I've never worked on a PC for more than 10 minutes, but I'm amazed at the wide range of experiences reported here and by friends. Some say they've had no troubles at all, and others tell horror stories about having to rebuild the registry, viruses, trojans and slow systems. I guess the truth lies somewhere in the middle?
No. Both groups are telling the truth. Two factors come in to play here:
1) When it comes to hardware, a lot hinges on the reliability of the particular machine. Just as some people swear by [insert car company here] because they had one for 10 years that never needs a repair, and other people curse [same company] because their's was a lemon. This happens with Macs too. I visit the Apple support forums (for iPhone and iPod) and I sometimes just check in on the iBook forum. Some people get ibooks where the hard drive or battery or something goes bad within weeks. This can leave a bad taste in the user's mouth even if it's just dumb (bad) luck and not really indicitive of the brand itself.
2) The experience, skill, wherewithall of the user. I, like HB, haven't had a virus in years. I even run one or two of my computers without an AV software at all. I know how to protect myself when it comes to e-mails and websites so it's not an issue. I also don't install junk - web toolbars, weatherbug, "search assistants," etc.
There are a lot of PC users who (simply out of ignorance) aren't so careful. They install all kinds of things (whatever the website they visit wants to install), they open e-mails from strange addresses and execute attachments. They just don't pay attention to what's going on with their PC. In a sense I'm thankful for them because they keep me in business, but I also make an effort to educate every customer so that they never need my help again for the same issue.
I don't think anyone is lying when they swear by PCs (or Macs) or curse their existence. I think they're speaking from their experience. In my case, I have a lot of computers myself and I manage a lot more at work - so I have a varried experience based on the machine and the user. I have noticed this though - if someone has a bad experience with a particular brand or OS it's nearly impossible to restore their confidence in that brand.
Agree with Pupator. I have worked with both Macs and PCs for years. I am most familiar with Windows PCs, but use Linux and Windows at home, Windows at work. Macs are in my family too.
I think Pupator has hit a point with behavior. OS X is not immune to virus's and other malware. It just does not have the footprint to attract developers to build it...yet. So far, there is one in the wild we know of, waiting for more. Granted, the underlying Unix has internal 'walls' and a default policy/permissions infrastructure that is on by default, but it is a matter of time.
Apple is just as boneheaded as Microsoft is in these things, they just haven't had the learning experience. For example, Leapord ships with the firewall off, and turns it off even if it was on in Tiger (upgrades). Boneheaded. At least Microsoft has the gift of experience here. (and lots of infected customers)
One thing about a Mac that helps malware developers is that nearly all Macs are the same...should be easy to trick the majority. I foresee a day where Symantec is selling lots of copies of NAV for Mac.... but that has nothing to do with superiority of the platform, and everything to do with incentives: both to cause harm, and to prevent it.
It just does not have the footprint to attract developers to build it...yet.
Hmm, I don't really buy that. Virus writers do stuff for the kicks, and if someone was the first to write a highly spreadable nasty virus for the Mac they would get a lot of notoriety as a result because of how Apple boast about it being secure.
Someone came up with a virus for the Mac the other week. But because of the way the OS works the user has to first of all go to a dodgy porn site, approve a file download, open the DMG file on their computer, start the installation process, type in their system password to allow it to get to the root level and so on.
So the Mac is more inherently secure just by virtue of the way programs are installed on it.
Is it immune? Nope, no computer is. And while Macs are growing in popularity, they will never dent rhe PC market simply because a) Macs don't come in the same sorts of varied configurations as PC's, and b) the average Joe in every city or town can't just walk into the local store to buy one unless they are lucky enough to have an Apple store nearby.
It would be good if Linux had more support from commercial software people. It would also be good if Linux didn't require a degree to be able to use and install programs on (and if anyone dares tell me how simple it is I'll proverbially stick my fist through my monitor and strangle them! )
The only way I managed too do anything with Linux (Ubuntu) was by spending days looking on internet forums for solutions to the simplest of things. Even then I couldn't get stuff to work properly and gave up (as would any normal person).
