Topic: Mac vs. PC

[Michael Vandeven]

ok... here's what i (think i) know about a mac...

they're vastly superior over the pc in multimedia applications, such as audio/video editing.  they're physically beautiful.  and they're really expensive despite the fact their hardware technology isn't beyond comparison to their pc equivalent(s).  they also appear not to afford the user a wide array of software.  am i essentially on the right track here?

my only experience with apple products is the iPod nano my wife has.  it is so locked down by apple that you can do almost NOTHING to make it operate the way you want (i.e. open source firmware like rockbox, managing files in explorer, etc.).  the very same shortcomings (lack of freedom) i have heard people scream about over the years as it relates to microsoft products seem to be alive and well in apple's products.  i have listened to iPhone owners prattle on and on about their inability to even text a picture to someone without having to log into some archaic and cumbersome website where their phone's postage stamp size pictures reside for them to retrieve and do with as they please.

just seems to me, based on these two VERY prominent apple products, that apple isn't exactly as impressive an entity as people would like pc users to believe.  i think the alternative for those who wish to escape the clutches of microsoft's often mediocre products seems to be the linux world.  not mac.  just a few rushed thoughts.

some of my thoughts on the macbook air:
http://ufoship.com/comment.php?comment.news.105

[EvB]

ok... here's what i (think i) know about a mac...


just seems to me, based on these two VERY prominent apple products, that apple isn't exactly as impressive an entity as people would like pc users to believe.  i think the alternative for those who wish to escape the clutches of microsoft's often mediocre products seems to be the linux world.  not mac.  just a few rushed thoughts.

some of my thoughts on the macbook air:
http://ufoship.com/comment.php?comment.news.105

That's pretty much how i see it - though haven't hunkered down to learn Linux yet, though I'm considering making my next PC duel-boot.

I do think that there have been improvements in the PCs ability to deal with multimedia - hopefully that will continue.

[HeReallyDoes]

I use linux, mac osx and windows on a daily basis and in roughly that order.  I find that they each have their strength and weaknesses.  I will try to enumerate them here and I will ask everyone to remember that these are my personal impressions and preferences ... so I cannot be wrong, only delusional.

Linux -- Pros: Powerful command line utilities, TONS of documentation, TONS of flexibility and choices of applications, interfaces, process control, user control.  Cons:  All the documentation can become overwhelming and it is difficult to determine the degree of completeness of any given project until you have invested a significant amount of time messing with it.  Linux of my operating system of choice because I tend to be more textual than graphical.  I don't have to look for the drop down menu that contains the right choice ... all I have to do is type it.  I recognize that I am THE ONLY person who feels this way, but it works for me.

Mac -- Pros:  Limited number of hardware configurations allow for thorough testing of each piece of software and allows for optimization of OS, apps etc.  This makes the life cycle of a Mac about double that of a similar windows based offering from Dell, GateWay etc.  I am using a 5-6 year old mac laptop to listen to the stream, play travian, skype with friends, type this message, read a pdf about a project I am working on AND shell into a remote server.  All using the most current versions of all software.  I wouldn't be able to install Vista on a PC laptop of similar age, let alone do all of the other things I listed at once.  Cons: Having to tell your parents you are gay (KIDDING!) -- The narrow range of software is my biggest problem, but this is somewhat alleviated  by the availability of MacPorts as an easy method for install a wide range of Gnu software.

Windows  -- Pros: large user base, huge array of commercial and free/cheap software, huge array of varied hardware specifications, combinations and manufacturers.  Cons: large user base, huge array of commercial and free/cheap software, huge array of varied hardware specifications, combinations and manufacturers.  The sheer number of users, manufacturers and specifications makes for a large number of benefits and problems.  I personally find windows difficult to work with because I never know where to look for what it is that I want to do.  I do love my gaming options on this platform and I have never been able to find a great replacement for MS-Visio.

In short, I use 'em all , love 'em all and hate 'em all.  No matter which one any of us settle on, there will be limitations and frustrations.

FLAME ON!

[Michael Vandeven]

Cons: Having to tell your parents you are gay (KIDDING!)

ELLE OH ELLE!!!!  priceless.

[EvB]

FLAME ON!

No flames here - I think your synopsis is brilliant. I use them all as well - but my order is more like Windows/Mac OSX/Linux (a little)

[Σεληνόλυκος]

I use Ubuntu on my desktop (have XP installed for games), OS X on my MacBook. I like OS X and Linux a lot more than I do Windows. I rather dislike using Windows, and I mostly find Linux and OS X a pleasure to use. They have their faults, but they aren't awfully significant.

