32 reasons why PCs are better than Macs: are they still true in 2010?

by Zara Baxter , John Gillooly | Wednesday 7 July 2010

Once upon a time, these were the reasons PC users could still hold their heads high. But do they still hold true?

Background: In July 2007 we'd gotten a bit sick of rampant Apple worship. In the interests of balanced debate, we ran an article outlining 32 Reasons Why PCs are Better than Macs.

Three years later, is it all still true? The Apple bandwagon has only picked up more steam with the success of devices like the iPhone and iPad, and MacBook sales are higher than ever.

We've revisited the story below, starting with the first 16 points. In coming days we'll be adding extra points to the list below. Readers with a copy of the latest August issue of PC Authority get the full shebang: we put four Macs in a room, side by side with the best PCs money can buy and asked, which would we choose? Plus we discuss issues like security, gaming, and the Mac "ecosystem".

It's time for us to wade into the slanging match again. Here are the 32 Reasons Why PCs are Better than Macs - revisited for the age of Windows 7, Steam and Core i7.

1 - Service packs don't cost $199

What we said in 2007: Since Mac OS X was launched in 2001, there have been four "new versions" of the operating system - Puma, Jaguar, Panther and Tiger - with a fifth, Leopard, due imminently. That's almost one a year, each costing a princely $199 - racking up a total bill of close to $1000 for anyone who's bought every version. And they say Windows is expensive.

Apple has effectively introduced the first subscription operating system, and has somehow gotten away with it. If Microsoft had done likewise, Bill Gates would have been before the anti-competition courts quicker than you could say, "isn't $199 a bit steep for a service pack?". The Mac zealots claim that each new cat really is a new operating system, but that argument doesn't bear scrutiny. Take Panther (Mac OS X 10.3): the Apple press release hails "more than 150 breakthrough new features", the pick of which are a new "Finder", a way to see all your open windows at once, and bundled video-messaging software. God knows how insignificant the other 147 were.

John Gillooly: For most PC owners Windows 7 has been the first operating system purchased since Windows XP. Considering that XP was released back in 2001 it means that the actual cash outlay for the operating system is small. Even those who went with Windows Vista haven't needed to fork out for the service packs needed to improve it to a modern standard.

Apple on the other hand gives out its mobile phone software updates for free, yet charges desktop users for the privilege of jumping to the next minor iteration of OS X.

Zara Baxter: Back in 2007, we said that every time Mac created a new point release of OS X they charged full OS price for it. That's still true, unfortunately, but at least Mac has slowed down its point releases, after the rapid succession of OS 10.1-10.4. Since 2007 we've only seen Leopard and Snow Leopard, while Apple focuses its efforts on iOS and the the iPhone and iPad.

Both Leopard and Snow Leopard, while only point releases, have added a few major improvements, such as CoverFlow, iCal, Spaces, Spotlight and Time Machine as well as Microsoft Exchange support and full multi-touch trackpad support.

2 - No price premium for flashy design

What we said in 2007: There still isn't a PC maker on the planet that can hold a candle to Apple when it comes to product design. But not everyone wants or needs a computer that looks like it fell off the back of a Bang & Olufsen lorry. Macs routinely cost more than their PC equivalents. The cheapest Mac you can buy, the Mac mini, costs $949 and comes with a piddling 60GB hard disk, a meagre 512MB of RAM and no screen. Pop over to Dell, and that same $949 will buy you a Dimension E520 Vista PC with a 160GB hard disk, 1GB of RAM and a 19in flat panel display. Dell's cheapest system costs just $898 at the time of writing. We're not expecting Dell's bargain-basement models to trouble our A List anytime soon, and Kate Moss wouldn't be seen dead near one, but they'll suffice for a cheap office PC that sits under a desk all day or a computer for the kids' homework. Mac buyers simply don't have that choice.

John Gillooly: Just take a look at the desktop section of our Mac vs PC feature. The Mac Pro looks good (even if said looks haven't evolved from the old Power Mac days) but for a similar pricetag you can get a truly beastly PC packed with cutting edge components. You can also choose from a huge number of case designs and sizes, tailoring the results to your precise needs. You can even get ones with the same sort of brushed aluminium finish seen on the Mac Pro.

Despite a newfound respect for the iMac, even it is very narrow in focus. The tightly integrated all in one design is unique, but it is also a lot more expensive than an equivalently powered PC would be.

Zara Baxter: The design tradeoff seems much less like a tradeoff these days. Not only have we found a few cracks in the impregnable MacBook Pro design, but you get much closer to value for money these days. Our testing shows that the iMac and MacBook Pro, in particular, are very good systems for their price - you'll be hard pressed to find a good quality 27in monitor for less than $600. A PC allows you to buy more parts for the same price, but the iMac holds its own comfortably. And who wouldn't want the stylish and powerful MacBook Pro?

What you do get with a Mac, instead of a design premium, is more akin to a battery life premium on laptops. They consistently outperform their PC counterparts in our battery life testing. The only PC laptops that come close are ultra-low-voltage (ULV) PC models. Of course, ULV PC laptops underperform in other areas compared to the MacBook Pro models we've tested.

You still can't choose a bargain basement, drop-dead hideous Mac for the back room, but is that such a bad thing?

3 - Thousands of decent games

What we said in 2007: "I was designed for the home," scream the Mac ads. You were? Then how come you've got such a poor bunch of games? At the time of writing, the top-selling Mac games on Amazon.com were World of Warcraft (yawn), Crazy Machines: The Wacky Contraptions Game (What the?!) and The Sims II - a two-year-old title designed for loners who need imaginary friends to compensate for the lack of actual people in their pitiful lives. Want the adrenaline-filled 3D action and spectacular graphics of Rainbow Six: Vegas? Or, a spin round the track at high-velocity in a beautifully rendered Porsche in Test Drive Unlimited? Want to revisit a seminal classic such as Half-Life 2? Sorry, you can't. Computer says no. That's not to mention the fact that the PC has a near-monopoly on all the decent graphics hardware. And even if you did want to upgrade your Mac's graphics, you probably couldn't anyway. "Nvidia graphics options for Apple desktops and notebooks can only be purchased through Apple or as Apple update kits," warns Nvidia's website. If you're even halfway serious about gaming, you need a PC.

John Gillooly: One of the smartest moves that Microsoft ever made was the tying in of DirectX to gaming hardware. Both NVIDIA and AMD develop graphics cards with DirectX as the intended software platform (while they support OpenGL it hasn't been a priority for nearly a decade now). DirectX is a technology tied exclusively to Windows (and the Xbox), which means that gaming hardware runs best under Windows.

Despite the fact that OS X gaming has had a shot in the arm thanks to Valve Software's Steam distribution platform, the need for OpenGL is a major stumbling block. So far the major 3D action games released through the Mac version of Steam use an OpenGL variant of Valve's Source engine, which runs slower than the DirectX version does. This is why the vast majority of releases are five-year old games that can run adequately on the Mac's graphics hardware (as long as Apple doesn't break the graphics drivers with an OS X patch).

This is also played out by those beta testing the upcoming Starcraft 2. The Mac version of the game is noticeably slower than the Windows one, thanks largely to OpenGL. So while there are more games available now for the Mac, the reality is that the best PC gaming platform is still Windows thanks to a combination of hardware, software and much wider developer support than OS X.

Ironically enough the top selling Mac game on Amazon is a Nancy Drew adventure, but Blizzard games like World of Warcraft, Starcraft and Diablo II still dominate the bestseller list. The bestselling OS X games on Steam are a bit more diverse, but the selection is thin compared to that available for Windows.

Zara Baxter: Poor PC. It's become the poor relation of gaming lately. More games are released for console and developed for console first these days - our counterparts at Atomic estimate 90% of games are developed for console first.

But that doesn't mean that the Mac has caught up. sure, Steam now has a Mac version, but the range of games is still considerably smaller than the PC.

It's interesting that the lack of games for Mac is concentrated into a few areas.

Casual games has been one area which has grown enormously since 2007. It's predominantly thanks to the iPhone, according to the Casual Games Association. Its now by far the largest category of games these days and the games are often cross platform, running in web browsers or on Flash (we won't talk about the iPad!). So if your tastes run to lightweight gaming, you'll be satisfied, no matter which platform you pick.

Simulation and roleplaying games are also catching up on the Mac. Blizzard releases all its games for both platforms, and the likes of Civilization V will be available for both platforms. Spore and Sims 3 are available for both.

When it comes to immersive first person shooters, however, it's fair to say that the only way Mac competes reasonably well against PC is if you're willing to install Windows.

4 - Two mouse buttons

What we said in 2007: Yes, we know Macs are meant to be so simple your Grandma could partition the hard disk while solving the Countdown conundrum, but do they really need to be dumbed down to use only one mouse button? A monkey with Attention Deficit Disorder could master two buttons, but Apple's (seemingly not ironically named) Mighty Mouse resorts to a single mouse click by default. Yes, you can easily tweak the driver for two buttons or simply plug in a normal mouse, but a firing squad is too lenient for the imbecile who decided that pressing Ctrl and left-click was a better out-of-the-box solution than a single press of the right button.

John Gillooly: Ludicrously, while Apple now has more than one mouse button, its Magic Mouse still has issues for advanced users. One thing, noticed especially by those trying to game, is that it is physically impossible to press the left and right buttons at the same time. The use of a multi-touch surface is nice, but it lacks the tactile satisfaction that a scroll wheel imparts.

Of course, this is a niche situation, and this is one area where Apple has improved its performance. USB has also had a lot to do with it. In reality you only need an Apple branded mouse to complete the ecosystem. Any old USB mouse will work.

Zara Baxter: Keyboard shortcuts are great, aren't they? The Mac is designed for it, including control-click rather than right click. I don't think this is a reason why PCs are better than Macs, when two-button mouses work perfectly well with Macs.

5 - Broadband just works

What we said in 2007: It's hardly their fault, but our poor Mac friends aren't always well served by the ISPs. Broadband modems can fail to work properly on Macs (especially with Bigpond cable), and when customers attempt to phone the tech-support lines for assistance, they're none too amused when the script-reading person at the other end tells them to "click on the Start button and select Control Panel". Finding a reliable ISP is hard enough; finding one that also supports Macs is a headache you really don't need.

