# Mac or Windows?



## rangerdud105 (Jan 24, 2008)

I keep wondering if Macintosh is better or Windows. Can anyone tell me some advantages and disadvantages for both Macintosh and Windows?


----------



## namenotfound (Apr 30, 2005)

Windows has more games for it.
Mac OS is more stable. (almost never crashes)


----------



## dannyn (Nov 9, 2007)

mac os X dosent have all the driver issues that vista has too.
and it usually gets most of its stuff right on the first release and not a year later.. don't get me wrong windows is good... mac is better
and if you get mac you can have both.


----------



## jonmcc33 (Jan 26, 2008)

namenotfound said:


> Windows has more games for it.
> Mac OS is more stable. (almost never crashes)


I don't get the "more stable" rhetoric. My PC with Windows Vista almost never crashes too. 

I'll add a better perk than having more games...on a PC you can upgrade/replace anything and everything on it. On a Mac...well, when your Mac gets old you have to buy a new Mac.


----------



## dannyn (Nov 9, 2007)

not exactly.. you can upgrade things on a mac too.. video cards..processors.. hard drives... its just that parts arent as easy to come by.. 
windows vista is still having problems with drivers in some cases and its a year old.. 
mac get it right the first time.. or at least in the first month.. almost always..
also if you get a mac you can run windows with a fresh boot or visualization...
but you cant do it vise versa


----------



## namenotfound (Apr 30, 2005)

Plus if you get the Mac Pro, it is a tower which means it's much easer to change/upgrade everything inside it.


----------



## jonmcc33 (Jan 26, 2008)

dannyn said:


> not exactly.. you can upgrade things on a mac too.. video cards..processors.. hard drives... its just that parts arent as easy to come by..
> windows vista is still having problems with drivers in some cases and its a year old..
> mac get it right the first time.. or at least in the first month.. almost always..
> also if you get a mac you can run windows with a fresh boot or visualization...
> but you cant do it vise versa


Can you upgrade the motherboard? Can you upgrade the case? How about the power supply? You can upgrade the CPU? Seems to me like you can only put Xeons in the Mac Pro: http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2832

What a pain the the rear to get to the CPUs as well. 

Go on and read the benchmarks and see how much slower the Mac Pro is in gaming compared to a PC when both are running Windows XP.

Not sure what you mean by Windows Vista having problems with drivers. They (Microsoft) don't make the drivers, the hardware manufacturers do. You are pointing the blame in the wrong area.



namenotfound said:


> Plus if you get the Mac Pro, it is a tower which means it's much easer to change/upgrade everything inside it.


Not too sure about it being much easier to do anything. Look above to see how "easy" it is to swap out a CPU on a Mac Pro. Looks like you have to practically take the entire thing apart.


----------



## namenotfound (Apr 30, 2005)

jonmcc33 said:


> Not too sure about it being much easier to do anything. Look above to see how "easy" it is to swap out a CPU on a Mac Pro. Looks like you have to practically take the entire thing apart.


Taking apart a Mac Pro is still a heck of a lot easier than taking apart an iMac, that's all I meant


----------



## jonmcc33 (Jan 26, 2008)

namenotfound said:


> Taking apart a Mac Pro is still a heck of a lot easier than taking apart an iMac, that's all I meant


Anything is easier than taking apart an iMac. 

Edit- This is Mac vs PC we're talking about, right? You can't compare a Mac vs another Mac.


----------



## obidon (Aug 12, 2007)

It also may depend on what you're going to be using it for. Laptop or desktop?


----------



## jonmcc33 (Jan 26, 2008)

obidon said:


> It also may depend on what you're going to be using it for. Laptop or desktop?


In that case the Macbook still has no positive over a Windows based laptop.


----------



## namenotfound (Apr 30, 2005)

MacBook is weak, I prefer the MacBook Pro which is more powerful.


