What's so great about macs? Why are they better than PCs?

dave-dave

Registered
Isn't more software compatible with PCs? Such as though free song software, Monopoly and such? Why does everyone favor macs? What am I missing!
 

ElDiabloConCaca

U.S.D.A. Prime
Because Monopoly and "free song software" (whatever the hell that is) are the two defining factors between a "good" computer and a "bad" computer. Right.

If you'd like to see what's so much better about Macs, head on down to your local Apple Store or authorized Apple reseller and try one out for yourself. You may find it better, you may not like it at all -- just be open-minded when you try it and don't expect it to work like Windows (because it's NOT Windows).

Just a short list of things that I think most of us here will agree are better:
- Better user interface
- Ease of use
- Don't crash as much
- Spyware/Viruses are virtually non-existant
- High quality of craftsmanship
- They're aesthetically pleasing
- They last longer (I'm using a 7 year old computer and running the latest and greatest software available)
- They can run Windows now, negating your entire argument about quantity of software available
 

camgangrel21

Mac Programer
I will backup what ElDiabloConCaca had to say. I run a now 6 year old G4 Power Mac upgraded the video card and RAM and I'm runing 10.4.6 server and Shake 4 and The whole Final Cut Studio pack. Works great. Now what almost 7 year old PC could you run Hollywood Apps on? With just upgradeing the video card and RAM? I also run 10.4.5 on my "PDQ" Wallstreet G3 233 Mhz 160 MB of RAM and a 100 GB hard drive. This laptop was stop being made in 1999. Now what x86 laptop could you run Windows XP on that was a P1 or maybe a low end P2. And still be able to have it be usefull to you. Seeing as I have came back to the Mac from the dark side I can tell you this XP can run on as low as a 200 Mhz P1 with as much as 250 MB of RAM but it will take at lest 10 mins for it to boot. Then that long for any other app to run.
So I hope that helps you out to see why Apple hardware even realy old hardware can still kick a PCs butt any day of the week.
 

Qion

Uber Nothing
camgangrel21 said:
So I hope that helps you out to see why Apple hardware even realy old hardware can still kick a PCs butt any day of the week.
Haha, I agree. There's a lot of things even we who use older Macs can brag about, things such as being able to run the absolute latest and greatest installment of OSX -which in itself is more than Windows and all it's apps can do- on virtually any Mac with a stick of ram and a Rage 128. I have a 450 Mhz G4 Tower sitting in front of me that has better case design than any PC I can think of. Everything about a Mac is just generally higher quality, and works more smoothly than what you would get if you were to use a PC box.

Like El Diablo said, why don't you just head down to the Apple Store?
 

texanpenguin

Registered Penguin
The thing that strikes me as amazing with OS X is that newer versions run *better* than their predecessors.

That's like installing Windows Vista on a machine and having it run quicker than XP.
 

Tommo

Registered
Playing Devil's Advocate here, yes Macs do last longer in general if you bought a top Spec Mac originally, drawback they are much more expensive, not necessarily if you are buying one of those crazy overpriced Dell gamer PCs perhaps. The G5 I have including the 17" Studio display cost nearly three times what the PC and its 19" Screen sitting next to it did so replacement on economic grounds is not an issue.

Secondly, if you buy a Mac now most software will work well but backwards compatability is not a phrase in Apple's vocabulary. Why is Vista taking so long, mostly software and hardwae comaptability testing, why will 10.5 be here sooner ? Because Apple don't care about compatability, either software companies 'fix' their software or it won't work. OK if they didn't force you to use the latest OS with a new Mac.

Finally, hardware support from Apple is appaling, we buy both Pcs and Macs and if a PC goes wrong we get a next day visit from an engineer to fix the problem. With Macs they have to be sent to an approved repairer who on average have it for three weeks before it is repaired and sent back. Both shipping costs have to be met by the customer.

