Why a Mac costs more than a PC...

[revelated]

I don't understand how you find it hard to "take" (?) photos from iPhoto. You find the photo, and drag it to where you want it, be that a Pages document, Finder window or a new Mail message.

Rocket science.

Not MOVE photos. TAKE photos. As in, take my picture? Something it can't do natively? That's why I mentioned Photo Booth after that. If I'm in a picture app - ANY picture app - I should be able to snap a webcam photo or import from a TWAIN scanner. I see neither in iPhoto. In fact it's extremely limited compared to almost every competitor, including the outstanding IrfanView, another FREE app I neglected to mention.

 

[userexec]

I try not to get too caught up in the numbers game of which computer has more GHz or RAM anymore. It often has very little to do with the user experience. The university I used to attend dropped nearly $2000 on this insane Lenovo for research I was conducting, and straight out of the box it was just a nightmare. Despite all the numbers, it was often infuriatingly slow even when completing the most mundane tasks. I ended up finishing that project on my old iBook G4 simply because it did the same things quicker and without constantly losing my work. So much of that had to do with the interrelation between OS and applications, though. Still, in that instance a $200 outdated Mac was better than one specific PC counterpart 10x the price. Put simply, I trust a Mac to come straight out of the box and do an excellent job at whatever I need it to do. I'm willing to pay a little more up front for that, even if I could potentially get a PC that is faster (at least in terms of numbers).

 

[Aniki]

I like macs and PCs, but this is a load of bull. You can build yourself a desktop more powerful than a mac pro with a 4870. Also note the mac pro 4870 adds $200 to the cost and is only 512 mb of vRam.

Here's a build that easily outperforms the upgraded mac pro with a 4870.



4870/Xeon X3450/4 GB DDR3 1600 MHz RAM/Modular PSU/32 MB cache 7200 RPM 640 GB HDD/ for $812. That's 1/3rd the price of a Mac Pro.

If you're gonna complain about the case, I'll add one that's more "mac like" and it's still under a grand

Macs are horribly overpriced. Not to mention if you have half a brain you can hackintosh these custom builds. I just felt the need to say that apple overprices out of their ass for their macs >_>

 

[Giuly]

I agree with you in principle...but some of your facts/figures are flawed. Sorry dude. It's clear to me that you have never used Windows 7.



I would agree if it wasn't essentially Unix with a GUI. This argument leads one to believe that something like Linspire is an "advanced" OS. It isn't. It's Linux with a GUI.



iTunes is horrible. Simply horrible. Compared to Windows Media Center, Zune Marketplace or even the old Sony Connect product, iTunes is counter intuitive. Just the simple art of burning a CD takes way too many steps (create playlist, add songs to playlist, burn playlist to CD instead of just dragging the files to the CD in the order you want and clicking Burn). It's also extremely bloated, choking on all but full-on DSL or greater internet connection speeds. The only time iTunes wins is for movies/trailers.



Some of the apps in iLife are downright clunky. iMovie, for example, has a horrific interface. iPhoto is decent, but it's silly that you can't actually TAKE photos from there without jumping through hoops. Photo Booth is a nice concept, but it's an app that belongs on an iPod or some other mobile device. iDVD I understand has been removed from the newer version and likely for good reason.

A better list:

iPhoto = Windows Live Photo Viewer, Windows Media Center. Both freely available. Picasa is bloated.

iMovie = Windows Live Movie Maker, VirtualDub. Both free. And Live Movie Maker blows iMovie out of the water in terms of simplicity, even integrating direct APIs to upload videos to popular sites.

iDVD = Windows Media Center, Windows Live Movie Maker. Both free.

iWeb = Windows Live Writer, Visual Web Developer. Both free.

GarageBand = Audacity for Windows. Free. In some ways superior to GarageBand in terms of flexibility of editing, plugins, and export formats.





Negative. Windows has had built in backup support since Windows 2000. Windows 7's Backup and Restore even takes it to the next level; its only limitation is the need to buy Professional or Ultimate to backup to a network location, otherwise it's just as functional as Time Machine and will complete the backup significantly faster.




You must not know much about Visual Studio. Express 2010 will do 90% of what developers need. Xcode also does not come with a robust database software like SQL Express, whereas Visual Studio Express does.


And I don't know where you got your pricing summary, but trust me. There isn't one app on the Mac that I can't find a free, solid (in some cases, superior) alternative on Windows. Not one.