I wish Apple would come up with an alternative to Photoshop though. For UK people Adobe make a 4x profit when converted back to $ over US sales for the same download, from the same server, of that program! Converted to US Dollars, at the current exhange rate, Photoshop CS3 will cost me around $1000!
Hmm, I don't really buy that. Virus writers do stuff for the kicks, and if someone was the first to write a highly spreadable nasty virus for the Mac they would get a lot of notoriety as a result because of how Apple boast about it being secure.!
I think this was true in 1998...but not any longer. Most Windows machines no longer get infected with virus's, but instead with other malware: trojans, worms, and become 'zombies' awakened in the middle of the nite. This is not work of a virus. These are done by truly 'bad people', not some 'script kiddie'.
I suspect a 'script kiddie' to do this initally for notoriety, but then that, as you say, is just a nuisance that impacts few.
As the marketshare increases, the attractiveness of the platform increases, remain vigalent, don't take comfort in the supposed superiority of the platform. Remember, a G5 machine was supposed to be so fast, then Apple switched to Intel, and the numbers were amazingly better...beware of the marketing kool-aid.
The only way I managed too do anything with Linux (Ubuntu) was by spending days looking on internet forums for solutions to the simplest of things. Even then I couldn't get stuff to work properly and gave up (as would any normal person).
Ain't that the truth!!!! And I end up with a machine that I can browse the web or read email with...anything else requires significant changes or compromises...and I only use Word, Quicken, Pinnacle Sys Studio, Lightroom, and Photoshop CS2 on my Windows PC.
Here is hoping Gutsy Gibbon is a better experience!
I love articles like this. They sound reasonable and then make large jumps in logic.
If I read this correctly, he's claiming Macs are cheaper because they hold their resale value better. To support this claim, he states that Windows users have to get a new PC every 2 years because the computer gets "gummed up" and is worthless.
For me, a computer is a large investment. I just bought a new one, yes. But my 5 year old computer has been handed down to my son for schoolwork. It still functions as fast as ever, but Lightroom and PS demand a lot these days so I needed a new machine for myself.
When I researched my new computer, resale value was not one of the factors involved.
Agreed. It's very strange that resale value would even be considered for most people. People (generally) buy computers and get rid of them or pass them down several years later. Most people I know don't upgrade every two years and aren't really concerned with resale.
I upgrade constantly, but even I'm not worried about resale because I'm not buying whole new systems, I'm just upgrading parts and pieces.
Never sold a computer in my life. It was that someone wanted info on PC/Mac costs thus i considered the article something that may be of interest to some people reading the thread.
Never sold a computer in my life. It was that someone wanted info on PC/Mac costs thus i considered the article something that may be of interest to some people reading the thread.
I did find it interesting Gus, I just didn't agree with his argument.
I did find it interesting Gus, I just didn't agree with his argument.
Agreed. It's worth a read, but out of all the Mac owners I know, or people who were considering buying a Mac, I've never heard them mention resale value as a driving factor in their decision.
Been standing by reading this, and for some reason, no one wants to post the performance results the OP asked for. All anyone wants to do it discuss how pretty their computers are
OK so, even though I am no longer in the elite PC club, here is how my perfectly serviceable, but indeed slow, AMD Athlon 2900+, 1GB, ATI 128MB Windows XP machine performs:
Fred Miranda test: 1min, 27 sec.
Retouch Pro Test: 3min 16 sec (8 bit) [edit: 3:34 16 bit]
Yep thats right over 5x longer than the machine the OP posted about. Kinda puts it into perspective doesnt it? Bet you guys are all arguing about seconds btw your machines...but who knows? Haven't seen any actual performance numbers!
So do your pretty new Macs and PCs actually perform, or do you just look at them all day . Come on...post your times!!!
Fred Miranda Test: 19 seconds
Retouch Pro Test: 55 seconds
Times are with Lightroom, iCal, Mail, iGetter, Safari, Firefox, Adium, and Preview running in addition to Photoshop.
