Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

A Month with a Mac: A Die-Hard PC User's Perspective

cb911

cb911

macrumors 601
Original poster
Mar 12, 2002
4,134
4
BrisVegas, Australia
i just found this article from some dude's blog. i did a search for it here, and was surprised that no one posted this yet.

i haven't read the whole thing yet, but i seems really intersting. it's not quite a review of anything, just an article on a 'die-hard' PC users experience with a Mac. and from what i've read so far, it seems that it's not written with any bias, i think the author is trying to be as open-minded as possible.

and the article: http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2232
 
I'm afraid that this has been posted before... recently, within the last 4 weeks or so.

Can't find exactly where, but I'm sure somebody will dig it out.
 
You can tell when he says, "Internet Explorer for the Mac is basically a piece of garbage." He's being Objective!!

Also I agree with his assessment of OS X Office...

"There are clear differences between the Mac and Windows Office interface that are seemingly unnecessary because the changes made to the Mac version don't exactly make the suite fit in any better with OS X as the application still feels very un-Mac-like. Instead, it seems that the changes to Office were made for the sake of making the suite different than its Windows counterpart, which doesn't make much sense at all to me.
"

I do love OS X and Apples H/W, but OS X does need a huge shot of fat-cutting and Office needs a serious re-factoring... fortunately the former should be fixed with Tiger! :)
 
I enjoyed that article— right up until the last line- when he suggested that Apple might do good, business wise, by offering up some Macs for PC users on a 30 day trial period...lol... I'm sure that was tongue in cheek, but it did bring up some crazy memories... lol.. Been there, done that, not going back...;-)...
 
iLife anyone?

I was enjoying the article until I came to the end and realized that not once did he bring up iLife or the Pro User Suite with DVDSP and FCPHD. I truly think that these products are the a huge factor with anyone who has made the switch.
 
Hmmm...

That dudes blog looks like a Windows GUI interface, *****ty design. With all he did, it could have been done on a G4 -- no need to blow 3k (+/-). Maybe he should have compared rendering video and audio to get a real perspective of how fast a G5 really is compared to a WinBlows machine.

<off topic>

This morning I went to my friend's house to show him how to burn a CD. We had a 2.8Ghz P4, Windows Media Player, 512MB DDR, and a 32x10x40x CD-RW. It took > 30 minutes to rip, convert (from WMA to Audio), and burn the CD. :rolleyes:

My 500Mhz ibook G3 can rip and burn in < 20 minutes using iTunes. :p

</off topic>
 
chanoc said:
That dudes blog looks like a Windows GUI interface, *****ty design. With all he did, it could have been done on a G4 -- no need to blow 3k (+/-). Maybe he should have compared rendering video and audio to get a real perspective of how fast a G5 really is compared to a WinBlows machine.

<off topic>

This morning I went to my friend's house to show him how to burn a CD. We had a 2.8Ghz P4, Windows Media Player, 512MB DDR, and a 32x10x40x CD-RW. It took > 30 minutes to rip, convert (from WMA to Audio), and burn the CD. :rolleyes:

My 500Mhz ibook G3 can rip and burn in < 20 minutes using iTunes. :p

</off topic>
Click to expand...

Too hilarious. You think that 2.8 P4 had something to do with ripping time? I can rip/burn in under 8 mins if i used dbPowerAMP. Whether I had my 800 Tbird, my friend's 2000+ or my overclocked Barton, it would all rip at the same speed. dbPowerAMP is free software folks, and one of the most used rippers (since early 98).

If you're friend is using Windows Media Player to do it, i mean, what do you expect?
 
It has been a very difficult article to write, and I hope that all of the people to whom I'm writing at least gained something useful out of this - I know that I did.
Click to expand...

Nope, I gained nothing from the article. Next....
 
5300cs said:
Nope, I gained nothing from the article. Next....
Click to expand...
I gained something from it. I didn't know previously that you could hold command to highlight text and drag images from a window without making it active, which is very useful.

Overall, it was a nice article.
 
XnavxeMiyyep said:
I gained something from it. I didn't know previously that you could hold command to highlight text and drag images from a window without making it active, which is very useful.

Overall, it was a nice article.
Click to expand...
yeah a lot of the key commands he mentions are cool. It was only about the things he does on his computer which i think limited it in a way. There was no discussion of WMP for mac and how crap that is. There is a lot of software that is missing that he could have whined about. Likewise there was no mention of iphoto or imovie/final cut, or how plug and play a lot of hardware for mac is. But i did really enjoy hearing about all the keyboard shortcuts. There were a bunch of mail shortcuts that I didn't know about too.
 
chanoc said:
This morning I went to my friend's house to show him how to burn a CD. We had a 2.8Ghz P4, Windows Media Player, 512MB DDR, and a 32x10x40x CD-RW. It took > 30 minutes to rip, convert (from WMA to Audio), and burn the CD. :rolleyes:

My 500Mhz ibook G3 can rip and burn in < 20 minutes using iTunes. :p
Click to expand...
My 3.5 year old athlon 1000MHz home brew can do it in under 10. What's you point. I'll have a video made up to prove it if you want.
 