Zara Baxter: Thankfully, the days of ISPs not playing nicely with Mac products are over. The support may not always be faultless, but the connections are perfect.

6 - Custom-made systems

What we said in 2007: Gaming PCs, video workstations, media centres, digital photo PCs, build-your-own, mini-chassis, midi-towers, business PCs... need we go on? There are dozens of different desktop PC configurations that can be fine-tailored with thousands of specialist components to meet a buyer's requirements. How many flavours do Mac desktops come in? Three. Mac mini, iMac and Mac Pro. If none of those meets your needs, take a hike.

The open architecture of the PC platform, on the other hand, gives you access to an immense range of configurations, enabling you to tailor a PC to your needs without wasting money on capabilities you won't use. It also means you can make modular upgrades, such as fitting a new CPU and motherboard without having to replace your existing graphics card and hard drives. Try that with an iMac.

John Gillooly: This is still one of the major advantages held by the PC. With a Mac, flexibility involves what peripherals you can plug into it. With a PC you can tailor a system's internals to your specific needs. If you need more RAM, then throw some in. If you want to game you can choose just how much to spend on a graphics card. Or if you dislike load times you can throw in a Solid State Drive (OS X still doesn't support advanced features like Trim).

If your needs change you can easily upgrade your system to keep up. Need more storage? Then buy some internal hard drives. Decide you want to be able to burn Blu-ray discs, then grab an internal burner. If your Mac is too slow to cope with new workloads then it's off to the Apple store for a replacement, whereas with a PC you have many options to upgrade your current hardware for a fraction of the replacement cost.

Zara Baxter: Customisation is still the bastion of the PC, but we also know that few people ever really customise their PCs. I'm one of those customisers (I get twitchy if I can't choose every last component in my new desktop system), but I'm relatively rare. From our reader surveys, we know that over 50% of people buy branded desktops, and while the rest buy from small stores, I'd estimate that 80% of PC buyers don't upgrade or customise their system.

Having said that, Australia is one of the great hold-outs when it comes to custom-builders, DIY and system configuration. That makes us a great country in which to buy a custom PC or upgrade parts, if you want them.

There's still a lot more choice in PC desktops, even if you only consider branded systems, but it's nowhere near as broad as it used to be.

7 - Macs are months behind

What we said in 2007: If you want cutting-edge hardware, you need a PC. Remember when the Intel Core CPU was released? Apple finally jumped ship from IBM processors, even though PC processors had been outstripping the PowerPC G5 CPU for years. But even though the agreement was trumpeted from the rooftops by Intel and Apple, it still took months for the complete Mac range to go fully Intel. Core 2 was even worse, with almost the whole PC market having them before Apple shipped a single Core 2 Mac. The same is true of almost all new technology. Not only is there no option to buy a desktop or laptop Mac with an internal HD DVD or Blu-ray drive, you can't buy an internal Mac-compatible one at all. The same is again true of graphics: while the PC has up-to-the-minute 3D video hardware, Macs are an entire generation behind. And while PC users have had super-fast draft 802.11n wireless for nearly two years, Apple users have only just acquired it.

John Gillooly: Apple's Mac Pro was last updated in early 2009, using hardware that was once impressive, but now superseded. If you want a Mac you are stuck with whatever Apple thought was a good idea at the time it set the specifications in stone.

Apple's use of Intel components does mean that occasionally Mac owners will be at the same point in the technology curve as the PC. But it also adds a secondary source of feature lag beyond Apple's. Take USB 3.0 for example. The big PC motherboard and laptop manufacturers have been proactive in getting USB 3.0 onto their products, yet Intel has indicated we won't see it built into its chipsets until 2011 or 2012. Mac aficionados are likely to miss out on USB 3.0 until after this point, when Apple finally updates its hardware to use whatever chipset Intel puts USB 3.0 into.

This means that Mac owners essentially double dip on hardware delays, waiting firstly on Intel's product development cycle and then on Apple's. Thanks to the diversity and competitive nature of the component market Windows users can go out and get their hands on new technology well before it appears on a Mac.

Zara Baxter: These days, Macs aren't months behind, except where stability and longevity are crucial to the overall product - such as for the Mac Pro. MacBook Pro systems have consistently come out with new Intel processors at the same time - and in some cases before - PC laptops of similar calibre.

On the other hand, you usually need to opt for the higher end products to get the latest stuff in your Mac. While our iMac in our latest Mac vs PC Labs feature story was a Core 2 Duo, you can get an i7 if you spend an extra few hundred dollars. It's also worth noting that waiting can be good: we commented in 2007 that Mac was yet to incorporate Blu-ray drives, and they still haven't - but that doesn't look like such a bad plan, all things considered.

8 - Life beyond 1st January

What we said in 2007: It isn't only children's sticky fingers that will take the gloss off the shiny new MacBook you got for Christmas - the new line-up of laptops announced at the annual MacWorld show every January will leave your cutting-edge gift looking so last year, almost immediately. Yes, consumer-friendly, cuddly-wuddly Apple decides to spring new products onto its customers just days after the peak buying period every single year, and there's little point in trying to second-guess what the company is about to launch, because it cloaks its announcements with an iron curtain the USSR would have been proud of. Thankfully, there's no such post-Christmas Microsoft jamboree.

John Gillooly: Steve Jobs hasn't done Macworld for a few years. But it doesn't necessarily mean that Apple has shifted philosophy. Its latest refresh of the Macbook Pro happened a month or so before Intel released a new range of mobile CPUs, but the sudden obsolescence has moved to the mobile space.

Just look at how the announcement of the technologically superior iPhone 4 soon after after the launch of the iPad sent Apple fans into a spending frenzy. While it isn't happening to the Mac right at the moment, it appears to be the way Apple rolls.

Zara Baxter: Apple no longer front the MacWorld show in January, so the 1st of January curse is far less likely these days. And you'll know the current Mac you buy will be available for a while. If in doubt, the best place to check is Mac Rumors' buying guide, which estimates the likelihood of your new Mac being a score or a dud.

The debate continues over points 9-16, on the next page. Click below to continue...

Browse this article: Next

See more about: pcs | macs | apple

Readers of this article also read...

