Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Don't know what you are talking about, I've had a Samsung Windows 10 laptop, scrolling is nowhere close to "buttery smooth", even on the Edge browser.

Scrolling smoothness depends on many factors. From the specs of the machine to the software implementation.

I haven't used a cheap Windows machines in years, but in a Surface Book and both my semi powerful desktop machines Edge is smooth, but so is Chrome.

The scrolling feature on OSX is implemented on the system level so it works in all applications, there's no need to choose the right application, which is very dumb.

Other than Apple apps, not all software uses the Cocoa API. Not Chrome, Firefox, or even Adobe's apps (which use a cross platform UI SDK). So no, what you said just makes no sense.
 
I know you've posted these in another thread already. None of these are "common macOS apps" - hardly anyone has ever heard of them. They're a bunch of minor tools you're using and because they don't exist as 1:1 versions in Windows, Windows is bad. It's fine if it's not for you - I'm not trying to convince anyone (not even myself, I still prefer macOS), but let's remain objective here.

Also, I use both Photoshop and Lightroom professionally on Windows 10 and both scale very well. They've just recently introduced scaling to 200%, which is the standard scaling for the Surface Book, the Dell XPS 13 and other popular devices. Unless you're using them on an iMac 5K with insanely high pixel density or on a tiny screen, they work perfectly fine.

It's even more bizarre, considering Windows is the grand-daddy of minor tool apps. There are dozens of applications for every one on macOS.

The macOS ecosystem is to Windows what Windows Phone is to ios.
 
Obviously you will never see the value in something you ignore.

I think the main point would be that if many of us haven't heard of them (I've only heard of iStat Menus from those), they're probably not really "common" apps.
 
The last thing a school needs is a collection of computers which need constant hand-holding by an IT crew, no matter how skilled the IT crew is.

And the reason the computers need constant hand holding is more often than not due to unskilled IT.

This goes for mac and pc.

Slowness is typically caused by any number if the following. Outdated hardware. No update policies leading to software being updated during business hours. No policies so users are allowed to install wherever they want to mess up the computer.

Not specific to mac or pc. I use Mac at work and home for the most part. Other than preference of the os they are both stable imo.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kis
I'd have thought the comparison is quite straight forward and valid.

I doubt that there is anything particularly complicated about the set up of the computers in the office I use on campus. And yes, they are probably low specced, but my base model early 2009 Mac Mini with 5 GB of RAM, is nothing fancy, and older than most of them. In the end it is the OS and apps we are talking about, more than the hardware. For me doing things using Pages and Numbers on a Mac is less time consuming than using Word and Excel on a PC. For photography, iPhoto (now Photos) is adequate for my needs, and straight forward to use. It comes preinstalled. I have no idea of the situation is with Photo processing apps on a PC, but it is likely to be more convoluted in use.

The long and the short of it…….. For the average Joe or Jill, who just wants to do stuff with minimal hassle, Mac and OS X (now MacOS) makes it easier and more straight forward than computers using other operating systems, in my experience. That's what I would miss if I went PC.

A geek with a penchant for mucking around with computers may have a different point of view, and conclusion.

View attachment 678752
View attachment 678727

Windows XP

Seriously?

That OS was released 2001.
 
Other than Apple apps, not all software uses the Cocoa API. Not Chrome, Firefox, or even Adobe's apps (which use a cross platform UI SDK). So no, what you said just makes no sense.

Of course they use Cocoa. What else would they use? Carbon? No matter what kind of cross-platform abstraction they slap on top of it, its still Cocoa underneath.
 
Windows XP

Seriously?

That OS was released 2001.
We still use XP at work (not connected to the internet) the legacy software we rely on can be used on W7 and W10 but not networked successfully - so we have stuck with XP.
We are in the process of moving to the cloud with a bespoke database solution.
 
Last edited:
My favorite part of Windows 10 is 'Edge' and how MS embedded it into a root file you have to destroy to prevent it from bugging the hell out of you in Windows 10. There is an example of how Windows is crrrrrrrrrrraaap (roll the R).BTW, weren't they sued for this back in the 90s? At least with Safari I can just opt out of it and never hear from it again..

You can defend it all you want, but from a consumer user experience there is NO comparing the two the operating systems. If I could have afforded it and thought it was worth it would have put my kids on a Mac. But they machines are so cheap it made more sense for them. You get what you pay for in life this is an immutable truth, but the law of diminishing returns varies for everyone depending on budget. If you are on a budget or used to the MS workflow, get a Windows machine and live with it. Just don't tell me it's better from a consumer perspective.

I use Windows all day for work, and when I get off it and log into my Mac it's like stepping through a portal to paradise.

I say the same thing about logging into my Linux boxes after using Macs all day at work.

===

What will you miss OP realistically nothing you use applications on your computer not the OS so if those are there it'll be the same enough for everything to be alright.
 
Windows XP

Seriously?

