Technology Mac vs PC?

[Vooder]

Let's see what is the preference for comp among medical professionals?
Almost eternal fight Mac vs PC!!!!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[southerndoc]

I have an iMac G5 desktop, a 12" Powerbook laptop, a Dell Inspiron 5100 laptop, and a homebuilt AMD Athlon XP 2700+ Windoze machine.

I don't think I've turned on the Dell laptop in nearly 6 months. The Athlon is currently in a closet... I dismantled it because it was taking up space on my desk in the guestroom.

I'm definitely pro-Mac, as most users of this board will attest.

Viva la Mac!

 

[deleted59964]

apple laptop and winblows desktop (will be replaced by gen 2 mac mini when one arrives).

yet another reason
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/archives/004144.php

 

[sunny123]

apple laptop and winblows desktop (will be replaced by gen 2 mac mini when one arrives).

yet another reason
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/archives/004144.php

gen2 mac mini huh? What nifty upgrades should we expect? Hopefully they'll upgrade the video card.

 

[4 Ever]

After donating my dell inspiron 8500 to my parents, i own only one PC (dell 8400 desktop) and a 12'' ibook. I have found that there are many things that my PC can do that my mac cannot and there are many things the mac can do that the PC cannot. At the end of the day, the two have found their respective positions in my life and I usually end up using them both at least once a day. If I had to get another mac, I would wait for the mactels and get an imac but this would in no way take the place of a future PC machine I would get.

 

[deleted59964]

After donating my dell inspiron 8500 to my parents, i own only one PC (dell 8400 desktop) and a 12'' ibook. I have found that there are many things that my PC can do that my mac cannot and there are many things the mac can do that the PC cannot. At the end of the day, the two have found their respective positions in my life and I usually end up using them both at least once a day. If I had to get another mac, I would wait for the mactels and get an imac but this would in no way take the place of a future PC machine I would get.

even if you could run windows on the mac natively?

 

[4 Ever]

If the systems could be booted on the same computer without any type of lag, then I wouldn't get another PC styled computer (definitely the mac in that case). I like the designs of just about all of the mac products (except the eMac) and would much rather have a dual boot mac than a dual boot PC.

 

[southerndoc]

There are rumours that the real reason why Jobs switched to Intel chips is so Macs could be marketed as dual operating system based computers. Got something that absolutely requires Windows? Great, just boot into Windows. Windows machines won't be able to run Mac OS (unless it's a hacked version, which the average user will never do), but Macs will be able to run Mac OS and Windows.

 

[Stroganoff]

There are rumours that the real reason why Jobs switched to Intel chips is so Macs could be marketed as dual operating system based computers. Got something that absolutely requires Windows? Great, just boot into Windows. Windows machines won't be able to run Mac OS (unless it's a hacked version, which the average user will never do), but Macs will be able to run Mac OS and Windows.

Thing is, x86 is x86 is x86. When Apple switches over, there will be no difference anymore. Both Windows and MacOS retail CDs exist right? Then there shouldn't be any need for hacking just to install MacOS X. Just buy either (or both) CD and load.

I could be getting this wrong, but it looks like Apple will strictly be another IBM compatible hardware maker + MacOS software maker.

If their prices don't go down, there's nothing to stop people from buying Dells or HPs or other OEM products and buying a MacOS CD to load.

 

[deleted59964]

Thing is, x86 is x86 is x86. When Apple switches over, there will be no difference anymore. Both Windows and MacOS retail CDs exist right? Then there shouldn't be any need for hacking just to install MacOS X. Just buy either (or both) CD and load.

I could be getting this wrong, but it looks like Apple will strictly be another IBM compatible hardware maker + MacOS software maker.

If their prices don't go down, there's nothing to stop people from buying Dells or HPs or other OEM products and buying a MacOS CD to load.

that'd be great for consumers - you could build your own system to suit your needs and install OSX, but I doubt it'll happen.

Apple will make OSX only run on their machines. There will probably be hacked versions that you can use - but the only way to legally run OSX will be on a mac. While a lot of people dont care about legalities, businesses, the education sector, and people who want ongoing IT support and security do care.

Hacked OSX on biege boxes probably will exist, but it'll only be for the fringe.

 

[Stroganoff]

Apple will make OSX only run on their machines. There will probably be hacked versions that you can use - but the only way to legally run OSX will be on a mac. While a lot of people dont care about legalities, businesses, the education sector, and people who want ongoing IT support and security do care.

Monopoly! Antitrust! I'd laugh if Apple got into a huge justice fiasco as a result of limiting MacOS to [Intel] Mac computers.

 

[mustangsally65]

I've been a Mac user since 1995, when my family's first home computer was a Macintosh Performa 6200CD. It had a whopping 75 Megahertz PowerPC processor, and I still have it. Oregon Trail is still so much fun to play!

