, I use IE7 because I prefer it. I dont run antivirus software, but for kicks i ran a system sweep before I reinstalled my 3 year old windows install last week and not a single issue was found. I think i spent 600 dollars when i originally built this pc, and then another 500 to upgrade misc parts over 5 years. These upgrades were due to gaming habits that a mac cannot even compete with on a major scale.

Now, I in my every day life run Windows XP Mac OSX and A RHE server. I have a mac mini, which isnt even close to any mid ranged pc when I bought it (the original), not to mention that 3 months later OSX 10.4 came out and I would have had to pay another 130 USD just to get updates fixes etc. Did you know that OSX still has dependances issues that wont be fixed unless I upgrade it? I like OSX, but not enough to switch away. I spent 3 weeks only using OSX on my mini because of relocation to texas and I was never happier than the day I got to boot up my windows machine.

 

[Sarah]

This awesome mini I've been hearing so much about is 600 bucks for 1.66 Ghz, 512 RAM and 60 GB hard drive. I do have an iPod, and it has more storage than that. Dell (which admittedly suck but I picked them at random) has a machine for 359 bucks, with 2 Ghz, 512 RAM, 160 GB hard drive. So whatever you like you like, fine, but I don't get the whole cheaper entry level argument.

 

[Dragonlair]

I guess the ratio is close to expected. I'm beginning to feel a little (but not much) sorry for MMM. There are now 5 or 6 of us who have posted our feelings that support the use of Windows but it looks like MMM is the only Mac supporter. I've been jokingly referring to him as "Mad Mac Maniac".

Considering the relative market share of the Mac Personal Computing market, I guess it's right. If anything, he represents a higher percentage here in this limited debate.

 

[Calash]

Meh...I like them both.


Ubuntu FTW!!

 

[ArmyMissionary]

Wow, I just read this thread, well most of it, and it's pretty amazing, that two people would just post and talk that long about some stupid operation systems, or computers. I like windows, and I like macs, both the same, but I wouldn't go with any one, even if you paid me one million dollars, that's some good money, but I like both of them, and I can tell you this. There probably equal to each other, sure they have some differences, but if you get right down to it, there pretty much the same. Except for what their based on, because mac is based on UNIX, and windows is based on dos. There pretty much the same IMO. I might just read threads like this more often.
Very entertaining guys, bravo!!!

 

[MMM]

If you are running Windows on a Mac, you are running Windows - PERIOD!

So what's your point? No one here ever said anything different Diane. What we said was that you can run OS X AND windows on ONE MACHINE! Seems you're having a problem with comprehension. Try to run OS X and windows on your 5 year old 800 Mhz PC with only 128 Mb RAM, or your new machine when you get it. Go ahead, I dare ya Even your software developer friend was at least HONEST enough to admit that you should be pitied for thinking about using vista! Funny how you didn't tell him to shut up when he told you that, as you always seem to want to shut anyone up with nary a discouraging word about your beloved windows It's also funny how you conveniently didn't notice that your software developer friend also said that he respects Mac. If you were open-minded Diane then you would have given that statement just as much weight as everything else that he said, but you didn't did you? I salute and have high regard for Marks honesty on the topic and it was very refreshing to see. As for OS X developer tools, you might want to mention to him that the next version of OS X (10.5 Leopard) is going to have extremely powerful development tools available. Send him this link and let him know that if he registers for WWDC before April 27, 2007 that he will be among the very first people to get a (free) copy of OS X 10.5 Leopard, and to learn how easy it is to add a Mac version for M&R Technologies. Looks like Leopard will be released in October '07 so he's got plenty of time

There are products that are not available for the Mac because Mac development tools are not there.

