# The Holy war. Mac vs Windows :p



## Rhys (Jul 6, 2008)

I'm running a Macbook. I also run a Compaq V2570NR laptop with XP and an elderly Dell with XP.

I've only had the Macbook for 3 months but my impressions so far....

All the software for Mac works flawlessly and doesn't crash the Mac. The only problem so far was the driver for an HP scanner/printer/copier which just plain did not work. I can print but not scan. My Epson (the one I want to dispose of) works flawlessly as a copier with my Mac. This is HP's crappy programming that's at fault.

I haven't got multiple Macs so I can't see whether I get the same results from a variety of Mac machines that I get from a variety of WIndows XP machines where one program will work on one system but not on any of the others - even systems supposedly identical.

My mac has not slowed down. My WIndows machines are forever slowing down. In fact I removed all the stuff from the one that was slowing it and it still does not run as fast as it once did. I blame the Microsoft updates for adding too much overhead and the antivirus software for this. My Mac does not need antivirus software. If software is installed from the web or email it will ask if I wish to run this software before I can. It needs a password for software that tries to install itself into the system.

My Compaq crawls badly when the disk nears 75% full. My Macbook hasn't slowed down yet but the drive is much larger.

My wife's XP machine lost her user account then after that was fixed, locked up totally and refuses to even complete booting. I've seen other equally horrible problems with windows. I'm currently waiting for a 2.5" to USB connector so that I can rescue her data and then reformat/reinstall her laptop.

The controls on a Mac are pretty intuitive and to be quite honest although it takes time to get used to it all, I do prefer my Mac to Windows systems. After using Leopard, XP just seems so 1970's Star Trek clunky.


----------



## pm63 (Jul 6, 2008)

> My mac has not slowed down. My WIndows machines are forever slowing down.



But you've only had your Mac for 3 months. Put it through _years_ of use involving copying/saving files, installing/uninstalling software like you have on your Windows machines and then comment on if it has slowed down.



> My Mac does not need antivirus software.



Uh-oh. My advice is to get some antivirus software for it ASAP. Despite it being true that Mac's are less vulnerable, nothing is foolproof, and viruses do exist for the Mac. Just because it asks you if you want to install something to the system, doesn't mean it "doesn't need antivirus". _All_ computers need it, no matter the platform.

My opinion is that Mac's are indeed nicer, but the huge price you pay for that isn't worth it for me. Maybe one day...

One thing which annoys me about Mac's is that Apple are obsessed with making everything really thin and light. Take the MacBook Air - it doesn't have a damn CD drive! Just to save a few milimeters and grams? They should focus on practicality and usability, instead of cool reflection effects in their OS and light, thin, and trendy hardware.

That sounds like a bit of a rant, but I do think they are nicer despite the emphasis on aesthetics, just too expensive.


----------



## Rhys (Jul 6, 2008)

The bonus of the Air is that it doesn't have a CD drive. We're in the process of changing from DVD to HDDVD/blu-Ray. If it had a DVD drive it would be out of date very soon. The Air is intended to work with TimeMachine for backups. It's a great little laptop. My only issues with the Air are the lack of a user-replaceable battery and the cost of the AIr with a SSHD.


----------



## Mav (Jul 6, 2008)

After running PCs for 15+ years I recently switched to Mac and couldn't be happier.  It just works.   I still run Windows though, through Parallels on my Mac! :mrgreen:


----------



## clarinetJWD (Jul 6, 2008)

Rhys said:


> All the software for Mac works flawlessly and doesn't crash the Mac.


I use a mac quite often in the recording studio, running ProTools HD.  It crashes/freezes/beach-ball-of-dooms all the time.



> My mac has not slowed down. My WIndows machines are forever slowing down. In fact I removed all the stuff from the one that was slowing it and it still does not run as fast as it once did. I blame the Microsoft updates for adding too much overhead and the antivirus software for this. My Mac does not need antivirus software. If software is installed from the web or email it will ask if I wish to run this software before I can. It needs a password for software that tries to install itself into the system.


