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.
Why a Mac costs more than a PC...
- Thread starter Giuly
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
r0k, you just smashed everyhater's arguments on this thread to dust and made them sniff that dust all the way in. Good job.
lolwut? All he really said was that his IT dept has crummy installs of an OS from 2001. Try to comprehend he didnt really "smash" anything or prove why a system should cost ~$1500-1700 (2.4x) more than I paid for mine.
My aluminum Envy 14 for $1095
Core i5-450M (2.4-2.66ghz)
160GB Intel G2 SSD
6 GB RAM
1GB ATI 5650
1600x900 350nit screen
Backlit keyboard
HDMI, eSATA
Apple competitor: $2650 - Discount
MBP 15" 2.4Ghz i5
4GB RAM
256GB SSD
High Res screen
Have you not read any posts but the two previous ones? For god's sake. The hardware on the HP Envy is better, but it's all about the experience. If you need to pay 2.4x more for something that will give you a better user experience and TCO (a term I believe is unknown to you), go for it.
By the way, very unfair to add that 256GB SSD since it's almost 2x the amount of space of the Envy and costs a lot from apple. With the same HDD as the Envy you pay 300$ less.
And it's so unfair to compare two machines with completely different OS's and style of usage.
Its either 4GB or 8GB ram and 128gb or 256gb SSD
I chose 4GB and 256gb. Couldve done the other if you wanted but I think the second is the choice i would go for on the mac.
And considering I enjoy Windows over OS X I think my purchase was well justified being that Id pay 2.4x more just to load Windows on the MBP. Keep grasping at straws to justify a 2.4x increase in cost
EDIT: I should mention that if whatever it is is worth the 2.4x price to you then go for it. Im just laying it out and people can judge how they want.
Its either 4GB or 8GB ram and 128gb or 256gb SSD
I chose 4GB and 256gb. Couldve done the other if you wanted but I think the second is the choice i would go for on the mac.
And considering I enjoy Windows over OS X I think my purchase was well justified being that Id pay 2.4x more just to load Windows on the MBP. Keep grasping at straws to justify a 2.4x increase in cost
EDIT: I should mention that if whatever it is is worth the 2.4x price to you then go for it. Im just laying it out and people can judge how they want.
Sure, you can't discuss preferences, we've got that cleared now. Thanks.
Macrumors became a troll site around 2008 when idiots joined en mass. Dont blame me
Answer the question.
Can I open a Finder window, drop a "folder.jpg" into the folder, and have Snow Leopard automatically read and apply the image as a thumbnail? Yes, or No?
No.
Summary: Windows 7 does. Snow Leopard doesn't. Your bullets show your ignorance - the level of effort in Windows is nothing compared to the level of effort in Snow Leopard to do the exact same thing. And yes, if you read the link I posted, it clearly tells you that it won't apply the image properly if it's not sized the way Snow Leopard wants it. Windows has no such limitation. You don't know what you're talking about in the Windows world. Stop replying as if you do. I've worked with Windows since before it was Windows, dude.
It's not rocket science dude. I know you guys are fawning over Snow Leopard like it's the greatest thing since sliced bread and you're pissy because I found a flaw - whether you THINK it's a flaw or not, it's a flaw of the system. It doesn't do something intuitive like Windows does. It's not unreasonable to expect Snow Leopard to do something so basic especially given Windows has had that functionality since XP.
Another user claimed that Snow Leopard lets you preview docs easy and Windows doesn't - debunked by another user. In fact, I've yet to see objective opinions either way or the other. People jumped on me because I pointed out something Snow Leopard can't do just because they don't find value in the feature(s) - get over it, peeps.
That doesn't make it worse than Windows - but don't sit here and try to claim that Snow Leopard is this perfect system, which is why this discussion even started - the claim that Macs is more expensive because the OS is better. I simply provided statements that proved that claim to be false. It's not the OS. The OS is just like any other OS. It has flaws, it has cool features, it has ups and it has downs. It's not the OS.
