Difference between Mac/PC

[dscuber9000]

You don't buy Macs for technical specs, you buy them for the Operating System they come with (Mac OS X). My new MacBook Pro is half the specs of my PC desktop, yet everything from iTunes to the Internet runs so much faster.

And with Windows-compatibility software for Mac all over the place, I don't see much reason to get a PC. All of the best PC games from the mid-90s will easily work on your Mac.

 

[jonbravo77]

You don't buy Macs for technical specs, you buy them for the Operating System they come with (Mac OS X). My new MacBook Pro is half the specs of my PC desktop, yet everything from iTunes to the Internet runs so much faster.

I get what you are saying here with the exception of why you are even comparing a laptop against a desktop?

 

[Kobra]

Regarding Windows applications not available in Mac OS X:



-Microsoft Access
-Real Microsoft Excel (VBA)
-Microsoft Streets & Trips (or any useful navigation and trip planning software)
-Vista Media Center (Boxee and Front Row do not compare)
-MyMovies and various other Media Center applications
-Slysoft AnyDVD (RipIt is close, but no cigar)
-Real 64-bit Photoshop

There are plenty of others, but that is what I have personally run into as a user. That is why I have both operating systems.

VMware and Bootcamp take care of this for me.

I find it hilarious that out of the seven applications you put in your list over "app's that wont run on OS X" four is Microsoft products That would be like saying "I don't want to use Windows OS because iMovie, iPhoto, iWeb or any of the other Apple programs wont run on it"

I give you right on MS Access, there's OS X alternatives that will give you the same functionality but if you must open a MS Access file your bound to the MS application in question. On the other hand, if you need to open a Bento db, your out of luck if Windows is your OS... same, same...just the opposite...

But I would question any one who says there isn't a OS X equivalent of any given Windows application! You just need to google more...

 

[Kobra]

...decent freeware that handles all video format conversion...

I give you:
V L C

 

[Schraiber]

One of the things that I've seen that tend to trip up Windows users is the concept of having an Application still running, but with zero currently open windows. For example, in Windows, when you close the last document, MS-Word (or whatever) also quits.


-hh

This used to really, REALLY bother me, but for some reason I kind of like it now? I don't really know why... I guess I feel like it gives me more options for how I want to manage my multitasking. Back in the day, this feature sucked because it would mean your RAM was getting eaten up like crazy if you were stupid---but now there seems to be enough RAM to make this feature actually what it "should be", i.e. you don't need to distinguish between applications that are closed and applications that are running.

 

[dhean]

It's ironic how a lot of people rave about the stability of Apple software. iTunes on my XP machine crashes every single time I try to exit the program and I've been using the latest released versions for the past year. Never used a Windows software this badly designed (from a technical standpoint).

 

[getz76]

I find it hilarious that out of the seven applications you put in your list over "app's that wont run on OS X" four is Microsoft products That would be like saying "I don't want to use Windows OS because iMovie, iPhoto, iWeb or any of the other Apple programs wont run on it"

I give you right on MS Access, there's OS X alternatives that will give you the same functionality but if you must open a MS Access file your bound to the MS application in question. On the other hand, if you need to open a Bento db, your out of luck if Windows is your OS... same, same...just the opposite...

But I would question any one who says there isn't a OS X equivalent of any given Windows application! You just need to google more...

Microsoft sells software for Macs. Apple makes software for PCs. What's the issue?

Functionality is great. You know, BetaMax was better than VHS. But I don't need to open a Bento database. I need to open Microsoft Access databases.

Same with Microsoft Excel. Numbers? No thank you. Ask anyone who needs the statistical add-ons. There are alternatives, but Excel is pervasive.

Vista Media Center is the heart of my home theater, and it has a rather strong community development and support. It is not perfect (mostly due to DCM from content providers), but it is by far the best I have used. I am actually considering buying a Mac Mini (now that they have a better IGP) with a USB Blu-ray drive to run Windows 7 for my home theater. It will be smaller than my current Shuttle SFF media center with about the same power. DaemonTools plus MyMovies plus a fabulous official Netflix Add-on makes for quite a nice setup. I canceled HBO.

