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 buy a Mac?
- Thread starter UglyLittleSpud
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Since when? I built a Vista machine for my dad with my old scraps, which is a P4 2.8, 2GB memory and ATI 9600 graphics. It runs great and he is a lot happier with it than with the G4 Mac Pro my brother made him try out, which about the same age. It is fast (considering the age of the computer), extremely stable and totally problem free. It currently has an uptime of about 3 months. And yes, he is severely backlogged on updates. 😉
There is nothing inherently wrong with Windows and/or Vista. Most very much depends on the quality of hardware put in the PC and the presence or absence of OEM pre-installed crap that can barely be removed and instantly destabilizes any pc and removes all speed the moment you turn it on.
If you built a PC like Apple does, aka cherry pick your components, you can build a kick-ass machine that is super fast, super stabile and significantly cheaper than any OE offering. Cherry pick the right components, and you can run ANY x86 operating system out of the box, including OSX.
neiltc13
macrumors 68040
I've not had a program crash on Windows (XP, Vista or 7) for a very long time. I can't recall the last time the system completely locked up. I'm sitting here looking at a nice Windows 7 Aero interface and I'm not having any problems with performance at all.
On the other hand, I frequently get program hangs and crashes under OS X and the system sometimes locks up completely while trying to shut down.
That's debatable. What's the deal with the two different "styles" of window, garish contrasting black quick look and other contextual menus and of course the brushed metal?
I don't worry about malware on Windows either.
Unless of course you're running a program which uses the GPU, in which case you'll get a fraction of the performance you would from the same application in Windows. I'm not sure about easier to use, a number of my friends have commented that they find the Macs at University difficult to use and would never buy one for this reason. If we're talking the same application, like Photoshop vs Photoshop then they will be the same - so I have no idea where you get the idea that the OS X versions are "easier to use".
PC or Mac
I think Windows and Mac are both very good systems. They both get the job done.
I am a casual filmmaker myself and the sole reason I choose OS X over Windows is because it is completely hassle free. The amount of times I am bombarded with boxes full of confusing jargon is phenomenal. OS X has a common sense it does the simple tasks in the background without asking permission because it knows what needs to be done to achieve your desired command; it doesn't bombard you with weird jargon.
xx
I think Windows and Mac are both very good systems. They both get the job done.
I am a casual filmmaker myself and the sole reason I choose OS X over Windows is because it is completely hassle free. The amount of times I am bombarded with boxes full of confusing jargon is phenomenal. OS X has a common sense it does the simple tasks in the background without asking permission because it knows what needs to be done to achieve your desired command; it doesn't bombard you with weird jargon.
xx
Windows is flawed. Easily attacked by Viruses and Trojans. Horrid transparent UI. Registry *ugh*. Prone to unreliability.
I also love OS X, Apple's hardware style and design. 😎
I also love OS X, Apple's hardware style and design. 😎
+2
If we're seriously saying Vista has anything on OS X, I'm out of here. I thought that was a given, it outmatches it in every way. Really, I thought we were talking about prices. It's flat out obvious OS X > Vista.
dsnort
macrumors 68000
Because we prefer doing things with our computers to doing thing to our computers.
No, reliable performance gets the job done. 4 Gb of memory on a spyware infested comp is useless.
No, not at all. You're as innocent as any of the other 100000000000000000000000000000000000 people who signed up today just to post BS......
RSW
macrumors member
Own one and you will understand. I just bought into the mac world, and can't believe what I was missing. However, it is a big switch, there is a learning curve involved!
windywoo
macrumors 6502a
The security flaws in Windows are exaggerated. I have 4 PCs running variously Vista, XP and Windows 7. I have never had a virus or malware problem that wasn't caught and dealt with by the (free) virus checker, and even those incidents are infrequent. There are numerous virus reports on Windows simply because there are numerous machines running it. And numerous idiots using them.
Windows Vista was clunky to begin with, but since Service Pack 1 its fine on 2GB of RAM and runs slightly sluggish on 1GB. This is because Windows has to support an immensely larger range of hardware than OSX, it would be impossible to optimize for every combination. I have an XP machine that has an Athlon 2000 in it and its running just as well as when I built it 4 years ago. Its had a motherboard and hard drive failure (neither are Windows fault), both of which were cheap to replace.