----------



## dannyn (Nov 9, 2007)

> MacBook is weak, I prefer the MacBook Pro which is more powerful.


agreed!!!
who cares about the case...beauty is only skin deep.. its performance we need not pretty little cases that have lots of fancy leds...although i think the mac pro is a pretty good looking case


----------



## jonmcc33 (Jan 26, 2008)

namenotfound said:


> MacBook is weak, I prefer the MacBook Pro which is more powerful.


They both use the same Core 2 Duo processors and everything else. The MacBook Pro has a better GPU. So how is it "weak"? I prefer smaller laptops, as evident with my Dell D400. It's supposed to be a laptop and be compact, not be some giant hot running monster the size of a suitcase.

So again, define "weak" between the two other than GPU capability.


----------



## dannyn (Nov 9, 2007)

> They both use the same Core 2 Duo processors and everything else.


that is incorrect... macbook is clocked at 2.2 ghz
mac book pro is clocked at 2.4ghz...
yes the same "core 2 duo".. but most pcs are based off core 2 duos also.. but that dosent mean that they are created equal.


----------



## jonmcc33 (Jan 26, 2008)

dannyn said:


> that is incorrect... macbook is clocked at 2.2 ghz
> mac book pro is clocked at 2.4ghz...
> yes the same "core 2 duo".. but most pcs are based off core 2 duos also.. but that dosent mean that they are created equal.


Yes, but they are both Core 2 Duo processors, both running on an 800FSB and both use the same DDR2-667 memory. A 200MHz clock speed difference on a mobile CPU of the same processor type (Merom) is 2-3% difference in performance. It's not something you'd even notice on anything other than a benchmark. It's not a difference where one would be "weak" by any significant margin.

Don't know why you drag the desktop based Core 2 Duo (Conroe) into this conversation. It's using the same Core 2 architecture but a drastically different FSB speed and isn't designed to be as cool running and power conserving as the mobile (Merom) version.


----------



## namenotfound (Apr 30, 2005)

I say "weak" because the MacBook can't run any of the Pro software that I use.
In other words: _Final Cut Studio 2_ and _Aperture_, because it doesn't have an independent graphics card.

Now if you're someone that depends on this software, it's reason enough to call the MacBook weak in comparison to the MacBook Pro.
Mac Mini also lacks an independent graphics card, so that's not for me either.


----------



## jonmcc33 (Jan 26, 2008)

How can it not run those? They are merely video and photo editing/manipulation software. Neither has anything to do with 3D which is the only difference between the video capabilities of a MacBook and a MacBook Pro.


----------



## namenotfound (Apr 30, 2005)

jonmcc33 said:


> How can it not run those? They are merely video and photo editing/manipulation software. Neither has anything to do with 3D which is the only difference between the video capabilities of a MacBook and a MacBook Pro.


Buy a MacBook and Final Cut Studio 2 and find out 

It will run, but be very very very slow. To run correctly you need the independent graphics card of the MacBook pro.


----------



## jonmcc33 (Jan 26, 2008)

When you look at the specs between the Intel GMA X3100 and nVIDIA GeForce 8600M GT there isn't that much of a difference, 25% more clock speed if anything. The most difference is with the pixel shaders, which again are only 3D and not 2D. Heck, the X3100 is so good that it supports some HD video hardware acceleration. They are both DX10 graphics chipsets as well. 

Sorry but video and photo editing software isn't going to rely that much upon the video card. I think you might be confused on this...


----------



## namenotfound (Apr 30, 2005)

Instead of quoting specs, TRY both a MacBook and MacBook Pro yourself with the software I mentioned.

Like I said before, if a computer has problems running the software I need it to, then it's weak in my mind.


There is no "right" or "wrong" answer here, it's my personal opinion that MackBook is weaker than MacBook Pro.


----------



## dannyn (Nov 9, 2007)

> Sorry but video and photo editing software isn't going to rely that much upon the video card. I think you might be confused on this...


sorry.. but he isnt.. im sorry to tell you but you are 100% wrong.. that software will barely even run.. i tried it 
i use this same software and i agree with his "weak" theory to the fullest


----------



## namenotfound (Apr 30, 2005)

I like how he edited part of his message after I replied to it 

My fault for not quoting it, since I don't remember the exact wording.