MS Streets & Trips was an example because it has a huge market share; mapping and navigation software on a Mac is not mature.

 

[Bakey]

Oh, come now. Do you really think that I don't understand that quite a few people are running things through translators here?

Of course there are. I've always been understanding with non-native speakers.

I sincerely hope you're not referring to me given that I'm a born and bred Englishman who is indeed a "native speaker" (as you so insincerely put it).

Your arrogance never ceases to amaze me! And "no" that wasn't a compliment...

 

[dlhuss]

I give you:
V L C

I said CONVERSION, not playback.

 

[-hh]

Regarding Windows applications not available in Mac OS X:

The general problem with such lists is that since the Mac is not targeted at the Enterprise, the question arises as to which of these applications are really relevant to the consumer demographic.

For example, Pro/Engineer isn't available for Mac OS X either. However, since one (1) seat's foundation licence is north of $5,000 (plus another $1K+/year maintenance), the hardware costs end up being functionally secondary. And that's before we ask ourselvs how many non-business "Home Users" of 3D CAD programs such as Pro/E really exist.

-Microsoft Access

Yet MS-Access is "popular" essentially only because it is bundled for free in MS-Office. Ignoring database transferability questions, what specific capability exists in Access that cannot be done by Filemaker, or even Bento under OS X?

-Real Microsoft Excel (VBA)

The Mactopia team has admitted that they screwed up and IIRC, that VBA is going to be restored for the next Mac Office version. Until then, can one simply not just choose to use the prior version of Mac Office?

-Microsoft Streets & Trips (or any useful navigation and trip planning software)

Streets & Maps alone doesn't support areas outside of the USA/Canada, so its clearly a YMMV...and AutoRoute Europe doesn't particularly sound like it will help me with pedestrian maps to/from Rail/Metro stops.

-Vista Media Center (Boxee and Front Row do not compare)
-MyMovies and various other Media Center applications
-Slysoft AnyDVD (RipIt is close, but no cigar)

Sorry, not familiar with these to comment; not my type of media.

-Real 64-bit Photoshop

Which you need today for precisely...what?

The reason I ask is because I'm currently able to open up ~250 megapixels' worth of images in 32-bit versions of Photoshop (Win & Mac) and I find that its only consuming 2GB of RAM (link here).

Since the RAM limit for 32bit is higher than 2GB (IIRC, its 3.5GB in Windows), this means that even at 250MP "consumed", there's still a healthy amount of headroom before one would bump up against the ceiling on the 32-64bit upgrade issue.

There are plenty of others, but that is what I have personally run into as a user.

Wonderful, for this means that you can provide very specific information on the above Photoshop 64 bit needs question: what photo equipment is being used, how many adjustment layers, stitches, etc...that must by definition be in excess of ~4GB of RAM addressibility. FYI, screen shots would help here too.

FWIW, I'm not trying to be a jerk, but merely recognizing that while 64bit is eventually coming, I have my doubts as to if it is a "nice to have" versus a "must have" today in 2009.

For example, I recognize that cameras like the $2,700 Canon EOS 5Dmk2 are currently at 21MP, which at 250MP means 11+ layers/HDRs/stitches are still within 2GB for 32-bit as I've already experienced.

As such, while I don't doubt that there's a few folks who really need 64bit today, I don't really believe that the need for 64bit has yet emerged as an important requirement for a significant portion of photographers. Proverbially, there's perhaps 0.1% of photographers out there today who can take advantage of it, but for the rest of us, its IMO very unlikely for it to occur before 2012-2013, if not much later...which means CS5 (2010) or CS6 (2012), plus new hardware.

To this end, it would be quite illustrative to those of us who don't need 64-bit yet to hear of the specifics of those who do need 64-bit today, so that we may gage from their level of application if we'll be doing something similar in a few years, or if we're potentially "Never" going to try to address that large of a workspace (and thus "never" need 64-bit).


