Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
If by "PC" you mean Windows, then no. I find that Windows offers me nothing I desire. However, I do maintain a Linux box at home, but I either build it myself or buy from an independent dealer so I don't have to deal with Dell/HP/<other major brand> bloat.

It all depends on what you need/want. Although I do recommend building a computer yourself if you can. Whether you want Windows or *nix, it is bound to be cheaper.
 
I think it all comes down to personal choice. For me, I don't think I would ever consider a PC. I work on a PC all day at work, so I am certainly exposed to Windows, and PC's, but they just don't interest me.

I'm comfortable with the simplicity of OS X, and for me, it is the only thing I would consider. I know some people love their PC's and wouldn't give up the huge number of software titles available at retail, games, etc. For them maybe a PC makes sense.
 
When it comes to a fully functional laptop (not a netbook), I would go hands down with apple. Imo some people fail to think about the environment they will/could use a laptop in. You could own the cheapest and fastest pc laptop in the world, but that doesn't mean that its portable. Things like a squeaky plastic body, a thick heavy body, a screen hinge with too much give, a trackpad with a poor surface and tricky scrolling options, too many ports, a poor battery life... you get the picture, I could keep going... All these things make the laptop great in some aspects (i.e. many ports can be a very good thing) but not the actual portable computer the laptop could be. When a product is easy and enjoyable to use, consumer's will end up using it more. This is probably why there are a lot of netbooks & macbooks at Starbucks. Also this is why you don't find a lot of laptops like Giampaolo's (from the new microsoft commercial) out and about.

Since apple rolled out the titanium powerbooks, they have been making some of the greatest laptops out there. Since I use a laptop as a portable computer (not a desktop that I move about twice a month... like a lot of college kids) mac is for me.

As for the other 80 percent of college kids who want a 17" laptop with a bit of kick that sits on their desk until finals at the library or until xmas break (*cough* lauren from the windows commercial); a pc is for them, unless they have a ton of money to burn.

Its shocking, I know but apple doesn't have a line up to fulfill every single niche. This is why market diversity is a good thing.

As for desktops, I may have to defer to the hackintosh point of view.
 
When it comes to a fully functional laptop (not a netbook), I would go hands down with apple. Imo some people fail to think about the environment they will/could use a laptop in. You could own the cheapest and fastest pc laptop in the world, but that doesn't mean that its portable. Things like a squeaky plastic body, a thick heavy body, a screen hinge with too much give, a trackpad with a poor surface and tricky scrolling options, too many ports, a poor battery life... you get the picture, I could keep going... All these things make the laptop great in some aspects (i.e. many ports can be a very good thing) but not the actual portable computer the laptop could be. When a product is easy and enjoyable to use, consumer's will end up using it more. This is probably why there are a lot of netbooks & macbooks at Starbucks. Also this is why you don't find a lot of laptops like Giampaolo's (from the new microsoft commercial) out and about.
what is a fully functional laptop, what makes netbook not "fully functional"?

a cheapest pc laptop is not portable? if you want to describe something new, go ahead, but i really dont think this is right place to redefine the term "portable". what does "plastic" have anything to do with "portability"? most mac laptops out there are plastic, what are you trying to say?:confused:

too many ports? poor battery life? my MB last 30 minutes now, how poor is poor?

please, dont make excuses, there are good things about a mac laptop, to exaggerate the terminology of "portability" is really not necessary.
 
for select programs and software i keep a PC desktop inside the home. But for my day to day computer (currently a macbook pro) i dont think a PC is an option.

I get so much more done, its very stable, and even though Windows may have more software titles, i find the limited amount of mac software to be vastly better. Looks better, performs better,easyer to use, not some cheap pieced together software.
 
I only consider PC's for desktops, Apple's desktop offerings are the opposite of what I want. Buts its hard to consider a PC for a laptop, but Dell's new Studio XPS is pretty tempting considering you can get a laptop that just blows the MBP out of the water for hundreds less (and something important to me, a good LCD, the ones on the MBP are borderline mid-range).

