PC vs Mac

No wonder so many people get so frustrated when buying computers! Forgive me, but all these claims and counter claims are simply offbase. Macs *have* changed since the old days. They now run on *exactly* the same hardware as windows machines. They just slap the apple logo on it and charge a little more, and they get away with it because they've got a good brand image. And the software is just a flavor of linux. That doesn't mean they're bad, by the way: all I'm saying is the claims of supporters are often, well, misguided.

Please note: it is the same hardware. So the price *should* be identical. Besides, the cost of having a machine, the TCO, has very little to do with the price of the machine. It's a truism that software for the mac will cost more, and there are fewer open source downloads out there.

But the hard and bitter truth is that the real cost of owning a machine is the user, in other words, the service and support. There are three different teenagers on your block who can troubleshoot a windows machine for every one who can troubleshoot a mac. That's why the mac people *must* have a wide network of support services, apple-care, and all that. And that network is one reason macs are more expensive: it costs money to feed that network!

On the other hand, I know lots of pros who have switched to macs in the last couple years. But they're using a nearly bare metal install to run multiple virtual machines. True, if you look under their desks, there's an apple. But if you look at their screens, it's mostly linux and windows. But all that's an oddity of licensing policies, and isn't relevant to the point at hand.

So, which should you buy, for home use? I have no idea. But you wouldn't buy a truck based on a flashy ad campaign, and you should be just as skeptical of anecdotal claims and brand image advertising about computers...

Sorry I can't be more help,

Thanks,

Bill

Rex, I'm similar to Brent in that I like to build my own PCs. I think my last one cost me around $1000, and I ended up with a box that would probably retail for about 4 times that price. I have virtually no Mac experience, but if you're not really into tinkering with your computer, I suspect you'll be happier with the Mac. The higher up-front costs may pay off in reduced frustration, as they have in Stu's case.

Don Baer said:

Be $ there was a GUI interface I was using both 8600 and 8080 (intel) based hardware. The first real OS was CPM and the first office suite of programs I was aware of was word star data star and mail merge. And visa calc ran on CPM
Now those were the good old days.

Click to expand...

I started on a Xerox CP/M machine my folks bought in the late '70s/early '80s. The CP/M operating system didn't have GUI (graphical user interface). It used a CLI (command line interface, similar to DOS). The GUI concept came out of Xerox's Palo Alto Research Center (PARC), and Xerox was selling their 8010 Star Information System computers (with a GUI) in 1981. Apple expanded on (or stole, in some peoples' opinions) the idea a couple years later with the Lisa computer, then the Macintosh a year or two after that. Microsoft didn't have anything with a real GUI until Windows was released in 1985, and by then, there were several others doing it too. It's been a gradual evolution with a fair amount of cross-breeding between companies in the process.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphical_user_interface

Thanks for the input. I don't understand much of the lingo going on with the workings of the computor. Ijust try to push the right buttons to go where I want it to go. Like I stated eariler LOML will be using it for e-mail and scrapbooking. Someone had asked if we wanted to learn a new system. We seem to do that everyday when we get . Short memory.

Paul Gallian said:

If it was identical it Would have an Apple logo!

Do a side by side price comparison and it will be very even in $$$$.
You can not buy a new cheap Mac but you can buy a real cheap machine running Microsoft windows -- and that is what you get a real cheap machine.

Click to expand...

Let's do some comparisons:

Macbook Pro 15" 2.53 Core i5
4GB Memory
500GB HDD
GeForce GT 330M graphics
$1999

Dell Inspiron 15" 2.53 Core i5
6GB Memory
640GB HDD
ATI Radeon Mobility 550v (a shade below the GeForce)
$899.99 (Reference link)



Apple 21.5" iMac - 1920x1080
3.2GHz Core i3 processor
4GB memory (2x1333 DDR3)
1TB hard drive
ATI Radeon HD 5670 (512MB)

Price - $1499

HP 5680t
3.2GHz Core i5 processor
6GB memory (3x1333 DDR3)
1TB hard drive
ATI Radeon HD 5450 (1GB)
21.5" monitor 1920x1080

Price - $969.98 (built on HP's website)

Not quite 2x, but $500 is nothing to sneeze at.

Let's go bad boy, though. The Mac Pro. For this example, I'll be building my own as a counterpoint. My goal is to beat it for half the price.

Quad-Core Mac Pro
2.8GHz Xeon Nehelam (Passmark CPU mark - 4915)
3GB (3x1GB) 1066
1TB HDD
ATI Radeon 5770/1GB DDR5
$2499

Core i7-870 Lynnfield 2.93GHz (Passmark CPU mark - 5981 (higher is better))
Biostar TPower mobo
G.SKILL 6GB (3x2GB) 1600 RAM
Samsung 2TB internal drive And for good measure, let's run the OS on a SSD for better performance. This should work nicely.