Sorry for the ramble, but I don't think Macs are better than PCs or vice versa. They both do a job, they both generally do it well, but you don't see many PC users trying to justify why their PC is better than a Mac, that might be an interesting question to post :)
 

fryke

Moderator
Staff member
Mod
Do we _really_ need yet another thread about this? Yeah: Watch the "Touché" clip on the getamac page at Apple (linked above). Should answer this specific question very easily, although not completely.
 

Bluesman

Registered
I'm running OSX 10.3.9 on a Trayloading Imac G3 with 233Mhz, i believe that's an 8 year old system. The things i upgraded are: ram to 288MB, a new 30GB HD and a new case fan for the silence. Granted, i can only run simple apps properly like Word, web browsers, IM software and e-mail clients. But that's what i'm using this computer for. To do my college work and a little web browsing every now and then.

I would take a mac over a PC anyday for almost everything. With almost i mean games. The only thing where Windows PC's are better are for games. I wonder what Windows Vista is gonna be like. According to beta testers and from what i've seen, it does have the potential of being better then OSX. But then again lets be fair, it's a next generation OS, i don't think it's a fair match to compare it to OSX. I really wonder how Mac OS 11 is gonna be like, lol.
 

davebz

Mac or bust
There is still much debate over quality vs. quantity. Last I checked, the mac had over 15,000 apps available. My question to dave-dave is as follows:

What good is an application if a: it is poorly written and b: has an interface that "only a mother could love"?
 

contoursvt

Registered
I will backup what ElDiabloConCaca had to say. I run a now 6 year old G4 Power Mac upgraded the video card and RAM and I'm runing 10.4.6 server and Shake 4 and The whole Final Cut Studio pack. Works great. Now what almost 7 year old PC could you run Hollywood Apps on? With just upgradeing the video card and RAM? I also run 10.4.5 on my "PDQ" Wallstreet G3 233 Mhz 160 MB of RAM and a 100 GB hard drive. This laptop was stop being made in 1999. Now what x86 laptop could you run Windows XP on that was a P1 or maybe a low end P2. And still be able to have it be usefull to you. Seeing as I have came back to the Mac from the dark side I can tell you this XP can run on as low as a 200 Mhz P1 with as much as 250 MB of RAM but it will take at lest 10 mins for it to boot. Then that long for any other app to run.
So I hope that helps you out to see why Apple hardware even realy old hardware can still kick a PCs butt any day of the week.
I've got a Compaq SP700 dual PIII 550Mhz Xeon back from 1999 (well it started life as a dual 450Mhz Xeon). Its got 2 Gigs of RAM (PC100 ECC), dual channel UW SCSI controller with an 18gig 15,000RPM Seagate boot drive and a 36gig 10,000RPM Quantum Atlas as the second drive. There is an SATA controller added which has a pair of 250gig Samsung SATA drives on there. Video card is an AGP Geforce4 Ti4200 128mb. The box also has dual firewire 400 ports standard. Its running XP Pro and is currently my main scanning / photoshop computer for image manipulation - especially for digital files from my Canon 20D camera (love that camera). Sometimes I burn DVD's on there as well since prices of burners are so low. Added an LG 16x dual layer.

I'm sure my 8 year old PC is not a slouch compared to your old G4. Please dont assume that all PC's are crap or slow. Thanks.
 

contoursvt

Registered
Just a short list of things that I think most of us here will agree are better:
- Better user interface
- Ease of use
- Don't crash as much
- Spyware/Viruses are virtually non-existant
- High quality of craftsmanship
- They're aesthetically pleasing
- They last longer (I'm using a 7 year old computer and running the latest and greatest software available)
- They can run Windows now, negating your entire argument about quantity of software available
-Better user interface? Maybe. Thats debatable. Its 2007 and I still have to resize a window from one corner? Still no real maximize window to fill the screen incase I need to squeeze every last drop of realestate on a spreadsheet

-Ease of use? Two of my friends have both Mac and PC and we had this discussion a short while ago. They both said that back in the days of OS9 this was true, but they actually find WinXP easier to learn/use or can imagine it being so for a new user.