-hh

 

[getz76]

Yet MS-Access is "popular" essentially only because it is bundled for free in MS-Office. Ignoring database transferability questions, what specific capability exists in Access that cannot be done by Filemaker, or even Bento under OS X?

I totally agree that Access is ubiquitous because of its bundling in Office Professional. It is actually a terrible database implementation if you ask me, and I actually studied database administration as an undergraduate. However, it is.

Streets & Maps alone doesn't support areas outside of the USA/Canada, so its clearly a YMMV...and AutoRoute Europe doesn't particularly sound like it will help me with pedestrian maps to/from Rail/Metro stops.

Autoroute is pretty fantastic, actually, if you have a need for it. It helped me through Ireland and through parts of non-easily rail-accessible Italy.

If you are not driving, probably not terribly useful.

Regarding Photoshop 64-bit6

Which you need today for precisely...what?

The reason I ask is because I'm currently able to open up ~250 megapixels' worth of images in 32-bit versions of Photoshop (Win & Mac) and I find that its only consuming 2GB of RAM (link here).

Since the RAM limit for 32bit is higher than 2GB (IIRC, its 3.5GB in Windows), this means that even at 250MP "consumed", there's still a healthy amount of headroom before one would bump up against the ceiling on the 32-64bit upgrade issue.

Fair question. The link you set up was for a jpeg. I am currently shooting a Nikon D3 and will likely purchase a D3x when the next refresh happens. I page out now, and I am running 4gb of memory. The D3x raw files are over 30mb out of the camera (14-bit, 24mp). For portrait work, depending on the subject, there can be as many at 16 layers (sharpening, skin touch up, texture, levels, colors, etc). And usually for portrait work, I will have Bridge open and at least a pair of photos open in Photoshop. Files get big in a hurry. Paging out is common, and I tend to not have anything else open other than Bridge and Photoshop. Running filters like surface blur will hit your memory and your processor rather hard. Access to 8gb of RAM would reduce page outs and in theory speed up the entire process.

I do not shoot many landscapes, but when I do, I tend to stitch 5 or so images together.

If the CS5 update is 64-bit for Mac, I'll upgrade to 8gb gleefully.

If I recall correctly, Ars did some benchmarking at 16gb of memory. For most uses, Photoshop Mac OS X vs. Photoshop Vista 64-bit was pretty even on similar hardware, which a slight edge to the Mac side. However, with very large files, the 64-bit Vista won handily. I have both Vista 64-bit and Photoshop CS4 for Windows on a comparable PC, but that machine only has 4gbs of memory and I am not planning on upgrading it.

 

[-hh]

I totally agree that Access is ubiquitous because of its bundling in Office Professional. It is actually a terrible database implementation if you ask me, and I actually studied database administration as an undergraduate. However, it is.

Exactly my point. Since the Home/Student versions of Office don't include Access, then it isn't automatically justified as "free". Add to that how it is technically horrible, then we may as well consider alternative solutions. For existing databases, there's always a way to export (eg, tab delimited, etc)

Autoroute is pretty fantastic, actually, if you have a need for it. It helped me through Ireland and through parts of non-easily rail-accessible Italy.

If you are not driving, probably not terribly useful.

Within the USA, I'd expect that an automotive GPS ("Tom-Tom", etc) for not much more than the Microsoft software is going to be the way to go. I used my boss's on a recent trip to California and was pleasantly surprised with it.

For the most part, I just use Google maps...domestic & international.

Regarding Photoshop 64-bit6


Fair question. The link you set up was for a jpeg.

That .jpeg was merely a screenshot showing Activity Monitor ... its from a 2008 discussion (elsewhere) where someone was claiming that having more than 1.5GB of total RAM was a "waste" on (any) computer, since Photoshop couldn't even address more than 1.5GB. The screenshot disproved the claim.