Windows machines slow down not because of Windows Updates, but because it uses the same old registry system as the very early versions.  This was implemented in the days where hard drive space was very limited, so that many programs could share common files.  This has not been 'fixed' yet, because it would cause absolute program incompatibility problems (100% of previous programs would not work).  Apple changed their system for OSX, and it did break a huge amount of compatable programs and hardware, but no one seems to remember that.  As for antivirus, good luck with all that.  In a recent hacking competition, Mac OSX was compromised in a mater of minutes, Vista SP1 took a couple days, and Linux was by far the safest.



> My Compaq crawls badly when the disk nears 75% full. My Macbook hasn't slowed down yet but the drive is much larger.


Caused by 2 things: 1, the drive is probably very fragmented, meaning it has to search between very distant physical sectors on the disk for what should be subsequent bits.  Vista has an auto defrag utility that works in the background, and according to PCMag works as well, or better than commercial solutions.  I'm sure OSX has something similar.

The second cause of the slowdown is probably related to RAM.  THat model laptop comes with 512MB RAM by default, and while I don't know if it's been upgraded, 512MB needs to be supplimented by virtual RAM, which is a block of hard drive space used to augment RAM (slower, but still faster than reloading all the time).  As the hard drive space becomes limited, so does the virtual ram, and as the drive becomes fragmented, so does the virtual ram.



> My wife's XP machine lost her user account then after that was fixed, locked up totally and refuses to even complete booting. I've seen other equally horrible problems with windows. I'm currently waiting for a 2.5" to USB connector so that I can rescue her data and then reformat/reinstall her laptop.


Sorry to hear that... did you try a startup repair from the XP disc?  As far as data recovery goes, it's much easier than that if you have any external hard drives, or large flash drives.  Take a live Linux CD like Ubuntu or a lightweight package like SystemRescueCD (Both free), and boot from CD...then just drag and drop the files to the external drive.



> The controls on a Mac are pretty intuitive and to be quite honest although it takes time to get used to it all, I do prefer my Mac to Windows systems. After using Leopard, XP just seems so 1970's Star Trek clunky.



 That was a joke right?  No, no right click, you need to use BOTH hands instead.  No, no scroll bar on the touchpad, 2 fingers instead (Granted it's nice once you know it, but if you sat down in front of a mac for the first time, there's no way you'd know it).  

Why should we keep your applications and open folders/programs separate?  Put them all on one cluttered bar.  Oh, and make the bar pop up whenever you go for the scroll arrows at the bottom of the window, but miss slightly because of the "precision mouse" that's both uncomfortable, and overdesigned for maximum user-unfriendliness at the same time.  I x-ed out of an application, so it must be closed, right?  Nope!  Gotta open it back up and quit from the menu, or it continues to sit in memory.  

"Video card upgrade for Mac Pro carries $100 premium over actual card price" Need I say more?  Yes?  OK!  What does that video card give you?  Well you can play...no...Oh, but you can...no, that's CPU heavy not GPU...ummm... Diablo II is out on the Mac!

The laptops have been constantly plagued with heat issues, many to the point of componenets failing, but Apple ignores the problem as long as possible.  My friend has a G4 laptop, which many have had the problem of the video chip coming de-soldered, but Apple has not, and will not admit it is a problem and offered to fix it for him...for $1400.

And don't get me started on how all the advanced options seem to be hidden away in order to make the interface appear more simple.

This is a good read, basically it calls out every OS on their strengths and weaknesses from a very computer savvy point of reference.  http://lucumr.pocoo.org/cogitations/2008/04/03/use-os-x-you-git/

Does every thread related to technology really have to end up being an advertisement for Apple by its fanboys?


----------



## Corry (Jul 6, 2008)

Hey, I have an idea . . . how about we DON'T do these pathetic "mac vs pc", "nikon vs canon", "film vs. digital", etc, etc, etc, threads.  

They get totally ridiculous, when mostly all it boils down to is personal preference.  You aren't going to sway someone to your side.


----------



## clarinetJWD (Jul 6, 2008)

Corry said:


> Hey, I have an idea . . . how about we DON'T do these pathetic "mac vs pc", "nikon vs canon", "film vs. digital", etc, etc, etc, threads.
> 
> They get totally ridiculous, when mostly all it boils down to is personal preference.  You aren't going to sway someone to your side.



I agree...I was just getting tired of seeing Apple! Apple! Apple! all over the place.