Don't delude yourselves. I've said it for years. It's all about the quality of the hardware, not the software running in it. Windows Vista SP2 runs so well in Boot Camp on a MacBook Pro that it's almost criminal.

1. You can't compare GarageBand to Audacity. This is like comparing the Windows TextEditor to emacs or vi. Ever hooked up an electric guitar to GarageBand/Audacity? I did. Or took piano lessons in Audacity?

Well, I don't know about the others. I'll have a look on them later. Windws Movie Maker can't compete with iMovie. And WMP couldn't make fancy DVD-menus, last time I used it. Nero can.

SQL Express? You saw CoreData with it's integration into Xcode and the stuff Jobs did on NEXTstep in the video posted earlier (which was in 1992 and still works today)?

And the GUI/OS thing was clarified on page 4 or so. Just a misunderstanding on the usage of the terms GUI (or Desktop Environment), OS and Distribution.

And there is an explanation, why Mac OS X is the most advanced OS (Or distribution of Darwin) out there. The reason why it Is the most advanced out there, is exactly because it's UNIX with a GUI and fancy stuff.

 

[ramzhh]

I agree with you in principle...but some of your facts/figures are flawed. Sorry dude. It's clear to me that you have never used Windows 7.



I would agree if it wasn't essentially Unix with a GUI. This argument leads one to believe that something like Linspire is an "advanced" OS. It isn't. It's Linux with a GUI.



iTunes is horrible. Simply horrible. Compared to Windows Media Center, Zune Marketplace or even the old Sony Connect product, iTunes is counter intuitive. Just the simple art of burning a CD takes way too many steps (create playlist, add songs to playlist, burn playlist to CD instead of just dragging the files to the CD in the order you want and clicking Burn). It's also extremely bloated, choking on all but full-on DSL or greater internet connection speeds. The only time iTunes wins is for movies/trailers.



Some of the apps in iLife are downright clunky. iMovie, for example, has a horrific interface. iPhoto is decent, but it's silly that you can't actually TAKE photos from there without jumping through hoops. Photo Booth is a nice concept, but it's an app that belongs on an iPod or some other mobile device. iDVD I understand has been removed from the newer version and likely for good reason.

A better list:

iPhoto = Windows Live Photo Viewer, Windows Media Center. Both freely available. Picasa is bloated.

iMovie = Windows Live Movie Maker, VirtualDub. Both free. And Live Movie Maker blows iMovie out of the water in terms of simplicity, even integrating direct APIs to upload videos to popular sites.

iDVD = Windows Media Center, Windows Live Movie Maker. Both free.

iWeb = Windows Live Writer, Visual Web Developer. Both free.

GarageBand = Audacity for Windows. Free. In some ways superior to GarageBand in terms of flexibility of editing, plugins, and export formats.





Negative. Windows has had built in backup support since Windows 2000. Windows 7's Backup and Restore even takes it to the next level; its only limitation is the need to buy Professional or Ultimate to backup to a network location, otherwise it's just as functional as Time Machine and will complete the backup significantly faster.




You must not know much about Visual Studio. Express 2010 will do 90% of what developers need. Xcode also does not come with a robust database software like SQL Express, whereas Visual Studio Express does.


And I don't know where you got your pricing summary, but trust me. There isn't one app on the Mac that I can't find a free, solid (in some cases, superior) alternative on Windows. Not one.

Don't delude yourselves. I've said it for years. It's all about the quality of the hardware, not the software running in it. Windows Vista SP2 runs so well in Boot Camp on a MacBook Pro that it's almost criminal.

Oh my god... wait... let me read that one more time...

Oh my god. Did you just compare GarageBand to Audacity? WHAT?! They're two different concepts. They're so different that it's just STUPID to compare them.

And if you say software doesn't matter, then I must say, you're either too noobish to understand or just plain stupid.

 

[jameswgarner]

I left that out on purpose, as Office is A) more comprehensive and B) Available on both PC and Mac. As soon as anyone uses a Mac, he'll switch to iWork anyways.

But "Avarage Steve" will update his MacBook soon (aka I'll add a passage about the prices of used Macs vs. used PCs).

I respectfully disagree about iWork. My purchase was a mistake. I cannot figure out a way to make Numbers do AutoFilter. That is a show stopper.

 

[revelated]

Oh my god... wait... let me read that one more time...

