Get a load of this!

[klymr]

So, there is another forum that I visit for work, it's a jewelry design forum, and most everybody on there is a Windows user. There are a VERY small handful of us who use Macs, as the software is Windows only. Anyway, someone asked about running the program using Boot Camp and we got talking about it and this guy posted this comment to me:

Your mac is just a PC running a Mac OS now. If it has an Intel chip in it... (don't tell anyone) It's a PC!

So I asked him why that makes it a PC. I also told him PC means Personal Computer. At least that's what I've always been told it meant. What's not personal about a Mac? Does that mean any computer with an AMD chip in it is not a PC then? I didn't know Intel had exclusive rights to telling people whether their computers were personal or not. Hmm...?

And here is his response:

pc as in IBM compatible platform. Intel makes the mobo, the chipset, nvidia graphics card. lol its a glorified Dell now running mac's OS. You didnt think they would keep 3% of the market share forever before they decided to cave in and make some money did ya?

a core 2 duo is a core 2 duo. mac didnt make it special.

ps since they are all pc's tell the mac commercial guy to stop referring to the windows machine as "pc"

 

[TEG]

A PC is a designation (that should be) applied to any computer built since 1984 (as most machines before that were Home Computers). Regardless of build material, OS, or design. The actual distinctions should be related to operating system, as that actually dictates whether software works or not.

Major System:
Windows (Version)
Mac (Classic or OS X)
Unix (and Flavor if needed)
Linux (and Distro if needed)

This is how all systems should be classified, but so many people say Macs vs PCs. A Mac is a PC, it always has been a PC, and always will be a PC.

TEG

 

[mgargan1]

can you ask him when apple insulted his mother? because he's really bitter! seriously, tell this guy to get over it.

 

[amanda kathryn]

ps since they are all pc's tell the mac commercial guy to stop referring to the windows machine as "pc"

i went to school with "the mac commercial guy," justin long!

 

[QuarterSwede]

This whole confusing "PC" thing is Apple's fault really. They were the ones that didn't want to be classified as a PC but instead as a Mac. Heck, they still don't classify their computers as PC's.

Anyway, why do you care if it's called a "PC" or not. It's OS X that makes it so different and easier to use!

 

[klymr]

This whole confusing "PC" thing is Apple's fault really. They were the ones that didn't want to be classified as a PC but instead as a Mac. Heck, they still don't classify their computers as PC's.

Anyway, why do you care if it's called a "PC" or not. It's OS X that makes it so different, special and better to use!

I understand that, it's just his whole attitude of you are running a glorified Dell because you have a Mac with an Intel chip that is annoying.

 

[QuarterSwede]

I understand that, it's just his whole attitude of you are running a glorified Dell because you have a Mac with an Intel chip that is annoying.

I still don't see the annoyance. He CAN'T run OS X and you can. That's the deal breaker I'd think. Apple hardware is good but it really isn't all that much different from what Dell uses (he's right). Although, Apple's design of what goes around common hardware is another thing that makes it more than just a "glorified Dell."

So in essence:
1) Mac's can run OS X, "PC's" can't.
2) Apple hardware is much better to look at and use. No contest. Period.*

*This comes from many years of experience with a lot of different hardware.

 

[klymr]

I still don't see the annoyance. He CAN'T run OS X and you can. That's the deal breaker I'd think. Apple hardware is good but it really isn't all that much different from what Dell uses (he's right). Although, Apple's design of what goes around common hardware is another thing that makes it more than just a "glorified Dell."

So in essence:
1) Mac's can run OS X, "PC's" can't.
2) Apple hardware is much better to look at and use. No contest. Period.*

*This comes from many years of experience with a lot of different hardware.

Ahhhh... I like that! I've never really sat and thought of it that way. You are correct in saying that OS X and Apple hardware are much better to use and look at. Thanks for pointing that out.

 

[Killyp]

Macintosh, or for newer models, Mac, is a brand name which covers several lines of personal computers designed, developed, and marketed by Apple Inc.

So it doesn't say anywhere there that a Mac is a machine using a PowerPC processor.

Apple have changed the processor platform their computers are based on twice now (they originally went from 68k to PowerPC chips in the 90s).

The definition of a PC:

A personal computer (PC) is a computer whose original sales price, size, and capabilities make it useful for individuals, intended to be operated directly by an end user, with no intervening computer operator.

