Why you shouldnt by a mac

[ysu]

I've used both Macs and PCs at work and home for nearly 20 years and the Macs are by far the nicer machines to use.

They start up faster, they have a nice working environment and I just prefer them.

Win7 has gone a long way to help them catch up but OSX is still better in my opinion.

yes, but you see, we were discussing hardware prices originally, not operating systems...

[Big Kev]

But it's very hard to compare like for like on hardware.

My point is that although the macs are more expensive, often for the 'same spec' you get a quicker machine cos the OS is better.

If you could get about the same spec, I'd still have the Mac, even if it cost more.

[wabbit]

I swear I haven't hacked into Kevs account

To Kevs point Ysu, I recently build an i7 WMD with Raid 0 SSDs. My '08 MacBook Pro both boots & shutdowns quicker. Explain that I say to people. It just shouldn't be the case.

[AstrO]

I swear I haven't hacked into Kevs account

To Kevs point Ysu, I recently build an i7 WMD with Raid 0 SSDs. My '08 MacBook Pro both boots & shutdowns quicker. Explain that I say to people. It just shouldn't be the case.

But your Mac still doesn't boot as fast as BeOS R5 on my PII 233...

PS The day I can run OSX on my generic Intel computer, is the day I'll consider moving over full time (although Finder still gives me the shits, even in 10.6).

PPS My 1.6GHz Intel Mac Mini boots up faster than my 3.1GHz Core 2 Quad, 8GB RAM, 2 x 640GB WD-Blacks in RAID 0 with Windows 7 x64... but once the system is up and running don't expect it to be able to keep up. Note that I don't have much installed on my Mac and that's half the reason my windows install takes ages to boot... damn you Adobe!!!!!

[ysu]

I swear I haven't hacked into Kevs account

To Kevs point Ysu, I recently build an i7 WMD with Raid 0 SSDs. My '08 MacBook Pro both boots & shutdowns quicker. Explain that I say to people. It just shouldn't be the case.

Is the boot up the boot up of the hardware or software?
If software, then you're comparing operating systems again.
Even if hardware, is the bios, it's settings, and the ram amounts comparable then? (eg ram testing on bootup can take ages if not set to quick-test, with more ram the longer)
(so we're already in software territory with bios, as you can see)

Boot-up is not a measurement of computer performance.

But if that's most important to you, I can recommend you employ the "sleep" mode on power switch, then your computer will return to usable state in about 5 seconds.

[w00dsy]

i've never understood why booting up and shutting down times are important. I rarely turn mine off so it makes little to no difference to me. If i was doing it 4-5 times a day it might be a factor. I got one of them hackintosh versions of OSX working on my pc not too long ago and i hated it, but i'm tipping that's because i'm so used to playing with Windows and Linux. It was just different and things weren't where i was used to so naturally i got frustrated by how difficult it all seemed. I tried it twice and couldn't be arsed persisting as it didn't seem to do anything all the other OS's do, it just does it differently. I certainly have yet to see a single reason why i would want to pay so much more for an Apple computer when it just does the same stuff that all the others do. Maybe if they were the same price or as Astro said, they ran on a regular PC then i might try it again.

[norbs]

i've never understood why booting up and shutting down times are important. I rarely turn mine off so it makes little to no difference to me. If i was doing it 4-5 times a day it might be a factor. I got one of them hackintosh versions of OSX working on my pc not too long ago and i hated it, but i'm tipping that's because i'm so used to playing with Windows and Linux. It was just different and things weren't where i was used to so naturally i got frustrated by how difficult it all seemed. I tried it twice and couldn't be arsed persisting as it didn't seem to do anything all the other OS's do, it just does it differently. I certainly have yet to see a single reason why i would want to pay so much more for an Apple computer when it just does the same stuff that all the others do. Maybe if they were the same price or as Astro said, they ran on a regular PC then i might try it again.

For me, it is stability that is the killer. OS X rarely, and I mean probably 4 times that I can recall in over 3 years, locks up. And it gets hammered. I do way more on this Mac than I ever did with a PC, and up until the last blackout in the wind storms, the Mac had been running for nearly 7 weeks with out a reboot. I am trialling a latest spec Toshiba laptop at work with Win 7 and it needs rebooting every 3 days and all it is currently doing is logging data on 4 USB ports and then sending that data off to a server via FTP. Fair enough, it has got data being fed to it constantly on all 4 USB ports, but jesus, it should handle that. If we don't reboot it, it grinds to a halt because of some known bug in Win 7. And believe me, the IT guys have tried to fix it because they are all Win 7 fans and are sick of supporting XP as SOE.

I run Win XP on a virtual machine on OS X and even that needs a regular reboot.

And just to prove I am no fanboy zealot, I hate the way different programs use different ways of doing things in OS X. I hate Finder, the OS X Explorer. And my views on that other piece of Apple software, iTunes are well known. WinAmp for OS X would be awesome. This whole library thing fucking shits me to tears.

[wabbit]

Woah woah, woah! I think you blokes misinterpreted my booting up post.

@ w00dsy, correct its not the be all and end all. My original post was just something I noticed which still puzzles me as my custom built desktop is purely a games pc (gets booted for a games session and shutdown afterwards). Which leads into...

@ ysu, whats the point of hardware without an OS and or software... the two will forever be linked. To answer your questions I've stripped down and setup my custom pc to boot and run as quickly as possible. Be that BIOS tweaks, Windows 7 tweaks (loading of services, system processes etc) & SSD tweaks. Of course booting isn't a measuremnt of a pc's performance re the w00dsy part.

