Desktops forum: MACS VS THE PC

I am an owner of both a mac and pc. My mac is a ibook 1.33 ghz powerpc g4 with os 10.4.8 while i have a self-built 2.4 ghz pc with windows xp professional. I prefer the max os over windows. it is feels much more better. the only downside i have is that most applications and programs are for windows. i cannot really compare the processing power of the 2. after using the 2 for the past year, i prefer to use my mac. i used macs in a class to edit photos. the program was adobe photoshop and i used the program on both computers and found that the mac was better at rendering and processing. the mac used in the class was an emac 1.42 ghz. i have yet to see the performance of macs with the intel chips but i plan to purchase one.

I have both also. Some of the people who work for me like Macs and have grown up with them. So for these people I buy Macs. But as the person who pays the bill I can honnestly say that dollar for dollar you get more machine with a PC than you do with a Mac.
As an example, the best PC's in my office cost around $2,000. They are faster, have more storage and the grapich output is equal to that produced by the Macs. The best Macs in my office cost nearly $3,000. They are not quite as fast as the PC's but since the people who like them are more productive on the Mac is worth the extra money. I would rather spend an extra $1,000 on a machine than to spend thousands on re-training someone.

I think you miss the point. The PC's offer more bang per buck. It's simply a matter of custom that the employees prefer macs - because that's what they are used to.
Starting from scratch there's no contest - Even photoshop offers more functionality on a PC than it does on a mac these days.
I've supported both for many years.(Since MacOS 7 / Windows for Workgroups networked to a Novelle 3.5 server)
In terms of functionality, stability and speed, Windows on the PC caught up with macOS around Windows 98, took the lead with 2000 and has firmly stayed there ever since.
Your point about Windows loading DLL's to run Photoshop also misses the point. Windows calls DLL's when the application loads (and, if the application behaves correctly, unloads them when it closes (Adobe please try harder on this one!!!) MacOS STILL needs to load everything at boot time - something which certainly amuses the Unix comunity but doesn't seem to perform any other function unless the application is called - at which point it will load a little bit quicker.
If you have used a PC at anything other than the most basic level there are so many things which will anoy you about MacOS and it's insistance that you work it's way. With any Windows PC I can set it up to do what I want it to do. MacOS denys access to far too much of the OS to allow you to fine tune it. I for one don't buy into the arrogance of the "It's perfect, why would you want to change it?" attitude.
And if you do have a problem.... remember the old MacOS 9 "It's not my fault...." That just about sums up the current Mac technical support attitude as well.

most game design is done on the pc for a large variety of reasons. The game industry is huge, and is still growing. I would not say "goodbye" to pc photoshop users. Maybe PC Photoshop users that are graphic designers. But not game designers, and that alone is plenty to keep PC photoshop in competition.

My experience is that the Intel Macs are faster.

Ever install the MacOSX? Piece of cake. Slip in the OS CD and boot from it. It will even offer to save your files.

Does Microsoft treat your files with care?

Bob

"Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't he invest in Apple to save the iPod?"

MSFT poured hundreds of millions into Apple (inflated "porting fees" for Explorer and Office) to keep it alive. MSFT is an illegal trade monopoly. But that's difficult to prove under an antitrust law that hasn't been revised since the age of steam locomotives. Apple helped MSFT fight that prosecution, just by being there. It wasn't real competition but it looked enough like it to make the antitrust case more difficult.

When MSFT beat the rap in the US, it didn't need Apple any more and the subsidy stopped. That was when Apple really needed to find another business besides Macintosh. Ipod and itunes, now a fancy PDA/phone.

Now MSFT is being prosecuted as an illegal trade monopoly in the European Union. MSFT admitted years ago in its SEC filings that free and open source software is its only serious competition. Now MSFT is pouring money into Novell, owner of SuSE Linux. This time MSFT doesn't *want* Explorer and Office ported, so they're doing a "patent exchange." That'll end when MSFT beats the rap in Europe.

CLS
http://notwindoze.blogspot.com

Ehhh yes!

I concur.

when you buy a mac people say its is over priced but you can get a macbook 1150 canadian with a core2duo running at 1.83 to find an equal pc laptop you be paying well over the price of the mac same goes for imac its about 999 canadian for an imac with the same specs and to get core2duo in a desktop pc its is over 999 in most cases plus then you need a monitor most people also forget you get a monitor included in the price of a mac also dont be fooled by the fact macs come with less ram because they are much more efficient and can run off literally like half the ram of a windows pc and perform the same no viruses no spyware i had a macbook and sold it i loved it though i bought a pc but only cause i wanted to hook up to my lcd and my xbox other wise i would of kept that baby if i could have afforded to so if your looking for somthing for photos or video editing i would defintely go for the mac

I've been using Macs since 1986, they are built to last, they are built so that each piece of software interacts with another seamlessly and without fault, Macs have a much more stable platform that PC users can only dream about, Macs can run several programs at the same time without either slowing down or locking up, Macs are much easier to use than any PC, there are no speed issues when comparing Mac with PC's, they are a little more expensive than a PC but they work out of the box and will keep on working without problems year after year. Loading software on a Mac is so easy that a mates 3 year old daughter did it to his amazement! Macs are the choice of the graphic arts industry, they are the choice of desk top designer, Macs have style, looks and reliability, they are not the choice of the gamer but the choice of the professional. How much more do I need to say to convince you that Mac is best?

