This is true. When I used to buy Windows laptops, I was lucky if one lasted 18 months. Between viruses, cheaply made parts and just overall performance, it was just too much. There is a lot of truth in the old saying "you get what you pay for"
-
After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.
Why don't more people buy Macs?
- Thread starter psychotron
- Start date
This is true. When I used to buy Windows laptops, I was lucky if one lasted 18 months. Between viruses, cheaply made parts and just overall performance, it was just too much. There is a lot of truth in the old saying "you get what you pay for"
That's a bit of an over-generalization. I have a low end budget Compaq laptop from '05 that still runs (Ubuntu) quite nicely. I use it as a media server at outdoor functions mainly because i don't care if it falls in a lake. It hasn't and it continues to chug along.
NightHawk877
Android Enthusiast
I could take a cheap 300 dollar desktop and install Ubuntu on it. Same type of Security found in OS X, but with a smaller software library.
A.Nonymous
Extreme Android User
I use a 5 year old Windows laptop at work. It desperately needs to be rebuilt from scratch, but it still works. My brother uses a 7-8 year old laptop. It runs XP beautifully just for surfing the 'net and other basic things.
Moved to Computers & IT, where it belongs. 
Bob Maxey
Android Expert
Depends on how rough you are, I suppose. I tend to keep my laptops for at least five or six years and so far, I have never had a serious issue. What makes my laptops "unusable" is the technology changes and the old gals just can't carry their own weight.
NYCHitman1
Gun for Hire
You are right though. Why am I going to pay $1500-2000 for a MBP/iMac when I can get better hardware for half the price elsewhere? In this economy, it only makes sense to go with the cheaper, yet still reliable option.
A.Nonymous
Extreme Android User
Personally, it is the price. I'd love a mac to screw around with, but I can't justify pay $2K for a *high* end MBP when for a fraction of that price I could get a killer dell (or any brand, not dell specific) laptop.
I'm the same way. I'm a computer tech by trade. I'd really like to learn OS X so I can support it better. My only option is to cough up several hundred dollars for a another computer that I'll have to find a place for somewhere. I can't justify spending that much money on a computer that I may not be able to grasp how to use and may not end up using. I cannot (legally) run OS X virtually so I'm screwed.
Well I notice a huge difference in my MacBook Pro compared to the high end HP I had right before it. Sure the MB cost double but I took the HP back and gladly paid more, why? Build quality for one. The MB is alluminum and built like a tank, very solid and quality all over it. The HP had tons of plastic, the keyboard bowed and creeked when you applied any pressure while typing, the trackpad was garbage and it just felt cheaply made but cost $800. Everything from the keyboard to the trackpad to the awesome screen on the MB was much higher quality.
Then there is software. Where Apple comes thru is giving you tons of great programs for free. HP gave me a ton of bloatware for free, gee thanks! Zero bloatware to uninstall on the MB and zero time or effort having to install maximum security programs and lock the computer down like a vault before even attempting to go online. iLife runs circles around the free Windows garbage that's loaded on their laptops, much more useful. So yea, I gladly paid double to get twice the laptop.
Then there is software. Where Apple comes thru is giving you tons of great programs for free. HP gave me a ton of bloatware for free, gee thanks! Zero bloatware to uninstall on the MB and zero time or effort having to install maximum security programs and lock the computer down like a vault before even attempting to go online. iLife runs circles around the free Windows garbage that's loaded on their laptops, much more useful. So yea, I gladly paid double to get twice the laptop.
Not to be argumentative (Okay, maybe a little) but you've got to expand your horizons beyond HP. I agree they make (or made) crappy cheap plasticy notebooks and loaded them with crap, but the nice thing about the PC ecosystem is there are always alternatives. Do a little shopping and you can end up with a gem. Right now my daily traveller is an Acer Aspire Timeline series that dual boots Win7 Pro and Ubuntu Ornery Ogre, or whatever the latest cutsie-poo name is
. It's thin, light, powerful, and very attractive, unlike those HP Fischer Price designs. And i still have the first battery (will be 2 years old next month) and still get 7-8 hours per charge. Did I mention it was only $600? It's a shame when someone writes of a whole category of products due to one dissatisfying experience.