Speaking as an A+, Net+, MCSA and MCTS on Windows 7, some of you need to understand one thing. If a Windows user is coming over to Snow Leopard, the FIRST thing they're going to do is try and figure out how they can do the same things with the new OS. If they can't, the new OS has failed them in those aspects and they're going to find third party software to do what they feel should be native to the OS (a good example: gfxCardStatus). That's not the user's fault; it's not the OS's fault. It's change, and they have a right to expect certain logical behaviors from their OS - behaviors that Snow Leopard does not have. Whether YOU agree with those requests or not, they're valid on their face, and Apple would be wise to pick up some of those features from Windows 7 just as Windows 7 picked up its Dashboard, taskbar and Pin features from Mac OS. IF your competitor is doing stuff that people like, you don't ridicule the features or the users - you EMULATE that functionality.
As I stated initially, Snow Leopard isn't anything special. Yes it's "New user" friendly. Yes for the most part it "just works". But it's nothing special compared to any other OS. It's the hardware, like I said. Why do you think Bootcamp even exists? Why do you think Parallels and VMWare are making money hand over fist? IF Snow Leopard's so great why are people looking for ways to run Windows and other operating systems on their Macs? It's because IT'S THE HARDWARE that attracts them - solid, reliable, dependable, attractive, durable hardware. Period. The OS is a fraction of the appeal.
As for the question, no you can't. I never said you could. I said you could do what you denied as possible in your original post.
What you don't understand is that for you, what's intuitive is what's done in Windows. By saying you've worked with Windows since before it was Windows you just proved my point on users coming from Windows.
What's "intuitive" is completely relative. It's not a flaw. It's a different method of doing the same thing. If you don't like it, it's not a flaw. It's just something that doesn't suit you and your preferences.
Snow Leopard is nothing close to perfect. Neither are Windows, Linux distros, BSD systems, you name it. It's just a different experience.
Stop dragging other people's mistakes in to our discussion. What we're discussing started from you saying it was impossible to create a custom thumbnail for a folder in Finder and me proving you could. Then you just started making up rules and laws that make no sense, since you're coming from a lifetime of Windows, you're not used to it.
Frankly, the same thing happens with other users switching from machines and OS's. Trolls like you who only join these forums to start trolling around discussing preferences and disguising them as "flaws".
Shut up, for god's sake.
in terms of dollars and figures, MACS are NOT cheaper. its a FACT. just compare the upfront cost of buying PC or MAC. Compare some predetermined prices set by the vendor, manufacturer, without you customizing it. PCs will come out cheaper.
you can't put a price on the "whole experience" of using either osx or windows.
cheapest macbook - $999.00
comparable business class Thinkpad from lenovo - http://shop.lenovo.com/SEUILibrary/...-category-id=B004765D5705496FA8CB7EE99E68D075
business Latitude from Dell - http://www.dell.com/us/en/business/...latitude-e6410&s=bsd&cs=04&~tab=ltdconfigtab1
both are cheaper than the macbook and offers more. the only two advantages i see are the dedicated graphics (i didn't check price for adding dedicated card on dell/lenovo) and the supposed "10 hour" battery life. but make sure you read the fine print of the battery life on apple.
someone said macs come with "FREE" software. how do you know that the price of those software was not included in the total price? they just don't differentiate it? it's like saying, hey guys, I'm selling a 19" wheel for $25,000.00 and if you buy it, you get a FREE CAR~~
if you are like me, you would go to a different vendor, buy a 19" wheel for $100 or so WITHOUT a "free" car.
OSX is the most advanced operating system? please. it's the most easiest, dumbed down, simplified os, yES it is. dancing icons on the dock aren't the most amazing thing. at my work, one manager was trying to convert file shares from windows to linux, they failed miserably. then we have this cio who blindly buys mac laptops in the library when nearly all students boot into windows. there are a few students with mac but its their own.
anyways, the software you've mentioned, windows has many many free applications that are nearly good.
regarding backup, "ntbackup" was built in to windows for ages. i guess you never bothered to look up.