So there. A Mac does officially fall under the PC catagory, and has always done since before they had Intel processors.

The difference between your Mac and his 'PC'? Mac OS.

The day Mac OS runs natively on PCs without a little bit of hacking is the day a Mac becomes a PC.

After all, Macs have always ran Windows in one form or another...

 

[klymr]

Wow, he's mad! Other people have been commenting in this thread and he is fighting back. I mentioned to him Final Cut Studio and other programs won't run on Windows and he wrote back to me:

I think what you don't get mitch is that OSX is just mac's branded version of Unix. Unix will run on any motorolla x86 processor. it boils down to mac/apples original failed plan to charge royalties to develop on their OS back in the 80's. Programers opted to develop software on the royalty free platform called DOS. Mac has never recovered from this terrible descision. Also Gateways looking like macs? Gee is that maybe because MS owns gateway and also owns around 50% of Macintosh now? MS is one of the new major controlling forces in an otherwise failing computer company. Mac has struggled to gain more than 3% of the market share and without the iMac in the early 2000's we would have never seen the iPod. Mac would have been bankrupt.

Now, their new secret to staying alive is to slowly become PC's but boast their propaganda that they are still "different". But the truth is that they are becomming no more different than a PC. Besides that Windows has 100x better hardware support than a Mac. This is one other reason why mac adicts think macs are different. The reason software runs smoothly is because each previous mac's hardware was the same. It's easy to write dependable software for a platform that has 4 variations. It's not so easy when the hardware can be 1 of Nth number of combinations. So you can say what you want about windows, but no other OS on the earth will let you jam a PCI device into it, install a driver cd and away you go. The mere fact that windows can support any 16, 32, 64 and 128 bit PCI device is the reason why it is the King of all operating systems. Not because the desktop is pretty. You won't see a mac powering a T66, Viper or Perfactory. Why? Because their "brilliant" OSX isnt cabable of handling it. Unix was not designed for that type of Plug and Play support. Linux tried to be that version of Unix but also failed due to the lack of interest. Macs are neat, but not better nor are they very "different" anymore.

And then after AGREEING with others about the worthlessness of Vista he made this claim:

I would stand to bet that in two years Macs will be sold with or without OSX. Just remember friends Bill Gates owns much of them now. muahaha. At that point they are just componet matched PC's. No different than Alienwares.

 

[JNB]

Just ignore him. Either he's just full of misconceptions, distortions, and outright BS and doesn't know it, or he knows it and doesn't care/can't back down now. Factually, his argument is completely hollow. Just rest easy with the comfort that while nobody's looking, he spends four hours trying to download the latest Norton Update/Windows Security patches

Oh, and take that bet!

 

[klymr]

Just ignore him. Either he's just full of misconceptions, distortions, and outright BS and doesn't know it, or he knows it and doesn't care/can't back down now. Factually, his argument is completely hollow. Just rest easy with the comfort that while nobody's looking, he spends four hours trying to download the latest Norton Update/Windows Security patches

Oh, and take that bet!

Hahaha. Nice. I'll second those updates! Seems like we have a new Windows update every other week. Plus, I don't think a Mac would sell without OS X, unless we hit OS XI by then.

 

[LizKat]

A PC is a designation (that should be) applied to any computer built since 1984 (as most machines before that were Home Computers). Regardless of build material, OS, or design. The actual distinctions should be related to operating system, as that actually dictates whether software works or not.

Major System:
Windows (Version)
Mac (Classic or OS X)
Unix (and Flavor if needed)
Linux (and Distro if needed)

This is how all systems should be classified, but so many people say Macs vs PCs. A Mac is a PC, it always has been a PC, and always will be a PC.

TEG

yeh then i should read all the way through a hyperventilating column about some new virus attacking my windoze registry regardless of whether I actually HAVE a windoze registry, right? Grrrr...

Pet peeve: tech columnists who write about some strictly Windows-based issue without making it clear that's what they're writing about. It's plain lazy (and that's a generous construction of their motive for leaving out a line like "btw this does not apply to machines running Mac OS.")

So I'm at least partly with you: the operating system is a critical distinction in personal computing matters. We're way past the point where only a few hundred thousand people in the world own a machine that runs a Mac OS. If tech writers can bother with "does not apply to Windows XP" then they can also tack on "or Mac OS."