"Compared to a Windows machine, X Windows sucks."

I guess it's what you're used to. I've been using the X Window System for about 16 years. To me it's the way a computer user interface ought to be. Choice and configurability. And a paste button on the mouse.

Now and then I use a friend's or an employer's MS-Windows or Macintosh native window system and they drive me up the wall. So much more work to do the same thing. No choice of mouse focus policy, it's click-to-focus with auto-raise or nothing. (I like focus-follows-mouse and no auto-raise. You can't do that on MS-Windoze.) No paste button, the mouse only has left and right! You can't type in a window unless it's on top, no wonder you need a two foot screen. You only get one desktop, I'm using seven right now. You can't have a desktop bigger than your screen, mine grows as big as I want it. If I don't like the way window resize works, I can switch into a different window manager or lay a different theme on the one I'm using, without even closing any windows.

I've never had a problem with window resize, you just drag the edges or corners, and if a corner is off-screen you drag the whole window with alt-left-button. Except on Tom's Window Manager, but nobody uses twm any more. If you don't like the default behavior, change the keybindings and mousebindings until it works the way *you* want it to.

If you don't like the desktop manager that came with the X Window System from Apple, just switch to another one. I've settled on K Desktop Environment. (KDE.org) You might prefer the equally bloated GNU Network Oriented whatever, GNOME.org, or something streamlined like IceWM (IceWM.org).

f you want X to behave like the MS-Windows desktop you're used to, choose KDE, set the virtual desktop count to one and the desktop size to the size of your monitor, choose the Redmond window decorations theme, and set the mouse policy to click-to-focus with auto-raise. And jam a toothpick in the middle mouse button so paste doesn't work. Voila.

They do give you a choice of desktop managers on Apple's X Window System, don't they? If not, then it's not really The X Window System, is it?

Oh, by the way, virtual desktops are why nobody cares that most applications don't know how to collapse and restore all their windows in a bunch. (You can tell KDE to do it for them.) If you've got an application that needs a million windows open (e.g. the GNU Image Manipulation Program, GIMP.org), just give it a desktop for itself. Right now I've got eleven Seamonkey windows. The tv guide and my ebay are closed, and the rest are on the desktops where their web sites are relevant. Desktop per task, more or less. If Seamonkey was all windows up or down, together, I'd have to switch to some other Web browser.

I bought a Vista Beta but never got around to trying it. Did they do virtual desktops yet? MSFT usually adopts features from unix, when they've been around long enough.

One more nitpick. "The X Consortium requests that the following names be used when referring to this software: X, X Window System, X Version 11, X Window System, Version 11, X11. (Not "X Windows.")

Why would you worry about repairing a Mac? They very, very rarely go wrong. I've worked in studios with 30-40 Mac's for the last 20 years, in all that time we've had one power supply failure and one logic board failure, the units are switched 24/7 and run cool and quiet. In my experience, just about anything created on a Mac can be displayed on a PC without problem so cross platform sharing is not an issue. Almost everyone I know who have used a Mac for any length of time will never turn to a PC (the dark side!).

OSX will run on any G3/G4/G5 and intel based processor, so I don't understand what you say about making your '99 model machine useless. Mac's have had less population exposure due to being a more 'professional targeted tool',. However, there are few movies (US or UK) produced which when featuring a computer don't actually use a Mac. I think the problem arises from the fact that you can constantly switch and upgrade a PC with new boards etc, where as a Mac has everything you need built in from the start. In fact the best way to improve a Mac is just fill it with memory, speed differences can be incredible. Mac is the annimation studios choice (PIXAR), so they can't be all that bad even if Steve Jobs does own shares in that particular studio!

More then a year ago Apple decided to switch to Intel processors which was a wise decision in many ways.

They accomplished the switch in record time. So the current generation of Macs have intel processors, though you will not find a sticker anywhere on their machines.

Even though OS X now runs on an Intel chip it will never run on a PC. This is because Apple is a very successful hardware company and they will never allow this to happen. Recently, someone successfully ran OS X on a PC and Apple quickly took him to court to stop it.

As you know you can run Windows on a Mac, but you will never be able to run OS X on a PC. Sorry.