See above... oh and and there are products that are not available for the PC either. So again, what's your point? The last time I looked Art Text does NOT run on a PC. There are plenty of 'Mac only' software products on the market. Maybe if you were a little more open-minded you would have noticed this fact. Google "Mac only software" and you'll find 136,000,000 hits! It would seem that there's plenty of Mac only software not available for the PC. Looks like it's time for you to run along and learn the truth, because you seem to be embarrassingly lost. What about running X11 applications, or a Bash shell? OS X can do that too straight out of the box. What about transferring all of your user data and applications from your old computer to a new one via firewire, in one VERY simple step? PC's can't do that. Macs can. And what about target disk mode? Windows can't do that either. Macs can. What about built-in voice recognition that actually works? Windows doesn't have it. Macs do. Ignorance is bliss huh Diane?

Perhaps it is best to sum this up by quoting this article:

"For people who haven't tried it recently, the most surprising thing about the Mac in 2007 is that software is simply not a problem. Most average Windows users have no idea how rich a software base the Mac has grown in recent years."


Here is another good article about software for the new Macs:

"There are a lot of misconceptions about the Mac. What's absolutely the worst one, though, is that there's no software for it."

The most popular (cross stitch) product in the US is NOT available for Mac OS.

Sorry to wake you up Diane but you do NOT need windows on a Mac to use that cross stitching software. All you need to run a windows app on a new Mac is a simple program called Crossover. Oops... betcha that's gotta hurt huh?

Second of all just because that one particular cross stitching program is not available for OS X does NOT mean that there is not a BETTER cross stitching program available for the Mac, it just means that the company that makes that one particular program only developed their program for the PC. But I assure you that if enough people asked for a Mac version that they would develop one. As a company they'd be crazy not to. According to Mark, they may eventually try to port the application for Mac, especially if you forward him the information above. If you like that particular cross stitching program then that's fine Diane, but don't blame Apple for M&R Technologies business decisions, and don't make it sound like there's not other great Mac cross stitching software available, because there is.

Before I bought a Mac my mother used to use programs like you're talking about, but she is now using MacStitch 3.5 and she said that she prefers it to any other program. There are several Mac cross stitching programs on the market. Don't knock 'em until you've tried them BTW- you'll notice the company proudly states "We have a Mac. And we love it!" Again, guess we're not the only ones

You act as if everything you need to do on the Mac is free and comes with it.

I never said 'everything' How could ANY Mac or PC possibly have a version of EVERY single software available on their computer? You'd need a pentabytes worth of hard drive just to contain them all. Come on Dragonlair, a little common sense goes a long way. What we said was that the Mac INCLUDES MORE REAL software (full version, not just 30 day limited or 'lite' versions) of software and that's TRUE! Please read what is written, and not just what you want to read. Thank you.

But please, don't just take my word for it, read what this windows expert has to say:

Windows expert to Redmond: Buh-bye

Bye-bye Windows! My three-month Macintosh trial has ended, but my permanent gig with the Mac is just getting started. Apple's MacBook Pro and Mac OS X are now my computer and operating system of choice. If you give the Mac three months, as I did, you won't go back either. The hardest part is paying for it -- everything after that gets easier and easier. Perhaps fittingly, it took me the full three-month trial period to pay off my expensive MacBook Pro. But the darn thing is worth every penny.

What About Windows?

After hundreds of hours testing Windows Vista during its extensive beta cycle, I found myself wondering last year if it would turn out to be the best operating system choice for most people. That's when I decided to give Mac OS X a fair shake. In early November, I began a total-immersion trial of the Macintosh. I started by making a brand new Core 2 Duo MacBook Pro 17 my primary computer. For a month before the trial officially started in November, and during the two weeks that followed, I worked on selecting products, converting data and setting up corporate software systems for my company, as well as finding solutions for personal use. Prior to my adoption of the Mac, I had one Windows computer for both business and home, so the Mac had to handle both sets of tasks too.

After living with the Mac for three months and comparing it with my Vista experiences, the choice is crystal clear. I've struggled to sort out my gut feeling about Windows Vista but the value and advantage of the Mac and OS X are difficult to miss. I am now recommending the Macintosh for business and home users.

When Mac users say, "It just works," what they mean is that you spend more time on your work, and a lot less time working on your computer.