----------



## jonmcc33 (Jan 26, 2008)

namenotfound said:


> I like how he edited part of his message after I replied to it
> 
> My fault for not quoting it, since I don't remember the exact wording.


Am I not allowed to edit a post to better explain myself?


----------



## jonmcc33 (Jan 26, 2008)

dannyn said:


> sorry.. but he isnt.. im sorry to tell you but you are 100% wrong.. that software will barely even run.. i tried it
> i use this same software and i agree with his "weak" theory to the fullest


100% wrong on what? I've done video editing on my Windows system using Ulead VideoStudio. I did extensive editing and encoding for little over 2 years. I know what I'm talking about when it comes to that. Thanks. 

It uses everything identical to the MacBook Pro except for the video card, of which it has a 25% performance advantage in 2D when you look at the specs of each chipset. Go ahead and look them up yourself.

I'm pretty much done with this conversation though. It's gotten slightly off subject and I could care less about any Mac laptop to be honest. It's not worth my time even talking about at this point. Talking to Mac fanatics is like banging your head against a wall. You won't get anywhere since they don't even know the hardware inside their own computers.


----------



## namenotfound (Apr 30, 2005)

jonmcc33 said:


> Am I not allowed to edit a post to better explain myself?


Editing to add something is one thing, but you edited OUT


----------



## jonmcc33 (Jan 26, 2008)

To better explain myself like I said. I didn't remove an insult or anything so don't act all crazy about it. It's just an edit and it happens on forums ALL the time.


----------



## concentratzen (Apr 23, 2007)

sorry to put myself in between your discussion, but it just interests me...i opened another topic "pc or mac ?the eternal qestion" and it has a lot to do with this one...but anyway i just want to ask if you work with *3d softwares* then a macbookpro will be a much better choice? then the *nvidia geforce* has a better performance than the *intel gma*?not saying just asking...
*whats the diference?*

i am intersted in buy a mac...maybe...not a fanatic...just seems to match more with my needs...or my process of work needs...

just a small note:continue the discussion...but dont simply fight...that doesnt get it to anywhere...

thanks for your interesting discussions...good vibes and best karma for all!!!


----------



## concentratzen (Apr 23, 2007)

ah...and it also seems to have a much bigger potential concerning to multimedia and graphics...i mean in relation to a pc...


----------



## dannyn (Nov 9, 2007)

Ok thinkk what you want but it interests me how you are just quoting specs on something you don't use and tell people that use them evryday tha they don't know what they are tlking about
besides you said that you did editing on a pc...
but your right and apple is wrong... They shouldn't charge such a premium for
something that isn't even better than there base model laptop except for a minor video card differnce


----------



## valley (Nov 17, 2002)

rangerdud105 said:


> I keep wondering if Macintosh is better or Windows. Can anyone tell me some advantages and disadvantages for both Macintosh and Windows?


I dont know if this helps or not but my sister and her husband have a Telecommunications business and they switched from Windows to a Mac months ago and she says that its way better for the business and they dont worry about it crashing at all.


----------



## dannyn (Nov 9, 2007)

yes.. the mac operating system dosent crash nearly as much as computer running windows.... its a lot more stable
sorry terms where a little off =)


----------



## namenotfound (Apr 30, 2005)

dannyn said:


> yes.. mac dosent crash nearly as much as a pc.. its a lot more stable.


That should actually be "as much as Windows". You can put Linux on a pc, and then it becomes very stable. :up:

(Mac is a PC by the way, but for the sake of this post, I'll pretend they are different)


----------



## tomdkat (May 6, 2006)

jonmcc33 said:


> Can you upgrade the motherboard? Can you upgrade the case? How about the power supply?


It's funny you mention this since I just took an iMac in for service and they replaced the power supply. 

Peace...


----------



## psam3 (Jan 14, 2008)

I'm getting a Mac as soon as I save up enough money. Have you seen the way it looks? The OS is beautiful. I've been using Windows for the last 12 years and I guess i'm kind of getting sick of it. I played around with a Mac in a local computer store and I was amazed of how good they look. That's my reason for getting a Mac.


