-
After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.
Mac or Pc from Evo users
- Thread starter facekl
- Start date
-
- Tags
- htc evo 4g
- Status
jtcannonball
Member
I agree, I'm kinda pro Apple but I'm a PC user and I can't afford to buy a MacBook but that doesn't mean I don't realize they are better machines. But I can do whatever I need on my PC. I had a iPhone but sold it to buy a EVO and I love it. I would totally go MAC and probably love it, but at the same time I don't have any problems or hate with PC either.
unwallflower
Well-Known Member
Personally, I say go with a mac... ONLY if you have the extra cash to blow.
It's true. If you have a mac and a PC side by side that are comparable performance-wise, the mac WILL be quite a bit more expensive.
In my opinion, if you have the extra cash, the mac is worth it. I have two - a MacBook Pro and a 27" iMac. I just got the iMac three days ago... the laptop I have had for three years. Last week - when I was FOUR DAYS out of warranty - the processor failed. They told me it would be $1,100 to fix, roughly. No way, right? That's more than half of what the computer cost NEW. Well, even though I was out of warranty, they fixed it for free.
Apple gives fantastic customer service, and that's why I decided to go with them again for my recently purchased desktop.
Really, a lot of it is personal preference. I think macs run smoother and I am more productive on them. My mac runs a windows OS session WITHIN my mac session. Macs run windows just as well as PCs do... it's nice to have the versatility. And no matter what everyone is saying on this topic, my laptop I have had for three years still performs JUST as well as it did right out of the box (minus the processor failure, but that's just a bad apple really). I took care of my PC diligently (I'm not some computer idiot), and while it was a great machine... it just didn't hold up as well over time.
Good luck with your decision!
It's true. If you have a mac and a PC side by side that are comparable performance-wise, the mac WILL be quite a bit more expensive.
In my opinion, if you have the extra cash, the mac is worth it. I have two - a MacBook Pro and a 27" iMac. I just got the iMac three days ago... the laptop I have had for three years. Last week - when I was FOUR DAYS out of warranty - the processor failed. They told me it would be $1,100 to fix, roughly. No way, right? That's more than half of what the computer cost NEW. Well, even though I was out of warranty, they fixed it for free.
Apple gives fantastic customer service, and that's why I decided to go with them again for my recently purchased desktop.
Really, a lot of it is personal preference. I think macs run smoother and I am more productive on them. My mac runs a windows OS session WITHIN my mac session. Macs run windows just as well as PCs do... it's nice to have the versatility. And no matter what everyone is saying on this topic, my laptop I have had for three years still performs JUST as well as it did right out of the box (minus the processor failure, but that's just a bad apple really). I took care of my PC diligently (I'm not some computer idiot), and while it was a great machine... it just didn't hold up as well over time.
Good luck with your decision!
I always laugh at the Mac users that say I use a Mac because its easy. That is literally a regurgitated line of thought from Apples advertising. Things on a PC also "just work" like they do on a Mac. I've never owned an Apple computer mainly due to their price and software (mainly games) compatibility but recently Macs have turned a corner and I have been considering a mac book for my wife. I would say that you should get to know both. In a professional environment you are going to be generally dealing with a PC most likely running windows 7 and you should know the basics.
unwallflower
Well-Known Member
I've been guilty of saying this, but I don't think that people always mean it in the way that you're interpreting it.
When I say that I prefer macs because they are "easier"... I mean that I am more productive on them. They have features - ESPECIALLY Expose - that allow me to work much more efficiently. Expose is a big one. I typically have 15+ windows open at a time, so being able to throw my cursor into the corner and see EVERYTHING I have open in a split second is very convenient for me. PCs don't quite have a feature that compares... and while you can pay for programs that do similar things, they aren't as polished as expose.