----------



## Hertz van Rental (Jul 6, 2008)

I get tired of PC users always knocking Mac even though quite often they have never used one. I also get sick of people banging on about how wonderful their Canon camera is, or their Nikon.
I don't start threads about it, though.
What say we use what we've bought instead of trying to publicly convince everyone we haven't made a bad consumer choice? 


PS Macs, like PCs, have to be subjected to housekeeping. If you don't do the basics to repair corrupt files and get rid of other gremlins then of course your computer won't function properly.


----------



## Mav (Jul 6, 2008)

clarinetJWD said:


> Does every thread related to technology really have to end up being an advertisement for Apple by its fanboys?


As if there are no PC fanboys? 

All of these threads are retarded and are of absolutely ZERO use to anybody.  BTW I can right click just fine on the SINGLE button Mighty Mouse!  It only "looks like" a single button mouse! :lmao:


----------



## Renair (Jul 6, 2008)

I'm just waiting to see what Windows 7 looks like.  They started it a year ago and even Gates said Vista was a complete disaster on a You Tube interview about Windows 7.  I think they got the message from Apple about all the different versions of Vista and just doing 1 version of Windows 7.  

Check out you tube for some of the updates.


----------



## The Dread Pirate Robins (Jul 6, 2008)

My four plus year old Mac mini running OS X 10.3.9 is much more stable than my not yet three year old PC at work running XP.

I don't get into this much.  I have a preference for Macs, but I use PC's all the time.

This is kind of like Ford vs. Chevy, isn't it?


----------



## hovis (Jul 6, 2008)

Corry said:


> Hey, I have an idea . . . how about we DON'T do these pathetic "mac vs pc", "nikon vs canon", "film vs. digital", etc, etc, etc, threads.
> 
> They get totally ridiculous, when mostly all it boils down to is personal preference.  You aren't going to sway someone to your side.


Could not agree more.


----------



## Senor Hound (Jul 6, 2008)

Linux > all IMO

Its stable, cheap and easy to use (and if you don't think its easy, just get another GUI that is!)

The only issue I ever have with Linux comes from incompatibility issues. But there are ways around this.

If my computer would let me, I would partition my HD and run both Linux and Vista. But my computer is horribly slow, so I only run XP. But on my new computer... ohhh baby. 

My question is even though all these threads are just argument sessions, why Linux never gets mentioned. Its always Mac vs. MS, but there is another option!


----------



## Village Idiot (Jul 6, 2008)

My MBP is great. I only had to reboot it once today when it froze while trying to access facebook.


----------



## Corry (Jul 6, 2008)

Senor Hound said:


> Linux > all IMO
> 
> Its stable, cheap and easy to use (and if you don't think its easy, just get another GUI that is!)
> 
> ...



Isn't Linux an operating system?  

The thread is about actual computers, not thier OS's.  So, that would be why it isn't an option.


----------



## Village Idiot (Jul 6, 2008)

Corry said:


> Hey, I have an idea . . . how about we DON'T do these pathetic "mac vs pc", "nikon vs canon", "film vs. digital", etc, etc, etc, threads.
> 
> They get totally ridiculous, when mostly all it boils down to is personal preference. You aren't going to sway someone to your side.


 
You would think that the OP, being around for just a little while, would understand this. Apparently they like starting arguements.


----------



## Rhys (Jul 6, 2008)

The problem I have with Linux is that there's not much in the way of software available and installing "tarballs" is nightmarish.


----------



## clarinetJWD (Jul 6, 2008)

Senor Hound said:


> Linux > all IMO
> 
> Its stable, cheap and easy to use (and if you don't think its easy, just get another GUI that is!)
> 
> ...



Linux does have it's good points, but it also has some serious drawbacks on the usability front.  If you need to install something, and there's not package for it, you better have some patience.  On this laptop (Dual boot Ubuntu 8.04 and Vista), it took me nearly 2 hours to get the wireless card up and running, and I (and a friend who knows Linux pretty damn well) spent hours trying to install the jgrasp, and never did get it working... same goes for connecting to the free wifi at Johns Hopkins...

It's very stable, and very fast...until you need it to do something new.  That being said, it is my primary OS for the laptop, because all I use it for is internet, 95% of the time, and it is the best for that.


----------



## Hawaii Five-O (Jul 6, 2008)

Mac and PC are both good machines. PCs just have a lot more hardware configurations so you can't really accurately say mac is better than  PC.