-Dont crash as much? Please dont even go there. I dont know how many months of uptime my Win2k server has rightnow which was only shut down for me to add more drives to it. Its not 1998 anymore. Things have improved since then in terms of stability. Win2k for example... XP another example.

-Spyware/virus ... I'll give you that. The mac has virtually none. Honestly though. Its not a big issue. There are at least 5 100% free antivirus software that update themselves. Just install and forget about it. Its not really an issue unless you want to turn it into an issue. I have not seen a virus on anyone's computer in the past 3 years. This is since everyone learned that it might be a good idea to install antivirus when surfing to 'warez' sites. If you dont do anything like that, you're pretty much safe anyway. I dont even run AV on my box.

-High quality workmanship. I assume you mean the case and not the parts. If you mean the parts...then I'll take a picture of the ibook keyboard. Says Acer on the back. Even us PC people dont regard Acer as anything to write home about.

-Aesthetically pleasing. Yes this is true, but honestly, I'll take expandability over appearance. Apple towers are very restrictive and barely hold anything - especially true in the older G4 days. My old Antec case (computer I'm typing from) may not look pretty, but its got room for 4 optical drives and 6 hard drives with good ventilation. Fans are quiet too.

-Last longer? Umm so whats stopping a PC user? I've got a dual xeon box from 1999 (thats 8 years old) with 2 gigs ram, UW SCSI drives, SATA drives, 128mb AGP video card..etc. Its running XP with SP2, photoshop CS2..etc. Pretty current sounding to me for a really old box. Trust me, with the 15K and 10K SCSI drives, its not a slug either ;)

-Macs can run windows. True and it does so generally well, but some people having huge SATA performance issues, sound stuttering issues, strange clock issues when switching between OSX and Windows. You can run windows but its not a walk in the park always.



Anyway those are some of my observations. I do work with macs at work (supporting both platforms) and I do have a B&W G3 with 768mb RAM so yes its old but at least I have a mac. Not just a PC person who's never touched anything :)
 

eric2006

iMovie Professional
If you're used to PCs, and won't even look at the benefits of Macs, you won't see them. Many of your points are untrue or not completely correct, from a Mac user's perspective.

You've got to remember, though, that many people expect their Windows computers to "just work", with drastic consequences. I've seen many BSODS (in XP), removed thousands of adware, spyware, and viruses from XP machines, and replaced many different pieces of hardware on PCs. If you're an experienced Windows user, you can usually hold down the fort, avoid most spyware, and reinstall only once a year. But for people who use the computer only as a tool, the Mac requires little or no upkeep, and focuses on user experience.

Oh, and I have an SE/30 from 1989 that works like new, so I've got you beat :)
 

contoursvt

Registered
See my experience is different. I have been building PCs for the longest time and almost nothing I've built has gone down due to faulty hardware. I believe generic PCs built by inexperienced builders may be unreliable but its not true to say that PCs are unreliable. It depends on the manufacturer. For example, at my current work we have about 20 macs and 120 PCs and at least in the past 3 years I've been there, I've seen more mac failures from power supplies, hard drives (in the G5 imacs...heat I guess), a logic board, ibook keyboard...etc. I've had between the 120 PCs, a HD that died, a PSU and a DVD burner. Its luck of the draw if equipment is well built.

You may have a good point about the viruses and spyware because inexperienced users may get more of those.