Get a life if you think OSX is so much better than Vista. You have been entirely brainwashed by Apple into believing there is only one way of doing things. I am still mystified by why maximise on OSX does not make a window fill the screen, and why closing the last window of an application doesn't exit that application. Double clicking an icon on a desktop in Windows is one click more than opening the same application off a dock, and Windows has quicklaunch if you want to save yourself one click.
So much is made of Expose in OSX, forgetting that Windows users don't need this feature because the Taskbar shows every application that is running. The Dock and Expose are very selective about what they show. Why does a style conscious company like Apple only allow me the choice of two colours for my windows? OSX is supposedly more consistent than Windows, but installing an application on OSX is sometimes an install routine, sometimes the app has a little applications folder and sometimes it doesn't. Getting both those Windows to the foreground on my 1024*768 desktop is pain in the arse with Expose.
OSX is nice for sure, and its nice not to have to install antivirus (though you really should, because even though Macs can't catch viruses they can pass them on through email), but to use it is to be entirely dictated to by Apple about which hardware you use, and how you use your OS. I like my G4 iBook very much, but I also have a 1.6Ghz Celeron laptop running Windows 7 that will do everything it can but it lets me choose what software I install and putting a new CD drive in it won't take me half a day.
Oh yeah, build your own, because if you want to play games, Apple are *****.
Windows Vista was clunky to begin with, but since Service Pack 1 its fine on 2GB of RAM and runs slightly sluggish on 1GB. This is because Windows has to support an immensely larger range of hardware than OSX, it would be impossible to optimize for every combination. I have an XP machine that has an Athlon 2000 in it and its running just as well as when I built it 4 years ago. Its had a motherboard and hard drive failure (neither are Windows fault), both of which were cheap to replace.
Get a life if you think OSX is so much better than Vista. You have been entirely brainwashed by Apple into believing there is only one way of doing things. I am still mystified by why maximise on OSX does not make a window fill the screen, and why closing the last window of an application doesn't exit that application. Double clicking an icon on a desktop in Windows is one click more than opening the same application off a dock, and Windows has quicklaunch if you want to save yourself one click.
So much is made of Expose in OSX, forgetting that Windows users don't need this feature because the Taskbar shows every application that is running. The Dock and Expose are very selective about what they show. Why does a style conscious company like Apple only allow me the choice of two colours for my windows? OSX is supposedly more consistent than Windows, but installing an application on OSX is sometimes an install routine, sometimes the app has a little applications folder and sometimes it doesn't. Getting both those Windows to the foreground on my 1024*768 desktop is pain in the arse with Expose.
OSX is nice for sure, and its nice not to have to install antivirus (though you really should, because even though Macs can't catch viruses they can pass them on through email), but to use it is to be entirely dictated to by Apple about which hardware you use, and how you use your OS. I like my G4 iBook very much, but I also have a 1.6Ghz Celeron laptop running Windows 7 that will do everything it can but it lets me choose what software I install and putting a new CD drive in it won't take me half a day.
Oh yeah, build your own, because if you want to play games, Apple are *****.
windywoo
macrumors 6502a
Apple haven't stopped anyone from doing it yet, they only take action when the offender sells the machines on.
Darth.Titan
macrumors 68030
ozyr
macrumors member
Frankly, it boils down to this...
Get what you need!
Figure out what you want to do on a computer (what software you will need), and what you want in a computer (hardware). Be it Windows, Mac, Linux, or whatever.
I get sick of the PC/Mac bashing here at times (even though it is fun sometimes). Each platform has its own merits.
As for myself, I picked Mac, because it does what I want (and the big thing for me is the UI and not having to deal with viruses). (Of course, having to deal with PCs at work didn't help - crashes, too many re-installs, viruses [even with firewalls and software], etc - just my experience with PCs)
I'll admit I have Windows using Fusion, but only because school requires it (and a very few amount of programs that are not on Mac - I don't count games, I use consoles for that). I'm not a big fan of the Windows interface as a whole either.
These are my opinions... end-of-line
Get what you need!
Figure out what you want to do on a computer (what software you will need), and what you want in a computer (hardware). Be it Windows, Mac, Linux, or whatever.