I am currently shooting a Nikon D3 and will likely purchase a D3x when the next refresh happens. I page out now, and I am running 4gb of memory. The D3x raw files are over 30mb out of the camera (14-bit, 24mp).

I have a pair of older Canon 20D (8MP) ... and was about to pull the trigger on the 5Dmk2 (21MP) when the Antarctica trip hardware failure report was posted on Luminous Landsape. I'll upgrade the Mac hardware whenver I finally pull the trigger. Maybe in the next month or two, as my wife is interested in going to Petra, Jordan.

For portrait work, depending on the subject, there can be as many at 16 layers (sharpening, skin touch up, texture, levels, colors, etc). And usually for portrait work, I will have Bridge open and at least a pair of photos open in Photoshop. Files get big in a hurry. Paging out is common, and I tend to not have anything else open other than Bridge and Photoshop. Running filters like surface blur will hit your memory and your processor rather hard. Access to 8gb of RAM would reduce page outs and in theory speed up the entire process.

Interesting, as 12MP on the D3 times 16 layers is figuratively <200MP before filters, etc. Although I do agree that Bridge is bloaty. Since my G5 dates from 2003, I try to avoid running both at once.

The actual "200MP" image in question was a stress test I had done on a Firewire scanner: a max-rez scan of a Kodachrome slide ... 17,433 x 11,551 pixels before trimming. In Photoshop (.PSD) format, its roughly 1GB in size on the hard disk...although I can't recall the bit depth. The .jpeg coincidentally shows page in/outs of 51,110 / 1,148 ... roughly 2%, which was with 3.5GB on a PPC G5 PowerMac running Tiger (10.4.x)...being PPC might have something to do with this.

I do not shoot many landscapes, but when I do, I tend to stitch 5 or so images together.

I suspected that it was probably a multiplicative combination of both layers and stitches.

If the CS5 update is 64-bit for Mac, I'll upgrade to 8gb gleefully.

That's what the claimed plan was, back in early 2008. If they remain alligned with their past release schedules, I'd expect CS5 to come out roughly Spring 2010. Not too long of a wait.

If I recall correctly, Ars did some benchmarking at 16gb of memory. For most uses, Photoshop Mac OS X vs. Photoshop Vista 64-bit was pretty even on similar hardware, which a slight edge to the Mac side. However, with very large files, the 64-bit Vista won handily. I have both Vista 64-bit and Photoshop CS4 for Windows on a comparable PC, but that machine only has 4gbs of memory and I am not planning on upgrading it.

Invariably, we're going to run into instances where we push the capability of whatever technology we happen to have on that day. For the generic home consumer user, the generic argument is that they're not even going to be using Photoshop...and if they use Lightroom v2, its already 64 bit on the Mac.


-hh

 

[getz76]

Autoroute/Streets & Trips is a different beast. It really is set up for planning a trip; the turn-by-turn navigation is a bonus. For trip planning, it can be wonderful if you are the type that plans trips in details. Length of stops, waypoints, etc. Much easier to deal with than a GPS unit or Google/Yahoo maps. We did this for European touring as well as a US West Coast tour. Wonderful. The nice thing about having it on the laptop is that you can also change on the fly with ease. It is not going to make or break, but something I would miss if there was no Windows via Bootcamp or VMware Fusion.

Right, got it. I was confused on the linked file you sent.

Bridge is bloaty, but very useful. I like the idea of Lightroom, but for portrait work with manipulation, Photoshop is still where it is at.

Interesting, as 12MP on the D3 times 16 layers is figuratively <200MP before filters, etc. Although I do agree that Bridge is bloaty. Since my G5 dates from 2003, I try to avoid running both at once.

I am not sure of the math, but I am thinking Photoshop is handling the file differently in a way that bloats; history data, etc. I don't know. I am sure, though, that Photoshop pages out. A system should not page out with 4gb RAM with this type of application. I would assume that a 64-bit Mac OS X with a 64-bit Photoshop CS5 will alleviate the problem.

CS4 is much better than CS2 or CS3 in my opinion (which is not shared by many).