Which leaves good old Astr0 "The day I can run OS X on my..." we all know that answer, just gotta turn back time in fact

[ysu]

sortof yes, what's the hardware w/o software. But then one software can run on multiple hardware (phone O/S-es prove it very nicely) it's just a matter of writing it properly.
Even windows proves it nicely if you think about it - and there's an interesting point. Windoze have to run on all sorts of configs, whereas the macos needs to run on very limited choices only! Which maybe a key to it's stability and relative bug-free-ness.

Maybe we need to go back to the zx Spectrum, C64 or Amiga times eh? One hardware - one OS. It certainly reduces the problems

[bengatta]

its the 2010 version of the ol...



v



Debate...

[durbster]

This thing about PCs being less stable than Macs doesn't wash with me. In my own experience they're pretty much the same. Back when it was the only thing Mac fans could shout about, the Macs we used at Uni would crash just as often as the PCs. The only real difference was that you'd get an entirely useless error message on the Mac (Error: 1584 - great, thanks Apple).

The funniest part about that was the design department were Apple fanaticists who refused to accept their beloved badge was flawed. In our first week there they gave a presentation in which they tried to convince us that having more than one mouse button was confusing and counter-productive.

Hmm... perhaps this is where my dislike of Apple products began )

Also, I use Windows XP every day at work and I can't remember the last time the OS crashed on me. I switch it off every evening but my colleague leaves his on 24/7 and it will usually run continuously for weeks. OK, perhaps it wasn't the case when it was launched but I've got Vista at home and the only thing I remember killed it was using the PhysX chip on the graphics card in a particular game, so in my experience Windows is pretty stable.

I'd be interested to see if anybody's tested this scientifically though. I've only ever heard anecdotal evidence which is flaky at best (except the above, obviously ).

[wabbit]

This topic has been professionally ARSE'd, I like it. Its become a general topic that I personally hope will turn into discussing the various options for inflating an air mattress while on a camping trip.

ysu, as funny as this may seem... your really heading off topic (in regards to the above... pot/kettle i know). In your last post I think you need to step back and remember the goals for Microsoft and Apple are different (for the last 13 odd years anyway), they once were aligned but both went about it differently.

Apple isn't interested in coding, testing and supporting all makes and models of various hardware, its only interested in making sure the OS and software works for the computer line up it sells. (also, I can see we are agreeing on most of it, I just wouldn't use your statement if I was explaining it to someone else).

Air mattress time now?

[pab]

Well, my air mattress inflates way faster than yours, proving my awesomeness without a shadow of doubt, while expressing the lameness of anyone who doesn't have my air mattress (or an identical facsimile possessing similar features and capabilities).

Now, what were we talking about?

[bengatta]

Mine is a thermarest... i found it quite comfortable in himalayan conditions when you are trying to sleep on frozen ground... what brand is your pab??? I will change over if yours is more awesomer...

[norbs]

This thing about PCs being less stable than Macs doesn't wash with me. In my own experience they're pretty much the same.

If I could get a Win anything PC to run for 7 weeks with out a crash with what I throw at it I would be happy. But from my experience, it will never happen. I use them at work all day and they are no where near as stable as my Mac at home. That is my experience. Whether you believe it or not is up to you Durbs. But I have no reason to blindly bull shit, I am just stating the facts as I see them.

Funnily, whilst I was typing this, the brides PC locked up doing a virus update.

[wabbit]

I've got a cheapy foot pump, doesn't take very long for a double bed. I also picked up a little gas burner for $20. I think it's called a Gasmate, it's a worked really well so far. For windy nights i use the little case it comes in to sheld the flame.

[ysu]

Well, my air mattress inflates way faster than yours, proving my awesomeness without a shadow of doubt, while expressing the lameness of anyone who doesn't have my air mattress (or an identical facsimile possessing similar features and capabilities).

But as we know inflating time isn't a measurement of the air mattress' performance...

[wabbit]

[pab]

Ysu.

Mine is a thermarest... i found it quite comfortable in himalayan conditions when you are trying to sleep on frozen ground... what brand is your pab??? I will change over if yours is more awesomer...

Ah, well, see, to be honest, they're all much of a muchness, mine is only actually more awesomer than yours simply because it's mine.

Do you want to buy mine? It'll make you awesomer!

[pab]

Well, my air mattress inflates way faster than yours, proving my awesomeness without a shadow of doubt, while expressing the lameness of anyone who doesn't have my air mattress (or an identical facsimile possessing similar features and capabilities).

But as we know inflating time isn't a measurement of the air mattress' performance...

Yeah, I know, it's the sleeping bag you put on it.

[durbster]

Blow-up mattresses are terrible things. The day you buy one is the day the countdown begins to it letting you down in every possible sense of the phrase.

Self-inflating mattresses, however, are awesome.

[w00dsy]

[norbs]

I hope it is a little more refined than the current one. The current version is a bit rough around the edges. But for free, its fucking awesome.

Now, where is that self boiling billy?

[w00dsy]

the edges get a little smoother with each release, one day it might be ready for mainstream use.

[durbster]

This thing about PCs being less stable than Macs doesn't wash with me. In my own experience they're pretty much the same.

If I could get a Win anything PC to run for 7 weeks with out a crash with what I throw at it I would be happy. But from my experience, it will never happen. I use them at work all day and they are no where near as stable as my Mac at home. That is my experience. Whether you believe it or not is up to you Durbs. But I have no reason to blindly bull shit, I am just stating the facts as I see them.

Here you go Norbs - I forgot all about this but when this thread was running I asked my aforementioned mate to send me a screenshot of his PC up time, as he doesn't shut his PC down every night like me.

He's just sent me this from his work PC that runs XP. Bear in mind it's used for at least 7-9 hours every work day - running various high-end multimedia editing software. He also remotes in from home to get files quite in evenings and weekends.

So this is exactly why I don't agree that Windows is unstable because in my experience, it's absolutely fine.