Apple iPad Mini parts leak as production begins

jwaustincrowe 7 July 2010	I have just installed bootcamp and vista x64 on my wicked 27inch imac. It is now the best pc I have ever owned. Not because it runs osx (I hate it), but because the hardware is so beautiful: fast hard disk, amazing screen, and also the windows drivers updates from apple. Ironic, but true! Comment made about the PC Authority article: 32 reasons why PCs are better than Macs: are they still true in 2010?? Once upon a time, these were the reasons PC users could still hold their heads high. But do they still hold true? What do you think? Join the discussion.
lawrence_o 7 July 2010	Point 2: about the iMac, really? Can you find a PC that costs less and can do more?? I purchased an iMac 27" with intel quad core i7 and 1TB drive and 4GB of RAM for about 2000USD. All built in and one hell of a screen... Show me that PC,please!
lawrence_o 7 July 2010	Point 4, two button-louse and scroll wheel. Dude, give me 1 mouse with a scroll wheel that beats the new magic mouse? The wheels always get crapped with dirt (as was the case with the mighty mouse) and stop working after a while. The magic mouse is totally digital meaning it can be programmed to do anything you want, unlike the mice with analogue buttons. Sure you can assign new functions to buttons but you can never do multi-touch actions which are in fact nice.
lawrence_o 7 July 2010	Finder is confusing?? Dude, In Windows 7 you totally miss the damn toolbar you were so familiarized with. Oh yeah, you have to press ALT first and then it shows up! Ah gee I didn't know that. WTF is the advantage on that besides confusing the user huh? With the finder you ALSO know where you are at any time. And there are WAY LESS icons that could confuse you. Oh and try to configure a network in Wndows 7 as compared to the Mac. On Windows, even I find it extremely difficult and user-unfriendly and I'm a developer with over 15 years of experience. On tha Mac, it takes exactly 2 minutes. etc etc etc. MAn, you are really biased. The only advantages windows truly has are indeed the open industry giving you choices all over the place and true, the gaming area sucks on mac as compared to windows. And believe it or not, I find windows 7 more stable than My Mac. But the mac is still easier to use.
lawrence_o 7 July 2010	" make a good operating system - while it leaves the hardware design to the hardware manufacturers." And that my friend is also it's biggest disadvantage at the same time. Why? Because windows has to support ALL drivers for ALL major vendors making the OS utterly huge, slow and waste up a LOT of drive space for nothing. Talk about uninstalling software, the registry hell etc etc etc...
lawrence_o 7 July 2010	Oh you forgot to mention how Media player has trouble playing video files of over 10.000kbps. ANd quicktime has not. You also forgot to mention the iTunes store. And of course the fact that Macs can read windows partitions but windows cannot read mac partition. Oh yeah, you need to defrag your windows every 3 months and the mac every....euhm never? You are right about the repairs though. They are too expensive and cumbersome on the mac and it is indeed true that mac parts are extremely overpriced. But your blah blah about BIOS etc, dude, those are maybe "nive to have" things your typical PC nerd might cry about not having them, however, Mac bears ease of use in mind and honestly, I never even cared about BIOS settings because you simply don't need to... So your looking for nails on low water man...
wheelnut53 7 July 2010	I like PC's because I have a choice and for what I do a cheap PC suits me just fine.
Nato 7 July 2010	Mac people are funny. When a logical explanation of the platforms downfalls comes into play, the coments sound like a stropy 2yr old that worked out there mates toy is heaps newer and cooler but its not theres to play with.
retta1 7 July 2010	I wonder lawrence_o if you like the sound of your own voice. there are pros and cons to both. at the end of the day the list of why one is better than the other comes down to personal choice. i can see the virtues of both and while i personally prefer pcs as I do enjoy playing games the mac is still a good machine for other things.
Bozo01 8 July 2010	@lawrence_0 "Dude, give me 1 mouse with a scroll wheel that beats the new magic mouse?" How about the logitech revolution mx mouse with free scroling mouse wheel. Very useful for long websites and documents.
j876 8 July 2010	I love Apple users, trying to cling on to old arguments. If you dont like Windows Media Player there is VLC. There is heaps of i7 destop replacements in that price range! Look at HP, Dell, Toshiba, Acer the list goes on and on in AUD! Try buying a Mac here without taking a mortgage on your house! Windows 7 kills Macs poor excuse for an operating system. Windows 7 Ultimate works on my Dell Inspiron Mini 1012 without a hitch. The facts are you cannot customise the Apple hardware, the technical support is expensive, you cannot change the iPad battery, you need apple's tick of approval and to pay a premium to write software for their platform do I have to go on! lawrence_o you can have your Mac (with an Intel Chipset and CPU which Apple hated for years) but I will be buying the superior platform which I can fiddle under the hood and change the battery unlike the iPad.
McDave 8 July 2010	So Macs are worse than PCs because they don't work like PCs. Funny but not clever. Outside of the factual errors & contradictions (the Mac shipped with a 4-button mouse in 2005. It's OK for Windows users to wait 6 years for another bad copy of MacOS then realise they have to wait another two years for that one to be fixed yet if a Mac user has to wait 2 months for a new Intel Chip which has no effect on how their software is designed...) the comments just don't account for differences in platform ideology. While MS cling onto the 80s when file hierarchies were everything Finder is weak because we don't use it, we moved to libraries in 2002. Imagine if Windows Explorer realised you were viewing photos, gave you re-sizable thumbnail previews, allowed you to collate folders & views with skimmable previews, create auto-folders with face & geo-location management, make not-so-basic non-destructive image enhancements, single-click emails, single-click web-gallery/facebook posting/tagging/updating, made all of that management integrally available to other software and then did the same for music & movies. That's iLife, free with every Mac - no more files/folders, load/save or copy/paste required. As I said, trying to use a Mac like a PC - not clever. McD
DJ... 8 July 2010	The debate between Mac and Wintel will go on forever until people start to compare like with like ["Apples with Apples"]. The range of PC hardware is much greater than that available from Apple but so is the quality. It would be unfair to compare the reliability and consistency of a $500 PC with a $1500 Mac. Apples are statistically known for their reliability, consistency and usability. One example of the inconsistency of Win7 is the use of dragging a window to the edge of the screen to resize it. Great idea, even if it is unnecessary as Win7 already has other methods to do this. Still, it offers users variety, although too much variety can cause confusion in new users. Drag a window to the top of the screen and it fills the screen. Great, now pull the window off the top of the screen and it returns to it's original size. Great. Do one action, get a result. Do the opposite action and get the expected result. Now drag the window to the side of the screen (say left) and the window fills half the screen. Drag that same window off the side of the screen (say to the right) and nothing happens. It bounces back to half screen. Do one action and the opposite action DOESN'T get the opposite result. Another example of a great idea stuffed up by Windows implementation. You have to drag the window DOWN to get it off the side of the screen. Where's the usability in that? You now have heaps of ways to resize a window, but a lousy user experience. cheers
DJ... 8 July 2010	It may be fine for some people to build their own computers and compare them to store bought models but the reality is that very few computer users these days make their own computers. I built my first in 1979 - A 6809 in an S100 motherboard with 56K of RAM dual booting Flex and OS9. You used to be able to buy a kit car, probably still can. But why would you. Yes, you can buy a stock car and modify it, but very few people do. You want to upgrade your car, you can buy another engine, run it of avgas or nitro, but other than a few fanatics, who cares. It would be considered an unfair comparison and a pointless exercise to compare a Lada to a BMW. The Lada wins on price and cheapness to run {repair with a bent piece of wire} and the BMW wins on comfort, reliability, ease of drivability and just about everywhere else. It's the same with the PC debate. You can upgrade, modify and tweak a PC but how many do? Very few, probably proportionally similar to those car nuts that build and mod their own. The vast majority of PCs go past their use-by-date in 3 years and get replaced, wholus bolus. How about PC Authority do a users comparison between PCs and Macs. Set up two user camps, one Windows on a PC and the other MacOSX on Apple. Each camp would contain a raw beginner and an average experienced user, both supported by an 'expert user'. Both camps would be given the same tasks to undertake - set up the computer as bought STOCK from the store, connect to the Internet, set up email, and other common tasks, such as word processing, photos, spread sheet, etc. If the needed software is not on the store-bought machine then the user must find, download and install some 'free' software to perform the common tasks. Any extra software needed to be bought has to be done at retail pricing and not 'borrowed' from mates. This comparison could continue for a number of years with regular testing of the users. Points would be gained for speedily accomplishing the task set and the quality of the result. Points would be lost for calling up the 'expert user' for support. Comparisons made of overall costs, including the cost of repairs and professional support. We could test the Operating system's natural ability to resist viruses and other malware and look at the cost of prevention/repair in terms of $$ and time. How about it PC Auth? Want to take on a long term PC vs Mac challenge? One where the criteria is 'real world' and is set up before hand and not cherry picked by biased editors. {add sound of gauntlet being thrown down} cheers
Nato 8 July 2010	No one in there right mind buys a desktop pc from a retail store DJ. My freinds and i have allways built our own and i dont know anyone personally that has a store bought pc. Only work place's have those for the warenty. You say very few people build there own, WHAT THE??? When i try and buy components from my local pc warehouse the line is so long its out the door and round the bend, and i have to wait normally 1hr to be served its so busy. I think your blowing smoke up your own behind there bro. And as for comparisons of set tasks, thats just stupid trying to compare a mac to a pc that has the latest hardware. A computer by name computes data right?? then why dont mac's compute as fast as pc's. We are taking about desktop computers here, that should be able to do everything and i mean everything otherwise just by a laptop. If you fork out over 2k on a computer that you cant take with you and it cant play all the latest games from your local computer shop you just got ripped off. Not to mention how many less folding@home work uints you can do on it or how long it takes to convert a video not using the gpu to do it. People who care about how a folder opens or expands or close's are just mental patients, thats not using a computer, thats just a load of bull dust. There are to many tasks that a mac cant actually do which makes comparisons very hard indeeed. Until apple comes to the party with a fully operational system comparisons are just cosmetic and not real number crunching.
Nato 9 July 2010	And just for laugh's Test 1 how do blue rays look in 1080p on these new hd screens? Pc - absolutely fantastic Mac - fail, can't play for 2k cash hahahaha, Test 2 how do games look in 3d Pc, absolutely crazy, when people see it for real there face is hilarious Mac - fail Apple had a win with the iPhone no doubt there but there computers are not innovative at all.