Now the video card. The Mac Pro's card benches at 1588, so we need a card that's again higher to beat it. Or, we could simply match it. It runs for $153 on Newegg. Let's stick with that for now and see where our budget is at.

CPU - $280
Mobo - $175
RAM - $120
HDDs - $145+$110
GFx - $153

We're under a grand, but we still need a case, an OS and cables and cooling. For under $250? Let's see.

OS - We'll go with Win 7 Premium. $100 You could use the upgrade version for $20 cheaper (and still install on a new computer), but we'll keep it simple.

Case - I've always been partial to the Antec 600. At $80, it's a steal. Comes with fans.

Power supply - This one comes highly rated. $110

Unfortunately, I've missed the mark on getting it for half price. No matter, let's keep going.

You know, I forgot all about an optical drive. Since we're over the $1250 budget, let's grab a Blu ray reader since we've got ourselves a nice system. This one looks nice. $50


We still need cables.

SATA cables - Let's get four in case we need a spare. I like Monoprice at $1.48/per. $6 total plus shipping.

Let's budget $35 for a better heatsink for the CPU, since we're going to be doing some serious media work. It's personal preference.

It's not the best prices I could find for most of this stuff, but it was the quickest. A little bit of effort should get you some lower prices, and I didn't figure anything like rebates, but they should be enough to cover any shipping charges. Have I missed anything?

Take out the SSD and I've built you a better system for half the price. Even with, I've given it to you for over a grand cheaper. But that's not what Apple is about. Apple is about style, and convenience. I've been there, done that when it comes to troubleshooting computers. I can understand where some find it easier to pay a premium for the product and to get less hassles from it. I really do get that. And if that's you, by all means go for it.

I do like the sex appeal of Macs and OSX. If it were apples to apples, I'd probably buy one, especially now since Boot Camp and Parallels make it so much easier to support the vast majority of the world who do use Windows. But the price doesn't make it comparable. At least not to me. And the inability to user troubleshoot hardware also turns me off.

There's a lot of stuff I do like Apple. I love my iPhone, except when they screw up new firmware. Love my iPods I had. Going to order an Apple TV soon. I just can't bring myself to spend that much coin at once for something I know I can do at least as well for cheaper.

EDIT - and for people who just need to surf the web and check mail and etc, Linux has come a very long way in the usability department. Ubuntu and the various flavors give you a near-Win/OSX environment at zero of the cost.

Chris Hatfield said:

EDIT - and for people who just need to surf the web and check mail and etc, Linux has come a very long way in the usability department. Ubuntu and the various flavors give you a near-Win/OSX environment at zero of the cost.

Click to expand...

I run Ubuntu on a little low powered box for running my weather site and the only time it reboots is when the power goes out... Ubuntu is just very stable.

There has to be a reason why about 96% of all computers in use in the world are PCs and the rest Macs and some other odd balls. I use mostly Dells since buying new became cheaper than assembling yer own parts.

Chris Hatfield said:

If you haven't tried Win7, it's such a pleasure.

Click to expand...

Clearly you've never tried to integrate Windows 7 into an established domain loaded with Windows XP clients and with Server 2003 running on the domain controller.

My colleague has spend weeks on it. I think the eye of newt and toe of frog may be making an appearance next... (that's just one of our domains. On the other domain it works... black magic I say)

Now, on a standalone laptop, you clearly don't have any of that to worry about. Hence my earlier questions.


At our house I have a 24" iMac which has become our defacto movie-watching location, since it is a far nicer screen than that on our 15 year old 20" CRT TV. We just pull up the love seat and enjoy. And yes, it has a remote control as well.

...art

ps: Bill, I think your teenagers-on-the-block ratio might have actually been a bit generous. I think it'd be more like 5 windows Teens for every 1 Mac teen. But in truth, I have no idea. There are TONS of macs that I see on campus here in the hands of students.

Art Mulder said:

Clearly you've never tried to integrate Windows 7 into an established domain loaded with Windows XP clients and with Server 2003 running on the domain controller.

My colleague has spend weeks on it. I think the eye of newt and toe of frog may be making an appearance next... (that's just one of our domains. On the other domain it works... black magic I say)

Now, on a standalone laptop, you clearly don't have any of that to worry about. Hence my earlier questions.


At our house I have a 24" iMac which has become our defacto movie-watching location, since it is a far nicer screen than that on our 15 year old 20" CRT TV. We just pull up the love seat and enjoy. And yes, it has a remote control as well.

...art

ps: Bill, I think your teenagers-on-the-block ratio might have actually been a bit generous. I think it'd be more like 5 windows Teens for every 1 Mac teen. But in truth, I have no idea. There are TONS of macs that I see on campus here in the hands of students.