MacBook Pro 2GHz Intel Core Duo, 2GB DDR2 SDRAM, and pretty much no open hard drive space until I move more of my photos over to a backup drive .
Mac resale values are very good. We upgrade 3 laptops at the same time, and then Ebay the old ones. It helps cover the cost of the new laptops, and allows us to upgrade fairly often.
We've owned both Windows and Macs over the years, sometimes both at once. For myself, the major benefit of using a Mac is stability and consistency. It doesn't matter what I load, download, trash, whatever... my Mac never even hiccups. Having used both platforms so much, there isn't a difference for me regarding ease of use. Now for my mother in-law, that's a whole different story. Our time spent as 'tech support' has decreased significantly since moving her to a MacBook Pro.
I have read this thread with great interest. My first experiences with programming was using punch cards - I learned quickly to number the cards with a marker :uhoh . I have used DEC, Commodores, 'Trash 80's', PC's of various flavors (including home-built). I have to use PC's at work. My home machine is a 20" iMac 2.16 GHz C2D (white).
My biggest complaint with Apple has been the lack of an intermediate Pro or "Semi-Pro" model. Ideally this would be with 2 HD bays, PCI express, replaceable video card, and single Core 2 Duo or Quad processor slot for around $1500.
In most PC vs Apple comparisons threads that I have seen, I have noted the following:
1. Processors are not equal. i.e. E6600 vs T7200
2. HD sizes.
3. Some spec the ridiculously high Apple Store RAM prices.
4. Factoring in cost of built in's: speakers, Bluetooth, wireless N.
5. Bundled software: OS, iLife suite.
6. In the case of the iMac - equivalent monitor cost. Many complain that the current 20" iMac Screen is poor quality. I agree - it does not compare to the 24" screen or the previous generation screens. Who wants to edit their pics on a crappy screen?
7. Often overlooked are the Apple Store refurbs. They are an excellent value and come with an original warranty. My refurb looked like new. It came with a larger HD and more VRAM - but YMMV.
:soapbox
My personal belief is that your computer is a tool, just like your camera. It is what you make with it that counts.
There will always be cheaper PC's as Apple has no desire to enter that market. Home-built will be cheaper also. There are as many PC 'zealots' as there are Mac zealots.
What am I missing here? Macs don't need cords? I work at radio station and we use macs for all our servers and audio editing and in all the recording studios. I promise you-- macs require just as many cords as PCs!
They do? Here is a snapshot of my iMac...
*one cord from the keyboard to the USB port on the back of the screen.
*A power cord from the rear of the unit to the outlet in the wall
*One cord from rear FW400 port to small external Lacie HD
*One cord from USB on rear to iPod
*One cord to my Harman Kardon speakers.
Five cords that's it...see for yourself:
I switched in August...and I run a scaled down version of XP in VMWare Fusion. The only things I have running in Windows on my Mac is Lotus Notes for work and a couple of apps that are windows only for my job. Nothing else is going in the Windows environment, no internet surfing, no downloading and files and exposing myself to viruses as had happened in the past even though I had Spyware apps, virus apps etc. The Mac has none of that and I have not had an iota of a problem.
Drives are cheap. USB 2.0 is fine, too, if those are easier/cheaper to get by you.
Really!? I have an FW400 drive that is dedicated for RAW files. I want to purchase another external drive and I am not conisdering a USB 2.0 because I thought speed might be a problem. I was hoping I could find a deal on a FW800 on or around Black Friday so I can back up everything...the drive on my iMac along with the drive for RAW files.
*one cord from the keyboard to the USB port on the back of the screen.
*A power cord from the rear of the unit to the outlet in the wall
*One cord from rear FW400 port to small external Lacie HD
*One cord from USB on rear to iPod
*One cord to my Harman Kardon speakers.
Five cords that's it...see for yourself:
Does the external HDD require a power cord? How about the speakers? No printer? Even if it's wireless it requires a power cord. No scanner? No media card reader or connection to the digital camera? Using wireless internet I suppose?