For desktops its just no contest, newegg.com beats whatever apple can give you hands down. But for laptops its hard to choose between subpar LCD quality but good build quality and looks vs high end LCD and performance but poor build quality and looks.

what is a fully functional laptop, what makes netbook not "fully functional"?
Playing games, rendering movies, rippings cds, running professional programs like Photoshop or 3D stuff, there are a lot of things you can do on a regular processor that you couldnt do on an Atom. So I agree, netbooks are not "fully functional" computers, the Atom is horrendously slow and is only suitable for very basic tasks.
 
I probably wouldn't consider a PC for a new computer anymore. I love my 2 macs and if I need Windows, I can use Boot Camp or Parallels, etc.
 
Don't see myself ever even considering going back to Windows unless I ever need to consider a sub-$700 computer.

After experiencing how easy to use an OS can get, how amazing support can be offered, how beautifully designed a product can be, and how it's all integrated and secure in one phenomenal product, I can't ever see my going back to a PC.

Then again, I can't recommend a Mac for everyone. Many friends of mine that I speak to are looking for the most powerful computer possible for the price. I generally will try to show advantages of the Mac, but at the end of the day, when customers are shopping for a desktop, they generally will compare a Dell tower to the iMac. A lot of people don't care too much about the design of the iMac, when they know the Dell will just be sitting under the desk. Since Apple offers nothing upgradeable under the Mac Pro, the only thing people really can compare is the iMac.

However, when it comes to notebooks...I can't stand seeing people get anything other than a Mac. Unless it's a netbook, of course :p
 
Playing games, rendering movies, rippings cds, running professional programs like Photoshop or 3D stuff, there are a lot of things you can do on a regular processor that you couldnt do on an Atom. So I agree, netbooks are not "fully functional" computers, the Atom is horrendously slow and is only suitable for very basic tasks.

so macbook air isn't fully functional neither.

since macs has extremely limited games available, is that a factor that can render all macs "not fully functional"?

I think its up to each individuals. who runs 3D program all the time? if at all?

who uses photoshop all the time, if at all?

Very basic tasks, do you consider skype video chatting, illustrator image handling, MS office, Games such as MM6,7,8, HoMM 2,3,4, avidemux video editing, google earth, NVU web page composing, adobe PDF editing,

all, just "very basic"? note not even mac can do all those things.
 

Attachments

  • untitled.PNG
    untitled.PNG
    250.1 KB · Views: 58
so macbook air isn't fully functional neither.

since macs has extremely limited games available, is that a factor that can render all macs "not fully functional"?

I think its up to each individuals. who runs 3D program all the time? if at all?

who uses photoshop all the time, if at all?

Very basic tasks, do you consider skype video chatting, illustrator image handling, MS office, Games such as MM6,7,8, HoMM 2,3,4, avidemux video editing, google earth, NVU web page composing, adobe PDF editing,

all, just "very basic"? note not even mac can do all those things.
I dont see how you can call something "fully functional" if you are ommitting things. Fully functional applies that its fully functional, if you are making exceptions to its functionality then that sounds like limited functionality.

The MBA is just as functional as a MB or MBP, its just low end, it is nothing like a netbook with an Atom processor that isnt capable of many tasks that you would expect a computer to beable to do.
 
It would be foolish not to say yes! Budget is a key factor that influences what computer a person gets. Like it or not, you get a better spec PC than a mac for the same price and you have a wider selection of computers to pick from. Don't get me wrong- i love my macbook and os x but not everyone can afford it!

Also it depends on what you are going to use the computer for- if you need a computer capable of playing the latest games with the highest amount of fps then a PC is the way to go.

Unfortunately getting a PC also means getting vista- but there is nothing wrong with putting XP on instead (or even os x if you dare to:p) and windows 7 is shaping up nicely. So- when buying- pc is always an option worth considering- an option people are still picking because despite the clear advantages of having a mac- its not suitable for everyone.
 
I dont see how you can call something "fully functional" if you are ommitting things. Fully functional applies that its fully functional, if you are making exceptions to its functionality then that sounds like limited functionality.

The MBA is just as functional as a MB or MBP, its just low end, it is nothing like a netbook with an Atom processor that isnt capable of many tasks that you would expect a computer to beable to do.

but MBA has no optical drive, does it? thats a classic "omitting", and how can it be fully functional according to what you said?
isn't capable of many tasks that User would expect a computer to do?

see, thats the problem, I think they are capable of doing most (and for many people, all) the tasks they expect a computer to do.