But much like the U.S. election system, although there may be the illusion of multiple options for your OS, in reality, there is really only one. If you want any sort of software compatibility, driver support and don't want to be made fun of, Windows is the way to go. There have been righteous attempts by smaller OSes to gain traction, and some of them have (e.g. Linux), but for the most part, we're dealing with a one-party OS system. Now that's not necessarily a bad thing; quite contrary, in fact. I believe that Windows XP is the best thing to ever come out of Redmond and I have very few issues with the OS. I actually liked the XP theme when it first came out and I've been happier with Windows XP than any previous Microsoft OS (except maybe the good ol' DOS days). When installed on the right hardware with the right drivers (and with an eye to be wary of poorly written apps), I found that Windows XP was just as stable as any other OS that I'd ever encountered. My personal machine would go months between reboots without a single problem. It's not that there is anything wrong with Windows; it's that if you want the option, if there's any particular thing that you don't like about the way Windows works, you're straight out of luck.
Click to expand...

This bit completely did it for me. Couldn't take it seriously after that (although I tried...)
 
Let me guess, you doubted his claims of stability?

My friends at college have easily left their XP boxes running for over 2-3 months. And they don't even keep it as clean as me (JV16 PowerTools/Spybot/Firefox). Anandtech's claims aren't that suprising, but if you choose to just shake your head and believe what you want to believe, that's your choice too.

(if XP was as unstable as the zealots on this board to be, why would there be so many PC enthusiasts, overclockers, tweakers? If it was crashing as much as the MR members would like to believe, there'd be little if any PC enthusiasts left. However this is more of a RDF issue than anything else, so I'm just going to stop there).

Mac users refusing to believe the claims of a PC enthusiast? This is even more hypocritical than a Mac user saying a PC users hasn't tried a Mac, when the Mac user hasn't even tried a box built by an enthusiast (non-Dell/HP junk). I've tried a Mac (G5's), own a Mac, and I own a enthusiast box (self-built) so I would hope you are coming from the same level here. I truly hope so.
 
Mav451 said:
(if XP was as unstable as the zealots on this board to be, why would there be so many PC enthusiasts, overclockers, tweakers?
Click to expand...

Not contradicting you, but let's face it. If you want to build your own machine, you can't really do it with a Mac. You can make your own box, sure, but you need to have a Mac ROM to do so, and to get one of those, you need to buy one. So, that avenue is kinda closed for Mac zealots.

That said, I still think that the best thing about my Mac is that I don't notice it when I'm working on it, whereas my PC is just in my face, not doing things I want it to do, not taking care of buisness. Still, I need it for work so I just put up with it.

I guess the car analogy would be something like this - people don't pimp their Mercedes and Jaguars, but they most certainly do pimp their Ford Escorts...

If you're into building your own PC, way to go and I fully support that. I actually just appreciate the work that Apple has put into the hardware and OS and apps so that they *mostly* just do the job... But I think it would be nice to see home-build Macs...
 
i agree with 5300cs, simply because the author is being narrow minded by saying that you really only have one choice of OS for compatibility, now for some people this may be true, i dont doubt that windows XP properly taken care of is stable, but i do doubt the fact that it is many people's only option. I only use macs and im fine, plenty of people get by using Linux and OS X with no issues, the author is being biased against other OSes simply because Windows is his territory. Windows is good for some things true, but nothing i need because i havent run into any problems with my mac
 
Colonel Panik said:
Not contradicting you, but let's face it. If you want to build your own machine, you can't really do it with a Mac. You can make your own box, sure, but you need to have a Mac ROM to do so, and to get one of those, you need to buy one. So, that avenue is kinda closed for Mac zealots.

That said, I still think that the best thing about my Mac is that I don't notice it when I'm working on it, whereas my PC is just in my face, not doing things I want it to do, not taking care of buisness. Still, I need it for work so I just put up with it.

I guess the car analogy would be something like this - people don't pimp their Mercedes and Jaguars, but they most certainly do pimp their Ford Escorts...

If you're into building your own PC, way to go and I fully support that. I actually just appreciate the work that Apple has put into the hardware and OS and apps so that they *mostly* just do the job... But I think it would be nice to see home-build Macs...
Click to expand...

I think you misunderstood what i meant. I said, PC users are coming from the perspective of their SELF-built, Name-brand component boxes. Are the Mac users, who criticize PC's, trying these kind of PCs? Or are they still comparing their experiences to your run-of-the-mill Dell/HP system? If you compare experiences to experiences, Mac users and PC users aren't even comparing the SAME THING.

Have Mac users tried a self-built box, say for example, like mine? To know what MY SHOES are like? (i.e. the expression the shoe representing my experiences and POV). Now, I admit now that I have only used library/Lab condition G5's (10.3.3). I, however, do have an iBook, which I use when I'm in my bed/couch. (that is only experience with 10.2 in the home though).
 
chanoc said:
This morning I went to my friend's house to show him how to burn a CD. We had a 2.8Ghz P4, Windows Media Player, 512MB DDR, and a 32x10x40x CD-RW. It took > 30 minutes to rip, convert (from WMA to Audio), and burn the CD.
Click to expand...
It only takes me a couple of minutes to rip and burn on my PC... using iTunes of course. You can also do it with Nero, or when I used to do it with Easy CD Creator (which was a pain in the butt). If you are talking built-in software like WMP, there's your problem. Especially with the re-encoding. That is a pain, and time consuming.
 