If I answered those questions the same as you I'd have exactly two more cables than you. If I got one of the Sony or Gateway computers designed like the iMac it would be the same. I'm just not sure this is a matter worth making a big deal about.
Does the external HDD require a power cord? How about the speakers? No printer? Even if it's wireless it requires a power cord. No scanner? No media card reader or connection to the digital camera? Using wireless internet I suppose?
If I answered those questions the same as you I'd have exactly two more cables than you. If I got one of the Sony or Gateway computers designed like the iMac it would be the same. I'm just not sure this is a matter worth making a big deal about.
Speakers under the desk do require a wire, and yes of course the external drive has a cord from it to the wall. My card reader is small, unobtusive and stays in my desk drawer until needed. I do not print my images from home they are all printed using various services EZPrints (via SmugMug), Ocassionally WHCC and MPIX too.
Oh, and Pupator...switch to decaf...you are taking this a little too seriously.
Heh. Sure I am. Resorting to ad hominem arguments are we? That speaks volumes for the merits of your point.
Sigh! Call it a personal attack if you must, but the purpose of the post with the image was to show the computer as it sits currently on my desktop...free of multiple wires.
Really!? I have an FW400 drive that is dedicated for RAW files. I want to purchase another external drive and I am not conisdering a USB 2.0 because I thought speed might be a problem. I was hoping I could find a deal on a FW800 on or around Black Friday so I can back up everything...the drive on my iMac along with the drive for RAW files.
FW is better/faster. Yes. But USB 2.0 is acceptable.
Comments
I've never worked on a PC for more than 10 minutes, but I'm amazed at the wide range of experiences reported here and by friends. Some say they've had no troubles at all, and others tell horror stories about having to rebuild the registry, viruses, trojans and slow systems.
Dgrin FAQ | Me | Workshops
1) When it comes to hardware, a lot hinges on the reliability of the particular machine. Just as some people swear by [insert car company here] because they had one for 10 years that never needs a repair, and other people curse [same company] because their's was a lemon. This happens with Macs too. I visit the Apple support forums (for iPhone and iPod) and I sometimes just check in on the iBook forum. Some people get ibooks where the hard drive or battery or something goes bad within weeks. This can leave a bad taste in the user's mouth even if it's just dumb (bad) luck and not really indicitive of the brand itself.
2) The experience, skill, wherewithall of the user. I, like HB, haven't had a virus in years. I even run one or two of my computers without an AV software at all. I know how to protect myself when it comes to e-mails and websites so it's not an issue. I also don't install junk - web toolbars, weatherbug, "search assistants," etc.
There are a lot of PC users who (simply out of ignorance) aren't so careful. They install all kinds of things (whatever the website they visit wants to install), they open e-mails from strange addresses and execute attachments. They just don't pay attention to what's going on with their PC. In a sense I'm thankful for them because they keep me in business, but I also make an effort to educate every customer so that they never need my help again for the same issue.
I don't think anyone is lying when they swear by PCs (or Macs) or curse their existence. I think they're speaking from their experience. In my case, I have a lot of computers myself and I manage a lot more at work - so I have a varried experience based on the machine and the user. I have noticed this though - if someone has a bad experience with a particular brand or OS it's nearly impossible to restore their confidence in that brand.
I think Pupator has hit a point with behavior. OS X is not immune to virus's and other malware. It just does not have the footprint to attract developers to build it...yet. So far, there is one in the wild we know of, waiting for more. Granted, the underlying Unix has internal 'walls' and a default policy/permissions infrastructure that is on by default, but it is a matter of time.
Apple is just as boneheaded as Microsoft is in these things, they just haven't had the learning experience. For example, Leapord ships with the firewall off, and turns it off even if it was on in Tiger (upgrades). Boneheaded. At least Microsoft has the gift of experience here. (and lots of infected customers)
One thing about a Mac that helps malware developers is that nearly all Macs are the same...should be easy to trick the majority. I foresee a day where Symantec is selling lots of copies of NAV for Mac.... but that has nothing to do with superiority of the platform, and everything to do with incentives: both to cause harm, and to prevent it.
shudder.
not even if it was the last antivirus on earth.