Oh my god. Did you just compare GarageBand to Audacity? WHAT?! They're two different concepts. They're so different that it's just STUPID to compare them.

The initial comment was that GarageBand was this fantastic app that has no peer on Windows. I'm simply countering that argument as false on its face.

The majority of people using GarageBand are (A) recording and (B) editing. Audacity does both with more options. What's the problem here?

• Audacity handles larger files than GarageBand.
• It also has more flexibility with its filters.
• It has background noise filtering made easy unlike GarageBand.
• It will drag-and-drop strip audio from just about any video file including FLV files, unlike GarageBand.
• If I need to change the pitch of a song without altering its tempo, Audacity is the easiest way to do it.
• If I want to take a multi-stream audio and mute parts of it to create a multi-track recording, Audacity does it; I have to buy ScreenFlow or Logic Pro to do that otherwise.
• Audacity supports OGG; GarageBand does not.
• Audacity lets me manually add dead space in audio files - GarageBand does not, at least not without futzing.
• Audacity lets me zoom into the visual EQ to fine-edit; GarageBand does not. And by zoom I mean ZOOM. So far in it that I can edit micromilliseconds - if there were such an increment.
• GarageBand swallows when it comes to editing pre-existing files. Audacity lets me strip and segregate audio streams if I need to. I can even break stereo tracks into two and work them separately.

GarageBand is a solid application if you're "creating" something. It swallows at editing. That summarizes those bullets above. That said, for people who are "creating" stuff, Audacity is more than sufficient once you learn how to use it - in fact, you'll see it's significantly more powerful and flexible than GarageBand.

I'll have a look on them later. Windws Movie Maker can't compete with iMovie. And WMP couldn't make fancy DVD-menus, last time I used it. Nero can.

Windows LIVE Movie Maker runs circles around iMovie; not the same thing as Windows Movie Maker. Again, you haven't used Windows 7 lately.

As far as "Fancy" DVD menus, yet again, you haven't used Windows 7 lately. Windows DVD Maker, if you want to get picky about menus.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_DVD_Maker

 

[thejadedmonkey]

And there is an explanation, why Mac OS X is the most advanced OS (Or distribution of Darwin) out there. The reason why it Is the most advanced out there, is exactly because it's UNIX with a GUI and fancy stuff.

OS X is NOT the most advanced OS out there. But because advanced is subjective, go ahead, keep telling yourself you have the best, because if by best you mean least kernel panics, than even Windows has you beat

 

[ramzhh]

The initial comment was that GarageBand was this fantastic app that has no peer on Windows. I'm simply countering that argument as false on its face.

The majority of people using GarageBand are (A) recording and (B) editing. Audacity does both with more options. What's the problem here?

• Audacity handles larger files than GarageBand.
• It also has more flexibility with its filters.
• It has background noise filtering made easy unlike GarageBand.
• It will drag-and-drop strip audio from just about any video file including FLV files, unlike GarageBand.
• If I need to change the pitch of a song without altering its tempo, Audacity is the easiest way to do it.
• If I want to take a multi-stream audio and mute parts of it to create a multi-track recording, Audacity does it; I have to buy ScreenFlow or Logic Pro to do that otherwise.
• Audacity supports OGG; GarageBand does not.
• Audacity lets me manually add dead space in audio files - GarageBand does not, at least not without futzing.
• Audacity lets me zoom into the visual EQ to fine-edit; GarageBand does not. And by zoom I mean ZOOM. So far in it that I can edit micromilliseconds - if there were such an increment.
• GarageBand swallows when it comes to editing pre-existing files. Audacity lets me strip and segregate audio streams if I need to. I can even break stereo tracks into two and work them separately.

GarageBand is a solid application if you're "creating" something. It swallows at editing. That summarizes those bullets above. That said, for people who are "creating" stuff, Audacity is more than sufficient once you learn how to use it - in fact, you'll see it's significantly more powerful and flexible than GarageBand.




Windows LIVE Movie Maker runs circles around iMovie; not the same thing as Windows Movie Maker. Again, you haven't used Windows 7 lately.

As far as "Fancy" DVD menus, yet again, you haven't used Windows 7 lately. Windows DVD Maker, if you want to get picky about menus.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_DVD_Maker

You just described how different Audacity and GarageBand are. You CANNOT compare them.

 

[chatfan]

Hey NERDS get out more, who the **** still cares about this bs? Want a mac, buy one, don't want a mac? Don't buy one.. yeah it is that simple.