As far as one machine being able to use BOTH OS X and windows I think that is a big advantage. Another happy Mac user put it this way:

"If you could buy a PS3 that could run both PS3 games AND XBox 360 games wouldn't you?" The answer is yes of course, because it offers you more gaming options. Well likewise todays Macs offer you more software options. I happen to think that's a GOOD thing. You may not yet agree and that's fine. When it comes down to it all a computer is - is a tool. You use this tool to get things done. I, and many other people happen to prefer the Mac because it's like a swiss army knife running BOTH OS X and windows. You may on the other hand, want to limit how your computer 'tool' can be used. You know the saying "If all you've got is a hammer, then everything begins to look like a nail." Hahaha...

There are now 5 or 6 of us who have posted our feelings that support the use of Windows but it looks like MMM is the only Mac supporter.

Sorry, I was never very good with being sheep or a lemming. If that's how you prefer to chose your operating system then have at it and enjoy

I've been jokingly referring to him as "Mad Mac Maniac".

Well I guess you're not here to honestly debate this issue. Please post your childish insults some place else. There are some people here who happen to really want to learn about the differences between each operating system. I will not get down in the mud with you so you can forget about that. Thank you

 

[CDarklock]

I'm pretty much done here. Now that my "competition" has essentially devolved into frothing at the mouth and clawing in the dirt like Taur Urgas at the battle of Thull-Mardu, I don't think it's particularly productive to stand around and watch his little spasmodic seizure play out.

So I recommend we cut off the discussion's head, drive a stake through its heart, and bury it seventeen feet deep before repeatedly stampeding a herd horses through the area so nobody can ever find it.

You know, to leave it some dignity.

 

[MMM]

a friend sent me a link and i felt like i needed to reply

Funny how the windows fanboys have to 'call in the cavalry' just to respond to one Mac person. 5 against 1 Like windows sharks you seem to all have a windows 'Borg' mentality. We are the windows fanboys. You WILL be assimilated, how dare you mention being happier with a Mac Even if, for the sake of argument, we said that both operating systems were similar, that STILL doesn't account for the fact that one new Mac can do the same work of several other computers (a PPC Mac and a PC). I'm not here to tell you where to spend your money as that's not the point of this thread. It started out as a 'vista has problems' thread and got sidetracked to it's present form. I am interested in only the truth about BOTH operating systems. I find it funny that every-time a Mac user tells someone that they love their Mac, that it's supposed to somehow be the same as the Mac person "trying to sell" Macs Windows only users have so much angst whenever someone says anything good about any other operating system. Get a clue, we're NOT trying to sell you anything. We NEED other people to use operating systems like vista because for us, it's A GREAT SOURCE OF ENTERTAINMENT Why would we want to take that away? Use whatever you want, just don't start whining when we tell you we love our Mac more than we ever loved windows. It really looks pathetic when windows people narrow-mindedly act that way

When you think about it, most people that use a Mac today started out at one point or another using windows. That's where we get most of our computer training from. In-fact I don't know of anyone who actually started out using just a Mac. Most of the people here bashing Macs haven't even spent a single hour using OS X. They are just bashing Macs because it's the windows equivalent of a feeding frenzy. Yet they are quick to pretend to be experts about both operating systems. If you don't actually have any real EXPERIENCE using OS X, then you have absolutely no credibility when it comes to talking about it.

if you want any new features and updates, be prepared to spend more money.

What in the world are you talking about when you claim that you need to spend more money to 'get more features'? There is no such thing for OS X! When it comes to OS X there are two versions; the standard OS X (that most people use) and the server. Please post links to these other 'mystical' versions of OS X or stop lying. I think you are thinking about vista, where you can buy the home version and then to get more features, you have to pay more. If that's the case then thanks for the entertainment. It was funny to watch you shoot yourself in the foot

Per verison, per year, per install

First of all it's NOT per year. Why do you even bother posting if all you can post is trash and lies? Do your research! From Panther (10.3) to Tiger (10.4) was a year and a half! From Tiger to Leopard will be 2-1/2 years! Im sorry but your post is a perfect example of the saying "a little knowledge is dangerous". So I guess according to you it's better to spend almost $400.00 PER version, PER install of vista huh? You can pre-order OS X at Amazon for only 70.00! So let's see, $400.00 verses 70.00? I think most open-minded people would rather spend the 70.00! Yep, it's starting to look like windows vista is microsofts new albatross

False, _every_ time you install a program, update, etc, it does an "optimize" which is a nicer word than defrag, but is the same thing.

