PC or Mac?

[Samerr9]

I had the same question about 6 months ago. Mac geeks were like "are you crazy, for graphics it is Mac and only mac"

When I saw the price tags.. I cared the less for what they said and got and HP laptop. It is turned on almost 80% of the time since I bought it and had not a single problem on this laptop nor the ones I got before. It is extremely fast, I render anything in photoshop just like that. I change them every 2-3 years. Mac was 3 times the price with i5 processor and 13" screen. I got i7 with 15" and double the memory, I said to myself let me change it 3 times in 10 years for me it is better than 1 mac for 10 years!

 

[PinkDoor]

I had the same question about 6 months ago. Mac geeks were like "are you crazy, for graphics it is Mac and only mac"

When I saw the price tags.. I cared the less for what they said and got and HP laptop. It is turned on almost 80% of the time since I bought it and had not a single problem on this laptop nor the ones I got before. It is extremely fast, I render anything in photoshop just like that. I change them every 2-3 years. Mac was 3 times the price with i5 processor and 13" screen. I got i7 with 15" and double the memory, I said to myself let me change it 3 times in 10 years for me it is better than 1 mac for 10 years!

How long have your had your HP? We were HP die-hards! After 5 years, and FIVE HP's (they were dying from battery/virus/other issues) almost annually, we finally gave the mac a try. I am now going on 2.5 years with my Mac Pro, with no issues. Battery life still the same as the day I bought it, no lagging, tons of memory, just awesome. My HP's were costing $700, plus $150 for Office, $120 for virus software (that did not work), and I would usually pay about $200 to salvage what was on my hard drive when it quit. My brother is now 9 years on his iMac.

I agree, the cost upfront on the mac is more vs HP. . . but the long run cost and durability is far better with the Mac Once you go Mac, you never go Back

 

[unpopular]

Apple still has their own operating system, but the hardware inside a Mac is now essentially the same as the hardware inside a PC.

I could plug a potato onto the SATA bus of any computer, too and it wouldn't much matter. Software is what makes hardware useful.

OS Upgrades cost about $30. There aren't all these different editions (home/professional/enterprise, whatever), all editions are 64-bit. They all have a file server, an apache web server, VNC and backup capabilities built in. Everything you'd really need out of an OS is right there.

You can upgrade to OS X server for like $20, which includes more servers: mail, Wiki collaboration, FTP, WebDAV, network time machine backups and Xsan.

There are far fewer Macs than there are PC's. Consequently, because there are fewer potential buyers, software for Macs is often available some time after a software application is available for PC users.

This is true, but the vast majority of software out there is total garbage, and a good portion of Linux software is directly portable to Mac. I would say at this point not finding a port is the exception rather than the rule.

In Q2 2012 - about 16,000,000 computers were shipped and about 2,000,000 of those were Apple computers, giving Apple a 12.5% market share.

Argumentum ad Populum. Spicegirls sold a lot of albums, too.

 

[mjhoward]

I had the same question about 6 months ago. Mac geeks were like "are you crazy, for graphics it is Mac and only mac"

When I saw the price tags.. I cared the less for what they said and got and HP laptop. It is turned on almost 80% of the time since I bought it and had not a single problem on this laptop nor the ones I got before. It is extremely fast, I render anything in photoshop just like that. I change them every 2-3 years. Mac was 3 times the price with i5 processor and 13" screen. I got i7 with 15" and double the memory, I said to myself let me change it 3 times in 10 years for me it is better than 1 mac for 10 years!

I'm sure the difference in the screen alone was enough to justify the majority of that price difference, let alone a solid aluminum body that doesn't crack and wear, a GLASS trackpad that will look and perform the same in 5 yrs, and significantly higher resale. Resale on a non-Mac laptop after 3 or 4 years is essentially ZERO. On a MacBook, in many cases you can recover more than half of what you paid after the same period of time. Why would anyone pay $800 for 19" Eizo when you can get a 19" Acer monitor for $150?? Why make prints on Fuji Crystal Archive paper when you could get a 500 page ream for $20. After all you'll have the same photo on paper with either choice!

 

[Derrel]

The above post reeks of the word "canard".

<snip>

Amazing how simple this is, isn't it??? see...if something looks like another product, and is made of the same stuff, then the MOST-popular, or highest-volume seller is the BEST!!! ... That's the only conclusion one can draw!

This is the sort of drivel that always seems to result from Ford/Chevy, PC/Mac debates. In this case Derrel evidently didn't even read the post he is trying to ridicule.

Nowhere does KmH conclude that more sales means the "best" computer. He doesn't use the word "best." He draws no conclusion at all, but clearly says, "Draw your own conclusions."

I don't have a dog in this farce. I couldn't care less who uses a Mac, who uses a PC, or why they make those choices. I'm posting on this topic only because Derrel's reply to KmH is not just stupid but patently unfair in misrepresenting what KmH said.

Sorry Peano, but this is farrrrrr from the first time that a certain poster has tried to appear impartial, and then attempted to heap scorn and ridicule on Mac users, the Apple company, and the computing platform that Apple has created over the past several decades. KmH's many posts that attempt to portray the entire Mac world as _____________ (fill in almost any pejorative you would like) are numerous. It is a PATTERN of behavior, of his, that I was responding to--not his snide "draw your own conclusions" ending. It doesn't take a lot of intelligence to see through a canard. I chose the word "canard" very deliberately. For those unfamiliar, perhaps look up the word, and then refer back to the post I was responding to---for an excellent example of a canard. Sorry Peano, but I KNOW, from multiple posts on this subject, what was being implied. Now that he is a moderator, he's changed tactics. One does not need to use the word "best" to write up a nice canard...it's an advanced form of manipulation...the kind really smart people use.

 

[aavivi]

I dunno, to me it boils down to a question of preference. Mac has a very specific look and feel which some people respond to, and some don't. I do agree that Apple marks up their product way too much, while frankly some of their quality has gone down a tad. The OSX is essentially a BSD-based operating system, which for me was the single most important advance from that annoying OS9.
PC's as a hardware do offer you the flexibility that you don't get from a single-source vendor like Apple, but that carries with it the need to make software a lot more tolerant of hardware variations. This basically means you need to abstract the underlying hardware to a degree that loses you some of that hardware flexibility. What good is a motherboard's ability to carry 64 GB of RAM, if the OS can only address 16 GB of it?

Even the discussion of PC vs. Mac is misleading, you need to split it to, HP/Dell/Asus/Samsung/Lenovo vs. Mac and Windows Vista/7/8 vs. Mac OSX.

Then look at the software you use, is it more stable on windows or OSX? Which one gets the updates you care about faster? Are you the person who responds better to 'Command' or do you prefer 'Control'?

In full disclosure, I use windows for work, and Mac OSX for creative apps. And if I have the options of choosing a server - Linux for OS on top of a PC hardware. But that's just me...

Sent from my stone tablet using semaphores

 

[aavivi]

Also, the notion that this topic is 'old' and has been done back in 2004 and 2005 and 2006... Is a bit myopic. Fact of the matter is that both sides of this question have been evolving over the years, and cannot simply be compared to conclusions or arguments drawn in the past. As some people noted, both PC's and Macs now use intel processors, both work great with Samsung monitors, and both utilize either Radeon or Nvidia graphics, which was not necessarily the case back in 2004...

Sent from my stone tablet using semaphores

 

[Britt]

I used a Windows computer before I started using my fiancees Macbook Pro. In all honesty I find the Mac holds up better with my pictures and faster all together (I mean come on it doesn't catch viruses!!)

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Forum Runner

 

[unpopular]

^^ but you shoot polaroid. I'm confused.