But on the other hand, PCs do certain things better and more efficiently than Macs do. That's why I run both operating systems on my computer... best of both worlds!
neodorian
Android Expert
They are both essentially the same. Only difference is that Macs are PCs built by Apple and the only brand of PCs allowed to run Mac OS. They also cost a bit more for the same specs but tend to have higher end build quality. I personally build all of my own computers because it's gotten very easy and you can build a bad-ass computer for under a grand whereas the closest Mac would be twice that. If you know anyone who does custom builds that's the way to go because you get high quality components at average prices.
Also, don't buy a cheap, low-end computer from *anyone* be it Dell or Apple or HP or whatever. Nobody buys the cheapest car on the used car lot and computers are no different.
I put together my last PC 2 years ago for around $900 or so. Quad core, 4GB RAM, nvidia 9800GTX+, dual tuner, wireless keyboard and mouse, and use my HDTV for the monitor. Plays any game I can throw at it. Does photo and video production well enough. Only thing I can see upgrading for at this point is if I start doing video production from home more often. Then I would probably shell out for a new Core i7 and 8GB RAM at least just so encoding and rendering doesn't take all day. Otherwise, I will be good with this PC for another couple of years at least.
Try finding a Mac for $900. Maybe a Mini or a low end refurb Macbook. Just ain't gonna happen. They charge for the name and the little bit of added polish. Unless you're rolling in dough, I'd say get a high end PC for around a grand. At least quad core or i3/i5/i7 etc. for the CPU and at least 4GB RAM. Win7 64-bit. Decent graphics card if you are playing games. Enough storage for your uses.
If you *are* rolling in dough and the look is just as important to you as the specs, get a Mac Pro. That is probably the only Mac I would ever buy just because at the very high end you will pay a lot regardless of brand and the Mac Pro is a really well-built machine. That's gonna run you at least $2500 or so.
PC = Personal Computer. It does not mean "Windows" regardless of what the Apple commercials say. Macs, Sonys, Dells, HPs, custom builds, and the rest are *all* PCs.
PCs can run a variety of OSes. The most common on the consumer desktop are Mac OS, Windows, and Linux. Yes I am being nitpicky but it drives me nuts to hear this false marketing dichotomy taken as fact. All of these are PCs. The only difference is that Apple only allows you to (legally) run its OS on its brand of PCs whereas Windows and Linux and others are typically not restricted to a particular brand of computer. If you can get it to run then it's all good. This is my main reason for preferring Windows to Mac OS. I can run it on whatever brand of hardware I damn well please and I'm not limited to pricey boutique hardware and tiny form factors. I understand that those smaller iMacs and Minis cost more to make in those small cases but it's just not worth that much more money to have it in a fancy case.
Also, don't buy a cheap, low-end computer from *anyone* be it Dell or Apple or HP or whatever. Nobody buys the cheapest car on the used car lot and computers are no different.
I put together my last PC 2 years ago for around $900 or so. Quad core, 4GB RAM, nvidia 9800GTX+, dual tuner, wireless keyboard and mouse, and use my HDTV for the monitor. Plays any game I can throw at it. Does photo and video production well enough. Only thing I can see upgrading for at this point is if I start doing video production from home more often. Then I would probably shell out for a new Core i7 and 8GB RAM at least just so encoding and rendering doesn't take all day. Otherwise, I will be good with this PC for another couple of years at least.
Try finding a Mac for $900. Maybe a Mini or a low end refurb Macbook. Just ain't gonna happen. They charge for the name and the little bit of added polish. Unless you're rolling in dough, I'd say get a high end PC for around a grand. At least quad core or i3/i5/i7 etc. for the CPU and at least 4GB RAM. Win7 64-bit. Decent graphics card if you are playing games. Enough storage for your uses.
If you *are* rolling in dough and the look is just as important to you as the specs, get a Mac Pro. That is probably the only Mac I would ever buy just because at the very high end you will pay a lot regardless of brand and the Mac Pro is a really well-built machine. That's gonna run you at least $2500 or so.