Now piss off. with all the so called logic, it's all BS.

 

[trip1ex]

Windows Live Photo viewer sucks compared to iPhoto. Not even close.

Same thing for Windows Live Movie Maker and iMovie. iMovie is much better.

Mail on Mac is better than Windows Live Mail except Live Mail has better layout like the iPad mail. Windows Live's handling of gmail and unread mail is lame. Nice feature to see a quickview of unread mail, but it also shows all unread junk mail in the same virtual box. No way to change that. So its useless.

Then under gmail I have INbox and then another GMail subfolder and in there a box called All Mail which shows all the inbox mail? Confusing as all hell. I delete thing in my INbox under gmail and then under the sub-folder gmail folder "all mail" still has those emails. Blah.

In general included built-in Mac software better designed than built-in Windows software. Apple trims alot of the noise out of the experience. Sometimes they overprune, but MS's stuff is the work of many seamstresses patching together a quilt from various requested pieces of cloth.

Windows Explorer seems easier to use than Finder though. And Apple too focused on minimalism for its own good. Icons/buttons/scroll bars/etc are bigger in Windows and easier to click which makes for better usability.

I'm finding IE8 to be a faster/more responsive than Safari. We will see how long that lasts.

Safari has nice features like resizing text boxes in mesage boards, easy emailing of webpages and automatic window size formatting built into OSX by hitting the green button.

 

[Giuly]

OS X is NOT the most advanced OS out there. But because advanced is subjective, go ahead, keep telling yourself you have the best, because if by best you mean least kernel panics, than even Windows has you beat

Advanced is when I can fix a bug in the kernel myself.
When I can access low-level system stuff easily via comandline.
When everything is just a file that has to implement at least useful read/write functions. May it be an DVD-Drive or a video capture card.
When I can verbose the boot-process.
When everything is documented, accessible and understandable.
And so on, and so forth, but this describes modern UNIXes in general. I just prefer, as I stated earlier, Aqua over gnome and KDE, also there is better software available for Mac OS X and the GTK/QT-stuff runs in a X11-window.
Your Hauppauge card may not work, but hey, get an EyeTV or the same hardware branded as terratec for half the price plus software. Your graphics card not work, but hey, I've got news for you, PCs will switch to UEFI, too, and you don't need to flash your card anymore. Someone just needs to take nVidia Linux-drivers, port them to OSX on his own and update them recently, and every recent cards will work.

 

[Mike225]

i love macs but i have to say that some of the stuff you mentioned is just bull. OSX being the most advanced operating system out there? thats the biggest fanboy statement someone could say.

number one in hardware? i suppose you meant the build of it. i personally dont like the aluminum that they are using on MBP because they get dented way too easily. i do agree about the build quality of older macs though. theyre are pretty though. also, have you used thinkpads before? far more durable than any mac out there and i have to say, i love the look of them. many people dont though. in terms of the specs, you can get a pc with far grater specs for a lot less. some people need that power, so would a mac be worth it to them then?

in terms of software you are right, but you put too much value to it as they're selling the ilife package at a much lower price than you stated. also, there are so much more options for free software for the mac that you cant get on a mac. there are also lost of software that you cant get on a mac that some people need. lost of 3D software is Windows only. im sure right now yorue thinking BOOTCAMP (duh), but why run windows software with bootcamp if you can run it far better on a pc with better specs??

the OS argument is somewhat true. what makes the development process for new Microsoft OS is that it has to make changes for so much more hardware and software for compatibility. OSX doesnt have to go through as much. its really a lot more work. this is the reason for the pricing. also, OXS gets new versions more regular while Windows has a 3 year cycle. If you ever tried vista and windows 7, the improvement form their predecessor was HUGE! (although vista should have been tested out more before release)

your development argument shouldn't be there at all. there are only a handful of people that buy macs for development. also, like the OS argument, theres a lot more to be done with windows development because of compatibility. also, most developers who spend that much make so much more in software sales.

you could say that its Microsofts fault for wanting to be compatible with all hardware, but i think thats just being plain selfish. they're doing it so that more people have access these kinds of tools for information. sure, its all business, but its their system, and cheaper hardware that is allowing even very poor people access to the same kind of information we are through the internet.

lastly, the mac community is like a cult, not for all but for many. i mean, you're posting on a site called "macrumors.com" right? i dont think there is a "sony rumors" (there is one but its not focused on computers). or "dellrumors" "or "hprumors". you're posting about how macs are better than pc's right? by creating the thread, you just proved it. by taking the time to actually look for arguments and posting them, you just proved it.

well, thats me trying to give an unbiased opinion. i love macs and use one myself, but i cant say that they are always worth it it depends on who is using it. it could be worth it to some, but not worth it to others. its still kinda early for me and im still a bit sleepy so i apologize for any typos or sentences that dont make sense at all have a nice day everyone

Very well constructed post.

