POLL: PC or Mac

garrison_k. · February 18, 2009

I could go on, but I'll spare you...

Thanks. That was nothing more than the usual echo chamber of propaganda void of any facts that can be quantified.

...have a lower total cost of ownership...

Please explain. I hear this all the time, but that's all I hear.

pmj · February 19, 2009

Here's one data point. My dad has a PC, a 2004 HP Pavilion with card reader, wireless keyboard and mouse (note: does require you to hook up some receiver first, so not quite wireless), wireless network (note: does require you to hook up an external antenna, so not quite wireless). It has a fairly decent videocard (note: no DVI). Sometimes the external hard drive is drive K:, other times it is called L: which is very convenient for automated scripts (not). It apparently comes with a program called pcnotify.exe which crashes after logging into Windows. I thought I had it removed, but after a while it "came back". It more or less requires an anti-virus program which needs updating. It displays a popup when it finds, loses and again finds the wifi network. The keyboard has all sorts of extra characters printed on the keys, making it look cluttered and hard to use for the hunt-and-peck typists. It doesn't look very nice. (Extra debet for HP: several months after XP SP2 was released, they still sold this machine with SP1, adding a few hours of work to upgrade.)

Maybe this is one terrible example of a PC; although, with a bit of love and care and soft cussin', it has been in use for more than four years.

I have a Mac. Its OS may not be able to run on 90% of the hardware out there, but it runs on mine. There may be a ton of programs out there, but I barely know how to use Aperture, Photoshop CS2 and the vi editor, so having even more programs seems not very useful to me. I can communicate with the rest of the world just fine. I have dutifully installed all Mac OS updates. I hook up my external drive and a backup is made.

I don't like fixing computers, but when people find out that I "studied computers", so to speak, they sometimes ask. "Sure", I say, "would that be a MacBook Air, perhaps? Or one of those shiny new iMacs?" "Oh, never mind" is the usual response. How's that for return on investment? (My dad is the exception. I fix his PC when needed.)

I like my Mac. It looks nice. It does what I want.

kelly_flanigan1 · February 19, 2009

Garrision;

The overall cost of ownership of Mac is lower for those who are careless; who surf the internet nude; who love the defined/rigid/controlled Mac world.

Thus they cannot assume and delete stuff and get in trouble.

If their kids tries some game and it just doesnt work; it is ok too; the computer did not get messed up by a DOS era program that wants to change ones computer.

Many mac folks seem ok that their canned burner program can only burn once to a CD;

or say if our Imac 20" unit from 2006 cannot run Photoshop 7 from 2002.

They are happy Old Steve has rigidly defined what they can or cannot do;

ie like not allowing Photoshop 7 to load or install on a 2006 imac 20" unit with OSx 10.4.

Here it bugs me that Photoshop 7.0 for the Mac will not install on a brand new 20" imac from 2006; this doesnt bother most macs folks; they accept old Steves dogma; the rigid control they need; worship and love as gospel.

Thus if a revised OS X version of 2009 locks out an install of old CS2 from 2005; who cares; they can all upgrade; money doesnt matter; what matters is doing what is right; worshiping macs as the end to all end. Locking out a paid for fully legal version 600 buck Photoshop ok in the mac world; 4 years is to long to support; or allow usage. It part of the anti green thing macs are about; being obsolete; wastefull; locking out 4 year old programs that cost 600 bucks.

What matters with a mac is conforming to dogma; not allowing older programs. In a way this consuming is good for the economy.

Thus to run old Photoshop 7 on the Imac 20" unit here I have to install parallels; and a windows os such as win2000; and load up my PC version of Photoshop 7; since Steve has decided that macs cannot use a legal full bore 4 year old program made just for macs; ie a 2002 program will not work on a 2006 imac; 4 years is to old for a mac.

patricklavoie · February 19, 2009

Kelly dont pus it too far because it sound silly.

heres real reason from a real mac user;

1_i dont use canend software to burn my CD, as you on PC, i use something better, Toast 10.

2_I dont use photoshop 7 since the release of photoshop 8..i dont see why and dont see any use for me to still have a older version installed other than 1 prior version *in case*. Same with Office, i use 2008 now, and dont see the point of keeping 2004 in it. By upgrading within the adobe spec (not apple) i make sure i can run whatever program i want knowing they are the latest one existing.

3_I like the fact that everything is trash protected, but any user with the administrator password can simply unluck everything and trash is whole mac.