OK zac it's time to put away your Magic 8 ball. You clearly know nothing about the inner workings of OS X. When you install a OS X application, you will see an "optimizing" progress bar, but it is NOT defragging the hard drive! It is updating the Unix library prebindings, which has NOTHING to do with disk fragmentation. However, if it makes you feel any better then you can just pretend that men wearing long black trench coats forced you to reply as you did, and that they also told you that adding preservatives to beer was OK Now since you wanted to play the 'install' card let's look at windows vista's install process.

Microsoft no longer has the same install verification process as XP had when windows is installed. It used to be that you simply showed windows that you owned a previous copy of windows (by inserting the CD) and it would let you continue on with the install process, but microsoft has decided that those days are gone. Hahaha... What happens now is that you have to have that previous copy of windows ALREADY on your hard drive. Image what fun you'll have if you've been buying windows upgrades over the years instead of the full versions. Every-time you install windows for any reason you'll now have to first install windows 2000 (or whatever full windows version you started with) and then continue to install each upgrade until you reach XP (wonder how much time that will take). Then when vista sees XP installed on your hard drive (not just in your CD tray) it will let you finish installing vista. Just think of all the time that you can now spend BONDING with your PC - as you sit there and install each previous windows version one after the other. Imagine all of the wonderful 'windows memories' you'll be able to reminisce as you install each version over and over again. Why I bet it will be just like old times Now image that your hard drive fails and you decide to upgrade to Vista as you replace the drive? Tou have to start all over again What if you wiped your hard drive to install Linux, and now you want to install Vista? Yep... you'll have to start all over again and first install all of those other windows versions first, and then when you reach XP on your hard drive you can finally upgrade vista over it, opting then for either a clean install or an in-place upgrade. Talk about a pain in the you-know-what

There is one other tinsy-winsy-little-iddy-biddy road block with installing vista. Microsoft calls it SSP. In a perfect world SSP is supposed to weed out the pirated copies of windows. However as many people are reporting they have a legitimate copy of vista that they purchased from the store, and SSP is still kicking in. What happens when SSP kicks in you ask? Well your PC will go into what Microsoft calls "reduced functionality mode." The only thing you can do in this state is to launch your Web browser ONLY for the purpose of paying up and getting a valid product key. Of course if you already have a valid product key then seeing this error message appear on your PC screen is not going to make you very happy. After one hour in reduced functionality mode, Vista AUTOMATICALLY will log you out whether you like it or not, without ANY recourse what-so-ever. You can try to log back in immediately for another hour, but unless you decide to pay microsofts ransom, then your computer becomes useless to you. Ask yourself what would you do if you bought a new computer and then were notified by a dialog box that your computer's copy of Windows is invalid (even if it isin't)? Bummer There is no Start menu to play with, there are no cute little desktop icons, and even the desktop background itself is changed to BLACK in reduced functionality mode. If you do decide to pay microsofts ransom just to get your PC up and running, then you'll have to find some way of contacting microsoft so that you can (hopefully) get reimbursed. Good luck with that I guess it wasn't so tinsy-winsy-little-iddy-biddy after all huh? Of course on the other hand, Mac users don't have to worry about ANY of those headaches. There is NO verification process to hassle you. You simply insert the new OS X disc and click on the install icon. The Mac will automatically reboot, and in less that 20 minutes your new version of OS X will be there lovingly greeting you. I guess things REALLY ARE a lot easier on a Mac