Not to be argumentative (Okay, maybe a little) but you've got to expand your horizons beyond HP. I agree they make (or made) crappy cheap plasticy notebooks and loaded them with crap, but the nice thing about the PC ecosystem is there are always alternatives. Do a little shopping and you can end up with a gem. Right now my daily traveller is an Acer Aspire Timeline series that dual boots Win7 Pro and Ubuntu Ornery Ogre, or whatever the latest cutsie-poo name is
It's a shame when someone writes of a whole category of products due to one dissatisfying experience.
One experience? Nah, not even close. That was just the most recent. I switched to Mac 5 years ago but deciided to give Windows 7 a shot with the HP laptop a few months ago and I regretted it to say the least. I have had tons of bad experiences with non Mac products, mostly poorly made computers and tons of viruses crashing hard drives. Switching to Mac was the easiest and best choice I have made, glad that Acer works for you though and you can't beat the price.
Pitamakan
Android Enthusiast
A lot of times, I think alleged Mac-PC price discussions end up being (forgive the expression) apples-and-oranges comparisons, caused in part by the fact that Apple isn't trying to compete in all segments of the personal computer market. When the comparisons are more even, Apple does end up being initially more expensive some of the time, but certainly not always. A good current example of the latter case is the Macbook Air, a machine that PC makers are finding tough to match in specs and price.
I also think that very often, when one looks at TCO (total cost of ownership) the Mac will come out ahead. Macs often last longer than Windows machines, while requiring less management along the way, and that latter point is a strong one for people who assign value to their time. I've done IT and tech support as one component of my job since the early 90s, in a mixed PC/Mac environment, and I've definitely noticed this disparity ... it's one of the reasons I've moved my home computing to the Mac platform.
I also think that very often, when one looks at TCO (total cost of ownership) the Mac will come out ahead. Macs often last longer than Windows machines, while requiring less management along the way, and that latter point is a strong one for people who assign value to their time. I've done IT and tech support as one component of my job since the early 90s, in a mixed PC/Mac environment, and I've definitely noticed this disparity ... it's one of the reasons I've moved my home computing to the Mac platform.
NYCHitman1
Gun for Hire
Any knowledgable computer user knows how to protect their property against acquiring viruses. Complaining that Windows is more vulnerable to them is basically just showing lack of knowledge. In all my years of using Windows, I have yet to experience any kind of virus that couldn't be fixed/removed with a simple scan of some kind.
Everyone knows that Microsoft has a stranglehold on the OS market. It would only make more sense for 'hackers' to target their efforts towards the OS which is used more.
Anywho, as I was saying - it goes a long way to know how to protect your tech. Buying it doesn't do much for you if you don't know how to care for it. The same goes for mostly anything.
Everyone knows that Microsoft has a stranglehold on the OS market. It would only make more sense for 'hackers' to target their efforts towards the OS which is used more.
Anywho, as I was saying - it goes a long way to know how to protect your tech. Buying it doesn't do much for you if you don't know how to care for it. The same goes for mostly anything.
andruoid
Android Expert
I've personally never been a fan of Macs. The only thing I agree with so far is that the build quality is right up there. In terms of hardware or choice there of PC/Laptops are far better. I dislike the Mac OS feel and look, can't say anything more about that.