Visual studio and Xcode are the same?
they are both development tools for different platforms yes but not same! if you are a developer, then you must know about "Technet" or "MSDN" subscription from microsoft right? With technet/msdn, you get all the tools, basically ALL of microsoft products for a fraction of the cost. finally if you like macs, use it. if you like pc, use a pc. its your choice. but to say macs are cheaper, i certainly don't agree with that.
I would really hate to see this thread dragged off to wasteland because somewhere between all these accusations that start with T and rhyme with Roll there are some interesting facts and observations here as well.
Preferring Windows over OS X does not make somebody stupid or a fanboy. There is a lot to like about Windows if it does what you need and you don't happen to operate in such a way you constantly find its warts. A Windows box can run for years with no trouble if you: don't install new software and don't change settings all the time. There are plenty of users who operate this way. The only software they ever install is Turbo Tax once a year. And I'm sure there are man of them who have never known an issue.
I'm not that kind of user. I tend to download software all the time. Lots of it. And while there is a lot more freeware available for Windows than there is for OS X, I prefer OS X because of my experience with it. There are some architectural differences here that are worth mentioning. There is no DLL hell in OS X and no registry. Drag an app to the trash and it's (mostly) gone. Try the same in Windows and you are in for some pain. If you are still using that inkjet printer you bought in 2004 then you are good to go. But if like me you decided to add a printer some time in the past 6 years, chances are you saw another of Windows' ugly warts.
Windows drivers are an ugly mess. The drivers for my old moldy HP PSC 2510 are a 700 megabyte .Net mess in Windows but a 35 Meg thing of beauty under OS X. Perhaps if I'd bought a different printer I would feel differently.
So a lot of this depends on luck. If you don't poke the sleeping dragon (registry, add or remove programs, add or remove hardware) then chances are Windows can work fine for you and you can hold on to more of your money. But if you are a tinkerer like me, there is more robustness and fault tolerance in any OS that is based on Unix. I prefer OS X to Linux because there is a pretty big outfit in Cupertino dedicated to making my end to end experience a pleasant one and they pick up the phone when I call with a problem. And the first 30 minutes of that call aren't spent trying to prove I'm not a thief. So {creatures that hide under toll bridges} begone.
Both sides are right depending on their experience. To quote a Steven Segal movie from a few years ago, "Chance favors the prepared mind." I would say that "Luck favors the OS X user." but that doesn't rule out the possibility your luck will hold up just fine with Windows 7. The next time you are in Best Buy and walk past that $999 Macbook to grab that $299 netbook, just ask yourself, {Try to imagine Clint Eastwood's voice...} "Do you feel lucky? Well do ya?" And depending on your intended use, your luck might hold up just fine.
Can we try to focus our discussion on the real reasons for pricing differences between WinDOS and Mac gear and not speculation about one another's intelligence, ancestry or species? Please?
Preferring Windows over OS X does not make somebody stupid or a fanboy. There is a lot to like about Windows if it does what you need and you don't happen to operate in such a way you constantly find its warts. A Windows box can run for years with no trouble if you: don't install new software and don't change settings all the time. There are plenty of users who operate this way. The only software they ever install is Turbo Tax once a year. And I'm sure there are man of them who have never known an issue.
I'm not that kind of user. I tend to download software all the time. Lots of it. And while there is a lot more freeware available for Windows than there is for OS X, I prefer OS X because of my experience with it. There are some architectural differences here that are worth mentioning. There is no DLL hell in OS X and no registry. Drag an app to the trash and it's (mostly) gone. Try the same in Windows and you are in for some pain. If you are still using that inkjet printer you bought in 2004 then you are good to go. But if like me you decided to add a printer some time in the past 6 years, chances are you saw another of Windows' ugly warts.
Windows drivers are an ugly mess. The drivers for my old moldy HP PSC 2510 are a 700 megabyte .Net mess in Windows but a 35 Meg thing of beauty under OS X. Perhaps if I'd bought a different printer I would feel differently.