Unknownsock 9 July 2010	Intel and Mac both use the same hardware, they are not smoother, faster nor technically better as many people seem to argue. They only niche they have nowadays is a locked PC that doesn't let you do much other than what Steve Jobs says, along with expensive hardware. And even when it comes to designing you've got to ask why Adobes primary platform is Windows, not Mac. Which has been like this for years.
davidald 9 July 2010	I prefer the PC because it is more flexible with a much wider variety of applications(software available) and because I prefer to build and upgrade my computers. Mac owners seem to be dedicated to a particular brand which is restrictive. Back in the day I preferred VHS to Beta. I would liken Mac diehards to Beta fans.
wtowers 9 July 2010	Point 1 - It hasn't cost anywhere near $199 for OSX Upgrades the last one from Leopard to Snow was only $49.90 and the most I have paid is $129 for the full upgrades. Point 2 - On the price of the 27" iMac, at the same time I looked at a HP 24" all in one supposedly similar to the iMac, it did not have anywhere near the productivity out of the box that the iMac does and cost about $300 more than I paid for my iMac. I also have it running Windows 7 as good as my wife's modern HP Tower. So is that two computers in one, the dearest part was Windows 7 Home for about $288. This is in AU dollars. On top of all this I bought a new printer and it was up and running on the iMac almost instantly but, took 20 minutes on the PC. I think like one of Microsofts slides says it all - Apple just works.
wtowers 9 July 2010	Oh! I forgot to mention that we (the non profit organisation I work with) purchased a top or the range PC built to order with 4gb RAM 2x 2 TB Hardrives with one mirrored via an automatic backup system and running the latest software available. $3500, which sounded pretty good, did we get a sound card (NO) did we get a big screen (NO only 19"), so far been through two mother boards (under warranty thankfully) and the two drives have yet to go a week without one dropping off the system. I have a 1989 Mac Classic that still works, and a 1998 iBook that is still running on the original battery and is currently running Leopard, it won't run Snow Leopard but then again how many PC's bought in 1998 still work today.
avoidz 9 July 2010	PC is more flexible, has more software, is user-fixable, has a Maximise option in its Windows, doesn't have USB ports inconveniently at the back... The battle will go on, like Sinclair Spectrum vs. Commodore 64 back in the 1980s.
pcmac 9 July 2010	Macs are prettier and sexier than pcs, no doubt about it. It is more expensive to own a mac, and you get drawn into more expense with itunes, iphone apps ipad etc. , if you want to. Macs are faster than pcs and little or no virus probs. PC's are smarter at some things, window resizing, placement, tiling, I don't game so that doesn't bother me. Bootcamp is the answer. I'm going dual on an el cheapo 21.5" imac. There is good and bad about both. Ain't we lucky though to have them. pcmac
frances 9 July 2010	ARRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!! Zara!!! I can't believe you're sucking me into this old vortex! I'm sixty years old - had Macs and PCs all my life (well since my 30's anyway) and they both have their place in the sun. I loved Macs (even went to war against the IT department for them) until OSX came along - now I hate them. OSX (the one that works on my Powerbook G4 anyway) is the most loopy unintuitive cluttered mess I've ever waded through. And yet Apple makes the most superb equipment you could possibly want to own. Steve Jobs invented the GUI - you gotta love him for that at least! But Windows XP was absolutely bomb-proof, so Gates got something right. XP's had a BSOD since I loaded it. Vista was rubbish, Win 7 is passabe, but treats me like an idiot. So it's like saying which is better, red or green? No no no, I won't get sucked in...
frances 9 July 2010	Whoops! A correction to my earlier ramble. I meant to type XP's NEVER had a BSOD (Blue Screen of Death) since I loaded it nine years ago.
petergaskin 10 July 2010	The magazine article clearly points out that the Apple and pc compete in different markets. An entyhusiast gamer will never buy an apple, and neither will budget pc buyer buy an apple. What is probably true, is that the price differences between apple and pcs is reducing, and some of apples benefits are reducing. So let each product take its rightful place in the marketplace.
Stomfi 10 July 2010	The ultimate reason why PCs are better than MACs for me is I can convert a Windows PC to Linux by installing Ubuntu Lucid Lynx to get more speed and power out of the hardware as well as superior windowing and networking. No trouble running on Bigpond Cable if you get a wifi enabled modem. I can run Windows games in a secure KVM snapshot without the need for slowing down the Window's system with virus checkers and firewalls. For those idiot banks who don't support anything but IE, I can fire this up under Wine. Apart for the Windows and game licenses for the VM, I can do everything on a Linux converted PC that Windows can at no cost, leaving hundreds more dollars to spend on groovy hardware. Maybe I can do this with a MAC and did when they had a decent chipset in the PPC, but there's humungeous support for x86 in a PC solution.
j876 10 July 2010	To certain people who posted on this forum that PCs aren't as durable as apple I have to laugh. I have a Acer 386SL laptop that is still running with no RAM failures and a hard drive with not 1 bad sector running MS-DOS 6.22 and Windows 3.1 with all my old DOS games on it. The only thing I changed on it was the cells of the Ni-Cd battery which I repacked. I have customised every PC I have ever owned and for my friends as well with graphics upgrades, RAM upgrades bigger hard drives and power supplies. Try and do that with a Apple computer.
somerandomguy 12 July 2010	they forgot another compeditor - linux service packs don't cost $199 - no, on linux absolutely everything is free. price premium for flashy design - You can install linux on any system, so it doesn't matter what model. Decent games - wine lets you run windows games, along with playonlinux. Mouse - any, comes with computer, not OS Broadband - wine Custom made-NA (computer, not OS) Months behind - First to support USB 3.0, full SSD support 1 jan - NA (computer, not OS)
somerandomguy 12 July 2010	Next page - Search/window management - all the features of windows explorer and more, like double panes. Safety in numbers - Actually, linux has many forums and things like that, despite its lack of numbers support costs - NA On your team - Linux plays by the rules, and supports windows proggrams through wine Color - NA CD-ROM - NA Version numbers - very simple - type (like in my case, ubuntu), followed by release (in my case 10.04, meaning 2010, 4th month) Annoying noises - Nope
somerandomguy 12 July 2010	Now for the comments My linux partition - only 3 GB is used, win-20, mac-10 (around) defrag -none needed Can any other operating system boot from RAM. NO And. Hardware: My whole family except my mum (mac) does custom builds. Mac - 13" bottom of the range macbook, upgraded to 4 GB RAM - ~$1800 with all the software. Toshiba laptop (mine) - $575, core 2 duo 2.1 GHz, ATI radeon 4650 1 GB dedicated, tv tuner, 16", 4 GB RAM Custom build desktop (dads) - ~$1900 - i7 950, bought air cooler so overclocked to 4.11 GHz, 6 GB 1866 MHz ram, Asus p6t deluxe v2, some nividia geoforce, antec 902 chassy, and 2 years old now Notice the difference in price between Mac, toshiba (negotiated), and custom build.
r3d4wn 12 July 2010	Wow. Really? Do I dare ask what OS you used to create this article, let alone the software you used to do so?
DJ... 13 July 2010	Doesn't look like PC Authority wants to take up the "Real World" challenge, or aren't any staff reading this any more? There are so many variables involved as to which is the 'best' machine, and breaking down hardware for a comparison is only one part of it. To draw a comparison with the car world, the comparisons done in the latest edition of PCA seem like comparing a V8 Holden with a Subaru WRX and a Yamaha motorcycle. They're all transport but without specifying the use of the vehicle, a comparison is unfair. The Holden may produce more horse power, and the Yamaha's engine may rev higher and the Subaru may have all wheel drive, but what does it matter? How can this be a fair comparison without also providing some real world references. On a rally course the Subaru would beat the Holden, especially if the Holden had bald tyres. The Yamaha would be cheaper to run and quickest (best) for commuting, unless it is a rainy day, the time taken for the rider to get into his wet weather gear was included in the time comparison. Was it a short commute or a long one? When comparing PC's to Macs, criteria needs to be set BEFORE the comparison is done, not after or during. People buy computers for differing reasons and purposes, so let's categorise these purposes and then do a blind test. In this test, a set of real world exercises would be set by person 1 (a group would be better) and then given to beginner & experienced Mac and PC users to perform. Time and costs of getting the task done would form the comparison. A sample could be, you receive an email with a PDF attachment containing a secret word. The winner is the first person to read out this secret word. This would entail opening your email program, locating the attachment and opening it to read the secret. You may have fast hardware but if the OS is slow to open the email program and then you find that you have to download Adobe Reader to open the attachment, then you won't win this challenge. So how about it PC Authority, how about a real world challenge? Then users can compare their computer usage with these challenges to decide which machine suits them. No reason to not throw Linux into this mix too. As with comparing vehicles, it's not a matter of which vehicle is the cheapest, or has the fastest revving engine, or produces the most torque, - it is also about the tyres, the boot space, the number of seats, and even the colour.
Nato 19 July 2010	There are just to many programs a mac cant run for a fair test, get 100 programs together for testing and you know which platform would win 90% of those tests cause the mac cant do most of them. If you like to pay heaps for a machine that cant run most things but the things it does run it does very well and thats what you use then just enjoy your computing experience. the end
somerandomguy 19 July 2010	Fair enough. I do admit, each different system has it's advantages and disadvantages. Let's do it. Sounds like fun. Linux ad - free and software free Linux disad - Not particularly good for a new user (like you tell them to click start and they won't know which button it is Windows ad - compatible and well known Windows disad - unsecure Mac ad - reasonably well known, with some of the advantages of linux Mac disad - expensive Mac disad - expensive and not compatible
rubaiyat 19 July 2010	Nato wrote: There are just to many programs a mac cant run for a fair test, get 100 programs together for testing and you know which platform would win 90% of those tests cause the mac cant do most of them. If you like to pay heaps for a machine that cant run most things but the things it does run it does very well and thats what you use then just enjoy your computing experience. the end Oh really! Name them. Then tell me how many programs the Mac runs that the PC can't. Can the PC run Pixelmator, TextMate, RapidWeaver, Pages, Numbers, Keynote, iPhoto, iMovie, iDVD, iWeb, Garageband, Qu-s, Espresso, iClip, Toast, Bento, EverNote, HyperSpaces, Audio HiJack Pro, MP3 Trimmer, Fission, Aperture, Wallet, Paperless, iBank, XCode, AppleScript, Automator, Compressor, Color, Logic, Motion… which are just some of the software I use day to day? It is true that eventually some of the software gets ported to the PC like Word, Excel, Photoshop, Illustrator, DreamWeaver, Handbrake, Comic Life etc, but why hang around forever in a bad Operating System waiting for some crumbs to fall off the Mac table? I think what you are trying to say is that the bulk of PC software, which is composed of viruses, spyware, adware, trojans etc, does not run on the Mac. Unfortunately neither does the vast amount of anti-virus, security software and software to find out why your system is running like velcro soled sneakers. Since PC users seem to spend most of their time hunting for and using these programs you will be left wondering what Mac users do with all that free time other than create a huge amount of work in total disproportion to their numbers. Unfortunately you will not like what they do because it is attractive, well thought out and spelt correctly. Edited by rubaiyat: 19/7/2010 05:34:51 PM
