Absolutly not. Just go to a software store and see what's available for a PC then look at the piddley difference of the Mac offering!
Windows has been and will remain the centralized best overal operating system as you can see from my other rated polls. I will not ever support or accept anything Apple, PERIOD.
A personal computer can be of any given CPU architecture if it is used for non-commercial reasons.
The PPC architecture was adapted after the 68k for older Macintosh enabled boxes. Now that the choice is the x86, there is no difference in hardware.
If you are talking about operating systems, then the OS?/series is based on neXtStep and the Mach kernel while Windows ?? is based on DOS and Windows NT.
Strip down the machine of the OS and install a Unix variant, then run a series of stress tests.
This will tell you the real capabilities of each architecture under similar environments.
The issue is not what IS installed, rather what CAN be installed. There is very limited expansion on a mac.
PC: Infinite choices
Mac: Limited supported (usable) choices
PC: Update/upgrade through two or three generations on most hardware
Mac: Update/upgrade through one generation of hardware, then pay for new system
First of all, Macs CAN be useful for years. I sold a seven year old PowerMac earlier this year; the new owner is extremely happy with it. I've known a good number of people who hang on to Macs for years and keep them as media servers, backup computers, etc.
Regarding upgradability of Mac vs. PC: I think you have it completely the other way around. Isn't that the main complaint for most people of Vista, that you need a better machine just to run it? I've run across statistics that say the significant majority of PC's cannot run Vista in its full "eye candy" mode without at least a system upgrade, if not a new computer. Macs, on the other hand: OS 10.5 requires an 867mhz processor and a DVD drive (among other things). A PowerMac "Quicksilver", which is a 5 year old machine and 3 generations back (PowerMac, G5, Intel) qualifies nicely for the latest OS.
As far as your earlier comment: of course you can legally get a copy of OS X without the hardware. It retails for $129 (and there's only one version -- no "home" or "ultimate" editions). The only caveat is that you can't legally run OS X on a PC, per the licensing agreements.
You should do a little basic research before you shoot yourself in the foot.
I have an old 386 that still runs fine too. I didn't state the hardware stops working. Windows 3.11 and Windows 95 still works well for many people, as does DOS, just like the old Power Mac systems still work. My comment had nothing to do with software nor the usability of older hardware. What I stated was you have a set, limited, upgradability HARDWARE wise in each specific unit. Your G5 may handle later software, but not the latest hardware. For Example, you'll be hard pressed to get 7.1 sound on your Mac or Mac II. I have a soundblaster Gold sound card in my 386 producing wonderful spatial 3d 7.1. That's what, a dozen generations later?!
Of course you can upgrade hardware on older Macs; why wouldn't you be able to? Granted, that depends on whether a 3rd party has produced upgrades, but it's almost a surefire guarantee that if you have an add-on and it fits in the slots, it'll work with no hassle. Macs have far fewer issues with drivers than PC's do - that reliability comes in spite of having switched platforms several times over the years.
Blu-Ray drives are available... I know people with old G4's that have been refitted with faster processors and better graphics cards than what I have in my G5... etc, etc. Were you implying that you can't upgrade a sound card on a G5--? Of course you can. All you have to do is Google it! And you're confusing the issue to boot... you say "G5", then "Mac II" in the next sentence. Not only are they on entirely different platforms, but those machines were built almost 20 years apart.
As far as "a dozen generations"... would that be implying that generation = how old your computer is? That's hardly the case... 386 is basically the same Wintel architecture as the most current processors, and the same x86 platform as it has been for years. So in your case, not a dozen generations: just a much older processor of the same variant.
If I was a gamer I would consider a Mac.....but since I usually use the computer for more serious things I'll give up my PC when you pry the keyboard from my cold, dead hands.
Yes. Why? Because it is more secure, has tons of features, and is completely stable. I currently use Windows XP and Gentoo Linux. I partition my HDD's in my two laptops and my desktop and install Gentoo Linux on the first partition and Windows XP on the 4th partition and then boot either using Grub. I want to go with Mac because it is built off the Linux platform and has everything installed that works easily with the OS where are with installing Gentoo Linux, RedHat, etc you have to buy the right network card, video card, etc to get everything to run right and still today wireless networking in Gentoo linux doesn't work right. Almost all laptops have the broadcom wireless card and the only way to get it to work and connect to a network is to load the Windows drivers.
I'm computer literate, to say the least ![]()
When I finally dump Windows, it will be for Linux. I actually use both right now. Macs are pretty and seductive. And, yes, I know the OS is Unix under the skin. But it's still Apple and Apple is every bit as protective of its brands as Microsoft.
Being a long-time Windows user and having friends with Macs, I know that Linux is more reliable than either. I still use Windows out of business necessity. But I'm within 5 years of retirement and when I no longer have to have Windows, it will be history!
I am intending to purchase the new imac desktop because I think microsoft is in a terrible mess with Vista, and the current wave of spam hitting windows.
Here in Australia many new resellers are now featuring macs for sale, and they are selling like hot cakes. Everywhere I here people condemning microsoft for not perfecting a new product before release to the public.
I am with XP and if there wasn't any macs available I would never buy Vista.
While I am not a PC expert or anything, I am quite happy with my PC, I have no problems with anything really. Why change something that is working just fine and I am happy with.
Firs of all, let me say that it is very possible that I do not know what I am talking about. I do not want anything to do with Mac. I am sold in pc, windows, Microsoft and Bill Gates. I think Bill Gates is a Go and deserves respect. Yes we have viruses to deal with, and Microsoft software is well knowwn to have bugs from time to time. I still prefer Microsoft over anything else. I am sure a Mac is great for simple tasks, but there is so much more that can be done on a pc. There are many more peripherals and software made for pc as well. As far as I am concerned, if anyone can top Bill Gates, then go ahead and do so, otherwise they should shut up and deal with it.
I've just switched after 20 years of dedication to the PC world. Bought both laptop and desktop. Why? Better software, better reputation for dependability, lower virus incidents, MOre stable platform, like its applicability to photography and video.
The adjustment has not been easy...I keep finding little bumps along the way...like learning I had to have an adaptor in order to use the Mac on lcd projector. Also, I'm having to change my thinking around file protocols and photo management. Neither better nor worse, just different.
| Forum legend: | |
| Locked thread | |
| Moderator | |
![]() |
CNET staff |
![]() |
Samsung staff |
| Norton Authorized Support team | |
| AVG staff | |
| Windows Outreach team | |
![]() |
Dell staff |
| Intel staff | |