Not to say that my Photoshop experience is terrible or anything. It is equivalent to my Vista 64-bit experience, actually. No real issues whatsoever. However, snappier is better. I remember when running Gaussian blur in Photoshop 4.0 on a large scan meant you could go get a cup of coffee. Glad those days are over.

Off-topic: The 5DmkII is a fabulous camera. If your hands fit on a Canon, don't hesitate. I loved it, and the IQ is fabulous. I fail to function without a second command wheel, though. I tried and it just never worked for me.

 

[midgetsanchez]

The ONLY thing about OSX that I don't understand is the lack of a "cut" option when it comes to moving files. If you right click a file, you can copy it, but you can't cut and paste it. You can drag it to another folder to move it, but that requires two finder windows and is a lot more hassle.

Cut and paste is a very standard, simple feature. It's been a part of every version of windows and even linux. Why does it not exist in OSX?


For those of you that have used OSX all your lives and don't know what cut and paste is or how it works(*shudder*), you simply right click to a file to "cut" it. The file becomes grayed out(letting you know that you just cut it) but is still in its original location. Then you go into the destination folder and right-click paste. The file is then moved to the destination folder.

If you cut a file and forget to paste it, and end up cutting/copying something else, the file is NOT lost - it simply stays in its original folder. It just DOESN'T make sense to me why Apple left this feature out, it's so basic...as a former windows user I find it extremely odd having to need two finder windows in order to move files.

Cut and paste is like dragging and dropping(while holding the command key) to move, except without the dragging and dropping. It's a lot more intuitive and simple.

I think there's a way of adding Cut & paste though through an add-on, I'm looking into it. Does anyone know more about this?

 

[patrixl]

I use only 1 window to move files, usually...

It's so easy with the column view. And even in other views, thanks to spring-loaded folders, I don't need to have 2 windows open..

Makes me wonder why Windows Explorer doesn't have such a basic feature that's been on the Mac for as long as I've been using them, why would I need to "cut" and "paste" files when files aren't something that logically are cut and pasted (unlike bits of text, pictures, etc)...

(just throwing this in, as there are always 2 sides - or more - to everything, and just because cut/paste is so obvious to a Windows user doesn't mean it's THE way or that OS X should behave the same way...)


As for the original question (which diverged into wild arguing about esoteric CAD applications that surely the original poster didn'T ask about), here's my view on it:

When you buy a PC, you buy numbers. What I mean is you buy GHz, GB, RPMs, whatever it is that the PC includes, you buy as many numbers as you can for as low a price as you can.

When you buy a Mac however, there are sooo many intangibles that don'T figure or can't be quite measured into numbers, and the price ends up seeming higher than a similarly specced PC.

What I mean by that is a Mac is much more than the sum of its parts. Yeah its got Intel processors, nvidia or ATI video cards, fujitsu hard drives, whatever. Same **** as in PCs right? Fair enough. But you get more than just those components put together.

It's like a human body, yeah there's a heart, bones, muscles, lungs etc... But a human is way more than all these organs put together, isn't it?

Same with a Mac. It's hard to really accurately describe it. It's more than "OS X is great". It's more than "AppleCare will take care of you" (and it does!). It's not elitism. There really is something about the machine that, unless you get a lemon or defective parts (bound to happen, this is the real world here), it just WORKS. And it's a joy to use. It doesn't get in your way. There's attention to detail not present anywhere else (just compare the trackpads to PC and netbook trackpads, even those with multitouch.. yugh) And so many more I just can't think of, off the top of my head.

A Mac is more htan the sum of its part, and that's surely why it costs more than a PC with equivalent "numbers", because.. It's more than just those #s. Maybe that's why people seem to form a bond with their Macs...

YMMV. That's been my experience, and the experience of every one of my friends who bought a Mac after seeing how happy I was with mine.

Patrix.