False, it gets them from time to time

That's a blatant lie! Since 10.4 (actually even sooner) there has not been one confirmed virus for OS X. There have been several scares, things that at first 'looked' like they might be a virus, but when they were investigated further it was found that they were just a hoax. Norton Symantec was caught creating one of them to scare Mac users into buying their anti-virus software Also if you believe that Macs install base is why there are no viruses for Macs then you are VERY ignorant on the topic. Everyone in the industry knows that is not the reason why OS X doesn't get viruses. Windows is only more "popular" because Bill Gates has made sure that the Windows OS got into OEM computers - Dell, Gateway, etc. He has sacrificed quality for quantity. Do you even remember microsofts MONOPOLY scandal? And I don't mean the game BTW do you know why windows vista isn't considered to be a virus? It's because viruses don't have major bugs

OSX does not run Windws, and Windows does not run OSX

ROFL It has nothing to do with the software and everything to do with the Intel chips. Why do you think Apple switched? DOH!!! Apple had COMPLETE CONTROL over what OS X did BEFORE they started using Intel chips. So why would they switch to using Intel chips if they could use both operating systems via their operating system? Did you think that Apple just got a good deal on Intel chips? Hahahaha... what a Kodak moment

all due to my STUPIDITY.

Care to explain how you completely got rid of that stupidity (your word not mine) and if you admit that you are human and can't get completely get rid of it, then how do you know that you're not making a mistake with your stance about being pro-windows only now? I know PLENTY of ex-windows only people who swore up and down that 'Macs suck' - that is until they became OPEN-MINDED enough to TRULY look at both operating systems in a NON-biased manner. Here's one example for you to read about. many more where that came from. Then they switched. THEN they saw the light. Amazing how that works huh?

I spent 3 weeks only using OSX on my mini

To quote another mac user:

"almost every single Mac user you ever scoff at has about as much windows experience as yourself under the belt, and then on top of that a vast sum of OS X experience as well." So now you think that just because you "spent 3 weeks only using OSX" that you're a self-proclaimed expert? Well gee... nice to see that you gave it a fair try

 

[MMM]

I'm pretty much done here.

Thank you for taking the time to discuss this CDarklock

I know we disagree and have our own preferences, but never the less it was fun to debate it with you.

Much respect and take care

 

[MMM]

I don't get the whole cheaper entry level argument.

It's just an inexpensive way to get a Mac, that's all. You know, just to get your feet wet so you can try it out. Hard drives are relatively cheap these days anyway. I certainly wouldn't let the size of a hard drive determine which operating system I was going to use. BTW- on the Mac mini you can easily add an external Firewire hard drive. Problem solved

 

[Zachery]

I spent 3 dedicated weeks on my mini, I still use it almost daily in my house. I've been using computers since i was about 4-5 years old (1990). I've had and have used both macs and pc's for a long long time. I'm not a stright out windows fanboy. If I was, there wouldn't be a mac in my house, nor would I use linux over windows for my choice in webservers. I'm a what does it best guy, and frankly windows still does it best for me.

I've also spent 3-4 weeks specificly working in a linux enviroment to evulate moving a company from windows to linux. At the end I told them realisticly it would not be worth the training.

If I want to update to OSX.4 I need to pay 129, agian, then 10.5 129, then 10.6 129, then 10.7, 129. See a trend? And if these are all within 2 years of each other, thats alot of money to sink for tiny updates. But then OSX doesn't back port too many bug fixes. Maybe its because I've grown lazy from Microsoft going on for 10 years on 98, still supporting 2000. I believe I got SP1 and SP2 free from MS for owning a legitamite copy of XP.

ROFL

It has nothing to do with the software and everything to do with the Intel chips. Why do you think Apple switched? DOH!!!

Apple had COMPLETE CONTROL over what OS X did BEFORE they started using Intel chips. So why would they switch to using Intel chips if they could use both operating systems via their operating system? Did you think that Apple just got a good deal on Intel chips? Hahahaha... what a Kodak moment

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PowerPC#History Reading is good for you yes?