But on the other hand, PCs do certain things better and more efficiently than Macs do. That's why I run both operating systems on my computer... best of both worlds!
PC = Personal Computer. It does not mean "Windows" regardless of what the Apple commercials say. Macs, Sonys, Dells, HPs, custom builds, and the rest are *all* PCs.
PCs can run a variety of OSes. The most common on the consumer desktop are Mac OS, Windows, and Linux. Yes I am being nitpicky but it drives me nuts to hear this false marketing dichotomy taken as fact. All of these are PCs. The only difference is that Apple only allows you to (legally) run its OS on its brand of PCs whereas Windows and Linux and others are typically not restricted to a particular brand of computer. If you can get it to run then it's all good. This is my main reason for preferring Windows to Mac OS. I can run it on whatever brand of hardware I damn well please and I'm not limited to pricey boutique hardware and tiny form factors. I understand that those smaller iMacs and Minis cost more to make in those small cases but it's just not worth that much more money to have it in a fancy case.
I have a Mac that's been running OS X since it was in Beta and is now at 10.4 (the hardware won't go further unless I play games that I don't want to). Ditto on my 2001 iBook, started with 10.0, now at 10.4 (use it around the house as a netbook when I want to).
They've been through a LOT of upgrades.
And yes, Apple pushes out upgrades on a regular basis.
The degradation in Windows performance is due to:
1. Registry degradation over time
2. File system (directory) degradation over time(*)
3. Bloat over time
All of which are user controlled.
Most people think chkdsk doesn't work, with proof by running it multiple times still having problems. Most people also think that re-installing software to fix problems is a good idea. WRONG.
I'm the Director of R&D for a company puts out industrial-use software.
Our machines - Windows, Mac, Linux, other unices - are all under configuration control. We know what goes on them and when and why. All are updated regularly.
One of my testbed PCs is 7 years old, has been running XP since SP2 came out in 2004 - and it runs like a champ, just as good as Day One.
Mac and Linux and *nix have a filesystem advantage over Windows. You rarely run fsck (unix for chkdsk) on your own, yes, you can force it, and yes, it typically runs at boot - and rarely finds anything wrong, but it when it does, it virtually never results in serious loss.
Windows is more primitive by comparison and people don't run chkdsk often enough - as in before and after any installs and on a regular basis - and Windows doesn't particularly help with that, except on hard failure and even then, I've watched people skip it on boot complaining that it takes too long. And contrary to popular belief, you don't defrag a Windows system - that can usually lead to worse performance, in my personal experience (and as explained by a number of disk drive manufacturers - the days of simple HD storage schemes are LONG GONE).
And then, things get confused, the disk starts thrashing (because now the OS is thrashing) and pretty soon you get the famous disk crash.
Did I mention that I've been running two Maxtor 60 GB drives from 2001 on that old Mac? You know - the ones with the super-low reliability record in the Windows world?
It's all about management.
I feel that Windows is harder to use because without understanding and proper training, yes, your PC will degrade. Most people don't know that that's not inevitable. Microsoft has made pretty good operating systems since Win2k - allowing for the false starts and bad initial releases they're known for, so you always wait until service pack reports come in before upgrading the OS. (Win7 by the way, is Vista re-branded, so it was pretty good from day one in our shop.)
I feel that Mac OS X and Linux are easier to use because once you get used to them, they just keep working - the superior unix underpinnings see to that.
Then again, these are just my opinions and I could be wrong.
You're paying more for the build quality than the never-ending boutique meme.
As would the better HPs from their business line.
As I mentioned before, you don't hit the price advantage with quality until you build your own.
And as easy as that seems to you or I, that's really hard for most people to do.
As for everything small being a PC - we Apple ][, Commodore and CP/M users were saying that when the IBM 5150 first came out.
Like the idea that Macs are overpriced, PC=Windows is another meme that will never die.
