If I'm lookinf for future proof, Mac or PC?

Discussion in 'iMac' started by diegobgr, Aug 10, 2010.

  1. diegobgr macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2009
    #1
    Hi.

    Well, my doubt is easy *I think*

    If I'm looking for future proof, should I got an iMac or a PC?

    I like the 21,5" i5 iMac, with 1 TB and 5670. On the other hand, I can get a Phenom X6, hexa-core, with 2 TB and a 5850 1 TB.

    I've always read that the Mac's don't get slower and slower with the time...it's true?

    For future proof, I mean 5 years. Games, photos, music, work...
     
  2. Intell macrumors P6

    Intell

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2010
    Location:
    Inside
    #2
    Mac's do tend to hold their age better then computers running Windows. I've got a ten year old iMac that still sees daily usage as a music box and light internet.
     
  3. JBat macrumors regular

    JBat

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2007
    Location:
    Washington
    #3
    I think all computers slow at least some as they age, but I seem to have less issues with my three year old iMac than PC's I've used over the years.
     
  4. archipellago macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2008
    #4
    well Macs are out of date off the shelf, and I can't believe that you'd get 3 years never mind 5 out of the newer Intel Macs.

    save ya money and do the right thing....
     
  5. JBat macrumors regular

    JBat

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2007
    Location:
    Washington
    #5
    Mine's three years old and still runs great. Just upgraded to Snow Leopard and everything works fine.
     
  6. advres Guest

    advres

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2003
    Location:
    Boston
    #6
    I have multiple macs that are 6+ years old that still work dandy. Sure, they can't handle high bandwidth streaming HD like new machines and they definitely show their age compared to new models, but they are far from unusable. My 2 favorite old machines are a 533MHz G4 Powermac (2001) and a 1Ghz G4 titanium Powerbook (2002). Both work "fine" today.
     
  7. Rodus macrumors 6502a

    Rodus

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2008
    Location:
    Midlands, UK
    #7
    There are lots of people still getting light work out of 10 year old G3/G4's, show me people using PC's to do this, add to that the far higher resale value of Macs and I'd say go Mac.
     
  8. Intell macrumors P6

    Intell

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2010
    Location:
    Inside
    #8
    Get a nice mid-line Mac? They last a long time.
     
  9. Giuly macrumors 68040

    Giuly

    #9
    As a little-over-mainstream PC has the same internal components as an iMac, they age in terms of hardware both the same. But Mac OS X is what makes a Mac out of the hardware, and because it only runs on Macs (Yeah, I know what you want to say...), that's why used Macs sell higher as used PCs.
    ...Until they hit some age. A PowerMac G4 from 2004 is still worth $50-200. A PowerMac G5 about $300-1000, an Intel MacPro $750-2500, mostly depending on their specs. A used Core 2 Quad PC is not worth $750, it wasn't even when it was released. If you want future-proovability, get a new Mac (At the moment preferably an iMac or a Mac Mini, or order a MacPro if you have the money). Sell it when the updated models come out, because they still have a good resell value, and you can get the latest Mac by spending a couple of hundred $. It's not keeping and buying a new one, it's reselling, to make another guy/girl happy with an used Mac, take the money and get a new one.
     
  10. redscull macrumors 6502a

    redscull

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2010
    Location:
    Texas
    #10
    Windows is not going to slow down over time any more than OSX, with the caveat that you are a user that knows what he's doing. The reason that PCs get this reputation is because Windows users tend to install a lot of crap off the internet on their machines (because there is more crap available on the internet that's actually compatible with their machines). And up until recently, Mac's Safari didn't even support plugins, while Windows's IE has been more than happy to let you slow it down with too-easy-to-plug-in crap for many, many years. If you know how to keep your system clean, neither OS is going to naturally slow down over time.

    You cannot future proof against gaming. Not if you mean modern, high-quality graphics games. Those will always look great only on the latest (0-1 year old) graphics cards, be playable on somewhat older cards (2-3 years) and probably be unplayable, except for low-quality-mode, on anything older (4-5+ years). If you decide on an iMac, you basically add +1 year to the age of your graphics card because they use laptop cards that are essentially the performance equivalent of a 1 year old desktop card.

    But for future proofing everything else, iMac is definitely a good choice. Apple's quality and support ensures the system will probably still be in good working order 5+ years from now, whereas PCs, tending to appeal to the cost-conscious buyer, are often made more cheaply and struggle to last.

    But if you don't mind the hassle of upgrading, you're always better off buying a not-top-of-the-line system every couple years than buying a top-of-the-line system and keeping it a long time (because the average annual cost works out the same while average performance will be higher).
     
  11. CampDavid macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2010
    #11
    A decent spec PC is around the £350 mark. A decent spec Mac is three times that in cost.

    For basic home use a PC will last 5 years or so. A Mac will not last 15.