PPC was not delivering for what today’s consumers and power users were demanding. Switching to Intel chips meant they could make a higher profit. Fact of the matter is since OSX is based on a nix variant it really doesn't matter what architecture you run on as long as you have the hardware and someone to rewrite the kernel and other apps to support it. X86 was a smart move for Apple, If I had to take an educated guess they made the change because it was cheaper for them in the long run and they would be getting more power out of there systems. For the record, OSX DOES NOT RUN WINDOWS, the hardware OSX runs can also run windows though.


I'll give it priase, but theres no way I could ever switch to OSX as my main OS. The free software development just isnt there for OSX. The daily tools I like and use are not there for OSX. Its secure, but so is any machine you take the time to secure.

 

[CDarklock]

I know we disagree and have our own preferences, but never the less it was fun to debate it with you.

You can't debate the truth. The truth is just... well, true. So when you "debate" it, what you're actually doing is lying. But the Mac crowd has always chosen to bet on the American public being stupid, and lately they're starting to bet on the American public hating Microsoft.

Largely because it's pretty much the same demographic...

 

[CDarklock]

I've also spent 3-4 weeks specificly working in a linux enviroment to evulate moving a company from windows to linux. At the end I told them realisticly it would not be worth the training.

I did a similar study. I moved six developers from Linux to Windows and six others from Windows to Linux. All of them were experienced with both operating systems, but had a strong preference. Being the boss has its advantages.

What I found was that all of the developers experienced roughly a 30% drop in productivity. However, their perception of this drop was very, very different.

The Linux developers, when asked to estimate their productivity on Windows, estimated it at roughly 25% of usual. They thought they were being less than half as productive as they really were. But looking at lines of code, billable hours, and project progress, they were about as productive as the Windows developers were being on Linux.

Meanwhile, the Windows developers actually thought they were MORE PRODUCTIVE on Linux. But they weren't. They were less productive - almost exactly as far under the bar as the Linux developers were performing on Windows.

What really interested me was that after three months, with weekly analysis of the reality and the developers' perceptions, no significant improvement was seen. The productivity stayed at 70% on both sides of the fence, and the developers continued to report the same productivity levels.

My theory is that Linux has a constant stream of stuff you're doing, so it always feels like you're working, even when you're not accomplishing anything. Meanwhile, Windows is a whole lot of click-and-wait; instead of using a string of common utilities, you just click a button and wait. So on Linux, you would be running four small utilities that each completed in five to ten seconds, but on Windows you're clicking a button and waiting thirty seconds. I think this creates timing problems that lead to inefficiencies, which the developers blame on the system instead of their thought processes and work habits; the Linux developer on Windows is ready to do the next thing in ten seconds but has to wait, while the Windows developer on Linux has the system waiting for his next instruction quite some time before he's ready to give it.

But I don't believe people think the way they do because of the system they choose. I believe they choose that system because of the way they think. This is something that is largely cemented in childhood and adolescence, so trying to mold it around my company's preferred system configuration was inevitably doomed to failure.

So my ultimate conclusion was to just let the developers work on whatever platform they want. While it's more complex and expensive to manage their IT needs without a standard platform, it's certainly not 30% more complex and expensive, and we didn't get paid for managing our workstation configurations.

 

[Calash]

This has become a very interesting thread. I have to agree with CDarklock in the opinion that the OS choice is based more on the way a person thinks than anything else.

Over the past several months I have been experimenting with several different Operating Systems myself. This is in part due to my job, I have to be ready to provide support for a very wide range of systems. I did have an ulterior motive though. I beta tested Vista and was not very happy with it, and being that I like to keep my options open I wanted to try other Operating Systems to see what would work best for me.

I really think each company id doing something right. OSX is just beautiful in both it's looks and it's simplicity. For what it is designed to do it is the best out there. However the stability this OS comes with has the price of customization. You HAVE to purchase a Mac to use it (Unless you to another route. Not that I would condone that, but seeing OSX on a Dell is an interesting sight...or so I am told ). Personally this is the biggest turn-off for OSX to me. If I want to build my own system, I can't.