Nato 19 July 2010	http://snowleopard.wikidot.com/start theres 206 programs in that list not working, not to mention the ones working but not very well
rubaiyat 19 July 2010	You are clutching at straws and are obviously not speaking from any kind of experience whatsoever. Do you have any idea how many programs there are for the Mac? This is a tiny infinitesimal fraction and your silly count no doubt has Bento 1 and 2 but not Bento 3? Along with the quick glance of the many other superseded versions I spotted. In fact I wasn't even aware of such a list since it had never bothered me at all, or anyone I know. Perhaps you could show us your Windows 7 incompatibility list? Or is there no such thing? Edited by rubaiyat: 19/7/2010 05:47:07 PM
rubaiyat 19 July 2010	Here to help you out, can't be bothered counting (double-counting) dud software though: http://www.microsoft.com/windows/compatibility/windows-7/en-us/default.aspx http://twitter.com/microsofthelps http://www.sevenforums.com/ Still curious what this has to do with the unsubstantiated argument that some PC software doesn't run on a Mac with or without Boot Camp (free on your OSX DVD). What PC software, worth having, are you talking about? Since the Mac can run all the Windows software plus its own large, mostly high quality, collection, it seems the PC is coming up short, not the Mac.
Slatts 19 July 2010	Good old boot camp. talk about making a virtue of a necessity...
rubaiyat 19 July 2010	Truth is hardly any Mac users, including switchers, actually use it. It's a sop to you PC users who imagine that we actually need it, and that you somehow have software that we want to use and is actually any good. When my neighbours, a doctor and his family, switched to Macs, I helped him install Parallels because like most PC users he assumed he needed to still run his old software. Last I checked he isn't running any Windows software. In fact nearly every switcher reaches that Nirvana when they ditch the last Microsoft app., even those made for Mac. So the "necessity" is your fantasy and we just humor you. Edited by rubaiyat: 19/7/2010 08:39:07 PM
rubaiyat 19 July 2010	I'm still waiting on this software list that we are supposedly deprived of.
Slatts 19 July 2010	rubaiyat wrote: Truth is hardly any Mac users, including switchers, actually use it. It's a sop to you PC users who imagine that we actually need it, and that you somehow have software that we want to use and is actually any good. You seem to be assuming that someone cares...:-k rubaiyat wrote: When my neighbours, a doctor and his family, switched to Macs, I helped him install Parallels because like most PC users he assumed he needed to still run his old software. Last I checked he isn't running any Windows software. You see that a lot with the computer semi-literate. rubaiyat wrote: In fact nearly every switcher reaches that Nirvana when they ditch the last Microsoft app., even those made for Mac. So the "necessity" is your fantasy and we just humor you. Edited by rubaiyat: 19/7/2010 08:39:07 PM Thanks for that. By the way, there's 2 Us in humour.
rubaiyat 19 July 2010	1. Certainly I don't care. But being curious I do wonder what the PC user imagines they have that is so precious that they keep banging on about it. 2. I have noticed the computer semi-literate applies to the PC user before switching. 3. btw "there're 2 Us in humour" in the English spelling and "there's 1 U in humor" spelt the more rational American way, which I prefer. Both are permitted by the Macquarie dictionary. Like many things, when you really don't know, you're/your/you's just guessing, and rotating through all the possibilities. Edited by rubaiyat: 19/7/2010 11:09:07 PM
petergaskin 20 July 2010	As more and more people buy macs, the big cfoncern is whether Apple can maintain their high standards while increasing sales. We have already seen Apple's halo slip with problems with the iphone. Lets see whether the problems become endemic.
blockcentre 21 July 2010	rubaiyat wrote: What PC software, worth having, are you talking about? Autocad, Solidworks - essentials for anyone doing any form of engineering. Matrox RT.X2 - essential for anyone in video production that likes to work in a real-time editing environment. Act! - essential for any organisation wanting to manage their clients effectively. MYOB - have cutdown versions for the Mac however all the enterprise based products are Windows only. These are just a few off the top of my head through my own experiences. To add, these products do not have some Mac alternative that can match them. I know these are an issue as they have been deal breakers for ex-clients of mine that considered going Mac. This doesn't include the range of applications either. For example in OSX you've got either Final Cut or Premiere for video editing. On Windows you've got Premiere, Vegas Pro, Pinnacle, VideoStudio, Magix, etc, etc. More options depending on what functions are important.
rubaiyat 21 July 2010	blockcentre. Thank you. At last someone who makes more than vague assertions. AutoCad does have a major lockdown on CAD but I know several Mac only Architectural firms who are built around VectorWorks. They have told me the only advantage they see AutoCAD having is that several people can work on a file at the same time. VectorWorks does this but not as well. There is also TurboCAD, DesignWorks, PowerCADD, RobotVisionCAD, ViaCAD, TouchCAD, MrArchitect3D, Cobalt, Design Intuition, TinkerCell, RealCADD, PowerCADD, DigiCad, CADintosh, DoodleCAD, Sailcut CAD, Domus.Cad, BRL_CAD, Live Interior 3D Pro… ACT! Been a long time since I used a customer relationship manager since much of this can be handled by the standard software supplied by OSX. CRM+ however gets high praise. Also ActionItems, Customer Manager, CST2Manage, 7Office, Blue Moon App, Perfect PA, Stock, Auction Tender, Organise Pro, Core2 CRM, SOHO Organixer, CRMHaven, Elements CRM, ContaxCRM… iPhone apps probably have made most of ACT! obsolete. MYOB is particularly annoying as it started off as an Australian Mac program and morphed under new management into what it is today. Thankfully I made a killing out of their share float then ditched it. Must say all the accountants I have ever met seem to have a pet hate for Macs without ever trying it, and Mac users seem to think Macs are wasted on accounts, so the feeling seems to be mutual. MoneyWorks, MoneyWorks Cashbook, MoneyWorks Express, QuickBooks, MultiLedger, GrandTotal, Billings, MoneyDance, iBank, Money, CheckBook Pro, MoneyWell, Buddi, Cha-Ching, Prospects… Final Cut or Premiere True but not bad for a start. Not my area and I couldn't find much or anybody to ask. Avidemux, Avid Media Composer, ZS4 Video Editor, iMovie, iDVD DVD Studio Pro. btw Pinnacle is AVID is it not? …and the fall back if you really, truly must, is Boot Camp, Parallels, VMWare, VirtualBox, CrossOver, Q Emulator. Now can somebody put their mind to finding substitutes for iWork, iLife, Scrivener, DEVONThink, Journier, Quicksilver, TextMate, PixelMator, SubEthaEdit, OmniFocus, Automator, Isolator, WriteRoom, Tofu, Skitch, Studio Artist, ArtMatic, MetaSynth, Time Machine, Spotlight, Growl, Papers, Plainview, Things, Miro, Adium, Audio HiJack Pro, Fission, iTextPro, FormulatePro, Vienna, Juice, Perian, Transmission, AppFresh, Transmit, Cyberduck, Macupdate PRo, VooDooPad, Garageband, XCode, iPhoto, Bento, Cocoalicious, Skim… Edited by rubaiyat: 21/7/2010 02:09:50 AM
rubaiyat 21 July 2010	petergaskin wrote: As more and more people buy macs, the big cfoncern is whether Apple can maintain their high standards while increasing sales. We have already seen Apple's halo slip with problems with the iphone. Lets see whether the problems become endemic. If people were prepared to be more honest and less partisan I'd happily tell you where most of Apple's bodies are buried. But I have been using both Macs and Windows for a very long time and the most striking difference I have noticed between the two is that Mac users have a much much higher expectation of Apple than PC users seem to have of Microsoft. PC users probably don't understand the gripes we have against Apple, in fact most new switchers are puzzled by my criticisms as they have known much worse. It all comes down to what you think it was you bought when you committed to the platform. Apple did sell us on much better design, integration, usability, easier user interface, quality and long term return on investment. I took them at their word. Mostly we get it, but not always. The sad thing about the journalism in magazines such as PCAuthority or Macworld is that they are bought advocates for the advertisers and any impartiality or investigative reporting is purely for show. The conclusions they come to have been paid for. Me I am happy to say it like it is. Here, because the general postings are extremely uninformed defensiveness for Windows, I write on the advantages of Macs and counter the obvious but repeated cliches that pass for "facts". In Mac forums I swing the other way and pull up the more ludicrous adoration of the fanboys there. At the end though because I use both platforms, I do have a conclusion on their relative merits and that is clearcut. As a reality check, I note that the movement of users is almost entirely one way, very few Mac users I have known have ever switched to Windows without a lot of pressure from work. Many of those have maintained closet Macs in the face of the extreme irrational hostility of some I.T. departments who seem to be control freaks. Years ago I went for the job of publications manager at the ASX who were running everything on MASS11. I was home and hosed after long interviews until the I.T. manager asked me if there was anything I could suggest before accepting. I said yes, why don't you use Macs for what was obviously a task right up their alley? He said, If I let you have one, everyone will want one. I didn't get the job. 18 months later I saw the job readvertised with the requirement, must have Mac experience. Edited by rubaiyat: 21/7/2010 02:31:12 AM
2 tanners 27 July 2010	The thing that fascinated me about the article was that PC Authority has an A-list. Not only did they not dare compare the Apples to the relevant A-list products, but where they declared the Mac the better product, it didn't make the A-list. Even more confusingly, the new Mac pro, separately reviewed, had worse processing scores than its predecessor (and exactly the same as a machine half its price). To say that the article was unconvincing in any sense would be generous.
rubaiyat 28 July 2010	All made obsolete by the just announced new range of iMacs and MacPros.
Choofski 29 July 2010	Oh its so funny to read all the comments whenever someone mentions Mac & PC in the same sentence. Single biggest problem with Mac systems: The big headed fanboy losers with nothing better to do than bitch about PCs and all of their problems to make themselves feel better for buying the Mac and not the PC. Single biggest problem with PC systems: The big headed fanboy losers with nothing better to do than bitch about Macs and all of their problems to make themselves feel better for buying the PC and not the Mac. Im a 100% PC user. Who bloody cares? If I could afford a Mac I would probably buy one but I can't. Pity, because they look like good machines. It's not because 'PCs are cheaper' in general, it's because I work in the IT industry and can get PC parts for cost price in most cases. For ME a PC really is significantly cheaper. If i was stuck with a prebuilt system from a normal computer shop then I would look at a Mac. I could run Windows on it anyway if I wanted to. The simple truth: PC users have no bloody idea HOW to use a Mac, and I believe this is the basis for them hating them so much. If i could afford one I would be happy to LEARN how to use one properly, but I have no trouble admitting that I can't use one properly at the moment. Who would expect me to? I've been using Windows since 3.11 for Workgroups! Of course I can use a PC more effectively! The problem with people on both sides of the fence is that they don't hate the other type of system, they hate the people who like the other type of system. And that is REALLY pathetic. - Cale. ...troll troll troll :) @rubaiyat "All made obsolete by the just announced new range of iMacs and MacPros" Mate who cares? Yay! The new Macs have cup holders. Next week the new PCs will have cup holders too. and no list of software is going to make this discussion look any less ridiculous.....
