PDA

View Full Version : Mac-vs.-PC Argument Has Taken New Twists


MacBytes
Dec 15, 2005, 08:49 PM
http://www.macbytes.com/images/bytessig.gif (http://www.macbytes.com)

Category: Opinion/Interviews
Link: Mac-vs.-PC Argument Has Taken New Twists (http://www.macbytes.com/link.php?sid=20051215214956)

Posted on MacBytes.com (http://www.macbytes.com)
Approved by Mudbug

nagromme
Dec 15, 2005, 09:26 PM
Sounds like someone who doesn't want to like Macs is having a struggle. Welcome aboard! Slowly... :)

"Owning a Mac won't make you smart; using a PC won't make you dumb."

I don't think anyone argues that... they argue the reverse: that being smart can lead you to choose a Mac ;)

His take on security shows a bit of a head-in-the-sand "I don't want to believe" struggle:

"While Macs haven't had trouble with viruses, the security landscape is changing fast. ... In fact, the Mac reputation for being bulletproof worries at least one of my security industry friends. He believes Mac users may be lulled into a false sense of security. ... Microsoft is a brilliant company. Security is high on its agenda these days. People who have bet against Microsoft in the past generally have not profited."

So... there aren't any Mac viruses, but that brings the risk of you worrying TOO LITTLE about viruses... so better use a PC that does have viruses, to keep you feeling properly insecure so that you stay safe from viruses! And besides, Windows will get better some day, honest! :D

And it's a good thing he factored the number of available games into his boss's choice of a business laptop :p THAT doesn't smack of "find a way to repeat the things I know people say are bad about Macs" or anything...

Oh well, give him time. His mind is open more than most, and he already recommends the Mac in many ways.

otter-boy
Dec 15, 2005, 09:41 PM
So... there aren't any Mac viruses, but that brings the risk of you worrying TOO LITTLE about viruses... so better use a PC that does have viruses, to keep you feeling properly insecure so that you stay safe from viruses! And besides, Windows will get better some day, honest! :D


Yeah, I just don't get this "go with the less secure system so that you'll be aware of the vulnerabilities" line of thought. Most people don't know where viruses come from or how to stop them anyway (especially since their anti-virus software is usually several days--if not weeks--behind the threat). Just tell them that there have been no viruses on OS X and over 65,000 on Windows . . . that'll get their attention.

And as for phishers--that's at least a wash, not a mark against Apple. Phishing has nothing to do with the OS and therefore shouldn't be counted when trying to choose which OS (and accompanying hardware) to purchase.

I still doubt that comment that Macs can't run the video for a concert, especially considering that some networks use Macs to broadcast live sports events (such as football games) and synch up all of their stock/pre-taped video during the broadcast. I would imagine that a concert (even a U2 concert) would have lower video demands than an NFL broadcast.

Macs can't handle video? That comment at least demands an explanation of the specific circumstances.

slooksterPSV
Dec 15, 2005, 09:48 PM
Sounds like someone who doesn't want to like Macs is having a struggle. Welcome aboard! Slowly... :)

"Owning a Mac won't make you smart; using a PC won't make you dumb."

I don't think anyone argues that... they argue the reverse: that being smart can lead you to choose a Mac ;)

His take on security shows a bit of a head-in-the-sand "I don't want to believe" struggle:

"While Macs haven't had trouble with viruses, the security landscape is changing fast. ... In fact, the Mac reputation for being bulletproof worries at least one of my security industry friends. He believes Mac users may be lulled into a false sense of security. ... Microsoft is a brilliant company. Security is high on its agenda these days. People who have bet against Microsoft in the past generally have not profited."

So... there aren't any Mac viruses, but that brings the risk of you worrying TOO LITTLE about viruses... so better use a PC that does have viruses, to keep you feeling properly insecure so that you stay safe from viruses! And besides, Windows will get better some day, honest! :D

And it's a good thing he factored the number of available games into his boss's choice of a business laptop :p THAT doesn't smack of "find a way to repeat the things I know people say are bad about Macs" or anything...

Oh well, give him time. His mind is open more than most, and he already recommends the Mac in many ways.

LMAO!!! Anyone see a problem with what I bolded. HAHAHAHAHAHA I have tears in my eyes now.

Photorun
Dec 15, 2005, 10:18 PM
LMAO!!! Anyone see a problem with what I bolded. HAHAHAHAHAHA I have tears in my eyes now.

Problem? Considering how far off base the entire article I just read the problem started when I started with the first word of the article and didn't stop until his last. Yes yes, Microsoft REALLY cares about security.:rolleyes: I mean, how disingenous can this idiot be? And the "buying a peecee doesn't make you dumb," well it surely doesn't make you bright, if you need to install a myriad of programs to keep it malware/spyware/virus free, and even THAT won't guarantee you anything, not to mention crashing more often and less productive than, say, running OS X ever could, I mean, you're right, maybe "dumb" isn't the right word because that implies you maybe lack a level of mental capacity, I think the word "stupid" or "a complete moron" is much more apt to people buying peecees, not to mention agreeing what this arsehat said.

bousozoku
Dec 15, 2005, 10:43 PM
LMAO!!! Anyone see a problem with what I bolded. HAHAHAHAHAHA I have tears in my eyes now.

