The Great Mac vs. Windows Debate

[pgoat]

at the risk of alienating every nice person on FL....

I started a new thread here:

http://www.thefedoralounge.com/showthread.php?p=499978#post499978

to help whittle down our choice of Macs.

I realize the Mac vs. Windows thing is redundant, never ending and moot, at this point, since, as noted, you can run Windows apps on a Mac with little issue these days.

Sorry to dredge the topic back up, and see you at the new thread o' computing madness.....

 

[pgoat]

Since late 2006, you simply put Windows on the Mac and install your programs.

In fact, with Parallels or VMWare Fusion, you can run Windows or Linux or DOS or whatever AT THE SAME TIME you are running OS X, dragging files from one to the other as you see fit.

Bill

I'm definitely looking into those. Thanks!

 

[KittyT]

I think it's a matter of what you're going to *do* with the computer that really makes a difference. I use mine for only a few things -- Internet, writing, and sound editing. I don't game, I don't use a lot of elaborate applications, and I tend to find all the tech bells and whistles more annoying than necessary. So for me, a non-tech-oriented person, a Mac makes it very easy for me to do what I need to do with a minimum of frustration.

But see, my logic tells me that if I'm only going to do basics with something, I shouldn't pay more for a machine when I can have what I need for less

Clothes: Pay more and hunt and search more to get things -how- you like them, in the style you want them.

Clothes are directly comparable, as all the arguments about the -cost- of windows can also be applied to vintage clothes in many cases. After all, wouldn't it be cheaper, both in time and money, to just wear whats commonly available?

But see, that's not how it works for me AT ALL! Yes, I can buy commonly available CHEAP clothes, but I'll get just that - cheap. I can get affordable vintage items and when paying the same amount at a middle end store that carries modern clothing, I'll not only be getting something of lesser quality, but also of lesser style. So no, to answer your question, it doesn't really cost me more money (or time) to find what I want as far as clothes are concerned.

Obviously, there's personal preference involved with computers, but there are a lot of people who don't buy MACs just because of the price. If you're one of those people who can afford to pay more for something that's exactly what you like (say a $200 pair of shoes instead of a $30 pair, or a $1200 computer instead of a $600), then I guess you're pretty damned lucky - or maybe just less frugal than I am

 

[KittyT]

I have Windows XP at home and it seems to be OK. We upgraded to the Windows Vista at work and everyone is having a lot of problems with both the Vista and interference for all of the other systems used at work.

Well see, that's the fault of your IT folks for not fully testing it and making sure there were no compatibility issues with your other applications. No Microsoft app is that great until it's been on the market for awhile and has had the bugs worked out, which is why we haven't switched yet at my office.

I just got a Vista machine for home and really wanted to reinstall it with XP, but decided not to bother and see how it went. I haven't had any problems with it so far, but I also had to go in and change everything to look like the classic Windows interface so it wouldn't drive me crazy.

 

[scotrace]

I started a new thread here:
(merged here)

Let's keep all this stuff in one spot.

Reposting on this page:

The wife and I have pretty much decided to go Apple with our new computer.

We are looking at the iMac or the Mac Pro. Basically trying to balance buying enough expandability to last us at least 8-10 years but without going too overkill with way more computer than we need (a little more than we need is fine; while i'd love to save the $1500 that the Power Mac requires, a $3000 iMac is still a lot of dough and I prefer not to have such an expensive machine that is maxed out and fairly obsolete in 3-5 years....)

We'd buy the iMac with its biggest HD and fastest processor options, as well as 24" screen. The Mac Pro would have to be a bare bones (maybe the larger screen - 23", not 30") and get upgrades as (if) needed.

we do basic home stuff 75% of the time - email, web, word processing, etc. we have been doing more and more video and audio stuff, so a decent sound and video card is important. We'll be getting the best scanner we can afford (a flatbed) soon and plan to digitize a lot of old family photos over the next few years. Finally I may do some home audio recording - nothing too crazy, I could use Garage band or maybe Pro tools.

Since we're breaking from MS, I may wish to run Leopard/Linux/XP using Parallels or Fusion - not sure if that is more rough with the iMac's capacity than the Mac Pro?

Any thoughts on which route would be best for us? (iMac or Mac Pro.)
We have a new 300GB external drive to use, and we're keeping our 8 yr old XP PC as a spare/backup and for some Office stuff (MS Access, etc.).

The consistent advice here has been: iMac. Mac pro is overkill.

 

[pgoat]

no prob - I didn't want to confuse the personal selection issue with the larger war of the computing titans!

This thread, if nothing else, has convinced me that Apple/S. Jobs is as hated by many as MS/B. Gates......anyway, lots of food for thought, so thanks and keep it coming.....

 

[Chanfan]

My personal take on purchasing hardware is, in general, buy as much as you can afford. If it's not a big thing to spend the extra for higher end (in this case, MacPro), do it - it will help it last longer. If that is a big thing - and for most people, $1500 is - then I'd go with the general consensus.