rubaiyat 29 July 2010	Since I have both Macs (7) and PC (1) where do I fit in the scheme of things? The obsolescence remark was due to that being the really only accurate criticism of the Macs as using older processors than the custom PCs. Have a look through my posts here. PC supporters make vague often inaccurate statements about Macs and OSX. You would think that detailed accurate responses would be the method of resolving the issue. But instead that leads to yet another vague unsubstantiated and inaccurate dismissal, back to square one. In the long history of Mac vs PC, it has been Mac users fighting to have the choice of what is evidentially a better system, and PC users and IT departments trying to stop them for no other reason than "We don't like them!" I have yet to be in any organisation no matter how Mac dominated where Mac users forbade PC users their choice, if that is what they wanted. We might consider it odd ill-informed and Macphobic, but hey its your choice. As reward we are painted as the crazy biggots.
.:Cyb3rGlitch:. 29 July 2010	rubaiyat wrote: PC supporters make vague often inaccurate statements... I think you'll find that both camps are equally guilty of this.
rubaiyat 29 July 2010	Right on queue, another vague, inaccurate statement… I can just picture your limp arms waiving listless little desultory circles through the air. Edited by rubaiyat: 29/7/2010 11:03:31 PM
.:Cyb3rGlitch:. 29 July 2010	Thank you for proving my point.
rubaiyat 29 July 2010	No thank you. "I think" vague "you'll find" inaccurate "that both camps are equally guilty of this." vaguely inaccurate. Little arms barely lifting from the Ezy Rest to gesture… somewhere… , as proof. Edited by rubaiyat: 29/7/2010 11:50:33 PM
.:Cyb3rGlitch:. 29 July 2010	:) One day you'll realise that there's no point fighting a war that doesn't exist. Mac vs PC is a silly game played by fanboys and the media. The former do it because they feel the need to defend their 'turf', the latter do it for hits. They thrive off each other. In the end, after all the bitching and bickering, the only thing that matters is that people are allowed to use whatever they want. If they prefer PC, good for them. If they prefer Mac, good for them. To try and defend multi-billion dollar companies, as if you're one of their investors, really is quite sad. When it comes down to it, they couldn't give two shits about you, but you're more than willing to sacrifice your time to fight for their cause.
rubaiyat 30 July 2010	Again you presume. I don't fight for Apple. Never have, they obviously are only pretending to be your bestus friend. But the Mac is such a bleedin' obvious good idea that I have always spoke up against the unending ignorant and unsubstantiated calumny against it. Right from the first day when I did in half an hour what it had taken me 2 and a half days to do on a PC. Accurately. If people were allowed to use whatever they want, the problem would end. But they aren't.
.:Cyb3rGlitch:. 30 July 2010	rubaiyat wrote: I don't fight for Apple. Never have, they obviously are only pretending to be your bestus friend. But the Mac is such a bleedin' obvious good idea that I have always spoke up against the unending ignorant and unsubstantiated calumny against it. Right from the first day when I did in half an hour what it had taken me 2 and a half days to do on a PC. Accurately. Like what? You're quick to call "PC supporters" out on "vauge" statements, but you're doing the same! rubaiyat wrote: If people were allowed to use whatever they want, the problem would end. But they aren't. You said it best: rubaiyat wrote: Again you presume. :)
rubaiyat 30 July 2010	MultiPlan spreadsheet in 1984. I came across a Mac in a bookstore in George Street and was surprised to find it had a GUI MultiPlan on it. I'd just gone through 2 and half days of creating and debugging a spreadsheet on the Office PC using DOS Multiplan. Did the same job without errors in my lunch hour on the Mac. I don't have to presume over the attempts to stop users using Macs, I have plenty of personal experience of that. Want me to list past and present organisations? But then how come I am constantly providing endless details where you have yet to show one skerrick of anything to back up yet another nothing post. Boring. May as well be talking to a root vegetable. You'll never even make an intelligent case for your own side. I feel like I'll have to step in to do it for you. Edited by rubaiyat: 30/7/2010 01:18:54 AM
.:Cyb3rGlitch:. 30 July 2010	Now you're assuming I'm taking sides! I owe neither platform anything. And everything I've said so far are my own observations, which I believe to be self-evident. On that note, I'm bowing out of this discussion. I've made my point.
rubaiyat 30 July 2010	Where? I agree, discussion over.
Slatts 30 July 2010	rubaiyat wrote: MultiPlan spreadsheet in 1984. I came across a Mac in a bookstore in George Street and was surprised to find it had a GUI MultiPlan on it. I'd just gone through 2 and half days of creating and debugging a spreadsheet on the Office PC using DOS Multiplan. Did the same job without errors in my lunch hour on the Mac. I don't have to presume over the attempts to stop users using Macs, I have plenty of personal experience of that. Want me to list past and present organisations? But then how come I am constantly providing endless details where you have yet to show one skerrick of anything to back up yet another nothing post. Boring. May as well be talking to a root vegetable. You'll never even make an intelligent case for your own side. I feel like I'll have to step in to do it for you. I feel your pain rubaiyat. it is obvious to anyone who reads you dulcet prose that you are a misunderstood, sensitive and tortured soul, sorely put upon by the Windows conspirators. Seriously though, have you considered therapy? Tell you what, as you seem to have started a new page, how about you use it to vent your spleen? You know, get it out of your system. You know you'll feel better.
rubaiyat 31 July 2010	Too late, discussion is over.
Nato 2 August 2010	Hahahhahaha, just got back from holidays, rubaiyat, god you took the bait hook line and sinker. Call lifeline man, you need it.
rubaiyat 2 August 2010	Yet another pointless ignorant post Nato?
DJ... 2 August 2010	How about getting down to tin tacks guys. On the Mac, when I receive an email with an attachment, say a Word doc, Excel Spreadsheet, pdf document or any other common format document, I simply click once on the attachment and press the space bar to be able to instantly read the document using the operating system. Simple & quick. Actually in Apple Mail, pdfs are displayed within the email window, so even quicker. In Windows, I double click on the attachment and wait whilst Word is loaded and the document opened. If I don't have Word then I have a problem even opening the attachment. Perhaps someone can update me on how this all works in Windows7. Do I still have to double click the attachment, wait for the application to open, load the document and then read it? Just so 20th Century. I'm sure there are some things that Windows does better than MacOSX, so let's be specific. Maybe we can come up with a feature set for a great OS. cheers DJ...
rubaiyat 3 August 2010	I'll second that. A real comparison between both systems instead of the usual shouting match and "I've never used it but know I don't like it!" Something I have noticed about PC magazines, books etc, they do not show you the issues. It seems PC users really have trouble with the picture is a thousand words adage.
Vulch 3 August 2010	This could have been a really valuable article - except it was undertaken right when the iMac and MacPro's were about to be upgraded! As a result the desktop portions of it are completly worthless and miss-leading. Apple have now released updates to both these desktops. How about undertaking that comparison again with the new machines and see how they compare now!
Slatts 3 August 2010	The article was published on the web site on the 7th of July. It would have been written for the magazine at least a month before that. The site follows the magazine, hence the long lead times.
blockcentre 3 August 2010	Vulch wrote: This could have been a really valuable article - except it was undertaken right when the iMac and MacPro's were about to be upgraded! As a result the desktop portions of it are completly worthless and miss-leading. Apple have now released updates to both these desktops. How about undertaking that comparison again with the new machines and see how they compare now! Should we also just wait until the next line of PC products as well? Every publication, when comparing products, selects from what is available at the time - not what might be available in the near future.
blockcentre 3 August 2010	rubaiyat wrote: I'll second that. A real comparison between both systems instead of the usual shouting match and "I've never used it but know I don't like it!" Something I have noticed about PC magazines, books etc, they do not show you the issues. It seems PC users really have trouble with the picture is a thousand words adage. Have you actually read a copy of PC Authority? They are probably the most partial reviewers of both platforms that I have ever seen. Often they are championing Apple products despite knowing that the majority of their readers would not agree. From my understanding, PC Authority has several staff members who are avid Apple users and understand the technology innately. As said earlier, they can only compare on what isn't up to user interpretation. For example, I have used Macs quite a lot over the last couple of years - I even used to own a MacBook (well it was my wife's but still) - and I still prefer working in the Windows environment. Therefore conducting a review on the intricacies of how the system works is pointless as every user has their own interpretation on what they prefer. So how do you review? You base it on the facts available - performance, support, warranty, build quality, upgradability, compatibility, price, etc. It's the only fair way to compare systems.
rubaiyat 4 August 2010	I think you mean impartial reviewers. Or maybe you don't? Yes I do read PCAuthority, how come you think I started posting here? Because I read the latest Mac review. They even declared that iMacs don't do 802.11n wireless or bluetooth. I'm hard put to remember when they didn't. That is a total give away of reviewers who claim experience and knowledge they don't have. All they had to do was click on the Apple in the menu bar to get a complete breakdown of what was in and running on the Mac. But they didn't know how. Funny that! As for tests we went through all this earlier. There is plenty of common software, do the performance based tests on that software, then the rest is up to user preference. That and what unique software is available for each platform. Plus time spent on fighting viruses trojans, spyware, adware, dim witted flaming PC users… I'd love to see the direct comparisons because if they show that HPs, Dell etc off the shelf computers beat the Macs in a fair comparison, I'll use that to beat the Mac fanbois over the head. So, your knowledge of the Mac comes from marital proximity? Edited by rubaiyat: 4/8/2010 10:41:34 AM
blockcentre 4 August 2010	rubaiyat wrote: They even declared that iMacs don't do 802.11n wireless or bluetooth. Apple's 27in iMac review I haven't checked the mag yet, but a quick search of the reviews on the website produced that review which clearly states that it supports 802.11n and bluetooth. Perhaps there's an error somewhere in the mag? A number of the staff clearly use Macs. If they have and use both, obviously there's a better chance of a fair review than a mag that simply uses one platform or another. rubaiyat wrote: There is plenty of common software, do the performance based tests on that software, then the rest is up to user preference. Have you read how they test? Their benchmarks are based on real-world benchmarks that test 2D, 3D, encoding and multitasking. What are they missing to gauge performance? Do you really want to run benchmarks where the Mac is restricted to 32bit single threaded performance by the OS/App in comparison to the Windows based PC using all threads in 64bit? rubaiyat wrote: That and what unique software is available for each platform. You can't be serious? Just do an internet search for available software for each platform and I bet that Windows has 10 times the options in terms of unique software. There's so much specialised Windows software that doesn't have an industry standard equivalent on the Mac. I've already covered this previously. This isn't something that you should want considered if you prefer the Apple platform. rubaiyat wrote: Plus time spent on fighting viruses trojans, spyware, adware, dim witted flaming PC users… So should they consider the driver when they review cars as well? I haven't had a virus/malware/etc in about 10 years. How about they include a fanboi rating for every platform and dock some points for that? rubaiyat wrote: I'd love to see the direct comparisons because if they show that HPs, Dell etc off the shelf computers beat the Macs in a fair comparison, I'll use that to beat the Mac fanbois over the head. Read the mag. They have on countless occasions. The only Mac that stands up right now is the iMac as there really isn't a comparable all-in-one PC that can match it. However, the idea of running a Core i7 in an iMac is scary - the heat coming off that machine would be unmanageable. Honestly, the idea of comparing only against a few brands of PC is just ridiculous. If customisable PC's are available that offer far better performance for the money, why shouldn't they be compared to them? The HP and DELL PC's are. rubaiyat wrote: So, your knowledge of the Mac comes from marital proximity? No. But feel free to assume and generalise whatever you like.