Windows gets a bad reputation, some of it is deserved. However much of it is based on user error, and not a weakness in the operating system. By it's design it is much more flexible then OSX. It can go on any Intel or AMD chip, and system board, in any case, with any power supply...yadda yadda yadda. It is the most used OS out there, and in this is it's largest flaw. The more something is used, the more the problems come to the surface.

I am really liking Linux lately. I have an Ubuntu partition on my main computer and that is my primary boot OS, except for when I play games. It is very flexible and powerful, but at the cost of user friendliness. Ubuntu makes this much easier, however there are many times i find myself heading to the terminal just to get simple things done. I do like how they have there software distribution setup, and I think this will be seen more in future Operating systems.

Apple does have a really good product on there hands, and if they ever opened it up to more hardware I think it would really take off (imagine having the option to select your new HP laptop with Vista or OSx....they could still maintain hardware control while allowing a wider distribution).

 

[MMM]

You can't debate the truth.

We're NOT here to debate the truth! We're here, to debate the FACTS! Big difference

So when you "debate" it, what you're actually doing is lying.

When someone tries to twist the truth around, THAT is lying. That is what we are trying to clear up here. When someone says that there is no software available for Macs, or that they defrag when you install a program, etc, those are all lies, and they all need to be cleared up.

But the Mac crowd has always chosen to bet on the American public being stupid

That is only your opinion Lots of people feel the same general way about microsoft. BTW-for the record, while I am no longer a fan of windows, I am a fan of Bill Gates. I do not like his business decisions, but I do respect him for trying to help others in this world through the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. If he ever stops blatantly copying Apple and becomes a better (more honest) businessman then I will respect his business decisions too. This is a thread all on its own, but the point is that I do not like Macs just because they are Macs, or hate everything windows. As I mentioned before I try to be as impartial as humanly possible. I see most that use windows as using it because they 'think' they have to, or because they believe misinformation and rumors (usually started by windows fanboys) about Macs. I'm just here trying to clear the air.

That's all, no more, no less

 

[Hazel]

I must say, I will probably never use OSx while it's locked down to apple's hardware, simple as that. I don't have the money, or the patience to buy a third laptop just so I can use OSx. That, to me, is a huge mistake on the part of apple.

 

[MMM]

I'm not a stright out windows fanboy.

Well thank God for that

I use linux over windows for my choice in webservers.

When we get our new Intel Mac we will be turning our PC into a server too. Better than a boat anchor, although some say that's debatable

If I want to update to OSX.4 I need to pay 129

You make it sound like there is only one place to buy OS X You'd have to be crazy to upgrade at this point anyway unless you buy OS X from a auction like e-bay (we'll be selling our CD there soon). 10.4 sells there for only 40.00! The new version (10.5) will be out soon (October) and you'll be able to upgrade to it for only 70.00 (more information can be found [ame="http://www.amazon.com/Mac-OS-Version-10-5-Leopard/dp/B000FK88JK"]Amazon.com: Mac OS X Version 10.5.6 Leopard: Software@@AMEPARAM@@http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51JcgilFn0L.@@AMEPARAM@@51JcgilFn0L[/ame]! That's less than 1/16th as much as windows is charging for their operating system

then 10.5 129, then 10.6 129, then 10.7, 129.

Well first of all you are speculating. At one time people speculated that the moon was made out of cheese. It could be over 7-8 years before 10.7 is available IF it even ever comes out. Word is that 10.5 might be the last 'traditional' upgrade for OS X. Besides, your same exact argument could be made about upgrading windows 2000, then windows XP, then windows vista, then windows gotcha... or whatever they'll call it The point IS that OS X cost a LOT LESS than windows upgrades. Period! And now many people simply refuse to switch to vista because of all of its problems. Almost 90% of windows users surveyed said no to vista:

The study of 2,223 web-using Americans found that although 87% had heard of the operating system, only 12% of those who knew of it were planning to install it.