That OS was released 2001.

Well spotted; the photo was taken three years ago when three of the four office computers were on Windows XP, and one was on Windows 7. Now there are five, with one running XP (not connected to the internet), two running Windows 7 and two running Windows 10. The Windows 10 machines are the newest. They often take a long time to boot because they are doing system updates, and they do seem to have more than their share of issues that call for the attention of the office geek or the IT department.

In use for me it is the apps are where it is at. Word and Excel are more time consuming and a hassle, whereas Pages and Numbers are straightforward; easy to use. Same for other apps. That's what I would miss if I moved from Mac to PC.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hanser
Exactly. That is your opinion based on anecdotal data. A 1 unit sample size is laughable a best.

For real data check this study about laptop reliability.

View attachment 678666

Edit:

That is data from a 2009 study but the only serious data I've found. The main point for me here is that the idea that Apple laptops are much more reliable was a fantasy in 2009 and is most probably a fantasy in 2016.

Here is some data from 2013.

I've been using and buying Macbooks since Apple switched to Intel and it's a lottery. I've seen white plastic Macbooks still work after 8 years of use, and expensive MBPs die before 2 years of use.


and what about this graph? :)

Notebooks.png
 
The Windows 10 machines are the newest. They often take a long time to boot because they are doing system updates, and they do seem to have more than their share of issues that call for the attention of the office geek or the IT department.

I haven't followed this thread completely, but I know from my experience that at work the Windows machines took a long time to boot because of all the software that my company's IT put on it. I've a Windows 10 desktop at home now, with an SSD system drive, and it boots very quickly.
 
Well spotted; the photo was taken three years ago when three of the four office computers were on Windows XP, and one was on Windows 7. Now there are five, with one running XP (not connected to the internet), two running Windows 7 and two running Windows 10. The Windows 10 machines are the newest. They often take a long time to boot because they are doing system updates, and they do seem to have more than their share of issues that call for the attention of the office geek or the IT department.

In use for me it is the apps are where it is at. Word and Excel are more time consuming and a hassle, whereas Pages and Numbers are straightforward; easy to use. Same for other apps. That's what I would miss if I moved from Mac to PC.

And are these PCs new?

Technically, Windows 10 can run on a PC with Pentium 4 and 1GB RAM from 2004.

Also, are you sure that the problems you saw have anything to do with the OS?
 
I haven't followed this thread completely, but I know from my experience that at work the Windows machines took a long time to boot because of all the software that my company's IT put on it. I've a Windows 10 desktop at home now, with an SSD system drive, and it boots very quickly.

The PCs at my University actually work pretty well despite the modest specs and a lot of software on it.

Intel Core i5 (Haswell)

8 GB DDR3 1600

512 GB SSD

Most of the issues (domain users and printers not working) has to do with network issues rather than the computers themselves.
 
estimated and "consumer reports" - where did they get their numbers?

with that graph im more worried about that the failure rate seems to increase with apple if you are going to use them more than 1 year... how long the rate would be after 4-5 years?

I have never had a pc laptop last more than 3 years. They have either been cycled out by IT or they had major failure. My personal experience so take it FWIW. My personal desktop is going on year 4 so I'm happy with that. And to be fair, who knows if the cycled out laptops would have lasted longer. But then again, IT cycles them out for a reason. Again, I like win10 but the laptop hardware leave something to be desired.

And fyi, not sure if you're American, but Consumer Reports is pretty reputable over here. I don't always agree with their assessments, but their stats are not often disputed.
 
I have never had a pc laptop last more than 3 years. They have either been cycled out by IT or they had major failure. My personal experience so take it FWIW. My personal desktop is going on year 4 so I'm happy with that. And to be fair, who knows if the cycled out laptops would have lasted longer. But then again, IT cycles them out for a reason. Again, I like win10 but the laptop hardware leave something to be desired.

And fyi, not sure if you're American, but Consumer Reports is pretty reputable over here. I don't always agree with their assessments, but their stats are not often disputed.

We call it lifecycle replacement all computers get cycled out after three years generally that's when onsite support ends. When my Macs were on the network and IT controlled them they were cycled out just like our PC's are. The only thing that's longer is non-critical servers and I believe they're on 5 years and I believe that cycle is for the same reason.

It's generally a bad idea to relate corporate IT to home use the demands and costs are different.
 
So I know this is pretty controversial to say in this place, but I haven't been impressed with the hardware of the new MacBook Pro. I've had hands on time with new windows 10 pcs all year from the hp specter 360 to the Lenovo yoga to dell xps. So going from that to the macboook pro...I don't know? I just wasn't impressed with the hardware at all. I liked the oled screen on the last hp laptop I tried as well as dell xps better. The speakers on the new MacBook Pro are good but so are those on windows pc. Speed on windows pcs easily trump macbooks and with all that, I get a touchscreen and maybe even a pen. Not to mention neat folding options.