rubaiyat 5 August 2010	Read the mag. You accused me of not reading it. And it clearly shows that PCAuthority is from out of town and doesn't know its way around even the basics of the Mac. The tests were done running Windows on the Macs which, there is no other word for it, is stupid! Macs run OSX. They only run the dodgy rip-off if you are a thumb sucking timid PC user in need of his plague infected security blanket. There is a reason why the Mac is not compromised by a shortcut! The vast Windows software out there is total onerous rubbish, which I found out when I tried to set up my PC to try and make it as useful as my Macs. There is plenty of Mac only software, some of which I listed previously, that reminds me every day why I'm on this platform. "Blah, blah, blah, Its your fault if you hang out in Plague Central." Guess you have made my point for me. The so-called "Tests" are useless as they pitted Macs running Windows up against PCs running Windows. As I put it in another post that's like a review by cricketers of tennis rackets and complaining the tennis racket isn't made of solid wood. But vice versa? "Why would you want strings on a cricket bat. Don't be stupid!" The Mac is a mass manufactured computer. Compare like with like. Auto magazines don't make stupid comparisons of garage built mods vs Holden, Ford, Toyota etc. Nor do they pretend that DIY is cheap because your time has no value, neither does the warranty and support that is part of the cost of manufactured products. Just had a look at the, now dated review of the older iMac. I also looked at the review of the more highly recommended Acer All-in-one and Sony VAIO and was struck by the language. The PCs have "surprisingly good specification" (inferior to the iMac's) "returned a superb 1.47" (inferior to the iMac's 1.50). They have "plentiful 4GB of RAM" and "massive 1TB hard disk" (same as "ho hum" iMac). PCA complained about the short wireless Mac keyboard, ignoring that it is optional. They whinged about the Magic Mouse as well, ignoring that it can be modified to suit your usage and has IMHO brilliant touch movement in all directions. Heaven knows what they'll find wrong with the Magic TrackPad, other than there is no PC equivalent (until they "innovatively" copy and catch up). PCAuthority summary of the iMac is the seriously doubtful: "Whether it's worth $2199 to a Windows user is the big question"* but the Sony is "brilliant" despite having smaller, inferior, screen, speakers and graphics card. Whilst the iMac is too expensive! (that old chestnut the "Apple Tax" ) there's no problem with the "brilliant" under-speced VAIO costing a whopping $800 more!. Guess like everything in life, with reviews you get what you pay for and Apple isn't buying the ads. * I paid $1979 for mine from Myers. Edited by rubaiyat: 5/8/2010 08:22:24 AM
blockcentre 5 August 2010	Wow. That's a whole new level of bitterness there. I'm afraid to respond in case you go postal on us. In fact I'm afraid in general. You win, okay. I'll go and buy a Mac tomorrow. In fact I'll buy 3. So go take a chill-pill and relax. You won. All PC owners are wrong. Your world is in balance.
rubaiyat 6 August 2010	Just being blunt and no longer beating around this increasingly unbelievable bush. If its any comfort, my current job is working on a PC fixing a really badly constructed database. My comment that there has to be a better way, went down like a lead balloon as well. When your on a reel good thing stick with it. :roll: Edited by rubaiyat: 6/8/2010 07:38:18 AM
amcmo 22 August 2010	Sorry Guys, Don't put much faith in your reviews of Mac. One of the Major PC Mags has put the iMac on their 'A' list, whereas in your review you focussed on the difficulty of accessing the USB ports on the back. Funny, we don't have any real problem.. Ever tried to get at a USB port on the back of a mini tower on or under a desk? In your MacBook Pro review you complained about the USB ports. Funny, we regularly run two USB sticks at a time and have no problems at all. You also complain about the Mac video port - they plug straight into all Apple displays, and a reasonably priced adapter plugs them in to any other display. Various adapters have been used in the PC environment for years. So Apple got ahead of the curve in having a compact port instead of the standard PC bulky ones. On your 32 reasons, you prattle on about what happens of Apple drop the O/S (cheap scare tactics?). Given the increasing market share for Macs worldwide, I think that one is merely someone at Microsoft's wishful thinking. While PC shipments were slipping last year, Mac sales were increasing We have been a PC environment for all our existence (many years), however recently had to buy 2 Macs for a specific customer requirement. The first last Nov was a MacBook Pro 15" It is already the most sought after notebook in the business and appears to be a far more solidly built unit that any of our recent HP and Toshiba units. The price of the MacBook was close enough to that of any reputable brand notebook of similar spec, and the quality does seem to be much higher. iMac is similarly the first choice desktop machine for everyone. Have no issues at all with Mac O/S, it does everything we want and the Mac Applications are as good as their PC equiv's. Final Cut Pro is easier to work with than the Adobe Equivs on PC and Mac. We stay clear of Office 2008 - rubbish. iWork does most of what we want and is more compatible with Office 2007 than Office 2008. Where we absolutely have to use PC programs, we use Parallels on one machine and VM on the other (customer requirements) and both work a treat. You claimed that support for a Mac was more expensive. Have a problem with a Microsoft installation and Microsoft want your credit card up front. If it's an installation issue they won't charge, otherwise cough up. When in England shortly after the purchase of the MacBook with an issue with the VPN connection. Wander into the Apple Store in London, and end up sitting down with a Mac Genius who works through the issue, no charge at all. Good thing about the o/s and hardware being all Apple is they know it and there's none of the Microsoft finger pointing. We sell high end PC software and 95% of our support issues relate to Microsoft issues or to problems with hardware compatibility. Just because it fits in a PC and apparently meets the PC specs doesn't mean specific hardware works with well written software that conforms to the published Microsoft requirements. Our PC fanatics have all, with one exception declared a preference for the Macs and we are giving serious consideration to making all future purchases Mac. Even our seriously tragic IT manager (Microsoft can do no wrong) has purchased his own iMac. Whether we decide to stick with PC's or move entirely to Mac, we will not be relying on PC Authority (and we have been an advertiser) for any journalistic integrity in comparing Mac vs PC. Lets face it your reviewers are not journalists, just ordinary people with no more knowledge than any average IT person. Your reviews are nothing more than personal opinions in most cases with benchmarks and specs being the only FACT and the rest of the review being opinion, with ingrained bias showing through on regular basis (This applies not just to your PC vs Mac issues). Quite frankly, while being software specialists, any one of my staff could give a more balanced and unbiased reviews than most of your team. While I still pick up the occasional PC A just to read a specific article, we now subscribe exclusively to overseas PC publications (and now one Mac) for more balanced and accurate articles.
amcmo 22 August 2010	Just a ps on my post, I happen to agree with rubaiyat in his summation of the unbelievably biassed (and stupid - Test a Mac as a PC running Windows instead of its native o/s) PC A approach to testing Macs. His comments regarding the 'recommended' Sony are valid and stuck me also as unsupportable at the time.
Shay 10 February 2011	the stuff this says is a load of rubbish, especially the bit about the eject button. i have a mac and the tech on it is either the same or better than windows tech. also macs crash a lot less than windows. if anything, macs are better than windows.
gone4good 10 February 2011	amcmo wrote: Just a ps on my post, I happen to agree with rubaiyat in his summation of the unbelievably biassed (and stupid - Test a Mac as a PC running Windows instead of its native o/s) PC A approach to testing Macs. His comments regarding the 'recommended' Sony are valid and stuck me also as unsupportable at the time. If you're going to test the raw performance of two cars - how fast they can get around a track and how fast they can get to 100kph, isn't it better to have them on the same track running the same type of fuel? Running Windows on the Mac allows them to run the same benchmark performance tool to examine the computational performance of the unit. It doesn't have anything to do with usability, functionality, style, etc. It's just a pure performance test - with machine can get to 100kph first. This may not be relevant to you, but would be to someone who may need to carry out several computational tasks with their work - accountants, scientists, designers, etc.
gone4good 10 February 2011	Shay wrote: i have a mac and the tech on it is either the same or better than windows tech. Unfortunately that isn't correct. Windows has nothing to do with the hardware in the system. Microsoft do not make computers. If you want to compare the hardware between a Mac and a non-Apple computer, you'll find that Apple tends to be at least 6 months off the pace and does not include all the same level of hardware. For example, I can build/purchase a non-Apple computer based on the new Intel Sandy Bridge architecture or on AMD's six-core lineup right now. Apple is months away from Sandy Bridge and won't offer AMD processors. Another example is graphics cards. The biggest you can go with a Mac Pro is a Radeon 5870. That dates back to mid 2009. Not only that, but they do not offer the latest nVidia cards either. There are vast differences in tech between platforms.
rubaiyat 10 February 2011	gone4good wrote: Shay wrote: i have a mac and the tech on it is either the same or better than windows tech. For example, I can build/purchase a non-Apple computer based on the new Intel Sandy Bridge architecture… Complete with the hardware bugs. On Principle I dislike the PC method of pumped up hot CPUs and Graphics cards with massive noisy cooling built on them. Living on the bleeding edge. There is a goldilocks principle, which is good enough is oddly, good enough. It's not as if PC users need all this power in most cases, it is just bragger's rights and the equivalent of Hot Rods. You get to waste your time faster? The Mac gets updated periodically so sees advances in steps. At intervals the Mac is the better hardware and still with the better OS. My son bought a PC just so he can play Warcraft more competitively. I said sell your iMac so you can get the maximum money back. He doesn't want to because for everything else other than Warcraft the Mac is so much nicer to work on. I personally think that Windows 7 is a decent operating system and quite usable. The only thing is that for a Mac user it feels like you are working on a really old machine, something akin to working on a Mac pre Tiger, and you miss all the nice touches on the latest Mac OSX. Windows just feels so dated. So ignoring the hardware which is not all that noticeably different on a current Mac, even an iMac is pretty darn fast, the thing that is in your face day to day, hour on hour is the OS and the software that goes with it. That is so much nicer on the Mac. Period.…and that is why Mac users pay more, wait longer and put up with some of the shit from Apple. It is just so we can get to use the best Operating System available.