The other thing is the "sweet spot". I'm not up on mac pricing, but - I know they just did Macworld, so pricing adjustments for any announcements should be out. In general with hardware, the latest and greatest processor/model comes at a premium. One or two steps back from that is normally the pricing "sweet spot" - right before the price/performance curve takes a steep climb.

And in my mind, 8-10 years is an awful long time for a computer's useful life, but I use mine for gaming, which tends to be significantly more demanding. I'm used to a max life of 4 years. Assuming just word processing / surfing / etc, I could see it lasting quite a bit longer - but 8-10 is pushing it. I'd think I would suggest in that case, buying more of a budget machine for 4-5 years, and then getting a new budget machine at that point.

Of course, now I expect several examples of machines still being used that are 10 years old (or more), and it's true, they can last. But in 1994, I'm not sure I knew a lot of folks still using a Mac 128k for much that was useful, at least as a primary machine.

 

[Vardeman Sneed]

Why buy an operating system that doesn't work (Windows)?
(Only in America do we willingly pay for something that is broken.)

Why over-spend to get an operating system that does work (Mac)?
(A major step above Windows.)

The answer: Get Linux - it's free!
(I recommend Ubuntu.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtp5gNhBZgo

 

[pgoat]

My personal take on purchasing hardware is, in general, buy as much as you can afford. If it's not a big thing to spend the extra for higher end (in this case, MacPro), do it - it will help it last longer. If that is a big thing - and for most people, $1500 is - then I'd go with the general consensus.

The other thing is the "sweet spot". I'm not up on mac pricing, but - I know they just did Macworld, so pricing adjustments for any announcements should be out. In general with hardware, the latest and greatest processor/model comes at a premium. One or two steps back from that is normally the pricing "sweet spot" - right before the price/performance curve takes a steep climb.

And in my mind, 8-10 years is an awful long time for a computer's useful life, but I use mine for gaming, which tends to be significantly more demanding. I'm used to a max life of 4 years. Assuming just word processing / surfing / etc, I could see it lasting quite a bit longer - but 8-10 is pushing it. I'd think I would suggest in that case, buying more of a budget machine for 4-5 years, and then getting a new budget machine at that point.

Of course, now I expect several examples of machines still being used that are 10 years old (or more), and it's true, they can last. But in 1994, I'm not sure I knew a lot of folks still using a Mac 128k for much that was useful, at least as a primary machine.

good advice. btw, we used the 128s to run caption label printers up till 2000 at one archive I worked at. That office was a few blocks away from Tekserve in Manhattan, so I'd have to run down there once every 6 mos or so with one of the old pinfeed printers coddled in my arms like a fragile baby.....

 

[Empyrium]

At my house:

Main computer -> Dual boot Ubuntu Linux 7.10 & Windows XP Professional
(Windows for my son's games only, everything else is
(done with Ubuntu. Windows on 20GB drive, Ubuntu
(on 80GB drive.

Second computer -> Ubuntu Linux 7.10 only
(includes many linux games, i.e., Enemy Territory,
(Frozen Bubble, PlanetPenguin Racer, various card
(games, UT2006, etc.

If it were not for my son's PC based games, we would be totally Windows free.

Bob

you can play windows games on linux with a tool called wine, with better performance than windows

 

[Vardeman Sneed]

Posted by Empyrium

you can play windows games on linux with a tool called wine, with better performance than windows

I did experiment with wine years ago, but haven't looked at it since. I believe I was using Mandrake 9.0 at the time (early '03?). Although, I have heard discussion that it is much more improved than what it was years ago.

Anyway, If the WindowsXP on my main machine corrupts, as they all seem to have a tendency to do, I will probably reformat that drive and use it for data backup.

Bob

 

[Sly]

Gentlmen, one way or another this is an issue of fashion, not application.

 

[rebelgtp]

Posted by Empyrium


I did experiment with wine years ago, but haven't looked at it since. I believe I was using Mandrake 9.0 at the time (early '03?). Although, I have heard discussion that it is much more improved than what it was years ago.

Anyway, If the WindowsXP on my main machine corrupts, as they all seem to have a tendency to do, I will probably reformat that drive and use it for data backup.

Bob

yes wine is MUCH improved of its previous versions, there aren't many windows games that can't be run under linux now.

oh yeah i run my system with suse linux 10.3

 

[pgoat]

well, I think we're gonna pull the trigger on an iMac tomorrow, folks. Thanks for the feedback and wish us luck!

We're gonna go for the 24" screen and will probably stick with the 2Gb RAM. Going up to 4GB is $630!

That model comes with a 500GB Hard drive. Would going up to the 750G or 1TB HD cause any issues with only 2G RAM and the stock processor? The bigger hard drives are only a couple hundred bucks extra.

Also, is the Apple Care Protection Plan worth it? I was on the fence about this if we got the more user-servicable Mac Pro but that integrated case on the iMac still scares me. I think it would be $119 off the price if we waived the protection.

 

[Salv]

well, I think we're gonna pull the trigger on an iMac tomorrow, folks. Thanks for the feedback and wish us luck!

We're gonna go for the 24" screen and will probably stick with the 2Gb RAM. Going up to 4GB is $630!