 

[ramzhh]

Very well constructed post.

Actually most of what he said was complete ********

 

[revelated]

Windows Live Photo viewer sucks compared to iPhoto. Not even close.

Can you take/scan a photo in iPhoto? No. That alone makes Live Photo Viewer superior. One feature a PHOTO app should have, one that even IrfanView has. In fact I can't think of a single photo app on Windows that isn't superior to iPhoto.

Same thing for Windows Live Movie Maker and iMovie. iMovie is much better.

Instead of giving an opinionated claim, how about providing functionality that backs up what you say? Because in my experience, iMovie is significantly clunky compared to Live Movie Maker doing the same thing - editing movies.

Mail on Mac is better than Windows Live Mail except Live Mail has better layout like the iPad mail. Windows Live's handling of gmail and unread mail is lame. Nice feature to see a quickview of unread mail, but it also shows all unread junk mail in the same virtual box. No way to change that.

This I agree with...

So its useless.

This I do not. I don't use Live Mail; I use whatever with Gmail's IMAP or I'll use Gmail's web interface. But Live Mail is superior for anyone using Hotmail, bar none.

In general included built-in Mac software better designed than built-in Windows software. Apple trims alot of the noise out of the experience. Sometimes they overprune, but MS's stuff is the work of many seamstresses patching together a quilt from various requested pieces of cloth.

The only "built in" Mac software you've mentioned is Mail. iLife is not "built in", it's thrown in, but it's not part of Snow Leopard. Let's be accurate here. In any case, I can do more with Windows' built-in apps. They don't try to assume I do or do not want something. The common theme with the majority of Apple's built-in or secondary apps is: The user is too stupid to understand this, so let's hide/remove/exclude it. Case-in-point: autofilter.

Windows Explorer seems easier to use than Finder though. And Apple too focused on minimalism for its own good. Icons/buttons/scroll bars/etc are bigger in Windows and easier to click which makes for better usability.

Windows 7 is also more intuitive than Snow Leopard in many ways.

Examples:

• If you copy a same-named folder to a location with another folder, Windows will ask you if you want to merge the files and do so automatically. Snow Leopard just yells about dupes.
• Windows 7 understands the nature of hot-plugging USB/Firewire/SD drives. Snow Leopard yells at you about the "proper" way to eject drives even though it shouldn't matter anymore and hasn't since Windows 2000.
• Windows 7 lets you manage folder thumbnails (excellent for movies, or music art). Snow Leopard does not.
• Copy speed, which ironically was an issue in Vista, has now surpassed Snow Leopard. This is my biggest irritant with SL is how slow it copies files, even locally.
• Startup items management. Windows shows it all in MSCONFIG. Apple *might* show it in Login Items, but other stuff just runs freely.

I love my MacBook Pro. I refuse to own another PC. But I'm smart enough to accept and understand the instances when Windows is superior. Microsoft put a LOT of work into Windows 7 and it shows.

Safari has nice features like resizing text boxes in mesage boards, easy emailing of webpages and automatic window size formatting built into OSX by hitting the green button.

See, I can't stand Safari. It is missing the one feature I would absolutely expect Apple's flagship to have: three-finger Home/End. It is appalling that this feature is not present yet Firefox handles it just fine.

 

[EgbertAttrick]

I recently (begrudgingly) sold my 5-year old 12-inch PowerBook. It was still in perfect working order when I sold it, and still used it nearly every day.

My current 2-year old MacBook Pro performs better than most PC laptops on the market, today, and I expect to get another 2-3 years use out if it.

My first laptop? It was a Compaq something-or-other. Just out of warranty, the motherboard died. And we don't need to mention the fragile keys on the keyboard, the broken power input, the bulky charger, and the slooooooooowness of the damn thing.

HOWEVER!!!

I have spent about $580 in replacement batteries and POWER BRICKS for these laptops. Apple's power accessories are their weak point.

