Mac or PC (which should I buy??)

[Greg]

Hi everyone,

So my old PC notebook is nearing the end of its life and it is now time I start looking for new computers. Hopefully, some knowledgeable folk here can let me know whether waiting till Leopard comes out and paying the heavy premium one pays on Macs is worth it.

I plan on using it for work applications mostly (Word, Excel) but I would like to use the computer for music as well.

Is the heavy premium worth OS X or should I try Vista?

[Nico Kempe]

Well, I see Mac as a more creative platform, whereas pc (or Windows) is more business to me.

Personally I don't like Windows very much, but I'll give you my ideas of hardware and OSses:
PC:

• Flexible, you can choose most any hardware and software
• Possibly unstable, depending on your choice (DIY or one of those HP's for example)
• Less limits, you're not tied to the manufacturers list of components

Mac:

• Stable, it's pre-build and tested to work well
• Limited modification options, you could be tied to the hardware the manufacturer offers
• Spiffy designs, it looks nice

But since Apple switched to Intel, there's not that much difference between the two anymore.

Windows:

• Most software is build for Windows
• Most virusses are build for Windows
• it could get, because of the above, a little buggy sometimes
• it works great for office apps and you can find just about any type of software for it

Mac:

• Sleek design, userfriendly
• Stable, unless you install buggy software (but I noticed the system itself keeps working still)
• a little more limited choice of software
• limited configuration options (mostly in the user interface, i.e. window handling and theming)
• great for creative work like graphics, movies and music
• office apps are a little weak, although you could install Microsoft Office..

If you'd like to get a little creative or just hate to do a little work to get a secure and stable system, I'd go for Mac.
If you need to do much office work, want to try out many types of software, or play games, I'd go for PC.

DISCLAIMER: The stability and safety of a system most of all depends on the sysadmin. I am also aware that there is really alot of software available for Mac, good software too, something for every task you can imagine, but quantity wise, Windows wins on that area. Hardware differences and stability are getting more and more thesame now between PC and MAC, since Apple now uses Intel systems.

[Nico Kempe]

Also, may I point out Apple has some nice MAC vs PC ads?
just click here..

[dor]

option 3:: linux?
I prefer macs, I just wish they wouldn't be so pricey, and as mentioned limited in their software options.
On the other hand if you're in the creative fields, it seems on the pro/prosumer level macs are always on the leading edge - final cut is the most recent example.

[WanderingOak]

Now that Apple has switched to Intel chips, BootCamp is an option that allows you to run either Windows or OS X on an Intel based Mac. You will have to pay for Vista (if you know how to get around that, you really should pay, even though it is M$), but you will be able to run both OS's on the same machine.

[dor]

Originally Posted by WanderingOak

Now that Apple has switched to Intel chips, BootCamp is an option that allows you to run either Windows or OS X on an Intel based Mac. You will have to pay for Vista (if you know how to get around that, you really should pay, even though it is M$), but you will be able to run both OS's on the same machine.

paralells works pretty well too.

[Sworn]

Im a mac user, I prefer macs but I dont know what my next computer will be actually

Why Is Low End Mac Advocating Cheap Windows PCs?
great article

[Indy107]

I plan on using it for work applications mostly (Word, Excel) but I would like to use the computer for music as well.

Something to keep in mind if you are using Itunes for music - Itunes and Vista are not exactly on speaking terms yet.

Apple warns iPod users off Microsoft's Vista-News-Tech & Web-TimesOnline

[빈센트]

If that's all you're going to use it for then just get a PC. PCs are cheap. Never buy a mac unless you have a really good reason to do so. Avoid Vista though. Stick with XP.

[Indy107]

Unfortunately, anything you buy from those 'big box' stores automatically comes with Vista. Remember there are 2 home versions, Basic and Premium. The new Aeroglass interface is on Premium only. And also remember it has some hefty requirements, >2G Core2Duo, >1G RAM, and stock integrated graphics will suck on Vista. You need a good ATI or Nvidia video card.

I agree, either find something (new or used) with XP, have one built with XP if you can, find something used and install Linux (also remember setting up Wifi on Linux can be tricky), or save your pennies for a Mac.

I'm not a Mac guy myself, I've always been a PC guy. But I now have 2 machines running Linux and my firewall/router is an old P3 running smoothwall. Microsoft appears to be forcing our hand, and for that reason alone, I'm learning Linux.

[Greg]

Originally Posted by dor

option 3:: linux?
I prefer macs, I just wish they wouldn't be so pricey, and as mentioned limited in their software options.
On the other hand if you're in the creative fields, it seems on the pro/prosumer level macs are always on the leading edge - final cut is the most recent example.