So a lot of this depends on luck. If you don't poke the sleeping dragon (registry, add or remove programs, add or remove hardware) then chances are Windows can work fine for you and you can hold on to more of your money. But if you are a tinkerer like me, there is more robustness and fault tolerance in any OS that is based on Unix. I prefer OS X to Linux because there is a pretty big outfit in Cupertino dedicated to making my end to end experience a pleasant one and they pick up the phone when I call with a problem. And the first 30 minutes of that call aren't spent trying to prove I'm not a thief. So {creatures that hide under toll bridges} begone.
Both sides are right depending on their experience. To quote a Steven Segal movie from a few years ago, "Chance favors the prepared mind." I would say that "Luck favors the OS X user." but that doesn't rule out the possibility your luck will hold up just fine with Windows 7. The next time you are in Best Buy and walk past that $999 Macbook to grab that $299 netbook, just ask yourself, {Try to imagine Clint Eastwood's voice...} "Do you feel lucky? Well do ya?" And depending on your intended use, your luck might hold up just fine.
Can we try to focus our discussion on the real reasons for pricing differences between WinDOS and Mac gear and not speculation about one another's intelligence, ancestry or species? Please?
I'm on my second T, have an X on order ... and also have a 15" MBP. Maybe the X will better the MBP, but neither of the Ts have.
Perhaps you could please point me to where the "take photo" button is in Adobe Photoshop? Any version ever made, except for CS5 (which I haven't installed yet).
...and while one used to be able to easily import via scan within Photoshop, perhaps you can point out to me where the TWAIN support disappeared to in CS4?
Next, we'll move over to Adobe Lightroom. Where are these magical "take photo" and "run scanner" buttons there? Just please point me to exactly which menu pull-down.
Finally, want to try pointing these out in Adobe Bridge, too?
My apologies for being a bit brusque, but its quite clear that what constitutes a "PHOTO App" by one person isn't necessarily the same as for the next person.
Applications such as iPhoto and Lightroom are predominantly media organizers (including workflow), whereas Photoshop is about the image and doesn't really do squat to help keep your catalog organized.
Yet it is still included in the box. Perhaps if MS believed that they could actually successfully charge anyone for updates to their "Photo & Fax" viewer (etc), MS would have followed a similar business plan to what Apple has done with iLife.
YMMV. From a ROI perspective, I view it as Apple making a reasonably correct guess that I don't want to waste my valuable time on inane BS details.
As was pointed out, Time is Money, and this really gets into the real shortcoming of this thread's debate, which is that all systems have hidden costs of operation (including one's time) that get overshadowed by simplistic comparisons of initial purchase prices.
The notional illustration of this paradigm is as follows: if you had the choice betwen two personal computers, and the one was $200 cheaper, but it required an additional 20 hours of maintenance per month, would you save the bucks and 'pay' in your time, or would you pony up the extra $200?
Q: And how long ago was that?
A: Before 2003.
Given that we're talking about historical elements from 7+ years (and thus, 5 Moore's Law lifespans) ago, I think that this is such a moot point to be bordering on disingenous.
Yet that feature is the default in XP. I don't doubt that it can be turned off/disabled ... but for whatever reason, at least our local IT Dept has chosen to not adopt what you suggest for the corporate 'Golden Master'.
-hh
You know, in a lot of ways, I prefer Windows 7 to Snow Leopard.
Also, we can get into all this (feature x vs feature y) sort of thing but there is one thing that I find interesting.
Sure Microsoft "steals" ideas from Apple but that's the world. What I find odd is that while Microsoft is doing just about every damn thing it can to make Windows better, Apple has been seriously lacking on their operating system advancement. I haven't noticed any new features in Snow Leopard that wasn't available in Leopard, and in some cases Tiger. Sure they have a lot right now and there isn't too much I'd ask for. It seems like Apples much more focused on the iOS right now... which is really not that great.
It's just Apple seems to have this vision that their OS is already perfect, which its far from.