----------



## Rhys (Jul 6, 2008)

C677T said:


> Mac and PC are both good machines. PCs just have a lot more hardware configurations so you can't really accurately say mac is better than  PC.



My experience is that the Mac is actually better than the PC. Conversion was hard at first but now I can do everything with the Mac that I could with the PC but without the irritations.


----------



## Senor Hound (Jul 6, 2008)

Corry said:


> Isn't Linux an operating system?
> 
> The thread is about actual computers, not thier OS's.  So, that would be why it isn't an option.



I thought since the original post said "Mac vs. Windows" that it was about software.  Sorry. 

And to the people that replied to me:  IMO Linux's downfalls come from it not being based around one company, and being open source.  But that's also what makes it great, you know?  So the dual boot is really the way to go.  I've never had incompatibility issues.  As a matter of fact, my wireless card worked without ANY sort of driver (well, the driver was already installed).  Another downfall is that there are so many versions you don't know what to get (KDE, gnome, Xfce).  Its very confusing (I know I don't know the differences between the three versions I mentioned), but its options are what makes it great.  Plus, it was invented by a Finn, so its automatically better than anything else. 

I put xubuntu on my laptop cause it takes the least amount of memory, and I only have 256 meg.  It really didn't have ANY features whatsoever, but (duh) that's kind of its whole point.  I'd love to run a faster computer where I could run a linux version with some more bells and whistles.  Put OpenOffice, GIMP, and other fun stuff on there, and I'd be in business!!!

I think we should all be grateful there's an option.  So let's all hold hands, gather around the campfire, and sing, "Koombayah. "


----------



## Corry (Jul 7, 2008)

Oh, I guess it is.  I had it in my head that it said "mac vs pc"


----------



## Senor Hound (Jul 7, 2008)

Corry said:


> Oh, I guess it is.  I had it in my head that it said "mac vs pc"



[sarcasm]

How dare you!  With your empty schedule, I'm sure all you have time to do is read this one thread over and over!

[/sarcasm]

It's all good.  I just get confused at the "a vs. b" arguments, cause in almost all of them, there is a "c."  Whether it be Chrysler with cars, Linux with computers, Sony with cameras (along with MANY others), etc., there's always an option left out.  I think its called a false dilemma when people do this, but I could easily be wrong.


----------



## monkeykoder (Jul 7, 2008)

I love Linux because I get to play around until things work just the way I want them to.  Also I can make it into a standalone web server for free without much effort (unless I really want it secure then there is a little bit of work to it (same as in windows)).  I think it is more of a to each the one that does what he wants it to do kind of thing.  I run windows when I want certain software to run that is a pain to get working in Linux and I run Linux when I want to have something I set up to work exactly how I wanted.


----------



## lostprophet (Jul 7, 2008)

[video=youtube;0-22EpQOm8c]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-22EpQOm8c"]*CLICK*[/video]


----------



## Village Idiot (Jul 7, 2008)

Broccoli vs. Cheese.


----------



## lockwood81 (Jul 7, 2008)

Sheesh...another one of these...


----------



## monkeykoder (Jul 7, 2008)

I have exactly one reason I don't use a Mac...  No one has ever given me one for free...  Free PCs are plentiful free macs not so much.


----------



## Rhys (Jul 7, 2008)

monkeykoder said:


> I have exactly one reason I don't use a Mac...  No one has ever given me one for free...  Free PCs are plentiful free macs not so much.



I went Mac. I'm waiting to see what the first problem will be. For the moment there seems to be no problem whatsoever. I tried Linux and while it works very well as a file server I'm not so keen on it as a print server nor as an internet gateway. It is, however, a decent webserver if you have the chance to have your own IP address.

Windows I've had and loathed for years. I started with Windows 1 when it first came out and have used all versions except CE, Vista and 2000. NT4 was the best they made but having to redo the patches was annoying. 95/98/ME were surely some kind of sick joke - nobody could seriously produce an operating system as awful as those! Windows 3.1 was better than they were. XP was reasonably decent but suffered from flaws introduced when they decided to make everything backward compatible. I almost went Mac when I built my first XP box. I didn't and I regretted it very quickly but it was too late then. OSX didn't run on intel. I tried Linux but while it had the look and feel of Windows, it just didn't do anything for me. It's an OS designed for experimentation rather than anything else. It's also pretty good as a server. It's not a desktop system though.