4_I can also sale my Imac 24 paid 1900$ in february 2008, 1500$ in february 2009..cost me 400$ for 12month use..33$ a month, i think this is what the user meant by a low cost overall ownership (i could mistaken the real meaning). My father bought a PC something 1 years ago, pay 1800$ for it and when he sold it to upgrade he barrely get 400$ for it (why he didtn just upgarde a card, a hd, a whatever..because he dont no how thing work..and like many normal user out there he is not computer savvy like Garrison or Kelly..or me on a Mac) .i find it unplasant for him, and for all the other PC user

Again, all i heard from the PC side is; $, dogma, cant play game...very borring. What do you care if *mac people* have enough monye to get what they like? why would i need to play game? i have a 360, PS3 and a Wii...enough for my game craving once upon a time during my well deserved weekend : )

Are you jealous because whe can afford a mac? its too over priced for what he offer..who care if he offer what I NEED. The dogma - $ - game related argument is really like the virus - problem - incompatibility that mac user talk about PC; in both case it come mostly from uneducated user, or by some other who are just jealous of what other can have..

I have a mac necause i like that. i feel comfortable with it, and it does what i need. You get a PC because it cost lees money, you feel comfortable with it, and it does what you need for what you can spend. Theres is no winner here, both will do the job fine; how much money you are ready to spend, whats did your friends around have, who can help you close to you in need are the question one should ask himself when buyng a computer.

steve_c.5 · February 19, 2009

(For Jeffrey A. Bubis) If someone gave you a PC, one thing you might do with it is run any of the 90% of software out there for computers. And let me tell you, if you keep your head in the Mac world 24/7, you might want to peek outside and see all the software you're mssing. That's one reason they developed Intel Macs, so they could finally access the rest of the world, and why you might want to use Windows-based programs on a Mac.

It's the other way around for me, though. I see no reason to plunk down the bucks for an overpriced Mac when everything I need to use is written for the PC. There's nothing on the Mac side that I need. Not the "elegant interface", not the supposed reliability (I built my PC and haven't had any reliability issues), not the Apple customer service, and not the slick shiny case. You can have 'em.

garrison_k. · February 19, 2009

4_I can also sale my Imac 24 paid 1900$ in february 2008, 1500$ in february 2009..cost me 400$ for 12month use..33$ a month, i think this is what the user meant by a low cost overall ownership

That's pretty good, Patrick. But why'd you sell it and what it's cost to re-tool? Spending $33/mnth to use a computer seems reasonable if you never had to buy another one. But you did. Maybe you spent another $2200 on a new one? This is what I find with my Mac friends, they sell their machine every 3 years for 1/3 the cost and then buy outright again.

Most PC'rs don't do this. Maybe some wealthy luddites do. Some gamers do if they can't work on their own machines. But this demographic shows that 15 year old gamers are budget tight and, with the wealth of info posted into google, most build thier own. Windows offers the flexibility to upgrade hardware when more speed is an option on older hardware.

I have a 5 year old Antec case that has gone through two computer builds already. I'm about to spend $800 and have an i7 920, a $250 mobo, and 8 gigs of ram installed. My raptor drives plug in and go RAID O, as does my optical drive and usb card readers. It's impossible for me to calculate the monthly cost, but over five years, and always having three extremely fast computers that gets my work done quicker than what Mac's offer, it's much less than $33/mnth.

It's not just the money. It's the environmental waste that I can't stand with Mac. Right down to all that arty packaging they come in. This has always bothered me since I see orange and blue and green CRT's in the landfill with perfectly working computers attached inside. In a few years, I'll be seeing all these $2000 iMac's in the land fill. My dad does his email and watches youtube on a 10 year old P2. He bought it for pennies 6 years ago and hasn't done a thing to it. I treated him to a $300 Dell LCD. Plugs in and works. I took one of my old XP 32 OS's, spent 20 mins on the phone with MS saying the motherboard died, gave me a key, and my dad now has XP instead of NT. I'm pretty sure there is no ten year old Mac's running at the moment.

My father bought a PC something 1 years ago, pay 1800$ for it and when he sold it to upgrade he barrely get 400$ for it

Simple can't believe this friend unless it was broken? Craigslist is filled with adverts for 5 year old P4's for $200 to $400. You dad's one year old PC must have been a dual or quad core and for $400, someone got a great deal.

Are you jealous because whe can afford a mac?

If Mac's are most cost effective, how can ask in the next sentence that their expensiveness might prevent ownership? I buy the most efficient tools. That's all they are to me. I'm as attached to my computer as I am to my cresent wrench. I could care less what powers photoshop and what few screens I see before I'm into Adobe. I'd have to spend $6K on a Mac to go as fast as what my PC cost for a 1/4 to build. And then what? Sell the for Mac for $3K in two years and spend another $6K? No thanks.