 

[RebootD]

My two cents:

Macs:
+ OSX - easy to learn and use even for the technologically challenged.
+ iLife comes with a new purchase and can provide 90% of consumers with everything they need to share movies, photos and DVDs
+ Don't have to run anti-everything software (for those who can't tread safely and need hand holding)
+ Build quality generally much higher than most Windows hardware manufactures. (I hate you Acer/HP)
+ You get +10 bonus points in 'coolness' and you get to hold that over your friends and family

- Locked into whatever hardware Apple says you need
- Higher initial cost of ownership
- No matte screens on displays, notebooks or desktops except the lone 17in MBP that you probably won't want.
- If it breaks you have to take it to Apple.
- Mandatory Applecare purchase
- Not every piece of Windows software has a perfect Mac counterpart.
- Some devices have features that are only Windows specific (Like Verizon vcast)

Windows(PC)
+ Vista (and soon Windows 7) vastly improved stability and security over XP and those before it.
+ Hardware aplenty. You can buy a machine off of any non-apple company or learn to build your own (which is much easier than you think) and customize it for a lot less.
+ Most hardware/phones/mp3 players/video cameras etc are made to work for Windows first, Macs second (or not at all)
+ Much larger free software database and tools available.
+ If something dies/breaks you can buy any compatible part and replace it yourself.

- Still need anti-everything software if you don't take care of your PC
- Apps still crash and take down your system rather than Apple's solitary app crashing. (One app an take down everything even in Vista)
- No Windows computer has anything comparable to iLife out of the box that I've seen.
- More difficult (especially for new users) to setup a network/wifi etc.
- You lose 10 bonus points for being a 'mindless windoze user lolz'

 

[Frosties]

I find it very easy to set up new networks in Windows Vista. Also Windows Vista has easier automatic reconnection after reboot to network drives than OS X.

Windows Vista does not have issues with having one application crashing the system with needed reboot like Windows XP had. What can happen that irritates me is that if for instance Firefox crash then it locks the system until windows by itself closes the application. This locks the system totally usually for 30 seconds or so and nothing can be done before it repair itself. This is on Vista 32 bit, 64bit perhaps handles this better. Not a good thing.

 

[neteng101]

VMWare Fusion... its a Mac, no wait, its a PC, no wait, its Linux... actually, its all of everything bundled into one package.

OS X runs best on a Mac (it can be massaged into a generic PC with mixed results), Fusion is the best user focuses virtualization software, and you pack up whatever other OS you want on a VM.

Access is a lousy DB and so is that thing often bundled with various apps written in VB ie. the MSSQL Lite. MySQL OTOH truly rocks. Vista, is pure, utter, bloat... XP still soldiers on today. Oh and Win7 XP compatibility mode is really a VM running XP!

 

[MacAndy74]

You don't buy Macs for technical specs, you buy them for the Operating System they come with (Mac OS X). My new MacBook Pro is half the specs of my PC desktop, yet everything from iTunes to the Internet runs so much faster.

Someone once said these words:

"Your hardware is only as good as your OS allows it to be."

Never been a truer statement.

 

[Macallan82]

Using Windows on my home computer seems like I'm at the office. It also feels clunky when compared to OS X. IMHO, OS X is more refined.

 

[markintosh]

They're both tools....

Speaking as a switcher, and as someone who HAS to use Windows Daily at work, both computers are nothing more than tools.

However, when I bought my personal computer, I looked at several things and the MacBook Pro was the obvious answer...

1. OSX vs. XP/Vista/Windows 7 - honestly no comparison, OSX consistently works, no viruses, no spyware, no malware.

2. Applications - there is NOTHING you can do on a PC that you can't do on a MAC. However, there is one major thing you can do on a Mac if you need to and that is run Windows. Best of both worlds....

3. Build Quality - anyone who still talks about the "Apple Tax" has never picked up an Apple Laptop. Go down to the local Best Buy or whereever you can feel computers and pick up all of the Windows laptops. Plastic cases everywhere. Try holding one on the front corner with the screen open. Most you will see a noticable bend in the case. Then go try it with a Mac Pro. The Unibody is an unbeatable case - lightweight and VERY sturdy.