As I said, I'm running Mac and Windows side-by-side at the moment. I find I use my Mac far more than Windows and am so pleased with my Mac that I might get a Mac desktop next year.


----------



## monkeykoder (Jul 7, 2008)

Ubuntu is a fairly decent desktop as far as I'm concerned Debian does have its faults though.


----------



## Rhys (Jul 7, 2008)

monkeykoder said:


> Ubuntu is a fairly decent desktop as far as I'm concerned Debian does have its faults though.



It falls flat on its backside as regards practicality though... I cannot use my Canon software on it. I cannot just go and buy software from Staples for it. I recall trying to make it work as a dial-up once and it was an awfully fiddly experience that had to be repeated every time.


----------



## monkeykoder (Jul 7, 2008)

Yeah that is where scripting comes in for Linux which I'm guessing the average person isn't going to go.  I've never needed camera specific software but I'm pretty sure it would run just fine through Wine.  I've also never had to BUY software for a Linux computer I can always find something free that happens to do EXACTLY what I wanted.


----------



## clarinetJWD (Jul 7, 2008)

monkeykoder said:


> Yeah that is where scripting comes in for Linux which I'm guessing the average person isn't going to go.  I've never needed camera specific software but I'm pretty sure it would run just fine through Wine.  I've also never had to BUY software for a Linux computer I can always find something free that happens to do EXACTLY what I wanted.



I actually do a ****-ton of scripting using AutoHotKey for windows, though I haven't yet delved into it on Linux (nor have I needed to yet)


----------



## monkeykoder (Jul 7, 2008)

Scripting is where Linux shines Linux is the operating system for geeks that want to do scripting/programming.  The command line is where Linux really exceeds all other operating systems.  If you're not a fan of command line and want to buy commercial software by all means never use Linux but if you're looking for something 100% customizable with excellent command line interface and a few different guis that are on par with Windows and of course free Linux is probably the way to go.


----------



## Rhys (Jul 7, 2008)

I'm not sure where Linux came in but...

Linux - great for experimenters. Not bad as a file-server for the average Joe. Imitates a desktop environment quite well but once you want to do more than web browsing or word processing, it gets a bit hard for the average Joe to handle.

Windows - works pretty well but has some horrendous flaws and exploitations galore. Quite nifty for the average Joe. Plenty software available although much is of dubious quality.

Mac - works very well. Less flaws than Windows (haven't found any yet aside from incompatibility issues with hard drives formatted for NTFS - can read but not write). Hard to convert to and expensive for Windows users.

I have experience of all 3 systems. Vista has fallen down where Linux falls down - too many slightly different versions. All I can say about Vista is that my sister-in-law has it on one of her two work laptops. She never uses that laptop because Vista just doesn't work - even with the updates and work won't retro-fit it with XP for her so it sits in a drawer most of the time.

At the moment I am a happy Apple advocate.


----------



## monkeykoder (Jul 7, 2008)

What is it that is difficult beyond dial-up?  + Linux =#1 web-server.


----------



## Corry (Jul 7, 2008)

I'm still surprised at how many people say that Vista just doesn't work.  I've been using it for over a year, and I haven't had a single problem yet.


----------



## Senor Hound (Jul 7, 2008)

Corry said:


> I'm still surprised at how many people say that Vista just doesn't work.  I've been using it for over a year, and I haven't had a single problem yet.



I think much of it is expectations.  I have XP, and it doesn't hardly freeze up at all other than once in a while.  Mostly its just slow.

I had a Mac with OS 9.  Granted its not the new X platform, but it still had issues.  If you try to open up 20 things at the same time like I do, you're gonna run into memory problems in Vista, OS X, and Linux.  Most of these issues people have could probably be more easily solved with hardware upgrades than anything else.  But yet, people go and get a whole new computer.  Oh well...