Thats what I was saying, fully functional should be a term based on users, not computer programs. Otherwise, most macs will be not fully functional, because they severely lack of support for games.
 
Oh you had to open the can, didn't you?

I want to make the point that anything that is so pleasing to use will be used more; that's why I completely agree with a previous posters point about there being a higher proportion of Macs on show in public than are owned.

Look at the iPhone- I see people constantly playing with their gadgets. Because they are showing off? No. Obviously because there is a lot to do with it, and it makes it a pleasure to do it.

It is the same with Macs, which is why I have become so attached to my MacBook since receiving it last year.
 
Oh you had to open the can, didn't you?

I want to make the point that anything that is so pleasing to use will be used more; that's why I completely agree with a previous posters point about there being a higher proportion of Macs on show in public than are owned.

Look at the iPhone- I see people constantly playing with their gadgets. Because they are showing off? No. Obviously because there is a lot to do with it, and it makes it a pleasure to do it.

It is the same with Macs, which is why I have become so attached to my MacBook since receiving it last year.

u assumed that people have as much time as they want to play with their gadget or laptops

u assumed the public area you went to are so representative.

its just so not true.
 
I dabble in the PC world. I've built many and continue to upgrade my wife's computer ever 2-3 years. So, for her I always build and never consider pre-built.

For me, I've "gone apple" so to speak. At work I can't escape and doubt it will ever be completely gone our home. I still try to get my wife to at least use it. My 8 year old as an eMac, and that's what she knows best. So at least it's not just me.:D
 
u assumed that people have as much time as they want to play with their gadget or laptops

u assumed the public area you went to are so representative.

its just so not true.


OK, maybe I understand. On the first line, 10/10 for irrelevancy.

Secondly, I made an anecdotal observation based on general experiences; it was not intended to be IPSOS poll-standard data. But my comment is reinforced by the fact that lots of people seem to develop a dislike for Mac users for reasons such as 'they are always showing them off in 'Starbucks''. You might think those people are not representative, but I do not know what you really mean by representative in this context. Short of conducting a survey on this trivial point any story or opinion you hear will most likely be anecdotal.

The typecasting of a writer grappling with his latest novel on a Mac in a café is one that I have found to be familiar to many. Yes, it is a stereotype. Yes, you will go out and see people who are not writers, writing on laptops that are not Macs, in cafés that are not Starbucks. But the existence of one thing does not defeat the fact of the existence of another.

In summary, I do not really know what you meant ergo the stream of babble that you have just read. Sorry.
 
I bought my kids some G4 Mirror doors along with studio displays, ( ADC ). They absolutely love them.

Yeah, I think they are a great simple platform for kids to learn computer basics on. Plus she uses PCs at school. So I think it's a great skill to be able to use both. She does sometimes get confused and forgets to close an app in OS X but, she's 8 and I'll forgive her. Plus, it was only $95 last year for a 1.25 Ghz eMac w/ 1GB of ram and 60GB hard drive. I used it some before I got my mini last month and it does everything she needs with plenty of speed. I can see it lasting her a while for basic tasks. Even if it is 5 years old already.

The MDD dual processor G4s are GREAT machines. I love the Powermac's. It's amazing to me how adequate a computer from 2002 still is.
 
I want to make the point that anything that is so pleasing to use will be used more; that's why I completely agree with a previous posters point about there being a higher proportion of Macs on show in public than are owned.

Theres something I don't hear often on these forums, and how true of a point. Why I bring my computer with me to places others may not is because I enjoy using it so much. The iPhone was a great example. Same with the iPod, which is why it seems like everyone has one (which most people do). You notice Apple everywhere not because people want to say "hey look at my fancy toy" but simply because people who use Apple's products become genuinely attached to them. And for Apple to be able to harness that emotional bond between consumer and product is why all of their products are so successful and why, we as a group don't look to buy PCs.

Though I can see the valid hackintosh argument. I, personally, have become less impressed with Apple's design and hardware choices. So I have opened my eyes to look at different things and would consider buying a PC, especially if I can't buy another matte screened (not 17") MBP.
 
absolutely not.

I cant even imagine myself owning another pc for the rest of my life.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.