I get sick of the PC/Mac bashing here at times (even though it is fun sometimes). Each platform has its own merits.
As for myself, I picked Mac, because it does what I want (and the big thing for me is the UI and not having to deal with viruses). (Of course, having to deal with PCs at work didn't help - crashes, too many re-installs, viruses [even with firewalls and software], etc - just my experience with PCs)
I'll admit I have Windows using Fusion, but only because school requires it (and a very few amount of programs that are not on Mac - I don't count games, I use consoles for that). I'm not a big fan of the Windows interface as a whole either.
These are my opinions... end-of-line
Demosthenes X
macrumors 68000
This comparison is stupid. Yes, you can build your own PC cheaper than buying an iMac. You can also build your own PC cheaper than buying a Dell, HP, or Acer. It's a poor argument to compare a self-built machine to a pre-built machine and make any conclusions - you can always build your own cheaper.
What you cannot do is build your own all-in-one, with software and hardware that work flawlessly together. And, as has been mentioned, you probably cannot get the same, high-quality monitor for your custom rig as the iMac includes.
What you cannot do is build your own all-in-one, with software and hardware that work flawlessly together. And, as has been mentioned, you probably cannot get the same, high-quality monitor for your custom rig as the iMac includes.
SlasherDuff
macrumors 6502a
Why buy a Mac?
Because it is the most stable computer I have ever owned. It runs exactly the way it did the day I took it out of the box, and that's saying something
Because it is the most stable computer I have ever owned. It runs exactly the way it did the day I took it out of the box, and that's saying something
I see more trolling by clueless Apple fanboys than the OP. So I guess you mean them?
get the custom
there are other screen vendors with same quality screen as the imacs---and only the 24 is HIPS.
Download RC1 of 7 and keep it for a year.
The system is fast, greatly than Vista.
The specs on the PC are absolutely and tremendously better than the imac.
Seriously though, if you can afford it, switch to the I7 920 (deal at microcenter) and new mobo---but if not, its still fine.
Seriously though a quad core in rendering is a savior.
Learn to use the programs----There are some in Windows and some in Macs----in the end, you'll get it done one way or another.
there are other screen vendors with same quality screen as the imacs---and only the 24 is HIPS.
Download RC1 of 7 and keep it for a year.
The system is fast, greatly than Vista.
The specs on the PC are absolutely and tremendously better than the imac.
Seriously though, if you can afford it, switch to the I7 920 (deal at microcenter) and new mobo---but if not, its still fine.
Seriously though a quad core in rendering is a savior.
Learn to use the programs----There are some in Windows and some in Macs----in the end, you'll get it done one way or another.
Gotta love fanboys. I'm not trolling, merely raising a question. I have not once bashed Macs, just asked if they are worth it compared to an alternative system and if so, why. Keeping in mind the uses that I mentioned.
Is that really too hard to grasp?
Okay, now back to the sensible debate please...
chrono1081
macrumors G3
Mac does not need the same hardware to run as a PC with Vista does. Mac OSX is MUCH more efficient. Comparing hardware on Macs and PCs is seriously apples and oranges.
Ok first off let me say I'm NOT bashing windows, because its constant problems are what keeps me employed. But it is a flawed, bloated operating system. (Vista)
I switched from Vista to Mac last year because Vistas issue (now fixed sort of) with copying large volumes of data made the OS unusable for my work. (The issue being 20 gigs of data took 20+ hours to copy on a vista machine and an hour on a freaking eeePC)
As others have stated mac OS gives you the whole package. With mac OS you dont have to download things like daemon tools for using disk images, you dont have to download encryption software, no need to worry about this codec and that codec for video, no need to fuss with getting bluetooth dongles or any other stuff like that. Also Mac has something windows has needed for a LONG time...Multiple desktop support. Ancient versions of Solaris have this why doesn't windows? (Oh wait it does but you have to download third party tools). Theres also Time Machine which has saved me on many many occasions. All built right in.
Honestly no peice of high end hardware could make me switch back to windows. When seeing how much more efficient the programs I use (ZBrush, Maya, Photoshop, Corel Painter X , Lightroom, Logic) run on my MBP verses the windows versions I had on a MUCH higher speced windows machine I was an instant convert. I would get the mac hands down.