To make matters worse for windows users; Vista does not allow users to rollback to earlier versions of Windows installed on a PC, which means that people now must re-install either their old operating system or upgrade to a FULL version of Vista which costs around $400.00 just to get all of vistas features! To complicate matters even further for vista, if users choose to upgrade to Vista from a release candidate, they must use a FULL and final version of the Ultimate edition (again $400.00) of the software rather than a cheaper "upgrade" edition. So let's see, $400.00 for vista vs. 70.00 for OS X. I'd say that it's not a hard decision to give up windows and to simply switch to OS X

I've grown lazy from Microsoft going on for 10 years on 98

Sorry to wake you up but windows XP support is due to get the chopping block on Nov '08 Looks like they're not letting it last for ten years like they did with Win98 At that time XP users will be left out in the cold, because they will no longer qualify for any security updates, and will not even be able to purchase support from Microsoft.

On the other hand there are plenty of people who have ten year old Macs still going strong, and using them as their main computer. There is a program which allows you to do this.

Reading is good for you yes?

It certainly is. Perhaps you should try it some time

First of all I do not see wikipedia as a definitive place for accurate information. This explains why.

However since you picked them let's see what they say

"Advocates of the transition point out the potential for the new Intel Macintosh systems to run four classes of software at near native speeds: Mac OS X binaries, Java/.NET applications, Unix applications, and now Win32/x86 applications. No other hardware vendor can offer more than three of these. [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Intel_transition"]Apple–Intel transition - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia@@AMEPARAM@@/wiki/File:Macsales.svg" class="image"><img alt="Macsales.svg" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/eb/Macsales.svg/835px-Macsales.svg.png"@@AMEPARAM@@commons/thumb/e/eb/Macsales.svg/835px-Macsales.svg.png[/ame]"

Also, emulation is not the same thing as dual booting and/or platform virtualization. PC's cannot run OS X (or even more people would be using OS X). However everyone knows that Intel Macs CAN run windows. Macs can even run windows programs WITHOUT windows

they made the change because it was cheaper for them in the long run and they would be getting more power out of there systems.

Yes, back in 2003 Apple promised 3 Ghz. G5's but many years later the 3 GHz G5s were still not available. This however was a problem because of IBM/Motorola and NOT Apple. The technology of the PPC chip simply was not moving as fast as it needed to be, to be competitive with the technology that was being offered by other chip manufactures. Lots of consumers were expecting a G5 chip in a laptop, and because of heat/performance problems that IBM/Motorola couldn't resolve; that simply wasn't going to happen.

The Apple laptop is the biggest selling Apple computer there is. Laptop performance was a key consideration for Apple, as well it should be. While the PPC chip manufactures were dragging their feet on performance, Intel and AMD were not. They had much better performance per watt and so Apple had no other choice but to switch. If they didn't then sales of their products would fall like a rock, and that is the last thing that any company wants.

so is any machine you take the time to secure.

Windows is NOT secure, and what's worse, vista is not even stable Time is the last thing that a person with a PC has when it comes to viruses. In 2006 the Samy (XSS) virus in just 20 hours of its October 4, 2005 release, had spread to over one million users! On the other hand not one single Mac user was ever effected by Samy. What about a few years ago when many business institutions were brought to their knees because of several fast spreading viruses. Do you seriously think that a bunch of zoo animals set up their business computers? No, these were maintained by highly trained computer specialist, far more knowledgeable about windows than the average windows user, and yet they were STILL infected! Zero Mac users were infected. Nuff said

 

[MMM]

That, to me, is a huge mistake on the part of apple.

Rumor has it that the next version (10.5) might be compatible with PC's It was already leaked that 'boot camp' was going to be integrated into 10.5. If this is the case then it's projected that at least 1/2 of windows users will jump ship and buy the new OS X over the next 2 years. Around a year ago someone made a program that allowed OS X to run on a PC, but he was arrested and the program fell off the face of the Earth. Like you, I keep praying that something like this happens. Would LOVE to be able to run OS X on our PC If you google 'run OS X on a PC' you'll find many hacks that supposedly allow this to happen, but I've never tried any. Let us know if you do