I've made $10,000's fixing windows machines over the years simply reformatting and removing viruses from everyones "stable" and "standard environment" Windows OS. While it's pointless to say which one is better because that is subjective to the user, it's a factual statement to say that after using windows and apple machine for close to two decades, that the amount of people calling me for problems with the mac are marginally less (even taking into account that more people own windows machines.) After working on literally thousands of machines, I will disagree every time that windows (all versions) is stable and without major problems like viruses, spyware, malware, and usability because once this stuff happens the machine is worthless without repair.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Looking for alternatives to Mac since Arrandale won't come out thread
- Thread starter ZSamuels28
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I've made $10,000's fixing windows machines over the years simply reformatting and removing viruses from everyones "stable" and "standard environment" Windows OS. While it's pointless to say which one is better because that is subjective to the user, it's a factual statement to say that after using windows and apple machine for close to two decades, that the amount of people calling me for problems with the mac are marginally less (even taking into account that more people own windows machines.) After working on literally thousands of machines, I will disagree every time that windows (all versions) is stable and without major problems like viruses, spyware, malware, and usability because once this stuff happens the machine is worthless without repair.
My Father-in-law loves his iMac and always talks about how easy it is to use, although it took much longer to get his Canon printer to work with OSX. He is a former windows home user, but he still has XP at home and in his own business's offices. Simply, because of the compatibility issues and familiarity his staff have with Windows.
As far as viruses are concerned, its a case of educating people and the fact that Windows is a heavily targetted environment by hackers/criminals. Even the banks who run some high end Unix servers are being hacked and losing a lot of money. I'm sure if a group of hackers got together to purely attack OSX, they would find a way. Maybe, if OSX finds itself as the new standard OS in the future, the landscape could change. But, the most important advantage that OSX has in terms of security holes etc is that it can only be run legally on an Apple MAC. That means they have more control over the system, whereas, Windows is licensed to run on so many different hardware ect, that it would be very difficult to control the OS as Apple can do with OSX.
I'm surprised a technician that actually is in the know would say something like this..
first of all mac has only a 5.11-7.5%~ market share [http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/ne...owing-faster-than-vista-overtakes-mac-os.ars]
So obviously just by that... you are going to have a massive amount of things different just from market share alone.
By nature of that market share if you were a person writing malware and viruses .... who would you attack? Obviously whoever will cause the greater splash. Also by nature of the marketshare... which system is the person who is writing code for these programs more likely to be more familiar with?
While I completely agree with you regarding the Vaio Z, Win7 can't touch SL with a ten foot pole. It has nothing to do with software offerings.. the OS itself is just inferior. I've used Windows since 3.1 and am currently using a Win7 box as an interim machine between macs. Sure, it's much better than Vista, but thats not saying a whole lot.
Honestly, I truely WISH Win7 was as good as SL. I'd have ordered a decked Vaio Z 2 months back and been more happy with my hardware than I've ever been with an Apple box.
As far as im aware Hackintosh's are not actually illegal.... there was a post in the mac pro forums somewhere and i believe you are perfectly within your rights to install OSX (that you have purchased) on whatever hardware you wish.
Go get your PC and hang out by the wall receptical... Apple don't make computers @ your (or anybodys) command so either you get what's available now, or wait for the new ones or you wait by the ELECTRCAL RECEPTICAL while your windblows machine charges! And OSX is superior to W7 bud... I can audition ANY type of file within the file hierarchy in OSX... In W7 you have to launch an application to see it! Now that's what I call an intuitive OS!!! NOT! Strait up junk!
So, I'm not one of those douche bags that insists my opinion is the same as everyones, but the taskbar and my ability to quickly navigate windows is still my biggest gripe. Sure, the new taskbar is a vast improvement to the old versions, but it still doesn't hold light to the dock. Essentially what I'm saying, is the dock in combination with expose, blows doors off of the taskbar and Microsofts garbage ripoff of expose.
I'm looking at a Sony Vaio F series. For $1079, includes Blu-Ray player as they are giving them free until April.
I'm also looking at a $900 laptop from Asus with all the latest tech, lacking BR player. It has USB 3.0 built in though. It's the N61 series.
Just sold my 2008 MBP for $1400. Not bad considering I paid $1900 for it 2 1/2 years ago. There are some fairly simply things that I expect an OS to do, but for some reason Apple doesn't want to:
1) copying a folder from 1 location to another that has the same folder name. Windows let's you MERGE the folders, which is what I want and is necessary. OS X outright replaces the "old" folder with the one your transferring
2) Cut & Paste. This should be a no brainer. Why does OS X feel it necessary to force me to have 2 Finder windows open to do a move? Or even "copy" the contents, paste it to another, then go back and delete. Lame. I like Windows feature that lets me "cut" from one location and paste it a new one, all in one window.
3) When transferring files (gigs and gigs worth) when OS X runs into a problem with a file and can't copy it for whatever reason/error it gives me, it outright stops transferring the files. LAME. Windows allows me to "Skip" the file and continues transferring the rest of the documents/files.