[Max]

I use both linux and windows...

I use windows in virtualbox on my main computer, I give it apx 1 gig of ram when I need big things done...

but mostly I use linux for things I do.. besides in less then 6 months i have figured out how to do alot of shit with ubuntu.

the other thing is... I can do 40 updates with either no reboots or maybe 1 reboot..

and only the 1 reboot if its a kernel update...

I find ubuntu easy to use and when I bought my new computer, it came without an o/s because I did not want to spend 80 dollars on windows, after all I have two computers using ubuntu... and 1 windows license of which I am using 0 of that license...

so needless to say my other computer is basically my home irc server and web server... it does well sitting there doing nothing other then IRC.

[slipstream]

   I haven't used a Mac since my highschool days. I thought they were pretty good computers, but I have always been a PC guy.  I don't think I'll ever adopt Mac either, as I have begun to be very fond of the Linux OS (Ubuntu) which I do use from time to time. I have considered Mac but like others here have pointed out the lack of software is a breaking point.
      I just read that Microsoft will support XP till 2014.  Given that I do not believe it is necessary to update to Vista or Windows 7 for a long while. 

[Michael Vandeven]

      I just read that Microsoft will support XP till 2014.  Given that I do not believe it is necessary to update to Vista or Windows 7 for a long while. 

holy shit that's good news.  now if we can just get MS to continue SHIPPING xp which clearly they don't want to do.

here we have XP, the first operating system we can look at and say to ourselves, "they finally got it right."  and what does MS choose to do?  they decide to push it off the shelves in favor of an unnecessary, hastily constructed, unstable, incompatible piece of cattle excrement known as vista.  i DO NOT understand this.  wait a minute... i DO understand this.  they're charging a lot of money for each Vista license.  'nuff said. 

i wish microsoft would begin focusing on applications as their source of revenue rather than operating systems.  they should have kept xp as the standard and built upon its already proven and stable architecture.  maybe they could have even charged users for additional features as they come online.  but this whole gimmick of rebuilding things from the ground up every few years when there's no demonstrable demand or need for it?  bullocks, i say.

[EvB]

i wish microsoft would begin focusing on applications as their source of revenue rather than operating systems.  they should have kept xp as the standard and built upon its already proven and stable architecture.  maybe they could have even charged users for additional features as they come online.  but this whole gimmick of rebuilding things from the ground up every few years when there's no demonstrable demand or need for it?  bullocks, i say.

Can SOMEBODY say AMEN!!!???
I have 3 or 4 XP licenses that I'm holding on to for dear life.

[Michael Vandeven]

perhaps the reactOS project will one day become mature enough that this all becomes irrelevant.

[Σεληνόλυκος]

perhaps the reactOS project will one day become mature enough that this all becomes irrelevant.

More likely Linux will become popular enough that Windows becomes only another player in the game.

The problem with ReactOS (and Wine, which is the basis of an enormous portion of its code) is that technologies like DirectX are quite complex and MS can change things quite easily to break Wine intentionally if it chooses to do so. Eventually, free software will become dominant, or equal to proprietary software. It may be a decade or two away, but it's bound to happen. Linux is a mature enough product and once its setup on a computer anyone can use it for the basic e-mail, web, chat tasks, and it can still do so much more for people wanting more. The problem is getting it out there.

Once people realize they can save ~$80 using a product that will do everything they'd use in Windows they'll start picking it. FreeBSD, Linux, whatever. The front-ends will all be more or less the same. Proprietary software is destined to fail.

[Michael Vandeven]

The problem with ReactOS (and Wine, which is the basis of an enormous portion of its code) is that technologies like DirectX are quite complex and MS can change things quite easily to break Wine intentionally if it chooses to do so.

could you elaborate on how that would play out technically?

Eventually, free software will become dominant, or equal to proprietary software. It may be a decade or two away, but it's bound to happen.

i'd be VERY surprised if that took even one day longer than a single decade.

[Σεληνόλυκος]

could you elaborate on how that would play out technically?

Not really, as I don't entirely follow what you mean. I'm not a programmer, I just know that it's taken the people at Wine a long time to reach version 1.0. It can wave its flag now that it supports Photoshop CS2 out-of-the-box, but that's a year's old program. It's uncertain how long it will take for CS3 to be supported out-of-the-box, and I'm only using Photoshop as an example.

Programs like GIMP will have to eventually become entirely level with PS.

ReactOS is in its infancy afaik, audio support isn't out there yet. It's totally developer-oriented atm.

[Max]

well microsoft is still stopping shipment and sales of xp within the next week...