4. "Free" iPods - direct from Apple every summer they give you a rebate on the price of an iPod. I'm sitting here listening to my new iPod touch right now.

5. Lasty, but most importantly - the hot chicks dig Macs

 

[kasakka]

1. OSX vs. XP/Vista/Windows 7 - honestly no comparison, OSX consistently works, no viruses, no spyware, no malware.

Not this argument again. Yes, there is 100x more malware written for Windows but guess what? Even with no antivirus and whatnot, I've never had any on Vista or Win7. They're inherently safer than XP and previous Windows versions, basically the only way to get viruses would be to install them yourself and the same could be done easily on OSX. My Win7 "just works" too.

2. Applications - there is NOTHING you can do on a PC that you can't do on a MAC. However, there is one major thing you can do on a Mac if you need to and that is run Windows. Best of both worlds....

You can run OSX on a PC easily. In fact I'm typing this right now on my desktop PC running OSX nicely, faster than any of the quad core Mac Pros actually. You can even run OSX in a virtual machine on top of Windows if you want.

3. Build Quality - anyone who still talks about the "Apple Tax" has never picked up an Apple Laptop. Go down to the local Best Buy or whereever you can feel computers and pick up all of the Windows laptops. Plastic cases everywhere. Try holding one on the front corner with the screen open. Most you will see a noticable bend in the case. Then go try it with a Mac Pro. The Unibody is an unbeatable case - lightweight and VERY sturdy.

I agree that the cases are well designed and for a laptop, a Macbook Pro would be my #1 choice. But on the inside they're really the same crap as most PC laptops.

5. Lasty, but most importantly - the hot chicks dig Macs

I prefer that they dig me, but whatever floats your boat.

Anyway, in reality both Win and OSX have their good and bad points. I like both, both will work just fine for nearly anything you can do. I feel Windows has the upper hand in file browsers, video and players and obviously games. OSX has better IRC clients, better keyboard shortcuts, easier program installation/removal, better filetype support (Preview) from the box etc. I like using both, I switch between 'em based on my mood.

Both have to suffer from Adobe's **** though.

 

[PAC88]

I use my mac in college and the biggest drawback is compatibility with windows..
The majority of teachers/students that I work with use windows and you really have to know how to save your files correctly in all the programs.. I've had to go back too many times to either re-save documents in another format or download a driver to view a document sent to me from windows.. Now going into my junior year, I've realized that I can't take the risk using osx anymore because I don't always have time to go back and fix things.. it slows down my work flow and I hate having to worry and do research about file compatibility when I send/transfer documents from mac to pc or even the other way around..
My internet (safari) is sometimes unresponsive and won't even load web pages when other people right next to me on windows are flying around with no problem.
Those are two big issues for me but other than that I think OSX is okay.. if the majority of people used OSX than my main issue would obviously no longer be a problem. Though I've managed to get by, I think right now osx just complicates things and I'm trying to reduce stress in my life.. My next notebook will most definitely have windows 7 on it.. I have never had any problems in all the years using windows and the only thing I'll miss from OSX are the hot corners with expose etc..

 

[cababah]

4. "Free" iPods - direct from Apple every summer they give you a rebate on the price of an iPod. I'm sitting here listening to my new iPod touch right now.

They aren't free. Apple makes you pay tax on it and they reimburse you the retail amount before tax. It is basically getting a $20 iPod. You are still paying more but getting a good deal if you already plan on getting one. This is a new promotion though and will not last long so I don't see how it should be listed as a stable long-term reason to get a Mac over PC.

 

[djharris]

They aren't free. Apple makes you pay tax on it and they reimburse you the retail amount before tax. It is basically getting a $20 iPod. You are still paying more but getting a good deal if you already plan on getting one. This is a new promotion though and will not last long so I don't see how it should be listed as a stable long-term reason to get a Mac over PC.

the iPod touches are cool, and this is a great benefit, but you can only get it if you're a University student.