Oh - BTW - part of the success of the reliability of OS X is that by Apple controlling all of the configurations, there are fewer peripheral brands/types/firmwares to support, so less to go wrong from Apple or third parties.
Apple is a hardware company that makes an OS to show off their hardware. It's always been that way. No use complaining about their OS not being open and available to other platforms - Apple is NOT a software company.
They simply happen to have put together a very good operating system, very good apps and have led the way with many of the things taken for granted with today's PCs. (ducks over use of term PC)
PS - There's always Darwin.
gowcaizer1978
Well-Known Member
PC all the way.
( custom built gaming pc FTW )
( custom built gaming pc FTW )
gowcaizer1978
Well-Known Member
Sorry about the extra post
Going back a little over a few decades ago, it wasn't uncommon to see Macs (Classic, some SE) in the workplace side by side with DOS-type PCs. Then PS/2+OS/2 came out, with its initial troubles, ditto for Windows. Graphical MS Word, Lotus 1-2-3 on a Mac with output to a Laserwriter satisfied a LOT of people's workplace-computer needs - a big percentage.
Then the games came out. And the people wasting time at work with games.
And that's when bosses and purchasing agents started not wanting to buy Macs.
And then the day came when people would say if you wanted to work, get a PC, if you wanted to do artsy things and play games, get a Mac.
And Apple got a spanking.
Later, maybe a decade and a half ago, everyone told me that if you wanted to artsy things better than a Mac, get a PC, and have I seen the cool software for that?
Within the last few years, a lot of people tell me that Windows' machines superior ability to play games with complex inputs and high frame rates prove how superior PCs are - and it's proven by Apple doing nothing to prove itself or even trying to capture the gaming market.
How soon we forget.
PS to gowcaizer1978 - this wasn't a reply to you, our posts were coincidental in time - but what a coincidence.
PPS - I don't do artsy things or play games on computers, except for my DOS-based Infocom games and Hunt For Red October (that was a lot of years ago), unless digital photo work and NLE for video and audio count. And I didn't even start that until 2001 or so.
Then the games came out. And the people wasting time at work with games.
And that's when bosses and purchasing agents started not wanting to buy Macs.
And then the day came when people would say if you wanted to work, get a PC, if you wanted to do artsy things and play games, get a Mac.
And Apple got a spanking.
Later, maybe a decade and a half ago, everyone told me that if you wanted to artsy things better than a Mac, get a PC, and have I seen the cool software for that?
Within the last few years, a lot of people tell me that Windows' machines superior ability to play games with complex inputs and high frame rates prove how superior PCs are - and it's proven by Apple doing nothing to prove itself or even trying to capture the gaming market.
How soon we forget.
PS to gowcaizer1978 - this wasn't a reply to you, our posts were coincidental in time - but what a coincidence.
PPS - I don't do artsy things or play games on computers, except for my DOS-based Infocom games and Hunt For Red October (that was a lot of years ago), unless digital photo work and NLE for video and audio count. And I didn't even start that until 2001 or so.
jtcannonball
Member
Yeah garbage b/c you don't like it. Sound like a windows fanboy to me. And I own 2 windows machines currently b/c college gives us one when we enroll as freshman or a transfer student. And I love my HP with windows 7 so b/c I know that even with constant updates and tweaking to keep my HP working correctly isn't done by most people. That is not garbage its fact. You work with the public and then you can try and argue facts about selling/retail consumer stats and you can say what you want. Until then you have no basis.
neodorian
Android Expert
Nothing to do with being a fanboy. You can repeat all the anecdotal evidence you want but it doesn't change the fact that it is not representative of my experiences. My computers don't "degrade". They keep doing the same things they have always done. After some years new software may come out that takes advantage of new hardware and you may want to upgrade but it's not as if the original computer slowed down or one day your CPU stopped running at 3.6Ghz and only runs at 3.0Ghz now because it's old or something.