gone4good 10 February 2011	@rubaiyat Not necessarily. While most PC users don't need all the power, it's the professional users that do. Put it this way, if you're rendering a project in 3D and have several to do, wouldn't it be worth your while if you can save an hour during the rendering process? What if you want to work with HD video in real-time? Having the processing power, RAM and access to 3rd party rendering hardware will make a big difference in completing the project. What about those that play games? You gave us an example of exactly that. The point was raised comparing the tech between Apple and non-Apple computers. This isn't a point that Apple users should be raising as something positive. The limitations of the platform in this regard are a real hindrance for several niche markets. If I was a Mac user as a professional, I'd be concerned about the growth in iPad/iPhone. These being Apple's new cash cow will result in $$$ being sacrificed in other areas, such as the Mac Pro.
rubaiyat 10 February 2011	I have spoken to professionals in audio, video and post production and they say the productivity and balance of hardware and software works best on their Macs. For real 3D and CGI they turn to render farms running UNIX distros. It is not a criticism of a BMW that Mack trucks can haul freight cross country cheaper and faster than in their boot. Most Mac employees I know have BMWs. Their delivery guys seem to prefer vans. I guess that even applies to BMW itself. Oh and I spoke to my son, he got the PC more because it was cheap and it solved some log-in problems he was having, which Warcraft failed to fix on the Mac, which he could have upgraded at more expense, but still would not have got him past Warcraft's PC nerds. Believe me I am worried about Apple's orientation towards their newer products and have said so vociferously on the Mac sites I go to. I am particularly concerned where the next OSX 10.7 Lion is going to take us. You should go to some and see just how fiery the debates get there on all sorts of issues. Whilst there are some who just accept anything Apple does as Holy Writ, just as some PC users seem to do for Microsoft, the only thing that binds us is a preference for Macs. Everything else is up for disagreement. There are even PC trolls but, like the class idiots, they don't keep up. As a Level 4 on Apple's support forums I now have access to the supporters' lounge. This is hosted on Apple's own servers and you should see what is said. Apple for all it's faults is pretty tolerant, they only step in to cool things down when it gets too personal. The imperative is civility, oh and not swearing. You can't even say hell! Mind you arse is open slather as it isn't in their dictionary. Edited by rubaiyat: 10/2/2011 02:31:14 PM
rubaiyat 14 February 2011	The NSW Ambulance service despatch system has shut down due to a virus problem that "is no problem."
PerthSV 3 July 2011	How times are changing….. Once upon a time MicroSoft was an unstoppable juggernaut. Ironically this is now its downfall. It cannot move with the times. The OS has only been updated twice in a decade and one of those iterations was an abysmal failure. It has so much old technology hanging around its neck requiring compatibility that it can’t start with a clean, optimised sheet. It has finally recognised there is a new world out there and is trying to play catch up with a new mobile platform, Window’s mobile 7. To introduce this they are sleeping in bed with Nokia. Once again there is nothing new invented in Redmond. Microsoft continues to lack innovation and will always be a follower rather than a leader in technology. The laptop market has now surpassed desktops. The notion of building your own super-fast PC is a thing of the past. This argument has now died. Upgrading items like RAM, memory and batteries is simple on both Mac and PC laptops, changing processors or motherboards is no longer an option. Computers have become consumer items, this was Apple’s vision a long time ago. They wanted a machine that was powerful and yet easy to use. PCs are following suit, look at the all in one HP desktops and new aluminium HP laptops, it is almost impossible to distinguish them from a Mac. Look at Windows 7 it is more a Mac OS than a PC. And yes, Apple also recognised a long time ago that as with any consumer item it not only has to function well but also has to look good. The slow thinking and moving PC fraternity is finally recognising this and have moved on beyond beige boxes. The next consumer PCs will be tablets. Just as laptops have replaced desktops, tablets will replace laptops. The OS will be an easy to use mobile OS like iOS or Android. Although powerful, fast and user friendly these new OS do not have the baggage associated with Windows (& OS X). The PC lovers who keep on about the merits of Linux have simply come to the same conclusion as Apple did 10 years ago. OS X is simply unix with a pretty face, underneath is a stable, fast and secure OS based upon an old multi threaded networkable OS. Windows? Also based upon an old system called QDos (Quick and Dirty OS) which was never meant to be anything more than a single tasking, non networkable, disk operating system. When using a PC its heritage is still evident. I feel like I’m using something from last century whenever I sit behind a PC. Most of the 32 points argued and supported by PC geeks reflect computers of yesterday. Yes, there will still be those people who tinker with cars and want to get under the hood of an old jalopy. But times have changed and people want to use these devices as they have moved beyond the realm of the tinkerer. Computers like cars are consumer items and are more reliable, stable, complex, cheaper and user friendly. Yes, like cars and computers I once pulled them apart and fixed them, now I use them because they are everyday commodities. Modern mechanics plug in diagnostic computers and replace damaged modules, there are few ‘repairs’ on modern cars. Computers are the same. Apple doesn’t repair many iPhones - that cost too much, they replace them. Finally, the weakest argument a PC person can offer is that they make better games machines, this just tells me the mentality of the acne scarred keyboard warrior at the other end of that comment - not really worth answering. Get yourself a Wii and grow up.
rubaiyat 3 July 2011	Nato wrote: No one in there right mind buys a desktop pc from a retail store DJ. My freinds and i have allways built our own and i dont know anyone personally that has a store bought pc. Only work place's have those for the warenty. You say very few people build there own, WHAT THE??? When i try and buy components from my local pc warehouse the line is so long its out the door and round the bend, and i have to wait normally 1hr to be served its so busy. I think your blowing smoke up your own behind there bro. And as for comparisons of set tasks, thats just stupid trying to compare a mac to a pc that has the latest hardware. A computer by name computes data right?? then why dont mac's compute as fast as pc's. We are taking about desktop computers here, that should be able to do everything and i mean everything otherwise just by a laptop. If you fork out over 2k on a computer that you cant take with you and it cant play all the latest games from your local computer shop you just got ripped off. Not to mention how many less folding@home work uints you can do on it or how long it takes to convert a video not using the gpu to do it. People who care about how a folder opens or expands or close's are just mental patients, thats not using a computer, thats just a load of bull dust. There are to many tasks that a mac cant actually do which makes comparisons very hard indeeed. Until apple comes to the party with a fully operational system comparisons are just cosmetic and not real number crunching. I know you are trying to sound like a PC, but the words you are groping for are "their", "too" "buy" etc. You don't have to buy a Mac for $2k, nor pay full price, there are an enormous number of places you can try and buy a Mac. I got my 27" iMac for effectively less than $1510 from Myers after a half day of shopping around, and I have not found a single PC that can beat the overall build quality, particularly the to die for screen. I'd love to know what it is that my Mac can't do. I do however know a stack of things my PC can't do. If there was software on Windows or Linux that I really wanted, but I can't think of any, I'd simply reboot holding down the option key into the alternate OSes. You make an enormous number of falacious arguments. "Macs are too expensive", but if you want a better PC it will cost you more, in most cases massively more. "Less software", but a Mac can run all the PC software and the enormous number of Mac software as well. "Windows 7 is superior", I have a W7 PC and it feels like I have stepped back 5 years when I boot it up. I just can't believe after Microsoft has farted around copying whatever they can from the Mac for so long that they still can't get it right. You nail your ignorance on the head when you suggest VLC as a substitute media player. I only have it installed to act as a background RIP for Handbrake,. It never gets opened it is that crude. The fact that Apple lets you freely use their hardware in their AppleStores and Apple InStores speaks volumes for the ease of use, security and confidence they have in their own hardware and software. Apple's competitors don't, because it is such a sorry experience and likely to fall down soon as you look sideways at it. It comes down to identifying quality over quantity or meaningless lists. Quality or total synergy of design totally mystifies most PC users. Bit like being able to tell the volume or bass on a sound system but failing to differentiate the music it plays. Or how well something is cooked instead of how many pieces of fried chicken are chucked in the bucket. It also helps to actually have some experience and knowledge, and that really frightens most PC users. I know a lot of PC users who have tried, and switched to, the Mac. Also power users who are forced to work on PCs by their bigotted IT depts but soon as they get the opportunity they are back onto their favorite workplace, the Mac. I know absolutely no-one who has gone the otherway. Now why is that? So you can rant on endlessly how the only thing you know is the "best in the entire universe", but it isn't your face you are talking out of.
grnorton 4 July 2011	After 3 years, this is allegedly still one of the most popular articles?! The sad fact is that if the Apple Mac becomes as pervasive as 'windows' then this magazine would not need to exist! Coverted to MAC 3 years ago and had withdrawal symptoms for a year! Not missing the actual OS, but rather the doubt and stress that I did not need to read about the latest virus software and all the other malware applications that I had to install on Windows , culminating in the well recognised slowing of the system after a few months. Its time that you objectively addressed this topic - if possible :)
DJ... 25 October 2011	Well said GRNORTON. I challenged PCAuthority (as was its name back then) to do a comparison between 2 beginner computer users in setting up a Mac and a Windows System out of the box, as supplied by a manufacturer, and then perform a list of certain common tasks. They are still to take up the challenge. Maybe soon. Along with a name change I have noticed that PC& Tech Authority is a lot wider in its interests and reporting and less 'one-eyed' about Windows being the only OS. This may have been brought on by the ever increasing interest in mobile & tablet OSs but at least now it is possible that the Mag will take up the challenge. YES??
rubaiyat 1 November 2011	Something we Mac users have always known but for some odd reason the IT department has been unable to discover for themselves: http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/10/27/hell-freezes-over-forrester-urges-it-to-support-the-mac/ Until now. But then this report ignores the real reason why IT doesn't want Macs. Something to do with maintaining the status quo that is largely of their own creation and for their own benefit.