As far as security goes it's a matter of educating yourself. In almost 15 years of working and home use I think 3, maybe 4 times I've had a virus on the specific computer I was using. Every time it was caught by the AV I was using at the time. You have a very false sense of security if you think Macs don't have exploits. My RSS feeds report of something newly exploited for Mac a few times a week. Since most Mac users have no AV (because of this false sense of security) they have no idea if they are 'infected' or not.
edit:
Just out today: http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2...tm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+arstechnica
As far as security goes it's a matter of educating yourself. In almost 15 years of working and home use I think 3, maybe 4 times I've had a virus on the specific computer I was using. Every time it was caught by the AV I was using at the time. You have a very false sense of security if you think Macs don't have exploits. My RSS feeds report of something newly exploited for Mac a few times a week. Since most Mac users have no AV (because of this false sense of security) they have no idea if they are 'infected' or not.
edit:
Just out today: http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2...tm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+arstechnica
9to5cynic
Android Expert
You know, it wasn't that long ago that MS was getting sued for including software with the OS. Even IE got them slammed with anti-trust lawsuits. I dare say, that if Apple had a larger share of the market, that software would not be included for the same reasons.
Though, I do agree. Just from the little I've used iLife, I quite enjoyed it over Windows programs included. (Especially GarageBand....)
What idiot is going to actually put their password in and let that install itself on their Mac? First, you have to go to the site its on, then you have to have your Safari set to allow auto downloading, then you have to put in your pass and allow it to download. Have to be pretty dumb to get that one. You can get a virus in Windows just going to a few pages on IE. Hell, my mom got a virus just searching for and looking at pics of Kim Kardashian and Brad Pitt. So yea, the Mac OS is by and large far more secure than Windows, especially while running IE. At least Firefox and Chrome are a bit more secure.
ardchoille
Android Expert
Exactly. We can download Linux distros for free all day long. I'll use a Mac when we can do the same with OS X.
andruoid
Android Expert
As I said, the user must educate themselves or be educated by someone else, doesn't matter what platform they use.
True
SUroot
Extreme Android User
Agreed.
Its not even necessarily that its more Vulnerable either. Its because they are targetted more. Governments don't use Macs for running their countries. At most probably to design their campaign posters
NYCHitman1
Gun for Hire
Agreed.
Its not even necessarily that its more Vulnerable either. Its because they are targetted more. Governments don't use Macs for running their countries. At most probably to design their campaign posters
Yep! I said the same thing in my previous post. It's only obvious that it being the more popularly used OS, that it will be targeted more by hackers and scammers.
alostpacket
Over Macho Grande?
As a long time Windows user (since the IBM DOS days), long time Mac users (since the Apple II days) and seldom dabbler in linux based systems, I have quite enjoyed my 1st MBP I got a few months ago.
( Note: having worked in the creative/advertising industries I had used Macs at work for many (10?) years -- sometimes PCs -- but mostly macs. I did mostly Flash development, some Photoshop, Some Eclipse/Flex/Other programming, etc. Some media encoding, but not much re:video editing. At home I have always used Windows and built my last 3 desktop gaming rigs myself).
So anyways, I decided to go with a 13" MBP for portability and went with no additional upgrades at purchase time. I got it for something like $1400 at the store.
It's a Core i3, 4GB RAM, 500GB 5400RPM drive (I think).
I had planned on upping the RAM and/or switching to an SSD, but I found that it worked fine for what I needed it for, being powerful enough to have a mobile work-capable computer.
That said I still will likely always build my own PC gaming rigs, and may even open the MBP someday and add upgrades myself. But while I spent more, I feel good about having a different OS (helps me learn), having something with a Unix based terminal, and having a very solidly built mobile work-capable computer. Most likely my next project is to start playing with virtualized Linux, and see if I can revive some old desktops I have.
But my needs were specific, I recently recommended a $600 Lenovo PC laptop to a friend with almost as good specs as my MBP. However I am still quite pleased with my purchased. But for here, the Lenovo met the needs better. More an office computer/desktop replacement + can play movies, etc.
