Apple, the computer, not the label.

[AllenLowe]

my secretary: before I got my MAC:

then after:

Edited October 22, 2010 by AllenLowe

[porcy62]

I have no problem admitting Macs are relatively safer and more reliable than PCs. But they are not quite all that their most fervent admirers make them out to be.

Just add that Apple showed to all computer manufacturers that a computer could be "designed". I know that a ugly computer isn't a big problem in office, but at home, when you spent $$$$ for furnitures, wall papers and wood block floor, a dull plastic box in the living room is definitely depressing.

[Shawn]

Every once in a while I read story about how Mac are really only free of hacking and viruses because hackers don't write attacking programs for them. It's the Mac OS itself, and they way it's structured to work, that keeps it safe. Maybe Chris or someone else can expand on the reasons better than I.

The primary thing that keeps Macs safe is that NO program can "install itself" on a Mac, ANY program that is installed will prompt the user to enter in the computer administrator password to allow the application. Most spyware are hidden programs within other programs, which you can sneak through on Windows, but not on a Mac.

Plus, the operating system is so simple by comparison it makes it easier to secure...and the file system is far superior to NTFS.

[mjzee]

What you sense as smugness from Apple owners is simply relief, the not having to worry about viruses, the painless using of a computer, and the pleasure of experiencing everything working as expected. Really, these Apples are wonderful machines. I often get a sense of delight from using them. We have 2 iMacs, an iBook, an AirPort, some iPods, and now an iPhone.

As for software, yeah, bite the bullet and buy Mac versions of those programs. Get it past you.

I have Fusion with Windows XP loaded for those PC programs I occasionally need to access, such as WordPerfect, but after awhile, I was only using it to play FreeCell. I haven't powered it up in a while. If anyone knows of a Mac version of FreeCell, please let me know. Or perhaps not; boy, that was a lot of time down the drain.

[Shawn]

The only reason I have Windows installed on my iMac is so I can use CAtraxx (which I haven't found a good Mac equivalent of) and to sync with my Xbox360 which I use as a media extender.

[ejp626]

As for software, yeah, bite the bullet and buy Mac versions of those programs. Get it past you.

After further reflection, I decided that the particular programs I need to run would probably not run properly on a Mac running Windows because of the I/O demands and distributive computing requirements. It might, but it isn't worth it to me to take the gamble.

Edited October 23, 2010 by ejp626

[Christiern]

John L: "I have even loaded Windows into my Mac for that reason, but switching back and forth is a pain."

You don't have toi switch back and forth if you install Parallels or Fusion. Both program allow you to runWindows and OSX simultaneously—no switching.

As for smugness? Well, let's call it a feeling of comfort induced by the Mac's ease of use and reliability. Remember, the Windows platform has its genesis in Microsoft's attempt to make their dreaded DOS Mac-like. They never really succeeded, because Apple was always a few steps ahead.

Platform envy, that's all it is.

[BERIGAN]

I've had 3 PC's in about 15 years. All have been worked very hard. Very easy to use, and after I got rid of Windows 95 and 98, no problems at all with XP or Vista(as others mentioned here years ago, just need a lot of memory for it to work right) Vista is lightning fast.

I can't think of a single reason why I would be better off with a Mac.

Usually, most Mac fundamentalists talk about problems PC's had 5-10 years ago like they are still current issues.

[porcy62]

Usually, most Mac fundamentalists talk about problems PC's had 5-10 years ago like they are still current issues.

That is the reason because most good guys became Mac fundamentalists 5-10 years ago.

Edited October 23, 2010 by porcy62

[GregK]

one of the most satisfying things about my 6 yr old iMac is that it still starts up in under a minute. I turn it on, pull out the desk chair, sit down, and it's ready for me to click my User name. It's really that fast.

what's with Jobs ditching Flash from all upcoming Macs?

[AllenLowe]

happy to report that I just installed Logic Express (an Apple program) on my Mac - and there's the kind of bug which is incredibly stupid - Apple designed the program so it is impossible to open prior files that have been saved in the program, in the regular way - as in "Open" and then "file" - at first I was tearing my hair out, but a trip to the internet showed me that

1) someone had devised a way to circumvent this and

2) Apple had never come up with a solution, except a later version of the program

I still love my Mac, but this is dumber than ANYTHING I ever saw from Microsoft. If it wasn't for the internet I never would have been able to figure this one out.

[neveronfriday]

The problem re viruses etc. is not one of the machines but one of the incredibly stupid users sitting in front of them.

A lot more PCs used worldwide = a lot more idiots in front of PCs.

It's really that simple.

[Swinging Swede]

OK, here is a serious question: If Macs have always been that much better (and I am not necessarily disputing that they have), why haven't they become dominant on the market a long time ago?

Edited October 23, 2010 by Swinging Swede

[Shawn]

OK, here is a serious question: If Macs have always been that much better (and I am not necessarily disputing that they have), why haven't they become dominant on the market a long time ago?

Microsoft own the business market (computers, servers, etc). Most companies aren't willing to upgrade a single system, much less convert their entire network and all their computers to Macs. Especially when that means re-purchasing licenses for Office suite software, etc. It's more cost effective for them to keep upgrading their Windows network instead.

However, if I was starting a company from the ground up right now, I'd choose Macs in a heartbeat.

[.:.impossible]

I am a happy Mac user and a frustrated Windows user.

I primarily use Adobe products, and between platforms, with quality hardware, they are practically synonymous. However, the process leading up to launching software, navigating and saving files, and interacting with the operating system in general is the major difference for me.

I can look at this objectively and tell you that software is software. It should not matter what platform you are on. RAM, CPU, quality parts... specs are specs.