----------



## Flashback (Oct 14, 1999)

namenotfound said:


> Mac is a PC by the way


It's a 'personal computer' yes, but most people don't think of that when the term 'PC' is used  A good example of this would be the 'PC vs. Mac' commercials


----------



## namenotfound (Apr 30, 2005)

Flashback said:


> It's a 'personal computer' yes, but most people don't think of that when the term 'PC' is used  A good example of this would be the 'PC vs. Mac' commercials


Some people are stupid, and those commercials just help to spread that stupidity. 
People that think 'PC' and 'Personal Computer' are somehow different, don't deserve to own a computer in the first place.


----------



## Flashback (Oct 14, 1999)

namenotfound said:


> People that think 'PC' and 'Personal Computer' are somehow different, don't deserve to own a computer in the first place.


That would wipe out most of the windows user base 

PC is an accepted term meaning 'IBM-compatible' or x86-based computer, since IBM coined the phrase a LONG time ago. There's nothing stupid about the term, or people who use it. See here for more information


----------



## namenotfound (Apr 30, 2005)

Flashback said:


> That would wipe out most of the windows user base
> 
> PC is an accepted term meaning 'IBM-compatible' or x86-based computer, since IBM coined the phrase a LONG time ago. There's nothing stupid about the term, or people who use it. See here for more information


According to that page, you can't really call an AMD computer a 'PC' since the site says:



> In general, though, it applies to any personal computer based on an Intel microprocessor


And since all new Macs have Intel processor, they are in fact 'PC's


----------



## middigit (Feb 3, 2008)

namenotfound said:


> According to that page, you can't really call an AMD computer a 'PC' since the site says:
> 
> And since all new Macs have Intel processor, they are in fact 'PC's


actually, they were PC's from the very start - all PC stands for is Personal Computer

I'd say the defining definition would be mac for pleasure windows for stress and gaming 

but the intel revolution in macs now is great - windows native on mac great!


----------



## namenotfound (Apr 30, 2005)

middigit said:


> actually, they were PC's from the very start - all PC stands for is Personal Computer
> 
> I'd say the defining definition would be mac for pleasure windows for stress and gaming
> 
> but the intel revolution in macs now is great - windows native on mac great!


And you quoted me because.......?
You don't have to convince me, I said from the start that they are all PC's. I was jsut rebutting the other person that posted the link, and being a little sarcastic when I mentioned AMD processors.


----------



## tomdkat (May 6, 2006)

Flashback said:


> PC is an accepted term meaning 'IBM-compatible' or x86-based computer, since IBM coined the phrase a LONG time ago. There's nothing stupid about the term, or people who use it. See here for more information


That's true but namenotfound's right. 

Peace...


----------



## Flashback (Oct 14, 1999)

tomdkat said:


> That's true but namenotfound's right


That's only your opinion and only in _todays_ terms. Remember, Macs only _recently_ started using Intel. You can't expect people to call something a 'pc' all these years and then suddenly stop, just because Macs now also use Intel chips  Besides, people aren't about to start calling them 'non-Macs', 'windows computer' or 'IBM Based computers' - especially when they have been in the habit of calling them PC's for all of these years and no one has said squat about it. It's a term that people use just like they call all facial tissues Kleenex. Lifes too short. Deal with it


----------



## dannyn (Nov 9, 2007)

well.. they were just stating the correct name.. and they are right.. not that you have to call them that.. just that is the correct terminology.


----------



## tomdkat (May 6, 2006)

Flashback said:


> That's only your opinion and only in _todays_ terms. Remember, Macs only _recently_ started using Intel. You can't expect people to call something a 'pc' all these years and then suddenly stop, just because Macs now also use Intel chips  Besides, people aren't about to start calling them 'non-Macs', 'windows computer' or 'IBM Based computers' - especially when they have been in the habit of calling them PC's for all of these years and no one has said squat about it.