 

[Spartan-117]

Are you being paid by apple Gluly ?

Cos you do realise majority of banking / financial software dose NOT run on OSX and even on parallels it sucks cos it runs at snails paces. You can use boot camp but you cant go see a client have them wait while you reboot your machine then use xp then reboot again into mac to connect to your exchange servers.

Also another main problem with mac's is the dated hardware, apple releases new models periodically every 6 months+, this is not the case with manufactures such as Intel which might release a bunch of new processors then 3 months down the line nVidia or AMD might release a brand new graphics card. A pc user could just upgrade to the latest part no problems, but using iMac makes it nearly impossible for a standard user to upgrade the gfx or cpu.

I really do wonder if you getting paid by apple

 

[bkap16]

Lets just compare the hardware. First of all, comparing the Mac Pros is ridiculous- they haven't been updated in a year, of course they're outdated. Wait until the new ones are released. Let's look at someting more recent. Say the $1700, 27" iMac.

27" 2560x1440 display: $1100 from Dell (cheapest one I can find)
Intel Core i3-550 (3.2GHz dual core) : $150 from New Egg
512MB Radeon 5670 : $88 from New Egg
2x2GB DDR3 1333 RAM: $81 from New Egg
1TB 7200RPM Hard drive: $75 from New Egg

So now we're at about $1500. That leaves $200 to buy the motherboard, power supply, OS, case, fan, webcam, speakers, wi-fi card, optical drive, and anything else I may be forgetting. I'd say the iMac is a pretty darn good deal here.

 

[Giuly]

Lets just compare the hardware. First of all, comparing the Mac Pros is ridiculous- they haven't been updated in a year, of course they're outdated. Wait until the new ones are released. Let's look at someting more recent. Say the $1700, 27" iMac.

27" 2560x1440 display: $1100 from Dell (cheapest one I can find)
Intel Core i3-550 (3.2GHz dual core) : $150 from New Egg
512MB Radeon 5670 : $88 from New Egg
2x2GB DDR3 1333 RAM: $81 from New Egg
1TB 7200RPM Hard drive: $75 from New Egg

So now we're at about $1500. That leaves $200 to buy the motherboard, power supply, OS, case, fan, webcam, speakers, wi-fi card, optical drive, and anything else I may be forgetting. I'd say the iMac is a pretty darn good deal here.

The 27" iMac is a good deal (now! In 3-4 month this will look different, no doubt. There will be i4 Sandy Bridge, Radeon 6xxx and what not). So is the dual processor MacPro, even if it's 1 year old. Will good will you could say that the Mini has good price may it be only in term of processing power per cubic inch.
The MacBooks are OK for what you get, at least they give you no reason to mowl around.

But everything else has an artificial price to fit in-between. The 21.5" IPS display is $400, the 27" is $900 (btw). The single processor MacPro is heavily overpriced right now, but let's see what we have later this month.
I guess we all agree that you should have bought a Mini in June, or an iMac RIGHT NOW, and the MacPro right when it comes out - if they offer value for the money again.

 

[star-affinity]

It's that I love IE8 or anything, but it seems ....snappier than Safari in my general web surfing. My only guess is I have a slightly faster pc now than my IMac, IE still has the lions marketshare (you design you website first and foremost to the market leader,) and it's a new computer - no baggage yet. Doesn't help my experience that 5.0 seems to have made Safari worse performance-wise than before. Quite a few crashes as of late even with Flash blocked.

I think it's a combination of a faster computer and that web sites containing Flash elements are rendered a little quicker and ”more lightweight” on Windows (it seems even if you have a Flash blocker on the Mac side of things). I have compared both Windows 7 and Mac OS X 10.6(.4) on the same hardware and I also notice this, but on pages where there's no Flash I don't know if there's such a big difference.

The big advantage for Windows 7 is when it comes to scrolling of heavy web sites. Even the ones with a lot of Flash elements are more smooth to scroll and seem to eat less CPU than doing the same thing in Mac OS X (except for Safari which seem to offload scrolling to the graphics card, but scrolling is quite laggy since Flash 10.1 came around).