Since then I have had a Blueberry iMac, an iBook G3, and currently have a PowerBook G4. My parents have three iBooks, and my bro and sisters all have an iBook as well.

I've never owned a PC. I hope I will never have to, but who knows? Even if I did, my Mac would still be my primary computer, and I'd only start up the PC with grudging emotions and a heavy sigh.

 

[southerndoc]

Thing is, x86 is x86 is x86. When Apple switches over, there will be no difference anymore. Both Windows and MacOS retail CDs exist right? Then there shouldn't be any need for hacking just to install MacOS X. Just buy either (or both) CD and load.

I could be getting this wrong, but it looks like Apple will strictly be another IBM compatible hardware maker + MacOS software maker.

If their prices don't go down, there's nothing to stop people from buying Dells or HPs or other OEM products and buying a MacOS CD to load.

Apple plans to embed hardware in their special-manufactured Intel CPU's that MacOS X will interrogate before booting. If it finds the hardware, then all is well. If it doesn't, then it will not boot.

There will no doubt be hacked versions around, but it will be time consuming to do this. My time is worth more to me (literally) than spending 10-30 hours hacking the operating system to make it work.

Apple promises that it will not be just one portion of the operating system that will look for this special hardware "marker," but instead will be multiple portions of the operating system, including subroutines, bundled applications, etc. all looking for it in different ways. What will take very little processing power will take a lot of manpower to overcome.

Even when copies are hacked and available, for the average user, he or she won't have access to it. The average user doesn't download pirated Windows updates.

The Mac OS X CD you buy in the store simply won't install on a non-Apple computer unless Apple decides to sell Mac OS X to all Intel-based computer systems.

 

[Stroganoff]

The Mac OS X CD you buy in the store simply won't install on a non-Apple computer unless Apple decides to sell Mac OS X to all Intel-based computer systems.

That's really sweet, Steve respects Bill and all and doesn't wanna take away his market share. Garsh.

Avoiding piracy of MacOS will save them money, but by opening MacOS to other PCs and abandoning the hardware marker, they'll probably still come out making a considerable profit.

 

[deleted59964]

Avoiding piracy of MacOS will save them money, but by opening MacOS to other PCs and abandoning the hardware marker, they'll probably still come out making a considerable profit.

i tend to agree apple would make more money by selling OSX for biege boxes, who knows - maybe apple would even get a majority of the OS market share

i think apple will continue to make hardware as well, because it is profitable. And people will buy it because it will offer better design, and unparalleled hardware quality. The other thing is, when you make the OS and the hardware - there are zero compatability problems. Running OSX on a biege box would incur some of the destabilising hardware - OS incompatability problems, that plagues windows.

 

[sunnyjohn]

PC Never!
MAC FOREVER!
I*heart* Apple

 

[tinman831]

once you go mac, you never go back




yeah that was a cheezy one

 

[Iwy Em Hotep]

In my opinion, for the average user, Mac is for those that do not have technical inclinations (hence the one-button mouse strategy and nearly locked OS). It's basically computer-lite, the system Grandma can use.

This is interesting, because I remember that the most technically inclined people from the CS department (where I'm from) had Macs, mainly because it was the best adaptation of a Unix/Linux-ish system out there. No messing with dual-booting, and there's not too much that Windows offers that isn't there on a Mac. However, that said, I do recommend Macs to my technophobic friends. They all come back happy.

 

[deleted59964]

I like the configurability and user access available to the PC world. I like being able to build my own system, selecting exactly the parts that I want. I dual-boot windows xp and linux. My system can do just about everything I want it to without much problem.

Mac is stylish, true, but I can get cool cases for a PC system as well. AMD is better than Intel. It was a mistake by Apple to go to Intel, btw. In my opinion, for the average user, Mac is for those that do not have technical inclinations (hence the one-button mouse strategy and nearly locked OS). It's basically computer-lite, the system Grandma can use.

I tend to agree that if you like to tinker with your machine you are better off with Windows. I built my own Athlon/Windoze machine too - back when I used to have time to tinker. I replaced my graphics card's fan too, so that I could overclock it better. The thing is, I got too busy to play with my computer - now I just want it to work. Work ALL the time that is, without wasting my time updating virus scanners, adware/spyware blockers etc. Spending hours fiddling with cooling systems to make my PC 1% faster no longer seems smart to me

Umm and yeah I know style is in the eye of the beholder, but come on ... none of the "cool cases for PCs" comes close to macs for style.

 

[Stroganoff]

Umm and yeah I know style is in the eye of the beholder, but come on ... none of the "cool cases for PCs" comes close to macs for style.