Also I think the "Macs are better for creative stuff" was true in the early PowerPC days, partly due to the apps that were available at the very high end. For example, Maya, Lightwave, Protools, etc... They also had a huge stability advantage for electronic musician trying to perform live. Almost every "live" application had to be run in Linux/Unix/Mac environments because Windows had latency and stability problems. This is really not a problem at all anymore, but the legend, as others have said, persists.
But when they made the switch to Intel, I think, at least the Adobe software lagged behind on Macs vs Windows. It was one of the things Apple fans really hated Adobe for (although I believe this was more Apples fault for changing/removing/hiding APIs). But this too, has been fixed.
TL;DR version:
I think it really holds true that "to each their own" in this case
( Note: having worked in the creative/advertising industries I had used Macs at work for many (10?) years -- sometimes PCs -- but mostly macs. I did mostly Flash development, some Photoshop, Some Eclipse/Flex/Other programming, etc. Some media encoding, but not much re:video editing. At home I have always used Windows and built my last 3 desktop gaming rigs myself).
So anyways, I decided to go with a 13" MBP for portability and went with no additional upgrades at purchase time. I got it for something like $1400 at the store.
It's a Core i3, 4GB RAM, 500GB 5400RPM drive (I think).
I had planned on upping the RAM and/or switching to an SSD, but I found that it worked fine for what I needed it for, being powerful enough to have a mobile work-capable computer.
That said I still will likely always build my own PC gaming rigs, and may even open the MBP someday and add upgrades myself. But while I spent more, I feel good about having a different OS (helps me learn), having something with a Unix based terminal, and having a very solidly built mobile work-capable computer. Most likely my next project is to start playing with virtualized Linux, and see if I can revive some old desktops I have.
But my needs were specific, I recently recommended a $600 Lenovo PC laptop to a friend with almost as good specs as my MBP. However I am still quite pleased with my purchased. But for here, the Lenovo met the needs better. More an office computer/desktop replacement + can play movies, etc.
Also I think the "Macs are better for creative stuff" was true in the early PowerPC days, partly due to the apps that were available at the very high end. For example, Maya, Lightwave, Protools, etc... They also had a huge stability advantage for electronic musician trying to perform live. Almost every "live" application had to be run in Linux/Unix/Mac environments because Windows had latency and stability problems. This is really not a problem at all anymore, but the legend, as others have said, persists.
But when they made the switch to Intel, I think, at least the Adobe software lagged behind on Macs vs Windows. It was one of the things Apple fans really hated Adobe for (although I believe this was more Apples fault for changing/removing/hiding APIs). But this too, has been fixed.
TL;DR version:
I think it really holds true that "to each their own" in this case
Cutting your teeth on System 6 with SCSI voodoo and Windows 3.x and the ISA bus was sure fun
(I think I just sprained an eyelid, winking so hard.)It's more of a philosophical thing that any technical superiority or failing. The things Apple doesn't do that irritated their users, like maintaining long term legacy support and backward compatibility, is also the things Microsoft gets criticized for. Much of the bloat, vulnerability and instability Windows users complain about are because of all the backward compatibility built into Windows. Much of the orphaned software and hardware that Mac users moan about are because Apple chose to go with a different model.
I won't say that one is better than the other, only that it's best consumers have a choice between the two.
Now, as far as I recall there were two times in the (is it 14 now?) versions of Adobe professional products where the Windows platform preceded the Mac in releases was when Apple finally dropped System 9.5 to OS X (I forget what the second release was named and am too lazy to look it up
) and as you mention, when Apple dropped the PowerPC and moved to Intel. Since Photoshop 5, the releases have been virtually concurrent with the longest disparity being something like three months. The attitude i found irritating from many Mac users was that in those two instances, somehow Adobe had screwed them by giving it Windows users first. As if Windows users didn't need it to do any "real" work and Mac users "deserved" it. Granted it's a gross overgeneralization, but it happened often enough for me to notice.
As with phones, the fact that these companies keep trying to leapfrog each other in terms of power and features ultimately benefits us, the consumers with better products getting into our hands more quickly.