Yeah, I was looking at Ubuntu and it looks pretty nice. I don't have too much experience with Linux as my main OS though - from what I've been told, it's more work than its worth. Your thoughts?

[dor]

Originally Posted by Greg

Yeah, I was looking at Ubuntu and it looks pretty nice. I don't have too much experience with Linux as my main OS though - from what I've been told, it's more work than its worth. Your thoughts?

i would go with ubuntu its supposed to be a lot easier to configure - i am downloading a copy as a i speak. I found fedora core pretty easy to install, but you're right simple things like installing stuff on linux can be a hassle if you're used to the plug and playability of macs and pcs (macs are by far easier than pcs, still! )
another thing about macs - a lot of 'pc people' are turned off by mac's simplicity which they mistake for lack of funcationality , actually mac software tends to be quite intuitive and deceptively simple, meaning you can do some pretty complex stuff with it.
ITunes is a great example - before itunes, mp3 players didn't do well because their interfaces were so poor -

[John Wesley]

I agree that it all depends on what you plan on doing with the machine. For what it's worth, I just got a new MacBookPro and so far I love it. Some of the main improvements over windows:

-Way faster start up times
-Better looking interface
-More intuitive navigation

I haven't run into any problems finding software yet either. If you follow any sites like Lifehacker.com, you'll see they post about Mac freeware all the time. One program I've started using is QuickSilver, which lets you search and open programs and files straight from the desktop. It makes working much faster. I really wish I had it on my PC at work.

[icesar]

Less than a year ago I made the switch from PC to Mac, and if I don't have to, I don't plan on going back.

Things just work more smoothly and I've experienced few crashes or frozen applications.

Also, since OS X is built on linux, Macs are more versatile than they used to be. I use mine as a development platform and I've been pleased with the results.

[WanderingOak]

Originally Posted by icesar

Also, since OS X is built on linux, Macs are more versatile than they used to be. I use mine as a development platform and I've been pleased with the results.

OS X is based on BSD Unix, which is not the same as Linux. However, as you said, being Unix based does make it more versitile.

[Nico Kempe]

Originally Posted by icesar

Also, since OS X is built on linux, Macs are more versatile than they used to be. I use mine as a development platform and I've been pleased with the results.

Technically it's not built on Linux, but that doesn't really matter now.
What I did miss to tell indeed, was that Mac OS X does have a Linux-like core, which you can easily acces via a terminal.
That is one of the top arguments that got me to purchase a Mac, because I already use *nix systems on all my PC's.

So if you're interested in *nix systems, then that's another reason to go for Mac. But then again, if you're interested in *nix systems, you might just as well stick with PC's..

[Baltar]

Originally Posted by Greg

I plan on using it for work applications mostly (Word, Excel) but I would like to use the computer for music as well.

Is the heavy premium worth OS X or should I try Vista?

For Word and Excel it doesn't really matter what OS you use, but OS X probably has an advantage for music software. Also, from what I've seen, Macs aren't as overpriced as most people tend to think. I've compared the hardware specs of an iMac with a roughly equivalent Dell PC and found that the iMac is only about $100-200 more expensive than the Dell, all things considered. You have to keep in mind that the hardware Apple uses is top of the line, while companies like Dell offer cheap but outdated PCs in addition to new, expensive ones. Plus with an iMac you're getting a computer that fits inside the monitor.. So that in itself should be worth the extra money.

I haven't used OS X yet, but I do have Vista installed on an old testbed PC. My own opinion is that of a software developer so it's probably different from what an average user would say, but I think Vista is pretty bad in terms of usability. They made the interface more confusing, and added security warnings for just about anything you do. Other than that, Vista is pretty much Windows XP with a lot of visual effects thrown in. It incorporates all the security and anti-spyware components that you can get for XP individually. For instance, the Windows firewall is available for XP with the latest service pack, and Windows Defender (anti spyware) is available as a separate download.

Also, Vista is an incredible memory hog. My install of Vista Business edition uses about 300 mb of RAM with no programs running (more RAM is used if the Aero Glass interface is turned on). That's in stark contrast to Windows 2000 (which is XP without a flashy interface), a fresh install of which uses 80 MB of RAM with no programs running. So Vista is a huge, resource wasting operating system, both in terms of CPU usage and RAM just to manage all the visual effects it does. This of course means less resources for your programs.

Originally Posted by Greg

Yeah, I was looking at Ubuntu and it looks pretty nice. I don't have too much experience with Linux as my main OS though - from what I've been told, it's more work than its worth. Your thoughts?

I have Ubuntu installed on my new computer, and I think it's a very good OS. It comes with a very large library of software you can install automatically and is very easy to use. Linux on a laptop is a bit more complicated though, and as far as I know you need to get a special version of a Linux distribution that was customized for your laptop. If anyone knows better feel free to correct me.