The points you make are comparing shitty low end computers to well-built midrange Apple computers. If you get a well built computer from any other company it will run just as well. It just costs less. The thing Apple loves to do in its marketing is compare its machines with the absolute bottom of the barrel low end offerings from other companies. It makes sense from a marketing standpoint but does nothing to actually inform anyone.
I can build a computer with the same CPU, same RAM, same video card, and same hard drive as an iMac or whatever but it will cost much less. The point we are calling BS on is this notion that Apple is the only manufacturer capable of building a decent PC and that is flat out BS. Just because cheap-ass people decide to buy the absolute lowest end PC they can find doesn't mean there aren't millions of other people doing just fine running Windows or Linux or whatever on other brands of hardware.
I'm intrigued as to how you are so certain of that point of view, when your next sentence begins with:
PS - I'm not trying to flame anyone here. This isn't the OS forum, this was the what OS works best with an Evo thread on the Evo forum. I'm just marking time with facts until the OP decides to chime back in.
That said - it's been a few days, so maybe his question was another drive-by post and it's time to just move on.
neodorian
Android Expert
Maybe because things have always worked for him? I use a Mac Pro at work on a daily basis because I use Final Cut Pro a lot. There are easily as many annoyances and issues on this machine than there are on my home Win7 machines. Even on this powerful beast of a computer I sometimes freeze when running Soundtrack Pro or sometimes codecs just get screwed up for no reason or options just disappear. I hate that I can only resize a window from the bottom right corner instead of the nearest one. I hate that my menu bar is always on the left monitor even if the application window is on the right monitor. I hate that I can't just hit delete on a file to recycle it.
Likewise if you use a Windows machine long enough there will be interface elements that annoy you, programs that don't work right, maybe a force-quit every so often if something doesn't want to close properly. It's just the nature of the beast.
Still, overall, Mac OS and Windows (in their modern iterations) are pretty seamless for the most part. The average person can fire up programs and do what they want to do and it "just works". The learning curve on both systems is so low for average daily tasks that I don't really see it as much of an issue.
It's all good. If there is one thing nerds can do endlessly it's explain why they choose the hardware/software/OS/personal electronics that they do.
jtcannonball
Member
Performance does degrade over time, I didn't say the machine does. That is a true statement, over time the performance/personal experience of a pc degrade, become slower/sluggish/not as responsive. I didn't say your pc would clock at .00000007 ghz a year later if its a 2.45 ghz today. Maybe you don't like what I said or how I said it but I think you understand what I said. I love my HP like I said, I paid with my work discount 929 for it and its a high end machine, however the white macbook which isn't a high end machine may show lower stats for processor but why is my cousins macbook faster at everything it does? It opens up photoshop faster by quite a lot, it turns on a lot faster and turns off in literally 2 seconds while my HP takes forever to turn on and off and that is after messing with all the configs to not have any programs that are not necessary from starting during bootup. Web browsing was noticeably faster on his until Chrome came out and that seems about a draw now between the two. Overall the performance seems better on the Apple even the base whitebook over my HP which for a customer would have cost 1300. So yeah I think Apple has the better product in laptops, however the pc desktop I built when I got my parts from intel for 1/3 of the cost for doing trainings can hold its own with there towers which start about 2 thousand and I have b/c of discount into mine like 700.
Cru
Member
I've been working on PCs for almost 20 years now...you don't know what you are talking about. A billion problems you must tinker with on a daily basis...and you work at Best Buy, imagine that. Forums are for sharing good information not blatant stupidity. If a certain topic is above your head (such as this) it's better to not speak.