EDIT: To add if you are using office software and such Mac OS integrates much much better with its own software then say for example MS Office and Windows. (If you could seriously see how many times I fix things like corrupt PST files youd see what I mean).
Ok first off let me say I'm NOT bashing windows, because its constant problems are what keeps me employed. But it is a flawed, bloated operating system. (Vista)
I switched from Vista to Mac last year because Vistas issue (now fixed sort of) with copying large volumes of data made the OS unusable for my work. (The issue being 20 gigs of data took 20+ hours to copy on a vista machine and an hour on a freaking eeePC)
As others have stated mac OS gives you the whole package. With mac OS you dont have to download things like daemon tools for using disk images, you dont have to download encryption software, no need to worry about this codec and that codec for video, no need to fuss with getting bluetooth dongles or any other stuff like that. Also Mac has something windows has needed for a LONG time...Multiple desktop support. Ancient versions of Solaris have this why doesn't windows? (Oh wait it does but you have to download third party tools). Theres also Time Machine which has saved me on many many occasions. All built right in.
Honestly no peice of high end hardware could make me switch back to windows. When seeing how much more efficient the programs I use (ZBrush, Maya, Photoshop, Corel Painter X , Lightroom, Logic) run on my MBP verses the windows versions I had on a MUCH higher speced windows machine I was an instant convert. I would get the mac hands down.
EDIT: To add if you are using office software and such Mac OS integrates much much better with its own software then say for example MS Office and Windows. (If you could seriously see how many times I fix things like corrupt PST files youd see what I mean).
windywoo
macrumors 6502a
What are you talking about downloading encryption programs? Windows has encryption built in. It also has backup features too, since Windows 2000 which is a lot longer than OSX has had Time Machine.
And Macs DO need codecs otherwise things like Perian wouldn't exist. It was one of the first things I had to download to get some movie working. Whats more, the divx codec advertised on Apple's site doesn' work on PowerPCs, its a good job I am not the average joe idiot user.
And there is NO NEED FOR MULTIPLE DESKTOPS. There I have said it. Only untidy users need multiple desktops. Besides, how long did it take for Apple to get multiple desktops when Linux had for ages. Tiger doesn't have it, only Leopard.
I'll admit that I have never had to compare Mac support and Windows support, but thats because no-one uses them. They cost too much and have too many features that just aren't needed in business. Every Mac comes with iLife pre-installed what a waste. Webcam on an office PC? Piss off.
Macs are for creative folk and families who love their photo albums.
And Macs DO need codecs otherwise things like Perian wouldn't exist. It was one of the first things I had to download to get some movie working. Whats more, the divx codec advertised on Apple's site doesn' work on PowerPCs, its a good job I am not the average joe idiot user.
And there is NO NEED FOR MULTIPLE DESKTOPS. There I have said it. Only untidy users need multiple desktops. Besides, how long did it take for Apple to get multiple desktops when Linux had for ages. Tiger doesn't have it, only Leopard.
I'll admit that I have never had to compare Mac support and Windows support, but thats because no-one uses them. They cost too much and have too many features that just aren't needed in business. Every Mac comes with iLife pre-installed what a waste. Webcam on an office PC? Piss off.
Macs are for creative folk and families who love their photo albums.
I'm going to refrain from Windows bashing and give a simple reason as to why I like my Macbook.
I use Windows and Visual Studio all day at work, so when I come home I don't want to come home to Windows, I want to use something else; OS X. For me, Windows = work and OS X = fun/hobby/whatever else.
But I could never recommend an iMac though. Never liked an All In One; it's just too overpriced for what it does (not necessarily for what it is, but when money's tight that doesn't matter). If you're happy with Windows, by all means build yourself a tower. If you want to dabble in Macs, get a Whitebook, which is good value for money and can drive a large external monitor when needed.
I use Windows and Visual Studio all day at work, so when I come home I don't want to come home to Windows, I want to use something else; OS X. For me, Windows = work and OS X = fun/hobby/whatever else.
But I could never recommend an iMac though. Never liked an All In One; it's just too overpriced for what it does (not necessarily for what it is, but when money's tight that doesn't matter). If you're happy with Windows, by all means build yourself a tower. If you want to dabble in Macs, get a Whitebook, which is good value for money and can drive a large external monitor when needed.