Don't agree with the small buttons in Mac OS X, though. Well, perhaps the ”maximize, restore and close” buttons are a little bigger and easier to ”hit” in Windows 7, but otherwise I think it's overall easier to hit ”the spot” in Mac OS X, especially since the menu is fixed to the top of the screen – can't miss it,

 

[Pentad]

You get what you pay for. I take my computer serious and thus I will pay the Mercedes price to get the Mercedes quality. Feel free to fill in your car analogy of choice. My ability to earn money is based on how well my computer runs. That is why I choose Mac.

+1

Amen!

 

[Mike225]

Can you take/scan a photo in iPhoto? No. That alone makes Live Photo Viewer superior. One feature a PHOTO app should have, one that even IrfanView has. In fact I can't think of a single photo app on Windows that isn't superior to iPhoto.



Instead of giving an opinionated claim, how about providing functionality that backs up what you say? Because in my experience, iMovie is significantly clunky compared to Live Movie Maker doing the same thing - editing movies.



This I agree with...



This I do not. I don't use Live Mail; I use whatever with Gmail's IMAP or I'll use Gmail's web interface. But Live Mail is superior for anyone using Hotmail, bar none.




The only "built in" Mac software you've mentioned is Mail. iLife is not "built in", it's thrown in, but it's not part of Snow Leopard. Let's be accurate here. In any case, I can do more with Windows' built-in apps. They don't try to assume I do or do not want something. The common theme with the majority of Apple's built-in or secondary apps is: The user is too stupid to understand this, so let's hide/remove/exclude it. Case-in-point: autofilter.



Windows 7 is also more intuitive than Snow Leopard in many ways.

Examples:

• If you copy a same-named folder to a location with another folder, Windows will ask you if you want to merge the files and do so automatically. Snow Leopard just yells about dupes.
• Windows 7 understands the nature of hot-plugging USB/Firewire/SD drives. Snow Leopard yells at you about the "proper" way to eject drives even though it shouldn't matter anymore and hasn't since Windows 2000.
• Windows 7 lets you manage folder thumbnails (excellent for movies, or music art). Snow Leopard does not.
• Copy speed, which ironically was an issue in Vista, has now surpassed Snow Leopard. This is my biggest irritant with SL is how slow it copies files, even locally.
• Startup items management. Windows shows it all in MSCONFIG. Apple *might* show it in Login Items, but other stuff just runs freely.

I love my MacBook Pro. I refuse to own another PC. But I'm smart enough to accept and understand the instances when Windows is superior. Microsoft put a LOT of work into Windows 7 and it shows.



See, I can't stand Safari. It is missing the one feature I would absolutely expect Apple's flagship to have: three-finger Home/End. It is appalling that this feature is not present yet Firefox handles it just fine.

Well put and very objective. Impressive for macrumors!

 

[Giuly]

Can you take/scan a photo in iPhoto? No. That alone makes Live Photo Viewer superior. One feature a PHOTO app should have, one that even IrfanView has. In fact I can't think of a single photo app on Windows that isn't superior to iPhoto.

Well, you stated PhotoBooth. Hook up a camera that can be used as an USB-webcam, and you can magically take your photos.

Instead of giving an opinionated claim, how about providing functionality that backs up what you say? Because in my experience, iMovie is significantly clunky compared to Live Movie Maker doing the same thing - editing movies.

You mean cutting Movies? Well, go VirtualDub then.

The only "built in" Mac software you've mentioned is Mail. iLife is not "built in", it's thrown in, but it's not part of Snow Leopard. Let's be accurate here. In any case, I can do more with Windows' built-in apps. They don't try to assume I do or do not want something. The common theme with the majority of Apple's built-in or secondary apps is: The user is too stupid to understand this, so let's hide/remove/exclude it. Case-in-point: autofilter.

tomato, tomato. It comes free.

Windows 7 is also more intuitive than Snow Leopard in many ways.

Examples:

• If you copy a same-named folder to a location with another folder, Windows will ask you if you want to merge the files and do so automatically. Snow Leopard just yells about dupes.

Use cp on the command line or FileMerger.

• Windows 7 understands the nature of hot-plugging USB/Firewire/SD drives. Snow Leopard yells at you about the "proper" way to eject drives even though it shouldn't matter anymore and hasn't since Windows 2000.

BS. The buffers have to be fully flushed to disk before you can safely remove the drive. UNIX provides the "sync" command on the command line for this, same thing does "Eject" in Mac OS X - or, boohoo, "Safely Remove Device" in Windows.

• Windows 7 lets you manage folder thumbnails (excellent for movies, or music art). Snow Leopard does not.