You may also have issues with hardware compatibility, and setting up WiFi networking can be a problem if you want to use security. In Ubuntu it's currently not possible to set up WPA without editing a text file (WEP is easy to set up, but is useless as far as security goes). Also, many devices don't have drivers or support for Linux, although these days a lot of them do. Printers, scanners and webcams for instance are an issue. When buying something you have to do research to make sure that the device works with Linux. Other than that, it's a very good OS.

[Greg]

Thanks for your thoughts. I'm leaning now to the macbook or macbook pro. Anyone know if it is worth going pro - or should I just keep it simple and get a macbook.

Also, any thoughts about waiting til Leopard or jumping in now?

[tobyhede]

I bought the MacBook Pro a few months ago and I love it. First Mac I've ever owned.

I run Windows XP using Bootcamp to play games - the Pro graphics are more than up to the task. If you're wanting to play games you really have to go Pro.

Otherwise, it depends ... unless you're doing heaps of graphics work like photoshop the MacBook should be fine for word processing and etc.

[Scientist]

I was a rabid PC fan until I bought my first Mac about a year and a half ago. I think the biggest reason that I switched was because I was tired of the stale Windows user interface. I've been using the start button / taskbar / Windows explorer interface since August 24th 1995, and being stuck using it at work, I don't want to have to deal with it at home.

I think Mac OS X is great. It is simple, uncluttered, pretty, stable and I can do what I want to do quickly. I don't have to worry about spyware and viruses which is a huge benefit.

[scottyp]

Macs are especially good for creative work, but they are expensive. I'd suggest looking at your budget first of all. If you really can't afford to spend a lot on a new computer, stick with a pc. If you have a decent budget and need a computer for internet/email/basic tasks then the low end imacs and macbooks (and mac mini) should be up to the task. If you work with music/video or other intense tasks then the macbook pro/high end imac/mac pro (if you have a huge budget) would be more up your alley...

[dgorila1]

Check out www.smalldog.com for good prices on refurbished Macs. They're an Apple authorized reseller. Also check out Apple's website. Look for their refurbished section. They have some great deals too. I just bought my wifes iPod there for about $60 less than retail.
We switched from a PC to eMac several years back. I just updated the OSX to the latest version. We have had far less problems with the Mac than the PC, and I like how much more compact they package them in with the same power. On the other hand, I just purchased a Dell laptop for my wife to use for school because some of her study software won't run on the Mac. I much prefer the Macs though.

[thijsvdanker]

I have just recently (beginning of january) made the switch from XP to Ubuntu, and are becomming more and more happy with my choice!

The only hick-up in my switch was the fact that my wireless NIC wasn't compatible with linux, but a cheap usb wifi-adapter did the trick.

The work related things you mentioned are very well supported in Ubuntu (open office) and for almost all the other software there is a linux equivalent (sites like Osalt helped me out greatly in these cases).

[dor]

i installed ubunto and like it but....no quick time?!

[Jerigan]

What do you need quicktime for?

I've been running ubuntu for about a month now. Fantastic OS. I had a couple issues with getting certain things running. For example, there is no 64-bit version of Flash so some web pages couldn't display everything. Luckily, it isn't that hard to trick it into thinking I'm running a 32-bit machine.

It's very fast and responsive. I find the graphics effects from Beryl look far nicer than OS X. And to top it all off, I have yet to find a situation that has no program for it. Everything is free and installs incredibly easily.

I just installed Windows XP for the couple of games that I play occasionally. I can honestly say that switching to Linux was the best computer decision I've made in the past 12 years of using them.

Getting back to the original post. If you really want to spend the money, get a Mac. But before doing that, I would see how well your current laptop runs Linux. Some versions are made for slower machines and could be extremely fast on yours. Those versions are usually quite slimmed down, so it probably wouldn't have everything you want right off the install. Getting the extra stuff you want is pretty simple. Office applications and music would only take a couple minutes.

[aussieNickuss]

At my work, we recently ordered 15 MacBooks after we had gone through quite a few price comparisons.

The actual price tag of the Macs look larger but in fact (in the case of our MacBooks) they were cheaper. We got MacBooks with an Intel Core 2 Duo 2Ghz, 1GB RAM, 80GB Hard Drive and DVD burners for (AUD)$1749 each. Our alternative was the IBM/Lenovo Thinkpads which at exactly the same price were only 1.8Ghz, 512MB Ram, 80GB HDD and NO DVD burner. The equivilent IBM was over $2000.

I think for what you need a MacBook is more than suffucient...however, if you plan to play games or run Vista (for the eyecandy), you would want to consider the Pro models. The MacBooks are fast! Mine boots to a ready Mac OSX desktop in about 12-15 seconds.