The funny thing is that MS continues to say that security is a big deal and yet, they continue to produce security holes. I would guess that they create two new holes for each they patch.

If it's not in the same place, it's no longer a threat, is it?

The writer was certainly correct about performance for the money. Apple has never sold cheap power. However, the fact that I'm not worrying as much as with Windows machines.

I saw some newbie on MR recently post that when it comes down to it, WinXP is much more stable than Mac OS X. It doesn't have applications crashing all over the place the way Mac OS X does. I'm still surprised to find people saying this because I've never seen it, even while using 10.0.x. Who knows?

Doctor Q
Dec 15, 2005, 10:56 PM
There have been some security weaknesses discovered in the Mac, just not as many as with the PC.Yeah, sure, go ahead, ignore orders of magnitude and make it sound like Macs are just a bit better in the security area.

He believes Mac users may be lulled into a false sense of security.Oh no! We're too happy with our computers. Somebody had better hurry up and fill our Macs with viruses before it's too late!

mduser63
Dec 15, 2005, 11:42 PM
I saw some newbie on MR recently post that when it comes down to it, WinXP is much more stable than Mac OS X. It doesn't have applications crashing all over the place the way Mac OS X does. I'm still surprised to find people saying this because I've never seen it, even while using 10.0.x. Who knows?

I'm definitely with you on this one. I have had Safari crash probably 5 times in the year and several months I've been using it, and it's running literally 100% of the time that my PowerBook is on (hours everyday). It seems like there was one point release of iPhoto that crashed a little. Other than that, I think I can count the number of app and OS crashes that I've experienced on one hand. That's definitely not my experience with Windows. Even on a well configured, well maintained, malware-free Windows machine, I experienced frequent crashes. Another thing is, I find crashes under OS X to be much less annoying than on Windows. In my experience, force quit always works, whereas ctrl-alt-delete->end task on Windows very rarely works.

Seasought
Dec 15, 2005, 11:42 PM
One thing solidly in the PC's favor: There's no doubt PCs are better gaming machines. Some popular games, including my favorite, "Guild Wars," aren't available for the Mac. And even with the games that are available for both platforms, the PC is the clear winner for power gamers.

I'd love to see this change...with the Mactel jump I certainly hope things will. I still say WoW runs better on my Powerbook.


Microsoft is a brilliant company. Security is high on its agenda these days. People who have bet against Microsoft in the past generally have not profited.

:rolleyes:

LethalWolfe
Dec 15, 2005, 11:58 PM
This guy sounds like he's trying hard to talk up his PC and point out Mac flaws.

Microsoft is a brilliant company.
Successful, yes. Brilliant, no.

Security is high on its agenda these days.
Better late than never I guess.


People who have bet against Microsoft in the past generally have not profited.
Probably because MS illegally used its market position to leverage an unfair advantage.



Lethal

ZildjianKX
Dec 16, 2005, 12:56 AM
I would make the argument that key applications that some businesses rely on aren't available for the mac over games not being available, but that's me (Autocad, etc).

The article is pretty much rubbish.

nagromme
Dec 16, 2005, 12:58 AM
The writer was certainly correct about performance for the money. Apple has never sold cheap power.
Although they sometimes have sold (and still do) the most real-world speed for your dollar for some important tasks and apps. Speed is not a simple measure.

Anyway, I like how he assumes raw computing speed is THE number one priority in choosing a computer for all users.

Speed is the #1 priority for render farms (and for certain classes of games, in terms of 3D GPU). Speed is tied with productivity (and probably security) for #1 priority when dealing with huge pro files like massive photos and layered video. For everyone else... having top speed is of little importance. Most people may shop by GHz numbers out of ignorance, but not out of genuine need. The very principle of the laptop (the best selling category now) is that it's often WORTH giving up speed to have other benefits. So... you find a Dell that has more speed for the same money as a Mac. Does it have the Mac's expansion ports and other hardware details? (Low-end Dells often lack DVI, Firewire, and even a real GPU with dedicated VRAM.) Does it have the Mac's software bundle? I am unable to make Dell come out cheaper than Macs in a real, thorough comparison that doesn't just single out a few chosen specs. A home-built or bargain-bin PC is cheaper of course, but good luck with cheap components and poor support.

greatdevourer
Dec 16, 2005, 01:12 AM
No doubt, some Mac users are normal humans I am not human but from Zarg! We are here to use our superior computers to destroy you weaklings!

But the most, uh, enthusiastic of them redefine the word zealot What about the masses of "anti-zealots", who will have anything but Apple - to quote a friend, "it's the best non iPod out there"

Mac enthusiasts claim the Mac actually is faster than a PC. That's just not true Find me a desktop computer that is even half the equal to the Quad G5

a PC is the only choice for speed-intensive video tasks used in the production Er... wtf? There's a reason why Macs are the industry standard, y'know

There's no doubt PCs are better gaming machines Wrong. Maybe you haven't noticed, but the GameCube (which has better fps than the XBox, even though it doesn't do as high res) as well as all 3 of the next-gen consoles are using PPC. Also, please consider Quake3, the only game that had more done to it than a quick recompile. None of the months/years of optimising that goes into PC games.