Heh. (though I don't really like the grill design of either case)


Now comparing the Mac mini to the Shuttle XPC cases, I think Shuttle wins based on function, not just form:

The Mac Mini may look cute, but I've read that it runs ridiculously hot. This, plus the fact that you can't really customize it (aside from the extremely limited Apple Store configurations), it crazy. There's a couple dozen XPC cases, all have integrated liquid cooling (I like to run my CPU at 100% 24/7/365) plus you can customize all the drives + 2 expansion cards.


What about a living room media center PC?

---------------

To give credit to Macs, they're preferred in the music and photo editing industries. I'd like to know why. Otherwise I'll have to jump on the PowerMac bandwagon someday.

 

[deleted59964]

innovator

imitator

sexy white mini

fat cousin from the country
but hey ... she's so .... practical

 

[Stroganoff]

I'll take the fat cousin. They need lovin' too.
and she dissipates a ton more heat better


I used to hate Apple/Macs/Microsoft because it was the thing to do (back in HS). Now I believe each has its pros and cons. I only wish Macs came way, way down in price and were more customizable.

I guess the pro to a Macintosh is that they are pretty darn stable out of the box, and the default configuration of Mac OS X is pretty optimized from the get go. Windows XP Pro is also pretty darn stable but is far from being optimized or efficient when you first fire it up. For those who want to focus on getting a task done, a Mac should do it. For those who love micro-organizing and personalizing, I believe the PC world (hardware) and Windows world (insane tweaks and minute controls) have more to offer.

PCs can be made to be harmonious and stable, but that requires dozens of hours reading reviews and manuals on each component you put in the case and each software app and setting. But when you get it right, it pays off.

OK, back to finding the perfect 120mm replacement fan by analyzing RPM, decibels, airflow, power draw, and price.

 

[southerndoc]

Macs are easier to use, which is why more technophobic people are comfortable with them.

However, they are not limited. If you know Unix/Linux/BeOS, you can do more things with a Mac than with Windows. This is why a lot of IT people use Macs.

 

[Iwy Em Hotep]

Well, that's not entirely accurate. The server market is not littered with Macs yet. It's expanding, but it is borderline gimicky at the moment. I must confess that I am not all that familar with the inner working of OSX. What is it capable of that Unix/Linux and Windows are not?


I wouldn't mind of those cinema displays!

Um, it's entirely built around a BSD-core, whereas Windows is not.

To give examples, I can pop open a terminal window, quickly 'top' and 'kill -9' an offending program, and then 'chmod a-x *' a given directory. Not entirely helpful for most people, but really really helpful for those who like the interface of Linux with the ability to run Office and Photoshop. One could dual-boot, but I think that's just jarring and messy.

 

[run4boston]

Let's see what is the preference for comp among medical professionals?
Almost eternal fight Mac vs PC!!!!

thinkpad t43

 

[southerndoc]

Wow, I'm in ecstasy here. I didn't realize there were so many Mac users on SDN!

 

[ItsGavinC]

So what did my fellow Mac-geeks get for Christmas?

I'm holding out until Macworld next month, where (hopefully!) the new Shuffles and new iBooks will be announced.

 

[tinman831]

So what did my fellow Mac-geeks get for Christmas?

I'm holding out until Macworld next month, where (hopefully!) the new Shuffles and new iBooks will be announced.

I didn't get anything, but I did get my mom an Ipod video. I think I've converted another one to the Mac side

 

[southerndoc]

So what did my fellow Mac-geeks get for Christmas?

I'm holding out until Macworld next month, where (hopefully!) the new Shuffles and new iBooks will be announced.

I got another Tag Heuer watch. I love them.

I'm curious to see how sexy the new Powerbooks are going to be. I hear Apple has made them sleeker, thinner, and sexier. Is that possible?!?

I'll probably switch to the Intel Macs in 2007.

 

[Stroganoff]

I got another Tag Heuer watch. I love them.

another one? I'd switch over to Macs just to have one.

I betrayed the brotherhood and went into my first Apple store at the mall. I felt a little ashamed and dirty, but then I saw the grail: the 30" cinema. It's huge!!!!

 

[southerndoc]

another one? I'd switch over to Macs just to have one.

I betrayed the brotherhood and went into my first Apple store at the mall. I felt a little ashamed and dirty, but then I saw the grail: the 30" cinema. It's huge!!!!

I'll probably switch to the Power Mac platform in 2007. Will likely go with the 23 or 30" screen then. I have a 20" iMac, which I love, but could use more desktop space since I work with high-res images in Photoshop.

I'll put the iMac in the guest room.

My next Mac purchase will probably be in February when the new Media Mac comes out.

 

[deleted87716]

Mac and Windows are nearly neck-and-neck. Based on conversations I've had with colleagues, I've always suspected that Macs were highly represented in medicine. Looks like I was right.