Why wait for a virus to slow your machine to a crawl when Symantec can do it for you?
Hmm, I don't really buy that. Virus writers do stuff for the kicks, and if someone was the first to write a highly spreadable nasty virus for the Mac they would get a lot of notoriety as a result because of how Apple boast about it being secure.
Someone came up with a virus for the Mac the other week. But because of the way the OS works the user has to first of all go to a dodgy porn site, approve a file download, open the DMG file on their computer, start the installation process, type in their system password to allow it to get to the root level and so on.
So the Mac is more inherently secure just by virtue of the way programs are installed on it.
Is it immune? Nope, no computer is. And while Macs are growing in popularity, they will never dent rhe PC market simply because a) Macs don't come in the same sorts of varied configurations as PC's, and b) the average Joe in every city or town can't just walk into the local store to buy one unless they are lucky enough to have an Apple store nearby.
It would be good if Linux had more support from commercial software people. It would also be good if Linux didn't require a degree to be able to use and install programs on (and if anyone dares tell me how simple it is I'll proverbially stick my fist through my monitor and strangle them!
The only way I managed too do anything with Linux (Ubuntu) was by spending days looking on internet forums for solutions to the simplest of things. Even then I couldn't get stuff to work properly and gave up (as would any normal person).
I wish Apple would come up with an alternative to Photoshop though. For UK people Adobe make a 4x profit when converted back to $ over US sales for the same download, from the same server, of that program! Converted to US Dollars, at the current exhange rate, Photoshop CS3 will cost me around $1000!
My Smugmug gallery
Pentax K10D
Canon 60D
I think this was true in 1998...but not any longer. Most Windows machines no longer get infected with virus's, but instead with other malware: trojans, worms, and become 'zombies' awakened in the middle of the nite. This is not work of a virus. These are done by truly 'bad people', not some 'script kiddie'.
I suspect a 'script kiddie' to do this initally for notoriety, but then that, as you say, is just a nuisance that impacts few.
As the marketshare increases, the attractiveness of the platform increases, remain vigalent, don't take comfort in the supposed superiority of the platform. Remember, a G5 machine was supposed to be so fast, then Apple switched to Intel, and the numbers were amazingly better...beware of the marketing kool-aid.
Ain't that the truth!!!! And I end up with a machine that I can browse the web or read email with...anything else requires significant changes or compromises...and I only use Word, Quicken, Pinnacle Sys Studio, Lightroom, and Photoshop CS2 on my Windows PC.
Here is hoping Gutsy Gibbon is a better experience!
If I read this correctly, he's claiming Macs are cheaper because they hold their resale value better.
For me, a computer is a large investment. I just bought a new one, yes. But my 5 year old computer has been handed down to my son for schoolwork. It still functions as fast as ever, but Lightroom and PS demand a lot these days so I needed a new machine for myself.
When I researched my new computer, resale value was not one of the factors involved.
I upgrade constantly, but even I'm not worried about resale because I'm not buying whole new systems, I'm just upgrading parts and pieces.
Agreed. It's worth a read, but out of all the Mac owners I know, or people who were considering buying a Mac, I've never heard them mention resale value as a driving factor in their decision.
Fred Miranda Test: 19 seconds
Retouch Pro Test: 55 seconds
Times are with Lightroom, iCal, Mail, iGetter, Safari, Firefox, Adium, and Preview running in addition to Photoshop.
MacBook Pro 2GHz Intel Core Duo, 2GB DDR2 SDRAM, and pretty much no open hard drive space until I move more of my photos over to a backup drive
Mac resale values are very good. We upgrade 3 laptops at the same time, and then Ebay the old ones. It helps cover the cost of the new laptops, and allows us to upgrade fairly often.