Click to expand...

No, I went into another field. But on an end-user standpoint (which the OP is), my statement stands. The vast majority of the gripes people had in Vista have been addressed (and rightfully so, 7 is really Vista.5). For many people, Win 7 'just works.'

Vaughn McMillan said:

Rex, I'm similar to Brent in that I like to build my own PCs. I think my last one cost me around $1000, and I ended up with a box that would probably retail for about 4 times that price. I have virtually no Mac experience, but if you're not really into tinkering with your computer, I suspect you'll be happier with the Mac. The higher up-front costs may pay off in reduced frustration, as they have in Stu's case.



I started on a Xerox CP/M machine my folks bought in the late '70s/early '80s. The CP/M operating system didn't have GUI (graphical user interface). It used a CLI (command line interface, similar to DOS). The GUI concept came out of Xerox's Palo Alto Research Center (PARC), and Xerox was selling their 8010 Star Information System computers (with a GUI) in 1981. Apple expanded on (or stole, in some peoples' opinions) the idea a couple years later with the Lisa computer, then the Macintosh a year or two after that. Microsoft didn't have anything with a real GUI until Windows was released in 1985, and by then, there were several others doing it too. It's been a gradual evolution with a fair amount of cross-breeding between companies in the process.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphical_user_interface

Click to expand...

Gee I never seen the Xerox running CP/M the only one I saw was called the Rainbow and it was already running the GUI interface. The funny thing is from what I understand is Xerox made a decision to not persue the "desk top" market since they decided the market was to small.

Here's my thoughts, after recently spec'ing and purchasing a new windows 7 computer at work, and limited use on a mac:

I like the windows 7 os a lot as a user, i think it closed the gaps between the two software programs. I don't see you going wrong with either one, but the Mac software certainly has the reputation and history of being more stable in the past. I would look closer at what software you might want to buy to run on your computer and the cost on the two different platforms.

Hardware cost - my latest computer was about $1300 with windows 7, the equivalant mac processor and setup is $1799. I think around 50% extra for a mac will be pretty standard. Smaller market to spread the costs, better service, no real way around that.

Overall, if you're bargain shopping you have to go with a PC. Otherwise, as long as you don't end up wanting some software not available on one or the other, it's hard to go wrong with a mac or an equally well equipped PC. The things I'd be wary of is anything with Vista or a bottom end PC that doesn't have enough memory/processor to run software coming out in the future. I'd probably opt for 4 gb memory on anything.

Don Baer said:

Gee I never seen the Xerox running CP/M the only one I saw was called the Rainbow and it was already running the GUI interface. The funny thing is from what I understand is Xerox made a decision to not persue the "desk top" market since they decided the market was to small.

Click to expand...

The Rainbow was made by Digital Equipment Corporation (ca. 1982), not Xerox, and it came after the Xerox machine my folks had. The Xerox computer my parents had (I don't recall the model) was one of the first commercially available PCs on the market. I think it was available before IBM had their PCs for sale. (My parent bought theirs to use in the office of my dad's materials testing lab.) The Rainbow was a CP/M machine that could also run a couple different versions of DOS, but towards the end of its life DEC ported Windows 1.0 to the Rainbow. (That's probably what was running on the one you saw.) For the most part though, it used the command line interface, not a graphical interface (with icons and a pointing device like a mouse or trackball). The Rainbow was a VT-100 compatible terminal as well as a PC, so it was often sold as a terminal to bigger DEC equipment that doubled as a stand-alone PC.

I believe you're right about Xerox getting out of the desktop computer business because they didn't think there was a big enough market.

I'm typing this on my company laptop, it is a dell Lattitude e6410, has an intel processor and is running Windows XP Pro (though the sticker on the chassis proudly proclaims win7, the tech gurus went with old reliable XP Pro)

My ancient windows box got a virus last spring, and I chose to upgrade with a stock basic 21" iMac iMac 3.0 Ghz C2D with 4 Gig of Ram, which came in for just under $1400 after tax several months ago. I use the work laptop because of the job, but I greatly prefer the Mac interface. I have essentially zero problems with viruses and malware, and in my chosen profession as a photographer, the Mac just fits.

I am perfectly capable of building a PC from scratch, although it would take a bit of research for me to build one which would match my iMac for ease of use. I don't care that I may have paid more than a comparable win7 box, to my mind OSX is far superior. I won't be going back to windows with the possible exception that some piece of software that someone MIGHT publish someday that I cannot live without. At that point, I will go buy the cheapest PC I can find, load up that software and have a one trick pony. HOwever that machine will Never see the internet as that's the only way I will be certain that it doesn't have malware on it.