Although Kelly's post is funny, there's great truth to it. You have no idea when you buy into Mac what will or wont work in a couple years. If one has been Mac for a number of years, there is certainly stuff you've bought that wont load onto Leopard. Not only does this piss me off, but devleopers as well and they don't even bother. All the time I am seeing important and nifty photoshop pluggins and "Mac version not availble at this time". My old plugins work just fine. I have one that was written for XP32. It works on XP64, Vista32, Vista64, Windows 7 32 and 64. That's six OS's covering a decade of Photoshop installs. Yet it only works on Tiger. And the Mac crowd paid the same $99 as I did. Adobe still 32 bit on Mac? This is 2009 folks. Limited and slower software on the Mac? No thanks. I have work to get done and do it wih software I know will work in five years.

patricklavoie · February 19, 2009

G, as you know i sell my Imac + my macbook pro (got 3000$ for both) to get a macbook pro unibody so when i travel i dont have to fight with the airplane to put my Imac in the cabin with me : ) And since they got the same power, i tought it was time to make the move. Plus having always to buy 3 license of the software (imac + laptop + macpro) i find it would be more efficient just to have 2 instead (when you buy cs4 its good for 2 computer..not 3)

So for all those reason i need to buy another one. Im waiting to sell my 2years old macpro now, not that im in a hurry, just waiting for the next i7 on mac to be release, and that will make my usual 24 month upgrade, i can afford it because its for me a biz expense, taxes deductible etc...

I was refering about expensive mac to buy..since everyone seem to talk about that, but as i said i get good money back from it after 12month, so even if its expensive to get at first, it still have a good money value, so in the end, it not that expensive.

In the end i think it depend if you are a customer who bougth it for home use or a biz owner that can afford to put money up front since is would be taxes deductible..anyway, as a biz owner, i ahve to send my money to someone; the governement or apple..i prefer apple as i get some candy in return : )

fp_anderson · February 19, 2009

Since there are lots of Mac people reading this I have a question.

First though Natalie I have to say I agree with the comment above about getting a used G5 - also Apple has the Cinema displays refurbished w/ warranty - you mentioned wanting two monitors. If one is for PShop tools you can use one of your Dell monitors. Your hardware cost would be a fraction of what you stated.

ref: http://store.apple.com/us/product/F9177LL/A & http://store.apple.com/us/product/F9179LL/A

My Question -

The new Mac Book laptop screens I believe can be had glossy or matte, TFT or LED ? Are there any preferences for PShop use?

thanks

F.P.

San Francisco

patricklavoie · February 19, 2009

i think the 17inch macbook is the only that have a option about the matte or glossy screen..maybe not even anymore didtn look at it.

for the rest, under normal in house condition, i dont find the glossy to be a problem at all, and for the road, unless you are on the beach or on a funky location, i dont see it as a problem eithr. I think they have a matte screen film that you can add on it made by a companie i dont recal there name..never try it, but i might have a look for the in case sitution. As for the LED itself (apple 24inch LED monitor) it is one unbelivable piece of monitor i have seen seen for a long time, color acuracy and look of it...after calibration : )

kelly_flanigan1 · February 19, 2009

Patrick;

One reason we tried to place 2002 Photoshop 7 for the mac on the 2006 Imac is that is what the retoucher we hired used on their own G4; they were familar with PS7 and never used anything more modern. We also got CS2 upgrade to move into. Thus the plan failed; Apple locks out using a 4 year old program. Thus the retoucher was frustrated not having PS7 on our imac; also frustrated with trying to use a PC too with PS7.

The Second reason to have some older versions is newer photshop versions sometmes will not support newer file variants.

The third version was some of MY custom batches use features in older photoshop; but not in newer stuff.

garrison_k. · February 19, 2009

i think the 17inch macbook is the only that have a option about the matte or glossy screen..maybe not even anymore didtn look at it.

i saw a picture yesterday of the new 15" macbook with a matte screen.

fp_anderson · February 19, 2009

In reading the many above comments some seem to have lost sight of the question Natalie asked:

"I'm curious what everyone uses at home , PC or Mac?"

-

As to dragging a disc to the trash to eject it - that was before OS10 (perhaps 5 years ago). I have had a PC laptop and Mac desktop since the very first of each came out (my Toshiba "laptop" weighed 17lbs. - but the screen was bigger [7 inch] compared to the Mac [5.5 inch]. Never did make sense that when you wanted eject the disc that you had saved all your valuable work on you "put it in the trash" - but that is all part of history and of no concern to Natalie.

And for those whom wish to use PShop 7 / OS9 - these older apps can be used on new Intel machines, see this page:

http://gwenole.beauchesne.info/en/projects/sheepshaver

But there again - Natalie I am sure does not care about any of this. Too bad there is not a "tally" here, perhaps the site administrators can implement something like this (with tally at the top):

http://portsmouthnh.com/survey/surveyResults.cfm?surveyID=875

cheers-

F.P.

kelly_flanigan1 · February 19, 2009

The real issue is that the MAC retoucher we had really didnt want to fart around with a Parallels; ie running a PC version of PS7 under an Imac. They wanted to use the MAC version of PS 7 in the Mac OS directly; without a kludge.

patricklavoie · February 19, 2009

FP, a mac vs pc thread had and will always bring this kind of long and nonsense answer..is part of the human life : )

Kelly, i found your solution! hire a new photo retoucher that can work with cs4..Oh wait, i can work with cs4! email me ; )

* a photo retoucher that use Ps 7 AND a mouse...dam you are reallllyyyy not lucky. LOL

kelly_flanigan1 · February 20, 2009