Also, every ThinkPad I've owned (T23, T42, T43, T61, T510, x41 Tablet) are all built better than any Apple I've used. Sure its made out of plastic, but damn they know how to reinforce that stuff.
It also costs SLIGHTLY less than an equivalent Mac (about 1200 for a good i5 machine and 1400 for a good i7 based one)
Also, we can get into all this (feature x vs feature y) sort of thing but there is one thing that I find interesting.
Sure Microsoft "steals" ideas from Apple but that's the world. What I find odd is that while Microsoft is doing just about every damn thing it can to make Windows better, Apple has been seriously lacking on their operating system advancement. I haven't noticed any new features in Snow Leopard that wasn't available in Leopard, and in some cases Tiger. Sure they have a lot right now and there isn't too much I'd ask for. It seems like Apples much more focused on the iOS right now... which is really not that great.
It's just Apple seems to have this vision that their OS is already perfect, which its far from.
Also, every ThinkPad I've owned (T23, T42, T43, T61, T510, x41 Tablet) are all built better than any Apple I've used. Sure its made out of plastic, but damn they know how to reinforce that stuff.
It also costs SLIGHTLY less than an equivalent Mac (about 1200 for a good i5 machine and 1400 for a good i7 based one)
These threads should be deleted.
As an advanced user of both Macs and PC (I drive a Mac at home and admin a large windows network at work) nearly everything in the first post is wrong and clearly written by someone who doesn't know PC's as well as Macs.
The fact is, they are very comparable. As I said, I use both, like both, and have problems with both.
<comprehensive rebuttal to everything you said deleted>
As an advanced user of both Macs and PC (I drive a Mac at home and admin a large windows network at work) nearly everything in the first post is wrong and clearly written by someone who doesn't know PC's as well as Macs.
The fact is, they are very comparable. As I said, I use both, like both, and have problems with both.
<comprehensive rebuttal to everything you said deleted>
I honestly think they don't. In the 90's microsoft stole everything, but with both Vista and now Windows 7 Windows is becoming further from the Mac.
The new taskbar isn't that different from the vista taskbar-they just iconized what used to be textual. Windows has allowed non-running apps to be stuck to the taskbar since windows 95 but it was turned off by default. They called it the shortcut bar. Thats not new and not copying Apple.
Microsoft is attempting to innovate new ways to access functions within an application with the ribbon concept. Like the ribbon or not, it is not copied from Apple, and is a big part of where Microsoft is going and a cornerstone of Windows 7's look and feel.
Microsofts idea is that users spend to much time in menus and want to make common features easier to find. The ribbon might be a bad idea, but at least it is a new idea based on a goal that benifits the users.
Base Mac Pro with six core option + standard ram (3 GB) + Apple care + my state tax = $4185.
Booo! Hiss!
Booo! Hiss!
Cost Of Ownership
People can say MacOS isn't advanced but it is one of the most advanced OS on the planet. Micro-Kernel, run time binding, etc... Windows or Windoesn't do most of that. Install an application, reboot. Remove an application, reboot. Let it sit long enough and it reboots itself. I daily use CentOS, Redhat, MacOS and Windows. There are but two flavors of MacOS. How many Windows 7 flavors???
Don't even get me talking about the messed up job of networking in Windows.
I administer a network is a NetApp, 6 additional NAS boxes, 40 or so PC's all running Xp, Vista and 7, Servers running RedHat and CentOS and several Macs.
The Mac's can directly mount via NFS home directories and anything else on the NetApp or NAS boxes. The PC's require samba services on the server side and some errant PC is always screwing up the Samba server. I can go on and on about Windows and PCs.
I prefer to administer the Macs because they just work. X11 comes shipped in the configuration. Try getting a PC to play well with X11 in an engineering env. Yea I know all about Ming and the paid programs. You can't even do SSH without getting Putty or some other client on the PC side.
Anyway, try configuring a Dell machine like a MacPro and see what it costs.