The difference for me is the overall experience. I find Mac OSX to be much more pleasant than Windows in every aspect. I prefer Apple hardware to pretty much every manufacturer, and I prefer Mac OS to Windows. Now, I have seen some other OS that seem just as nice that have no affiliation with a hardware manufacturer, but I prefer Apple hardware.

All this being said, one of the worst computers I have ever owned was a G5 iMac. Quite possibly one of the poorest designs ever. First revision, burnt through three logic boards in as many years. The fourth board is now burnt as well and the machine is in it's box in the closet. Not even worth it's parts at this point. Poor design. Apple never admitted to the problem. This was a widespread issue with a product that should have been recalled. Apple store's response: consumer machines have a 3 year lifespan, whether failure or obsolescence. I had to work harder than I should have to have the board replaced after Apple care expired. I can understand the policy if it was out of warranty and the board failed for the first time. This was the third.

I bought a MBP last year and it is by far the nicest computer I have ever owned. I absolutely love it. I am not a blinded fanboy or whatever, but I would predict that I am an Apple user for life. Haven't purchased a PC since 1994. Work has provided those headaches for me.

My advice, from experience: do not be an early adoptee. Wait for the second or third revision of a product. The G5 iMac is a perfect example. I have friends still running their G5s after all these years. Rev. 3... design improvements. OSX 10.6... a lot of people could have held off until 10.6.2 or .3 and been much better off. I had very very minor issues, small quirks (compared to windows issues I would call them idiosyncrasies), but others reported process hangs and intermittent failures.

Software and large files seem to be so much more stable, in my experience, in a Mac environment.

Chris, Rod, anyone who knows, is 10.7 the move to true ZFS?

[Christiern]

OK, here is a serious question: If Macs have always been that much better (and I am not necessarily disputing that they have), why haven't they become dominant on the market a long time ago?

Bear in mind that only one company, Apple, markets that platform, as opposed to countless brands of PCs. Furthermore, many of the latter are of poor, cheap quality.

[porcy62]

I don't think MAC is "better" then PC a priori. I have seen both machines in high tech applications. I do think that MAC OS and interface are better for what I usually do with a computer, including video editing at broadcast level. The most common software for film and video editing, AVID, was born on Apple, then a Windows version followed and all the major studios adopted it because PC hardware was cheaper. It was such a nightmare for years, I was forced to work with old OS's, (Windows) because any, and I mean any, new version of Windows OS had tons of bugs: directors don't pay 100 bucks per hour for watching me trying to solve the problems caused by Microsoft's poor engineering: install drivers, delete drivers, reinstall drivers, delete again the very same drivers, get new drivers that fix the bug.

Now if you pay specific computer technicians, system managers, etc in order to get all the things running, PC is fine: cheaper, most powerful and you can assemble the hardware as you like, but Microsoft OS's...man sometimes they got a good one but they replaced it superfast for marketing reasons.

Edited October 23, 2010 by porcy62

[medjuck]

After Avid went Windows Apple developed it's own editing program, Final Cut Pro, which many editors now use. Apple ran a very clever ad in the Hollywood trade papers announcing "$100,000 worth of editing equipment 95% off." Though I don't know if it really is that much cheaper than an Avid system if you buy all the top of the line equipment. We've never edited a feature film using Final Cut yet but lots of people do, especially young people.

Edited October 23, 2010 by medjuck

[porcy62]

After Avid went Windows Apple developed it's own editing program, Final Cut Pro, which many editors now use. Apple ran a very clever ad in the Hollywood trade papers announcing "$100,000 worth of editing equipment 95% off." Though I don't know if it really is that much cheaper than an Avid system if you buy all the top of the line equipment. We've never edited a feature film using Final Cut yet but lots of people do, especially young people.

It's not cheaper, Avid prices collapsed when FCP became reliable, they was forced to adopt a "open" market policy, selling stand alone boards, audio and video, and software, instead of the overpriced "all" packet, software, computer, boards, monitors, storage disks, etc. Anyway Apple was the only that developed a professional system, Adobe and Microsoft died on the road. Personally I am used to Avid and I think it's still the better system around, but FCP is close.

Edited October 23, 2010 by porcy62

[papsrus]

I like my Mac. Doesn't much bother me if others prefer PCs.

[AllenLowe]

though I just spent the entire weekend figuring out how to copy and burn DVDs on it, I still like my Mac - though the programs on it are even more poorly illustrated than with PCs. (eg: Handbrake, free shareware that I got off the internet, has a so-called "users manual" that don't say shit).

once you get it working, however, it really works.

still, you MAC guys who write these programs need to learn how to speak English.

ALSO: IMPORTANT QUESTION -

if you get one of those programs that allows you to use Windows on your MAC, do you first have to install a Windowns operating system (like XP, etc)?

Edited October 25, 2010 by AllenLowe

[Christiern]

Yes, programs such as Parallels and Unison only give you the Microsoft platform, not their operating system. That said, since you have a PC, you probably also have a copy of Windows lying around. Apple does not assign serial numbers to its OS, so there is no problem, but there might be with Microsoft, because they—being super suspicious of their customers [they know they are hated], and, seemingly incapable of writing user-friendly code—probably ask for your social security, phone, and apartment numbers.

[AllenLowe]

uh huh....but what happens when you try to install something like XP? does it just end up like an icon on the desktop?

[Christiern]

I think you can install it without Parallels or Unison, but you will not be able to run Windows and the Mac OS simultaneously, you have to switch and, I think, reboot. The Mac OS comes with an app/utility called Boot Camp, which is what allows that.

[AllenLowe]

allright, still enjoying my Mac;

so - what's the consensus for Word Processing? Word for Mac?

Edited October 28, 2010 by AllenLowe