That model comes with a 500GB Hard drive. Would going up to the 750G or 1TB HD cause any issues with only 2G RAM and the stock processor? The bigger hard drives are only a couple hundred bucks extra.

Also, is the Apple Care Protection Plan worth it? I was on the fence about this if we got the more user-servicable Mac Pro but that integrated case on the iMac still scares me. I think it would be $119 off the price if we waived the protection.

Apple-installed RAM is very badly overpriced, but upgrading RAM on a 24"iMac is a very easy job and you can find RAM online for much, much less than $630. I've always bought RAM from Crucial and fitted it myself - checking the US Crucial site I found 4GB of RAM for you iMac for just $129.99 - for that you get 2 x 2GB RAM modules. You'll need to remove the installed 2 x 1GB modules and replace them with the new modules. You'll get an illustrated user manual with the iMac, and there's a .pdf of it here. Instructions for fitting RAM start on page 33. The only tool you need is a Phillips screwdriver.

I can't think of any problems that would be caused by having a larger HD - reads and writes may take fractionally longer as the OS searches for the right segment on a larger HD, but that would be the case no matter what OS you're using, and it would be a delay of thousandths of a second, which you'd hardly notice. Get the largest HD you can afford.

Apple Care is a tricky one - I've never bought Apple Care, and the only problem I've had with any Mac I've owned was a logic board on a G3 iBook failing after about five years. But ... Apple hardware is as prone to failure as that of any other big name computer manufacturer, so maybe I've just been lucky. If you're more comfortable buying an extended warranty then you should get one. For what it's worth I didn't buy Apple Care for the new iBook which replaced the dead one.

 

[pgoat]

Salv, I could kiss you!

Thanks so much; Especially for those links.

We have heard so much conflicting stuff about how difficult it is to crack open an iMac that we wanted to stuff it full of all the desired options from the get-go - this, despite being fully aware since day one that Apple overcharges insanely for everything. Not saying it won't be good stuff; but I'd obviously much rather go the route you laid out and pop those modules in ourselves. I believe we do own a phillips screwdriver!

One last dumba** question - we had visited an Apple store at a local mall and were headed there to purchase - a friend told me the computer would be cheaper on an official Mac website - any truth to this/leads on where to buy reliably?

 

[scotrace]

What Salv said, verbatim.

Edit to add: If you have no major difficulty using an average toaster, you won't have any trouble installing RAM in your new machine.

Apple's pricing is the same no matter where you get it. There are no "deals" unless you are a student, teacher or government employee, in which case there's a slight discount, but you have to be able to prove it.

Your first resolve should be to not take advice about buying and using your new Mac from your Wintel pals.

 

[Salv]

One last dumba** question - we had visited an Apple store at a local mall and were headed there to purchase - a friend told me the computer would be cheaper on an official Mac website - any truth to this/leads on where to buy reliably?

You can occasionally get free extras from authorised Apple resellers. It may be worth buying a Mac magazine and looking through the classifieds to see if there are any online offers at the moment.

Actually, checking the Apple US online store they are offering a $100 rebate on a selection of printers if you buy a Mac and the printer together.

But as Scot said the price you'll pay for the iMac will be the same, within a couple of dollars, wherever you buy.

 

[pgoat]

Mwahhh! to you both!

Merci Beaucoups and then some, gentlemen!

I do indeed work for an educational institution and should qualify for a discount. (I'll take whatever break we can get!) We don't need a printer, though that is indeed a good offer.

My wife read in Consumer Reports that the Apple Care is not a must have. The Apple store we went to also tried to sell us on the courses (one-to-one where they walk you through the various applications/software - I think we can handle that okay). We are on the fence over whether to add Windows office, since we're keeping the old PC and can use that for Word, Access, et al as needed.



I am getting pretty excited this morning.....weird, since I am not a techie - I usually only feel this way about purchases I can wear....

 

[pgoat]

well, so much for that. We phoned the Apple store cause we were driving 50 miles away to check if they'd have a 1 TB iMac for us to pick up - they said "surrre" on the phone, but naturally they didn't once we got out there...:rage:

anyhoo, twas a nice day for a long drive and we asked plenty of questions so no harm done. We ordered the iMac online this afternoon and purchased the extra memory to max it out at 4GB (Thanks again for thse links Salv!).

We went for the 1TB hard drive and we're about to order an external to sync with Time Machine backups. Any recommendations on a reliable brand of HD? We also weren't sure if 1 TB would suffice or whether an additional $100 was worth spending on a 1.5TB external.

We kinda like the iOmegas, though the backup scheduling software for the 300GB external we bought a few months back is a little confusing to set up.

We were looking at :

http://www.iomega.com/direct/produc...id=26890319&bmUID=1201993940911#prod-info-nav

and

http://www.iomega.com/direct/produc...SORTMENT<>ast_id=26890319&bmUID=1201993957647

Also looking at LaCie which look to have nice features - power cut switch, and Fantom, which looked a little cheesy in build quality and had spotty user reviews. Both their 1TB drives have 32MB cache buffer, as opposed to the iOmega's 8Mb; I think all were 7200 rpm.....