Do not compare a Mac to a bargain PC. The only comparison comes from tier one manufacturers.
People can say MacOS isn't advanced but it is one of the most advanced OS on the planet. Micro-Kernel, run time binding, etc... Windows or Windoesn't do most of that. Install an application, reboot. Remove an application, reboot. Let it sit long enough and it reboots itself. I daily use CentOS, Redhat, MacOS and Windows. There are but two flavors of MacOS. How many Windows 7 flavors???
Don't even get me talking about the messed up job of networking in Windows.
I administer a network is a NetApp, 6 additional NAS boxes, 40 or so PC's all running Xp, Vista and 7, Servers running RedHat and CentOS and several Macs.
The Mac's can directly mount via NFS home directories and anything else on the NetApp or NAS boxes. The PC's require samba services on the server side and some errant PC is always screwing up the Samba server. I can go on and on about Windows and PCs.
I prefer to administer the Macs because they just work. X11 comes shipped in the configuration. Try getting a PC to play well with X11 in an engineering env. Yea I know all about Ming and the paid programs. You can't even do SSH without getting Putty or some other client on the PC side.
Anyway, try configuring a Dell machine like a MacPro and see what it costs.
Do not compare a Mac to a bargain PC. The only comparison comes from tier one manufacturers.
I agree the ribbon represents innovation. I can't find a way to get used to it. Maybe it's the way I do my work flow, but I find using menus easier than using the ribbon. I'm constantly having to do "extra clicks" to get from the formatting ribbon to the views ribbon back to the formatting ribbon. It's aggravating. And yes, I've moved a few frequently used features to the "ready bar" (or whatever microsoft calls it), but I'm still constantly clicking to get from the ribbon MS thinks I need to the ribbon I really need. On Office 2003, the function I needed was always available by following menu structure without being forced to "hide" functionality I would need a few seconds later. Perhaps the ribbon should be shrunk to the size of a toolbar and I should be allowed to create my own toolbar so I can get out of my endless cycle of toggling between ribbons. There is an add-on for Office 2007 that allows bringing back the old menus but I'm not about to pay for an add on for a machine I don't own.
Speaking of spending too much time in menus, the Spotlight saves me from this on my Mac. I've almost completely depopulated my dock. I simply click spotlight, type one or two characters and pick the app I want to run. I know the Spotlight (and in turn Quicksilver) are capable of so much more but I just love not having to spend any of my time in the Start Menu. Rather than force developers to write code to place shortcuts in the Start Menu, Apple does the work for them. Spotlight finds everything in Applications mere seconds after it's installed. Another annoyance is apps that put shortcuts all over the place and an icon in the system tray, often without asking. I don't blame MS for bad behavior of a developer any more than I blame Apple when OS X apps do the same kind of stupid stuff (most often apps written by developers used to the Windows platform). I just run across these badly written third party app annoyances more often when I'm using Windows.
BTW, I don't agree about deleting these threads, but perhaps they should be merged into a sticky "Mac vs PC" thread whenever they do crop up.
@PeterQVenkman: I agree wholeheartedly. That's almost mainframe pricing. Let's see six cores. You could run 6 Mac Minis for that amount of money and use screensharing or VNC to run 5 of them "headless" doing calculations in the background. Sheesh.
@PowerGamerX: Good for you. There's no earthly reason why you shouldn't. It's about what works for you and not what anybody else thinks. BTW, those Lenovos aren't "made out of plastic". Many of them include a magnesium chassis inside and are known to withstand astounding levels of abuse. I like the industrial design of the unibody 13" Macbook Pro better so that is likely to be my next machine (or possibly a Macbook Air if the price drops).
Have you lost your mind?
1.- You can't compare different versions of Windows to different versions of OS X. It's just silly. Windows versions are made public every 3-4 years. OS X versions vary from half a year to 3 years. They're different concepts.
2.-Have you considered the possibility of Apple liking their work so far and thus not wanting to ruin it by changing a lot of superficial stuff? Most of the changes from version to version are much deeper into the OS. Security issues, speed, etc.