4) Microsoft Office is flat out better in Windows. I had Office for Mac 2008, but I work ALOT with Excel and having to load Parellels just to get Windows Excel was a pain. Entourage was a joke compared to Outlook.
5) Photoshop CS4. Don't get me started on this one. 64-bit on Windows sealed the deal for me. Photoshop Elements 6 for Mac wasn't as good as its Windows counterpart, but they seemed to get PE 8 on both platforms to be equal. Unfortunately, it took them too long (no wonder Jobs calls Adobe lazy).
6) Mp3s. I have 200GB's of mp3/aac files. About 24,000 tracks/files. Why there's not good mp3 tagger on Mac is beyond me. I use Media Monkey in Windows to get good tags/artwork/naming, before sending them to iTunes. Itunes is good, but severly lacking in this department and sometimes their tags/artwork is flatout wrong.
It's just simple stuff like that, which always bugged the crap out of me in OS X. For these reasons, Mac OS X is not on par with moving files around as it is with Windows. I loved my MBP and all their colorful, bouncing icons, but I'm 100% back to Windows.
As for cost, I'm not sure what other Windows users do, but once I buy my system, that's pretty much it. Saying that Windows users spend more compared to Mac is relative. More tech gets to Windows faster and that could possibly cause the increased spending (graphics cards for instance, new USB 3.0 add in cards), but for me, I don't do all that until it becomes standard (the reason why I don't care for e-Sata ports, FW 800, etc.).
I'm also looking at a $900 laptop from Asus with all the latest tech, lacking BR player. It has USB 3.0 built in though. It's the N61 series.
Just sold my 2008 MBP for $1400. Not bad considering I paid $1900 for it 2 1/2 years ago. There are some fairly simply things that I expect an OS to do, but for some reason Apple doesn't want to:
1) copying a folder from 1 location to another that has the same folder name. Windows let's you MERGE the folders, which is what I want and is necessary. OS X outright replaces the "old" folder with the one your transferring
2) Cut & Paste. This should be a no brainer. Why does OS X feel it necessary to force me to have 2 Finder windows open to do a move? Or even "copy" the contents, paste it to another, then go back and delete. Lame. I like Windows feature that lets me "cut" from one location and paste it a new one, all in one window.
3) When transferring files (gigs and gigs worth) when OS X runs into a problem with a file and can't copy it for whatever reason/error it gives me, it outright stops transferring the files. LAME. Windows allows me to "Skip" the file and continues transferring the rest of the documents/files.
4) Microsoft Office is flat out better in Windows. I had Office for Mac 2008, but I work ALOT with Excel and having to load Parellels just to get Windows Excel was a pain. Entourage was a joke compared to Outlook.
5) Photoshop CS4. Don't get me started on this one. 64-bit on Windows sealed the deal for me. Photoshop Elements 6 for Mac wasn't as good as its Windows counterpart, but they seemed to get PE 8 on both platforms to be equal. Unfortunately, it took them too long (no wonder Jobs calls Adobe lazy).
6) Mp3s. I have 200GB's of mp3/aac files. About 24,000 tracks/files. Why there's not good mp3 tagger on Mac is beyond me. I use Media Monkey in Windows to get good tags/artwork/naming, before sending them to iTunes. Itunes is good, but severly lacking in this department and sometimes their tags/artwork is flatout wrong.
It's just simple stuff like that, which always bugged the crap out of me in OS X. For these reasons, Mac OS X is not on par with moving files around as it is with Windows. I loved my MBP and all their colorful, bouncing icons, but I'm 100% back to Windows.
As for cost, I'm not sure what other Windows users do, but once I buy my system, that's pretty much it. Saying that Windows users spend more compared to Mac is relative. More tech gets to Windows faster and that could possibly cause the increased spending (graphics cards for instance, new USB 3.0 add in cards), but for me, I don't do all that until it becomes standard (the reason why I don't care for e-Sata ports, FW 800, etc.).
Scottsdale, many people here know you hate Apple and you have a score to settle, but if you're gonna tell the story, at least to whole the story. If you could easily choose a Sony Z without bloatware at zero cost anyone would. This option is only available when you choose Windows 7 Professional 64 Bit for an extra $50 USD. You cannot choose any other version of Windows.
I suppose its subjective, but i think the Envy looks like it was designed by commitee to me. Far too fussy.
It seems like they said "Right, we need to copy the unibody MBP, but lets stick lots of vents and dodgy aluminium textures here and there, and a huge bezel to make our 16:9 screen fit the 16:10 chassis would be good too."
Pretty much any PC manufacturer offers laptops with 10+ hours of battery power + swappable batteries, so no, it's more likely the Macbook-folks who'll be crowding the outlets...
i was thinking of buying 2 gigs of ram for my current brick so i could at least work with something decent until arrandale comes out. (currently i work on an ancient dell laptop with 800mb of ram... this is suicide for a design student). i don't think i can spend all this saved up money on anything but a mbp.