Nor is it impossible to create a virus that attacks the Mac's operating system. It's just that no-one's been able to do it yet. And before you say that it's because no-ones tried, people have held contests over this, and still, no-one can. It's the same reason why there are only 9 Linux viruses, one of which is a true "anti-virus" (it would exploit a hole, go in and patch the hole :p)

What an awful article.

Neerazan
Dec 16, 2005, 05:24 AM
Not wishing to defend the guy and his article too much, but the reference he made to Apples not being able to keep pace with PCs for intensive video stuff, I read it to be refering to laptops. If that wasn't the case the man is obviously an ass, quad core G5s and all that... :)

And if it was a reference to laptops, well that'll all change in a few months (or weeks?) once the Intel Powebooks are unleased with native video apps (and as a lot of 'em are Apple apps, they should be along right away).

angelwatt
Dec 16, 2005, 08:16 AM
...using a PC won't make you dumb....

Okay, sure it won't make you dumber, but I do believe PC users have higher blood pressure and stress than Mac users. Any Doctors out there want to run an experiment? Using a mac is just a healthier solution for users. At work I constently hear my co-worker screaming at the computer (with WinXP) about it not doing something right, and generally it is not from user error. She'd be a lot less stressed and vocal if we had macs to do our work on.

AlmostThere
Dec 16, 2005, 08:32 AM
I would have thought so too, until I found myself in an all Mac office. "Bloody Apple" was a direct substitute for "Bloody Microsoft". Plus ca change ...

Dane D.
Dec 16, 2005, 11:01 AM
Here I sit typing away on a G4/467. Pushing 5 yrs old and still handling my work load with ease. I am always connected to the internet, file sharing is always on. I just never experience these crashes people talk about. My opinion is that the users is to blame for 99% of computer problems. Just watch a PC users and see the way they do stuff. It is like nails on a chalkboard. I think PC users are jealous and in denial for using a sup-par computer. In many ways PC users are like the Liberals, always whining, always name calling, always saying 'that's not fair', but never have an answer to the problem. They just think more 'time and money' will find a solution. Like MS, always spending money on security issues but never getting anywhere. The whole article was BS, this report is headed for the bird cage as it is only good for that. Just hope the bird can't read, he might take offense to me lining his cage with MS trash.

shamino
Dec 16, 2005, 12:10 PM
And as for phishers--that's at least a wash, not a mark against Apple. Phishing has nothing to do with the OS and therefore shouldn't be counted when trying to choose which OS (and accompanying hardware) to purchase.
Phishing works because of bug-ridden users, not computers.

greatdevourer
Dec 16, 2005, 12:12 PM
Phishing works because of bug-ridden users, not computers. (off my shirt) "Social Engineer - Because There's No Patch For Human Stupidity"

shamino
Dec 16, 2005, 12:22 PM
a PC is the only choice for speed-intensive video tasks used in the production
Er... wtf? There's a reason why Macs are the industry standard, y'know
Cite the full quote:
Even a Mac-fanatic professional techie, who travels with rock band U2, explained to me a few weeks ago that a PC is the only choice for speed-intensive video tasks used in the production.
This sounds like U2 uses custom software to provide live video effects during concerts. (Am I close? I've never been to a U2 concert.)

If so, then his assertion would depend on what software is being used and how it's written. If it's a purchased program, there may not be a Mac program with similar features. If it's a custom-written program, porting it may be prohibitively difficult. And clearly, using VPC for something like that would be nuts.

Working with the assumption of custom-software and with the assumption that the code is portable (both of which are blind guesses), the nature of the code could easily produce this conclusion. If it's all straight x86 code without multithreading, a PC's 50% higher clock speed will give it a huge advantage over any PPC-based Mac.

But if it uses system libraries (like OpenGL), then you're now involving hardware acceleration of the video cards, making the choice of CPU and OS less significant.

It would be really interesting to know the details, but I suspect we'll never be able to find out.

Doctor Q
Dec 16, 2005, 12:31 PM
Because There's No Patch For Human StupidityWe really ought to get working on that. Of course, if we had such a patch, some people would download it but forget to run it.

SummerBreeze
Dec 16, 2005, 01:36 PM
The thing that bothered me about this article was that it didn't seem to try to prove anything. It talks about how Macs aren't as fast, but that you should consider them anyway, but that Microsoft always wins. Incoherent and inconsistant writing makes me insanely angry.

dejo
Dec 16, 2005, 01:49 PM
We really ought to get working on that. Of course, if we had such a patch, some people would download it but forget to run it.

Actually, I've heard you have to wear this patch on your shoulder, just like the nicotine patch. :)

slooksterPSV
Dec 16, 2005, 11:05 PM
This should be M$ new slogan - "Microsoft: Big brother makes security holes and is watching you."

Belly-laughs
Dec 17, 2005, 12:11 AM
Mac-vs.-PC Argument Has Taken New Twists… What "new twists"? I don´t see "new twists" in argumentation until Macs go Intel.