3.- How would you have any idea what Apple is focusing on? Just because they've announced iOS 4 and the iPhone 4 recently doesn't mean they're ignoring OS X.
Yes, OS/X is advanced, but no more so than Windows. Windows has a microkernel (equivalent) but Microsoft calls it the Windows Executive. And Windows also supports run time binding. Both of these date back to Windows NT 3.1, so you can't even say that Microsoft copied Apple.
Windows beat Apple to Preemtive Multitasking as well. Until OS/X was released, Mac users had cooperative multitasking. But that's history, both have it now and that is what counts.
While it is certainly hated, the windows registry is more advanced and more efficent in terms of space and performace than hundreds of preference files.
Lot's of operating system tasks in OSX are shell scripts which are interpeted at runtime. Less effecent than compiled exe's and dll's that Windows uses.
I'm not saying OS/X isn't advanced, or that Windows is better. I prefer to be able to look at preference files and shell scripts and use a Mac at home. But Windows is just as advanced and has many advanced features. On any specific feature one might beat the other. But take all features together as a whole and they are pretty comparable.
The whole mac vs. pc thing is stupid, which is why I suggested the thread be deleted. Buy what you like and be done with it.
OSX is the better-designed OS. And also gets some advantages from its small market share like lack of viruses and spyware.
Windows 7 is good, but its advantages mostly stem from its monopoly position in the marketplace, from its business model and from its ties to OFfice - MS's other monopoly. IT's not the better product.
But its cheaper to get into Windows. MOre software runs on it. The real full version of Office is only found on Windows. Mac version is always gimped and behind the curve in features/release date.
Windows 7 is good, but its advantages mostly stem from its monopoly position in the marketplace, from its business model and from its ties to OFfice - MS's other monopoly. IT's not the better product.
But its cheaper to get into Windows. MOre software runs on it. The real full version of Office is only found on Windows. Mac version is always gimped and behind the curve in features/release date.
Wow... there is nothing more efficient about the registry or DLLs. Those things are too easily compromised and corruptable.
Cue fake story when I ask if this has ever happened to you. Its never happened to me since 1995 aka never. Neither has a failed hard drive though so maybe Im lucky.
Yes, consider yourself one of those "Lucky" Windows Defenders.
The real question to ask yourself if you've ever had the occasion (since only 1995) to wipe/reinstall on any of your machines.
Anytime that the answer was 'yes', this means that you didn't really diagnose everything that was wrong with it - - you simply shotgunned a solution with what is now the default 'fix' on Windows: wipe the sucker and start over.
Granted, the Mac's OS isn't immune from having problems either - - its just that the configuration of Windows makes it more vulnerable to getting messed up, and its degree of ... call it "bloatware complexity" ... is what manifests itself in the 'Nuclear Option of wiping a Windows PC as what is now their preferred means of repair.
To humorously abuse an automotive analogy, its like pouring gasoline over your car, light it, then acid-clean the burned out shell, then reinstalling a new interior and repainting the exterior ... all because the cigarette ash tray was full.
-hh
Well, the first thing you notice is that the Snow Leopard installation take up only about 5GB, Leopard takes up about 7GB more disk space.
Snow Leopard is capable of running in 64Bit, Leopard's kernel runs 32Bit, but Leopard runs 64Bit Applications. Windows does that? No. It's either 32Bit-only or 64Bit w/ 32Bit Apps, SL does that as well.
Finder and QuickTimeX have been rewritten in Cocoa in order to run 64Bit.
TimeMachine backups are much faster.
Snow Leopard introduces GCD and OpenCL.
Have a look here.
If you don't see any difference from Tiger, read this as well.
The purpose of Snow Leopard is better usage of the Intel architecture, by dropping PPC and concentrating on developing Intel-only code. That's why older G4 and G5 machines are still fine with Leopard, and why Apple calls it "Leopard, finely tuned."
10.7 will take that even further, I guess.