    When people compare Macs to PCs they never factor in the cost of the machine on a year by year basis
     
  12. dukebound85 macrumors P6

    dukebound85

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2005
    Location:
    5045 feet above sea level
    #12
    PC for sure in the desktop world

    Why? Because you can upgrade parts to a greater extent than macs be it graphics cars, cpus, ram, pci slots, etc

    I am confused why everyone focuses on $$ for future proof measures vs function

    Regardless, those who say macs hold their value better has alot to do with their greater initial cost
     
  13. archipellago macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2008
    #13
    yay... winner!!!
     
  14. advres Guest

    advres

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2003
    Location:
    Boston
    #14
    Wanna bet?
     
  15. archipellago macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2008
    #15
    absolutely.....

    Intel Mac CANNOT last more than 5 or so years without needing major service or repair.
     
  16. Intell macrumors P6

    Intell

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2010
    Location:
    Inside
    #16
    How about a PowerPC Mac? They are nearly indestructible. I do believe that an Intel Mac can last 15 years, running almost non stop, without any fixing or cleaning.
     
  17. EarlofCroydon macrumors member

    EarlofCroydon

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2010
    #17
    I love my iMac it's 2 years old though so I'm not sure. Being honest I'd say get a PC, there's a huge temptation to just upgrade after a year of the same mac because they refresh them so fast and a lot of the time newer models are more powerful, cosmetically nicer etc etc. PC's last a LONG time and because they lack the style of mac's you'll be with the PC for a lot longer :) :apple:
     
  18. NoSmokingBandit macrumors 68000

    NoSmokingBandit

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2008
    #18
    If you like updating parts a PC will last much longer than an iMac. For example, if i want more gfx power than my GT260 i just buy a new card. If i want more gfx power in an imac i'd have to buy a whole new machine. Mac users tend to be more tolerant of old parts anyway since most macs ship with old parts.
     
  19. diegobgr thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2009
    #19
    I have to say that, the most CPU demanding applicactions that I will use are Photoshop and Lightroom (or Aperture if I finally switch).

    The bad point is that I will have to buy a PS3 to do gaming in...a year?
     
  20. advres Guest

    advres

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2003
    Location:
    Boston
    #20
    He said "a mac will not last 15 years" and I have about 8 within a mile from me right now at friends places that still work going on 19 years.
     
  21. drjsway macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2009
    #21
    3x the cost, huh?

    A 27" 2560p Dell monitor is $1,049 on dell's website and $965 if you buy it on Amazon.com.

    The low end 27" iMac is $1,699. A similarly specced Alienware aurora is $999.

    http://www.dell.com/us/en/home/desktops/alienware-aurora/pd.aspx?refid=alienware-aurora&s=dhs&cs=19&~oid=us~en~29~alienware-aurora_anav1~~

    $1,049 + $999 = $2,049. They both have 5670 and while the Aurora has more VRAM (1GB vs 512MB), the iMac has a faster processor, more HDD space, and more RAM.
     
  22. trip1ex macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2008
    #22
    Can you even get an i5 21.5" iMac??????

    STrengths of imac Hardware are the IPS high quality screen. Aluminum body. all-in-one space saving design. Low-power usage. Built-in webcam, mic, bluetooth, wi-fi. Included wireless keyboard aluminum and magic mouse.

    And of course on the software front - OSX - lack of spyware and viruses, better organization out of the box, not as tedious to reach to common options, higher quality built-in software and solid Unix underpinnings.

    Advantage of Windows is wide variety of hardware choice including many lower-end choices. Much cheaper to bulid a bigger tower computer that isn't as power efficient than to build a power sipping all-in-one. Plus can pick and choose hardware features you want or don't want. Don't need wi-fi? Don't pay for it. Same with Bluetooth. Or IPS-screen. Or aluminum body.

    Windows 7 gets the job done too. Not like it can't do what OSX does. The difference is more in how well or easily or pleasantly the job gets done. And in many cases Win7 does its share of tasks better. File management, business options and greater variety of software due to its market position are key software advantages.
     
  23. CampDavid macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2010
    #23
    [​IMG]

    This is a 15 year old Mac. 14.4kbps modem? Don't mind if I do ;)

    I'm not saying that PCs are better and they certainly aren't cheaper in many instances but the idea that Macs are somehow completely future proof is fairly nuts
     
  24. FnuGk macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2009
    #24
    when it comes to computers there is no such thing as future proofing it is that simple.
     
  25. dukebound85 macrumors P6

    dukebound85

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2005
    Location:
    5045 feet above sea level
    #25
    I have had 2 ppc macs and both are shot after 6-8 years apiece

    15 years on a computer, while may be possible, would not be practical. Heck, even those shot ppc macs I remember could not even play anything on youtube
     

Share This Page