Here is another great alternative. HP's new 8740w.
Processor choices: 1.73 GHz Core i7 820QM quad core, 1.60 GHz Core i7 720QM quad core, 2.66 GHz Core i7 620M dual core, 2.53 GHz Core i5 540M dual core and 2.40 GHz Core i5 520M dual core
4 DDR3 1333 MHz RAM slots for up to 16 GB total RAM
7200 RPM hard disks are standard; capacities available range from 320 to 640 GB
17 inch 16:10 full HD+ (1920 x 1200) display with optional DreamColor (looks like DC1 at this point in time); ambient light sensor for display is standard
Choice of 1 GB ATI FirePro M7820 GDDR5, 1 GB Nvidia Quadro FX3800M GDDR3 or 512 MB Nvidia Quadro FX2800M GDDR3 workstation-class graphics cards
2 MP webcam
Optical drive/upgrade bay for secondary hard disk
2 USB 2.0 ports and 2 USB 3.0 ports; other ports remain the same as 8730w except HDMI which has been replaced by DisplayPort
Weight: 3.57 kg
Dimensions: 39.75 x 28.55 x 3.65 cm
Processor choices: 1.73 GHz Core i7 820QM quad core, 1.60 GHz Core i7 720QM quad core, 2.66 GHz Core i7 620M dual core, 2.53 GHz Core i5 540M dual core and 2.40 GHz Core i5 520M dual core
4 DDR3 1333 MHz RAM slots for up to 16 GB total RAM
7200 RPM hard disks are standard; capacities available range from 320 to 640 GB
17 inch 16:10 full HD+ (1920 x 1200) display with optional DreamColor (looks like DC1 at this point in time); ambient light sensor for display is standard
Choice of 1 GB ATI FirePro M7820 GDDR5, 1 GB Nvidia Quadro FX3800M GDDR3 or 512 MB Nvidia Quadro FX2800M GDDR3 workstation-class graphics cards
2 MP webcam
Optical drive/upgrade bay for secondary hard disk
2 USB 2.0 ports and 2 USB 3.0 ports; other ports remain the same as 8730w except HDMI which has been replaced by DisplayPort
Weight: 3.57 kg
Dimensions: 39.75 x 28.55 x 3.65 cm
I don't mind sitting by a wall adapter when my Asus G73JH-A1 kicks the crap outta any macbook and will destroy even the new ones (if they ever come out which they won't).... All I have to say is 8gb ram, 1 TB HD, i7 720, and of course THE ATI HD 5870...
I use my dual core netbook for traveling and stuff, lasts around 6 hours... so why would I care?
I use my dual core netbook for traveling and stuff, lasts around 6 hours... so why would I care?
Why is this like a competition to some people. My laptop is better than yours, etc. If you enjoy your new laptop, then good for you.
Way to compare a folding desktop to a real notebook.
I could glue a folding display and a keyboard on the side of a Mac Pro connected to a pile of car batteries and smoke everything.
What? Apple designed their own batteries and they last longer than any laptop bud!Pretty much any PC manufacturer offers laptops with 10+ hours of battery power + swappable batteries, so no, it's more likely the Macbook-folks who'll be crowding the outlets...
But you still have to launch an app to audition your files before import and by then Im done and getting another project done while your upgrading a driver issue or installing a virus definition... PC's are crap!
OK... Now what are you doing with all this extreme power... making a stupid post on mac rumors? Your so darn better than everyone now that you have a faster virus flowing through your machine while looking for or anchored to a wall receptical he he... WOW man!
Except for the fact that the Mac Pro gets its ass whooped every way to tuesday by pretty much every ($1000+) desktop PC available today...
Actually, I'm at work as a computer tech atm... I don't have the machine with me... Umm.... btw, Macs are WAY more vulnerable than PCs... I mean come on you can plug one in via usb and start it in hard disk mode or w/e and see it as a hard disk on another computer.... real safe guys.... also, read the recent article macrumors posted about mac's vulnerability... The only people who get viruses are the people on Windows 2000 who look up porn and download .exes off limewire without virus protection... I've never gotten a virus in the 12 or so years I've been downloading crap.... and I do mean crap....
It also sounds like you're jealous that my laptop kicks the crap outta any mac...
"WHILE THE THINK DIFFERENT COMPANY Apple continues to smugly tell users that its OS is safer than Windows, an insecurity expert has claimed that it has 20 zero day security flaws.
Security researcher Charlie Miller, who is already known for having discovered a number of bugs in Mac OS X, told Heise Security that the holes are found in closed source Apple products."
That's from the article today sir.... I believe you have just been PWNED
Oh and here's another
http://www.pcworld.com/article/189760/hacking_impresario_windows_safer_than_mac.html
"Last year at the contest, it took only five seconds for a security researcher to hijack a Mac by hacking in through Safari. The year previous, it took less than two minutes to hack in to a Macbook Air --- and once again, Safari proved to be the security hole."
Very secure Apple....