Use your brains or CoverFlow.

• Copy speed, which ironically was an issue in Vista, has now surpassed Snow Leopard. This is my biggest irritant with SL is how slow it copies files, even locally.

this is because the file isn't actually fully copied, inform yourself about the sync stuff.
Also, do you refer to the same hardware? Sure, the WD Caviar Black inside your PC is faster then the 5400RPM laptop drive inside your Mini/MacBook. Larger buffer->faster copy time on screen, more time to flush it onto the disk behind the scenes. This even depends on amount and speed of the RAM, because there's where the buffer's at.

• Startup items management. Windows shows it all in MSCONFIG. Apple *might* show it in Login Items, but other stuff just runs freely.

You don't use the bash very often, do you? Or know about the init-system and it's management UNIX uses?

I love my MacBook Pro.

that says it all.

See, I can't stand Safari. It is missing the one feature I would absolutely expect Apple's flagship to have: three-finger Home/End. It is appalling that this feature is not present yet Firefox handles it just fine.

You're free to use Firefox or Opera. I don't like the way Safari opens tabs at the end of the list either and you can't see all the tabs that are open, but this is personal preference. I use Safari anyways, after a while I learned to live with it by using multiple windows and exposé.

And to the guy with the banking software: My banking runs inside the browser. IE, Firefox, Opera, Safari and even MobileSafari. You may want to switch to a bank which provides you with an iTAN-Generator for your HBCI-Card.

 

[kernkraft]

Yesterday, I accidentally clicked on the Dell ad between two threads. I was actually shocked. A 17" laptop with an i3 processor and 3GB RAM was around £450-470. That is less than half of the cheapest MBP. It was less than two years ago that I paid around £1500 for a 15" 2.53GHz C2D unibody (after HE lecturer discount). I love aluminium and I love the trackpad, but when I saw that even the i5 was around 40% of the price of the roughly equivalent MacBook Pro, I thought that my next MBP purchase will be either a reasonably priced 13" i3 or i5 with matte screen or nothing and I'll just use two unibodies.

I recently sold my second MacBook Air (I already miss it). When new, that was similar in price to the current 13" MBP range. Another example: in 2006 I had a 2GHz MacBook for around £829. That was the more expensive white MB. Last year, before I settled with the overpriced 2.53GHz 13", I considered the 2.26GHz one. That was around £1000. Three years, the same type of processor as in 2006 and only minimal speed improvement in terms of clock speed.

I know a few people who purchased a Mac when Apple went Intel. Then there was a reason to buy Mac and be happy with the price: the 13" models were relatively expensive from other manufacturers, whereas that is the size that Apple asks the least for. But things moved on then. Others learnt to produce quality for less, while Apple insists of charging premium for mainstream internals and admittedly nice externals.

 

[Mike225]

Yesterday, I accidentally clicked on the Dell ad between two threads. I was actually shocked. A 17" laptop with an i3 processor and 3GB RAM was around £450-470. That is less than half of the cheapest MBP. It was less than two years ago that I paid around £1500 for a 15" 2.53GHz C2D unibody (after HE lecturer discount). I love aluminium and I love the trackpad, but when I saw that even the i5 was around 40% of the price of the roughly equivalent MacBook Pro, I thought that my next MBP purchase will be either a reasonably priced 13" i3 or i5 with matte screen or nothing and I'll just use two unibodies.

I recently sold my second MacBook Air (I already miss it). When new, that was similar in price to the current 13" MBP range. Another example: in 2006 I had a 2GHz MacBook for around £829. That was the more expensive white MB. Last year, before I settled with the overpriced 2.53GHz 13", I considered the 2.26GHz one. That was around £1000. Three years, the same type of processor as in 2006 and only minimal speed improvement in terms of clock speed.

I know a few people who purchased a Mac when Apple went Intel. Then there was a reason to buy Mac and be happy with the price: the 13" models were relatively expensive from other manufacturers, whereas that is the size that Apple asks the least for. But things moved on then. Others learnt to produce quality for less, while Apple insists of charging premium for mainstream internals and admittedly nice externals.

I dont mean to brag but I got a 14.5" HP Envy 14 with:

Core i5-450M
6GB RAM
160GB SSD
1GB ATI 5650
1600x900 350nit screen
Backlit keyboard
aluminum alloy
5.2lb 1.09" w/ HDMI port

for..... $1095 after cashback