Mav451 said:
Mac users refusing to believe the claims of a PC enthusiast? This is even more hypocritical than a Mac user saying a PC users hasn't tried a Mac, when the Mac user hasn't even tried a box built by an enthusiast (non-Dell/HP junk). I've tried a Mac (G5's), own a Mac, and I own a enthusiast box (self-built) so I would hope you are coming from the same level here. I truly hope so.
Click to expand...

Here we go again :rolleyes:

YES, I've built my own machine before. Many times. If I want a quick and dirty Linux server I'll go out and make my own. But everytime some pc user tries a Mac, I'm supposed to drop everything and listen to them like they're some Oracle or something? Gimme a break...

What is it with you and building your own machine? Are you on some quest or something? Do you enjoy arguing with Mac people because you know they can't build their own machines?
 
Mav451 said:
If you compare experiences to experiences, Mac users and PC users aren't even comparing the SAME THING.

Have Mac users tried a self-built box, say for example, like mine?
Click to expand...

Well said and very valid. At the moment I really believe hardware comes down to choice of OS. I've built every PC I've ever owned but they've always had Linux or *BSD on them. I switched to Mac over a year ago because Panther imho is the best UNIX desktop out there.

Your points about the stability of XP are valid too. I use an XP box at work and other than apps sitting there blank then drawing in a little later (rare but it happens) it's as stable as Linux or OS X. It also has a shed load more software (including viruses/malware crap), but it's not UNIX so it's not something I'd use at home.

The whole Hardware/OS thing though is pointless use what you want!
 
I've built my own PCs before. Explorer seems to crash on me all the time. Everything else is usually fine, except maybe certain apps that hog all my resources and slow my PC to a crawl, but Explorer (and not just IE, I use FireFox) seems very susceptible to errors. Most of the time it's pretty stable if I'm not trying to do too much with good hardware. But when it goes down, it really goes down. I've seen Blue Screens with software errors too, and a lot of data corruption out of nowhere for no reason. Plus, it's more difficult to install Win2000 on a 200GB hard drive than it should be. Even with on-board ATA/133.

Edit: Ha, spell check doesn't like the word FireFox. How do you like that?
 
solvs said:
I've built my own PCs before. Explorer seems to crash on me all the time. Everything else is usually fine, except maybe certain apps that hog all my resources and slow my PC to a crawl, but Explorer (and not just IE, I use FireFox) seems very susceptible to errors. Most of the time it's pretty stable if I'm not trying to do too much with good hardware. But when it goes down, it really goes down. I've seen Blue Screens with software errors too, and a lot of data corruption out of nowhere for no reason. Plus, it's more difficult to install Win2000 on a 200GB hard drive than it should be. Even with on-board ATA/133.

Edit: Ha, spell check doesn't like the word FireFox. How do you like that?
Click to expand...

The explorer.exe problem was very common on XP vanilla. If you installed SP1 as a service pack onto of XP vanilla, you still had the problem. How did I fix it? Clean install. University has XP Pro w/ SP1 Integrated for cheap, so that's what I use. No more explorer.exe problems. That's a ditto with SP2 as well, but SP2 is more security oriented.

Yeah, the 137GB 48-bit LBA limitation pre-XP SP1 is nonsense. Add to that, it requires a slip-streamed custom XP install to install SATA w/o a floppy. I'm still on PATA.
 
lkjl;kjlkjlkj

In this "what crashes more XP or OSX?" debate your all basing your ideas on experiences without looking at their individual context.

Generally the harder u push a PC, or a mac, the more it crashes. Most crashes are either caused by drivers installed/uninstalled repeatedly, bad drivers, memory errors, or internet explorer.

Some of your here are comparing OSX to windows, and yet youve said it in your own posts that u use them both for different purposes. Thats really hardly comparing them on an even playing field is it?
Some of you are even saying that youve used 1 or the other briefly and that "from your experience" theyre roughly the same.
Well sorry, but you cant base any ideas on briefly using a product, or even using the 2 products for different purposes.

If you want to compare them both to find out if XP is as bad as some say, then you push both machines hard in a series of similar apps, over a long perios of time. Thats experience.

From my experience, XP is no way as bad as mac zealots will tell u, and for most light users it will appear roughly as stable as OSX.
But if u push both hard, constantly installing/uninstalling different drivers, running apps, pushing both machines to the limits of their allocated memory; then things start to go a little wrong for XP. Normally ending in a reformat and reinstallation. OSX however keeps alot stabler, not perfect, but stabler. Also, when memory gets tight explorer has a habit of crashing, which is annoying. I have to reinstall XP woughly twice a year after it confuses itself, i reinstall OSX roughly once every 18 months.
OSX is stabler. But windows is not the virus it was in the ME or 98 days.

theres my 2 pence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back