Said program had better be absolutely fantastic for me go have to have it, probably isn't going to be written any time soon.

your mileage and computer choices may vary of course, but I'll take my iMac and associated hardware any day.

I will say that I built my Win 7 box last February, and it hasn't seen any downtime or errors due to virii. If you're on a genuine Windows build, and don't have Microsoft Security Essentials, get it now.

(Feb Vista, 7 as soon as it hit Gold in MSDN)

Personally speaking i think the age of the desktop is coming to an end. Who in the future wants to be tethered to a desk. Mobile computing is the way to go. Of course if you running serious programs well you stuck. But for basic stuff, go mobile.

Amazing how a bunch of techies can take a subject like this and run away with it.

I like the mobile platforms because they will open up the whole computing market again. Choice of operating systems, Choice of hardware and many new apps giving the whole internet a new breath of fresh air and use.

The cycle has completed itself in my mind. We get back to the fact that if you want to be able to do great things at high speed and have control over your bugs, you need control over the hardware, embedd the software and have your own operating system.

Hooray to the end of the lazy high level coders. Your time has come to an end. Bring on solid state. Bring on efficient code. Bring on fast devices.

Goodbye hard drives. you have slowed us down long enough. Join your brothers the compact cassette tape.

Oh boy remember loading backup programs with an old compact cassette tape recorder.

Rob Keeble said:

Personally speaking i think the age of the desktop is coming to an end. Who in the future wants to be tethered to a desk. Mobile computing is the way to go. Of course if you running serious programs well you stuck. But for basic stuff, go mobile.
Goodbye hard drives. you have slowed us down long enough. Join your brothers the compact cassette tape.

Oh boy remember loading backup programs with an old compact cassette tape recorder.

Click to expand...

Rob,
my Mac will be the cornerstone of the Studio (which is going through a major push right now) and is essentially my Lightroom (though I don't have that program as yet, it is on my list...)

I will also have an iPad eventually as a mobile portfolio showroom/connectivity device, though I Might go with a refurb'd Mac portable as well, more for the on site photo storage etc... I'll continue to do post processsing at the desktop, as that's where I've got the software now.
I finally went with the iPod Touch, and I'm amazed at just how much I use it while I'm at home. I can check email, social network sites etc... and I find I'm getting more done now that I'm not stuck staring at the laptop or the desktop all night after work. I don't use it all that much during the day, since I'm on my work laptop and generally don't take much time away from that online during the day (this being lunch hour, I stopped in for a visit). I DO use it heavily as a music/audio book source as I mentioned in stu's quest for what to do while laid up thread. I look forward to getting an iPhone once they port it over to Verizon next year. Not looking forward to the higher cell bill, but it will also be a major studio expense so I'll cover it that way. Can't have a studio without a phone and internet these days.


OH and I distinctly recall loading programs from cassette onto the 8k Commodore Pet with the chiclet keyboard in high school, and then I couldn't believe it when my father bought a 10 Megabyte Hard drive for his PC at the house. Man that was a Huge drive, how could he ever fill it up??

Folks,

One more comment on costs. I admit that Macs cost more.
But for those folks who would like a mac, and are struggling with the price, consider the used market.

Just last night I was browsing Kijiji (like Craigslist) in my area and found a good handful of recent-vintange iMac systems on the market. All of them about 6-18 months old, and still very current and usable. It probably helps that I live in a University town.

What's more, at least two of the units had the 3-year extended "applecare" warranty on them, which is reportedly transferable once, so you could buy an 18month old Mac and still have a full 18 months of bumper-to-bumper warranty coverage on it.

Just providing a few more options.

Thanks Art. What about factory refurbs? Do you see any problem with them? I know that they must have had some problem to start with or they wouldn't be in the refurbs list. They could also be just fine now also. We were going to go to my son's this weekend and I was going to check out his Mac and let LOML see what see thought, but our plans got changed.

Rex Bloem said:

Thanks Art. What about factory refurbs? Do you see any problem with them? I know that they must have had some problem to start with or they wouldn't be in the refurbs list. They could also be just fine now also. We were going to go to my son's this weekend and I was going to check out his Mac and let LOML see what see thought, but our plans got changed.

Click to expand...

What kind of the warranty does the refurb have? If it has a full warranty, I can't see why not.

generally Apple puts a 1 year warranty on them, but you can also buy the applecare extended on the refurb units.

I would look hard at the used market, there are several resellers which can save up to 60% on a new Mac, which gets you the Mac OSX environment with less sticker shock. My next machine will be a refurb and/or used one, likely a couple of year old iMac just to have in the living room for general duty browsing.

If it's got an AppleCare or Squaretrade warranty, I wouldn't be opposed.