I think OSX and Windows7 are both great platforms depending on what you use them for. I however think Macs are way overpriced and is Apple's main downfall. I saw someone above post that price really isn't debatable...I beg to differ. I've looked at purchasing a Mac for the last couple years and the price is usually 2-4x the cost of what I can build a similar specced machine for. If someone knows a great Apple Desktop for under $600 let me know, but a Mac Mini doesn't even compare to what I can build a similar windows/*nix machine for. I'm speaking solely on desktops, laptops I won't even look at a macbook because of the price difference...I've never paid more than $500 for a laptop, my last one was a $200 Dell Mini and it's perfect for work. Oh and I run OSX on my mini
I did the same thing, but I think I'm going to get rid of the MacBook Pro (4gb) - the price to upgrade ram to 8gb is way too much.
Yep - it's why I asked and didn't flame. I've no idea if that was an opinion or based on work experience.
In my book, experience counts for a lot more than opinion. So I asked.
You got it, you get it. As I mentioned earlier, an OS is a necessary evil and they all leave a lot to be desired.
Golly, not me. (rotf)
jtcannonball
Member
jtcannonball
Member
rickyaustin
Member
Unless you need a PC for some work reason, Mac is the answer. Macs are for people, PCs are for techies.
Well, atleast you have to be a techie to keep a PC running and without viruses, etc.
It's just me, but it's Mac or nothing. This being an Android forum, I've encountered so much anti-Apple stuff here, you're gonna hear a lot of PC answers.
But for people, Macs are the best operating system.
Well, atleast you have to be a techie to keep a PC running and without viruses, etc.
It's just me, but it's Mac or nothing. This being an Android forum, I've encountered so much anti-Apple stuff here, you're gonna hear a lot of PC answers.
But for people, Macs are the best operating system.
1. You may beg to differ, but I was specific in comparing a Mac to an equivalent quality, off-the-shelf PC, such as a better PC. I also stated several times now that this doesn't apply to building your own.
That applies to anything. Am I the only one that remembers Heathkit? I had a buddy who built his own TV - really took his time, knew what he was doing. That turned out great. At a fraction of the price of the equivalent Zenith. With better picture quality because the first thing you built in the kit was the built-in test hardware that you used to ensure convergence.
Same thing with stereo amps. And I used to build my own radios.
But somehow, we didn't live in The Age of Entitlement.
We all said, "Hey, look how much money I saved by learning and applying a new skill!"
Today, all I really hear is:
2. The Mac mini uses laptop components, and that adds greatly to the cost. It may interest you to know that a few manufacturers have tried to compete with the mini in the home theater PC by offering that same form factor. Fully populated for full media use, both PCs and minis in that form factor end up pricing out at around $1300 (prices as of two years ago, I haven't checked lately) - for the form factor and for the convenience.
And no - you can't build one for cheaper that works and market it for less. Prove me wrong, become a millionaire selling the next great HTPC and laugh all the way to the bank. I'm into home theater and nothing would please me more than to eat those words.
3. You have a $200 Dell laptop that's great for your work? Wonderful. My laptop needs for work requires a high speed Core 2 Duo, a separate DVI output with high-res graphics, the ability to run multiple operating systems reliably, as much disk space as I can carry (300+ GB plus a separate drive), and a firewire port in order to read raw OCR data from time to time, and a USB2 port for some of the data acquisition cards I use - and I need wifi and also Bluetooth file exchange capability. And I need vendor support in case something goes wrong, even overseas.
Please advise how I'm to get that for $200 to $500.
Until then, I'll be happy to continue getting ripped off.
PS - Sorry, I got carried away thinking of these arguments I've had in real life. I haven't looked yet and I'll bet I flamed away. Seriously, sorry.
Cru
Member
EarlyMon. I've had these arguments in real life many times as well. No harm. I'm one of the few who don't choose sides. I'd love to own a Mac desktop but they just don't warrant the price IMO. I looked at the new edition of the mini for $699 and I think you have a good point...if I had to choose to buy a preassembled system not used for gaming I'd buy it instead of a similar loaded PC for $500.
@jtcannonball OSX does feel snappier than XP on my mini.
@jtcannonball OSX does feel snappier than XP on my mini.
- Status