You're mostly right except for *all those years* people have been incorrectly using the term PC. That's namenotfound's point and he's right on the money.

Here's another example: how many people do you know, possibly yourself included, who refer to their DVD *player* as their "DVD"? And for how long have they been doing that? Tons of people do that and they're all wrong when they do it, but it's accepted despite it being wrong. 



> It's a term that people use just like they call all facial tissues Kleenex. Lifes too short. Deal with it


Not quite but I've been dealing with it for years now so I'm used to it. It's just refreshing to see someone else share the same view. 

Peace...


----------



## Flashback (Oct 14, 1999)

dannyn said:


> they were just stating the correct name


Yes we understand, that's your opinion, but it was only a technicality that made it correct. There are thousands of things in society that aren't called by their "technical' proper term, _but so what_, people still know what they're talking about. A person would have to be anal to want to call each and every thing in life by only its technical term. Seriously, why call a computer mouse a 'mouse'? Why not call it what it really is - a hand-held-cursor-controller...  Whether or not you call something by it's technical term isn't important as long as the person knows what you are talking about, and I'm pretty sure most people that you'd walk up to would consider a PC a _non-Mac_ type of computer. It's _just a label_, deal with it. Whether you're technically right or wrong, it doesn't matter, the term is not going away


----------



## tomdkat (May 6, 2006)

Flashback said:


> Whether you're technically right or wrong, it doesn't matter, the term is not going away


This is definitely true. 

Peace...


----------



## namenotfound (Apr 30, 2005)

Flashback said:


> That's only your opinion and only in _todays_ terms. Remember, Macs only _recently_ started using Intel. You can't expect people to call something a 'pc' all these years and then suddenly stop, just because Macs now also use Intel chips  Besides, people aren't about to start calling them 'non-Macs', 'windows computer' or 'IBM Based computers' - especially when they have been in the habit of calling them PC's for all of these years and no one has said squat about it. It's a term that people use just like they call all facial tissues Kleenex. Lifes too short. Deal with it


Intel-based or not, PC stands for Personal Computer and no amount of websites that define PC as being Intel-based won't change this fact. Mac has been a PC *since it's first one in the 1980's*


----------



## dannyn (Nov 9, 2007)

> Intel-based or not, PC stands for Personal Computer and no amount of websites that define PCas being Intel-based won't change this fact. Mac has been a PC since it's first one in the 1980's


hes right.


----------



## namenotfound (Apr 30, 2005)

Flashback said:


> Seriously, why call a computer mouse a 'mouse'? Why not call it what it really is - a hand-held-cursor-controller...


Because it has NEVER been called a "hand-held-cursor-controller", that's just retarded. How could you even suggest that?

If you really want to know, it's called a "pointer device". And it's called a "mouse" because that's what the guy that invented it, decided to call it.

oh and one more thing, in an interview he said "I don't know really, why I called it a mouse, I just liked the name"


----------



## techruss (Jul 18, 2007)

Bottom line, there are some things that Mac has going for it and some things that PC has going for it. I use both and like both for different things. Everyone is going to offer opinions but its based on what you will be doing with your computer most often and what you can afford.

TechRuss


----------



## VegasACF (May 27, 2005)

namenotfound said:


> Because it has NEVER been called a "hand-held-cursor-controller", that's just retarded. How could you even suggest that?
> 
> If you really want to know, it's called a "pointer device". And it's called a "mouse" because that's what the guy that invented it, decided to call it.
> 
> oh and one more thing, in an interview he said "I don't know really, why I called it a mouse, I just liked the name"


And it kind of looks like a mouse. Smallish rounded body, long tail. Glad they didn't call it a "rat!"

Though the hand-held-cursor-controller could have simply been called an "H2C2" by Star Wars fans, or a "Double-H Double-C." Yeah. Mouse is better.

My question is this: what do you call two hand-held-cursor-controllers? Mice? Mouses? Meese?

And, while we're on the subject of small rodents, how many mice does it take to screw in a lightbulb? Just two. The trick is getting them in there.


----------