We've owned both Windows and Macs over the years, sometimes both at once. For myself, the major benefit of using a Mac is stability and consistency. It doesn't matter what I load, download, trash, whatever... my Mac never even hiccups. Having used both platforms so much, there isn't a difference for me regarding ease of use. Now for my mother in-law, that's a whole different story. Our time spent as 'tech support' has decreased significantly since moving her to a MacBook Pro.
Nikon D300
Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8
Nikon 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6
Nikon 50mm f/1.8D
[SIZE=-3]Mary Beth Glasmann Photography[/SIZE]
http://lifehacker.com/software/hack-attack/build-a-hackintosh-mac-for-under-800-321913.php
My biggest complaint with Apple has been the lack of an intermediate Pro or "Semi-Pro" model. Ideally this would be with 2 HD bays, PCI express, replaceable video card, and single Core 2 Duo or Quad processor slot for around $1500.
In most PC vs Apple comparisons threads that I have seen, I have noted the following:
1. Processors are not equal. i.e. E6600 vs T7200
2. HD sizes.
3. Some spec the ridiculously high Apple Store RAM prices.
4. Factoring in cost of built in's: speakers, Bluetooth, wireless N.
5. Bundled software: OS, iLife suite.
6. In the case of the iMac - equivalent monitor cost. Many complain that the current 20" iMac Screen is poor quality. I agree - it does not compare to the 24" screen or the previous generation screens. Who wants to edit their pics on a crappy screen?
7. Often overlooked are the Apple Store refurbs. They are an excellent value and come with an original warranty. My refurb looked like new. It came with a larger HD and more VRAM - but YMMV.
:soapbox
My personal belief is that your computer is a tool, just like your camera. It is what you make with it that counts.
There will always be cheaper PC's as Apple has no desire to enter that market. Home-built will be cheaper also. There are as many PC 'zealots' as there are Mac zealots.
*one cord from the keyboard to the USB port on the back of the screen.
*A power cord from the rear of the unit to the outlet in the wall
*One cord from rear FW400 port to small external Lacie HD
*One cord from USB on rear to iPod
*One cord to my Harman Kardon speakers.
Five cords that's it...see for yourself:
I switched in August...and I run a scaled down version of XP in VMWare Fusion. The only things I have running in Windows on my Mac is Lotus Notes for work and a couple of apps that are windows only for my job. Nothing else is going in the Windows environment, no internet surfing, no downloading and files and exposing myself to viruses as had happened in the past even though I had Spyware apps, virus apps etc. The Mac has none of that and I have not had an iota of a problem.
http://www.nkpix.com
Really!? I have an FW400 drive that is dedicated for RAW files. I want to purchase another external drive and I am not conisdering a USB 2.0 because I thought speed might be a problem. I was hoping I could find a deal on a FW800 on or around Black Friday so I can back up everything...the drive on my iMac along with the drive for RAW files.
http://www.nkpix.com
Does the external HDD require a power cord? How about the speakers? No printer? Even if it's wireless it requires a power cord. No scanner? No media card reader or connection to the digital camera? Using wireless internet I suppose?
If I answered those questions the same as you I'd have exactly two more cables than you. If I got one of the Sony or Gateway computers designed like the iMac it would be the same. I'm just not sure this is a matter worth making a big deal about.
Speakers under the desk do require a wire, and yes of course the external drive has a cord from it to the wall. My card reader is small, unobtusive and stays in my desk drawer until needed. I do not print my images from home they are all printed using various services EZPrints (via SmugMug), Ocassionally WHCC and MPIX too.
Oh, and Pupator...switch to decaf...you are taking this a little too seriously.
http://www.nkpix.com
Heh. Sure I am. Resorting to ad hominem arguments are we? That speaks volumes for the merits of your point.
Sigh! Call it a personal attack if you must, but the purpose of the post with the image was to show the computer as it sits currently on my desktop...free of multiple wires.
http://www.nkpix.com
Very nice!
http://www.nkpix.com
FW is better/faster. Yes. But USB 2.0 is acceptable.
Dgrin FAQ | Me | Workshops