So I think the days of buying macs for hardware that is light years ahead of pc are pretty much gone. It now comes down to the value of Mac OS. What small things would the everyday person notice switching to pc full time that would make them miss Mac? I assume some of you tech heads switch back and forth regularly

Hi, well try to find out how you're "looking at/or using" your Hardware/OS.

I mean, currently I work with Windows HP Workstations and Macs for Game Coding and Design.

Your work, you can probably do with both, as long you don't depend of something special that is available only on one platform. Privately I tend to see my primary computer as something I really like to use, something that I enjoy and feels good, not just as a XYZ Computer to do the job.

Macs was never about using hardware that is lightyears ahead of PCs, it always was about buying an good quality computer that simply plays well with the OS, and that works out of the box. A decent hardware wrapped by great design and build quality case, with a great OS and great ECO-System.

The high class HP workstation Laptop I use (provided by a client), tends to do this:
The background light of the keyboard fades off too quickly, totally disturbing, you notice that nobody sat down for a few days thinking about the "Background Light Fadeout Time".
You put a DVD into the drive and the keyboard rattles and vibrate, like a rocket that its just about to get launched into space.

You will always get more powerful PC/Laptop hardware for less money than a Mac, but you won't get the same great build quality nor the great macOS+iOS ECO-System.

I worked with and coded for many operating systems like (DOS, OS2, Windows +WinNT, many Unix variants like IRIX, BeOS, freeBSD, HP-UX, Solaris, Linux.
I can build computers, and I still build them as freeBSD Render Servers.
So it's also not the missing knowledge that makes me use a Mac.
I prefer the Mac as my primary hardware to work on, because it gives me the less headache.
I still just works!

On a Mac...
I don't care much about viruses, I don't run into "feeling wise" infinite update routines.
I have a decent UNIX Base, a coders heaven.
I also don't want to spend my time trying to fix stuff that others did wrong, I prefer to use my time to fix my own stuff.

Overall answer, well you can use both, but a Mac is more comfortable, gives you less headache and more time to work on your own stuff.

But Gamers place is Windows or Consoles.

It's really a hard complex topic, that only you can decide for yourself.
My PRO for me can be a CON for you, and vice versa.
Anyway Windows also has few great stuff, it's just not so relevant to me.
 
Last edited:
Just get a mac with Parallels and despite the yearly subscription you have the best of everything.

• macOS is the best OS, apple hardware is the best
• so the solution is - invest in Parallells for mac
 
...
• macOS is the best OS, apple hardware is the best
...

Neither of those statements are objectively true.

MacOS is better in some ways, worse in others.

Some of Apple's hardware is fantastic in a lot of ways, but not in others... The Mac Pro, for example, is a joke at this point.
[doublepost=1482170997][/doublepost]
I haven't followed this thread completely, but I know from my experience that at work the Windows machines took a long time to boot because of all the software that my company's IT put on it. I've a Windows 10 desktop at home now, with an SSD system drive, and it boots very quickly.

My work was the same. We had 5400 RPM hard disks, heavily encrypted, tons of company bloatware... Windows was absolutely abysmal on it. If that was my only encounter with Windows, I'd despise it.

Meanwhile on my own computers with SSDs and no crapware, Windows 7 and 10 run exceptionally well.
 
I initially bought a Dell XPS 13, i7, 16G ram, 512 SSD, UHD screen (really good deal) but returned it and picked up a Macbook pro base model no touch bar for the same price. What I really like for Mac are 1) customer service 2) quality control, 3) design 4) system optimization on basic everyday usage. The dell xps looks really good on paper and got high rating from reviewers. But for normal customers it is different. There are so many things I don't like for that computer. If you compare the reviews from tech reviewers vs Amazon or Bestbuy, you will be surprised by the low scores on those websites. That is because the very bad quality control or customer service. Yes, Macbook are expensive but I really don't think they are overprice. You just got more for the design, track pad, speaker, screen but less for the performance.
 
Last edited:
and what about this graph? :)

View attachment 678822
I was trying to make some sense of this chart

I'm quite happy to take the data on face value as you have to subscribe to see full information but I would of liked to know if the comparisons are also matched on price range, maybe someone can confirm ?

If not matched then it would be no surprise to see higher failure rates in less premium priced products which may account for some of the data results against Apple premium priced laptops

I think the comment is also misleading that given we all would prefer a failure in the 1st year when we have full protection outside the hassle of getting the repair in the 1st instance. Additionally there is also a possibility strengthening of consumer rights on the repaired part post the initial warranty period.

What's more interesting is there is little or no difference between OEM's in 2nd or 3rd year

Another interesting point from consumer report was their recommendation on not taking extended warranties and the like.

Therefore you could say given you already pay a premium for Apple products for their better customer services that according to the chart you are less likely to need and so adding AppleCare is even more likely to less cost effective but that's statistics and no one likes being on the wrong end of repair bills :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Queen6
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.