Truthfully, I feel the whole debate is totally overplayed.  It REALLY doesn't matter which one you get, as long as you can do what you want with it.  People throw around a lot of "facts" to help determine which one is better, but in the end there's some good parts and bad parts to all three.  And despite what some may say, if you're familiar with one system, you're probably going to like it more.  For example, I think Macs are cool looking, and my artistic side likes them, but I can't stand how when you "X" out of a program, it doesn't close.  I also can't stand how when you maximize a window, it doesn't automatically take up the whole screen.  In XP, I hate how everything runs as slow as molasses, and I have a few virus/spyware threat on my computer every time I run a scan.  With Linux, it was hard to find good information on it.  There are so many versions that making books for the GUIs is more difficult.


----------



## clarinetJWD (Jul 8, 2008)

Senor Hound said:


> I think much of it is expectations.  I have XP, and it doesn't hardly freeze up at all other than once in a while.  Mostly its just slow.



I'll agree and disagree...Microsoft dug its own grave, releasing too much information too early, and letting a lot of features slip to future releases.  They promised an OS that would descend from the heavens, giving milk and honey to all, but gave us an incremental upgrade.  It is, however, just that.  You implied that stability is a problem in Vista, but my work computer (XP, c2d e6850, geforce 8800gt, 4gb ram, yes, you get killer computers when you work for a game company) blue screens way more than I'd like, and does a lot of freezing as well.  

Vista on the other hand is stable for days, if not weeks at a time, and most of my restarts are before playing a very demanding game, if only to clear out the memory.  As for the speed of XP and Vista, I don't notice much difference between the two, maybe 5% slower for vista, but with gadgets and the fast start menu search, I work a lot faster in Vista too.  It had a rocky start with driver releases, and I've been using it since its pre-release candidate betas, but has matured into a very good OS.


----------



## Andrea K (Jul 8, 2008)

coke or pepsi?


----------



## lostprophet (Jul 8, 2008)

Andrea K said:


> coke or pepsi?



Pepsi, with ice :thumbup:


----------



## Corry (Jul 8, 2008)

lostprophet said:


> Pepsi, with ice :thumbup:



Ew! Disgusting and flat!  

Coca-cola all the way!


----------



## Village Idiot (Jul 8, 2008)

clarinetJWD said:


> giving milk and honey to all


 
I'll settle for coffee creamer and sugar water


----------



## Village Idiot (Jul 8, 2008)

Corry said:


> Ew! Disgusting and flat!
> 
> Coca-cola all the way!


 
No way. Coke is like drinking syrup; it's too thick and sugary. 

Unsweet tea > all

I less than three unsweet tea.


----------



## clarinetJWD (Jul 8, 2008)

Village Idiot said:


> No way. Coke is like drinking syrup; it's too thick and sugary.
> 
> *Unsweet tea > all*
> 
> I less than three unsweet tea.



Q.F.E and Q.E.D.


----------



## Corry (Jul 8, 2008)

That wasn't an option.   It was coke v. pepsi.  

If it were something other than coke v. pepsi, I probably wouldn't have picked either one, either.


----------



## BoblyBill (Jul 8, 2008)

I still use an Amiga to develope my pictures...


----------



## Village Idiot (Jul 8, 2008)

BoblyBill said:


> I still use an Amiga to develope my pictures...


 
With the monitor that displays 16 shades of green?


----------



## Village Idiot (Jul 8, 2008)

Corry said:


> That wasn't an option.  It was coke v. pepsi.
> 
> If it were something other than coke v. pepsi, I probably wouldn't have picked either one, either.


 
Hangover vs. Sleeping

I don't less than three hangover.


----------



## Corry (Jul 8, 2008)

What's this less than three thing you keep saying?


----------



## Corry (Jul 8, 2008)

Nevermind, as soon as I posted, I got it.  <3

Nerd in the extreme.


----------



## Rhys (Jul 8, 2008)

BoblyBill said:


> I still use an Amiga to develope my pictures...



This is an interesting article....
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/10/06/linux_vs_windows_viruses/


----------



## clarinetJWD (Jul 8, 2008)

Rhys said:


> This is an interesting article....
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/10/06/linux_vs_windows_viruses/



"Published Monday 6th October 2003 09:55 GMT"

Good to see we're using current articles to proclaim Apple's godliness now.  Service pack 1 hadn't been out for too long, and 2 (the one focused on security) hadn't even been brought up. 

Must I remention the hacking contest in which Mac OSX fell a full competition day before Vista SP1?


----------