PS. I still have my first PC and its running as well ;) Its a 386-25Mhz with 4meg RAM. Its a retro dos gaming box at the moment. Its also from around '89 :)
 

nixgeek

Mac of the SubGenius! :-)
Isn't more software compatible with PCs? Such as though free song software, Monopoly and such? Why does everyone favor macs? What am I missing!
I guess it's kind of like jazz: if you have to ask, you'll never know. ;)

Seriously though, why not give one a try? If you have an Apple Store in your area, go there and take them for a test drive. But I do ask that you be open to the operating system and not expect it to be like Windows because it's NOT Windows. Being open is what allowed me to give Linux a try and I'm totally in love with it (I started as a Mac user, so you can imagine). I also was open about learning Windows even though I didn't like it at all during the 90s. I grew to like it, but then once I learned about Linux and opened up to that I eventually started moving away from Windows on my PCs to the point where now I don't even run Windows at home. I'm still a Mac user, so I have my iMac G5 for mainstream use and a Macintosh Quadra 650 that's acting as a web server for my family homepage and some other uses. This isn't to say that I don't use my Linux PCs for mainstream use....I do my surfing, e-mailing, productivity, and music composing on them as well. So for me, the applications are there for Macintosh and even Linux....so why bother with Windows and all of its issues? :D
 

fryke

Moderator
Staff member
Mod
contoursvt, you've revived a very old thread in order to continue its OS war bashing theme. I'm not sure whether this is really a healthy path. We all know that these things can heat up pretty quickly. You're content with your PCs that you put together yourself. You also don't find the fact that you have to use antivirus-software and anti-spyware a problem. Your Windows 2000 Server has a good uptime. Well: Be glad is all I can say. But you're not the average Windows user fed up with all the problems they encounter. I'm pretty sure there are _ways_ to make Windows work as intended, mainly because there _is_ an intended way. I remember being quite content with Win2K myself. But why _was_ it more stable at the beginning? Because Microsoft didn't let it run old problematic drivers and software in the first place. With XP, MS brought some compatibility back, and sure as hell many of the problems came back as well (plus a couple of new ones). I'm sure there are a lot of valid reasons for why Windows isn't that bad at all - even for less tech-avid users than yourself. But this thread's about what's better about Macs. And your personal experience, imho, doesn't defy the points set up by ElDiabloConCaca in June of 2006:

"Better user interface" - I guess there _can_ be a debate about that one. Maybe it's down to opinion. So let's forget about this one, although I *personally* strongly disagree with anyone saying Windows XP or Vista having a better user interface. You mention "no full screen button" for Mac OS X, neglecting the fact that making any app fullscreen kinda kills drag and drop or at least makes it a *lot* harder.

"Ease of use" - Well, that goes with above point, I'd say, so I wouldn't count it as a separate point.

"Don't crash as much" - I'd write "doesn't" instead of "don't", but in my years of experience with unexperienced users of both Macs and Windows PCs, I'd say statistics are with me. ;)

"Spyware/Viruses are virtually non-existant" - You yourself give that point a little validity and I agree with you there. I add some emphasis: It really _is_ a problem for many non-experienced users.

"High quality of craftsmanship" - Skip that one. If that was the _one_ point for decision, I'd be using an IBM Thinkpad by now. Well, a Lenovo Thinkpad, maybe.

"They're aesthetically pleasing" - It _is_ a reason, although maybe not the most important one.

"They last longer" - I think your 8-year-old PC is really a personal experience, and you have given it a _lot_ of not exactly inexpensive hardware upgrades in order to make it still a decent PC. And yet it's not exactly a good candidate for Vista compared to a cheap new PC. But I personally don't really enjoy that old G3 in my signature much with Tiger. It'd need updates as well.

"They can run Windows now, negating your entire argument about quantity of software available" - Heck, that _is_ true, you know. But I'm glad my copy of Windows XP that I can run in Parallels Desktop stays closed for all but the occasional time when I have to test websites against IE. I often decide to let users do that nowadays, though. It's just too much hassle. Start up Windows, hope that the virus defs are not tooooooooo old by now, let Windows do all its updates and let the antivirus software do all _its_ updates, then reboot and finally load _one_ page in IE. Err... ;)
 
Top