brad's Experience - Mac vs PC, 2006
Nov 03 '06 (Updated Apr 04 '08)
The Bottom Line You know Windows. Try a Mac. A Mac is-a superior computer, a superior operating-system. That's the simple-truth. Unpolished, unbiased.
UDPATE: January 4, 2008
The reason for this update is to provide a couple of revisions to the original review, which aside from the noted updates, will remain unchanged.
1) prospective Mac buyers need no longer fear what I have called "The Intel Question." Every notable piece of software ever published for the Mac is now universal binary, meaning that versions of popular software and niche software alike are available for both Intel Macs and PowerPC Macs (notably, Adobe Create Suite (Acrobat, Photoshop, Premiere), Macromedia (now under Adobe, but Dreamweaver and Flash), and Microsoft Office 2008 (as of January 15, 2008)). There should not be any prospective buyer weary of purchasing a Mac because of concern that certain software is not available due to the 2006 switch to Intel chips.
2) The emulator known as "Rosetta" has proven more than capable of handling non-processor intensive PowerPC applications (older versions of Microsoft Office included). I would only fear running heavy apps such as Adobe applications prior to version CS3. Aside from that, PPC versions should run just fine on Intel Macs
3) I advise those teetering to consider looking at Parallels, an emulation application that is used to run Windows on Intel Macs. If there are Windows-only applications that you must run and you fear losing them by switching to the Mac, you should consider checking reviews of the Parallels software. I haven't personally used it, but from my research and second-hand reports, Windows runs quite responsively on Intel Macs
UPDATE: December 11, 2007
The reason for this brief update is because normally this time of year, I write an annual essay on this subject. I cannot do that this year because I have not yet used Windows Vista or Mac OS X Leopard (10.5). So as far as I am concerned, everything you read below stands. My PC at work is due for recycling fairly soon, and I imagine at that time I will be on Vista at work. I don't have plans to upgrade to Leopard at this time, mainly because operating systems are best installed when first getting computers. I generally discourage OS updates from major revision to major revision (e.g. Windows XP to Windows Vista or Mac OS Tiger to Mac OS Leopard).
UPDATE: January 5, 2007
This is a lengthy update that is posted at the end of the essay. Scroll down to the bottom to see the update, which serves the purpose of establishing my credentials for writing this essay.
---
It is time for my annual PC versus Mac essay. This year’s report will include a comparison of the three major operating systems, those being Windows, Mac, and Linux, but focusing on the former two. I have decided to add a bit of commentary about Linux, because perhaps, for the first time, it is a worthwhile discussion for consumers.
This will be a long essay, so feel free to scroll. If the topic sentence doesn’t grab you (first sentence in the paragraph), maybe you should scroll down. Different segments of the essay will be broken with all CAPS headers.
The versions considered for comparison will be the most current of the big three, except for Linux, which I will focus on one distribution, Ubuntu. For the most part, it will be Windows XP and Mac OS Tiger (10.4). There will be some commentary on Windows Vista, although that version has not been released and is probably six months away.
WHY SHOULD YOU BUY WINDOWS?
Windows is available from several reputable, major hardware vendors (those being Dell, HP, Acer, Sony, Gateway/Emachines, and Toshiba and Lenovo). I don’t recommend buying a Windows machine from any other vendor. There are other Windows vendors that make quality machines, but they are much smaller companies, and tend to focus on niche markets. If you’re reading this essay, you know if you should buy from another vendor.
Windows runs on a wide variety of computer hardware - hardware components that are available from many, many hardware vendors. Because of this, Windows machines tend to be commodities. That is, essentially, you will be buying the same machine if you buy it from any of the above recommended vendors. Really, the only difference you will notice is perhaps in the customer service area, and I would check customer service reports from places like PC Magazine (they do annual surveys on this stuff).
And because Windows machines are commodities, this means that you will encounter the most competitive prices for the same features. This is why Windows machines tend to be cheaper than Macs.
So then, if the actual machines are commodities, what are we talking about here? The rest is on the shoulders of Microsoft and its Windows operating system, specifically, Windows XP (Pro and Home versions being identical except for bells and whistles that consumers do not need from the Pro version).
I ask again, why should you use Windows?
You should use Windows if you need to use it for work and your company/supervisor mandates that you use software that only runs on Windows. Most enterprise, client-installed applications are made to run on Windows only. Thin-client enterprise applications can usually be used on Macs (Web-based apps like Peoplesoft).
You should use Windows if the applications that you are looking for are not available on a Mac. These include critical applications such as MS Office and Adobe/Macromedia products (Photoshop, Dreamweaver). This has less to do with Windows than it does Apple Computer and its new line of Macs that have Intel chips inside. MS Office is available for Mac, but it is not currently Intel-native. More on that later.
Any other strengths of Windows over Macs? The only thing that I can think of would be user-preference of the graphical user interface (from here, “GUI”). However, it is not an excuse to say “I have been using Windows for ten years, why should I buy a Mac and try to learn that system?” That is not user-preference. That is being lazy and not willing to invest your time in learning a new GUI that for the most part, mirrors much of the functionality of Windows.
WHY SHOULD YOU USE A MAC?
In my opinion, the Macintosh’s operating system, Mac OS X, is superior to Windows in many ways. The only reason people buy Windows over Mac OS X is because OS X is tied to Apple computers, Apple computers are not commodities and thus cost more, and because Windows is a legacy system that supports hardware and software as old as ten years or even older.
Why do you have problems with your Windows machine? You get viruses, right? You get spyware, right? Your system becomes disorganized because you don’t know how to completely get rid of things you would like to remove, or because you cannot keep track of where everything is, right?
Microsoft has done almost nothing to its GUI since 1995. That’s eleven years. If you look at a screen shot of Windows, circa 1995 and compare it to the “Classic” screen shot of Windows XP (minus the skin – the Fischer Price look), you probably will think you’re running the same system.
The one area that Windows has really progressed is stability. Windows XP and its younger siblings, Windows 2000 and before that, Windows NT, are very stable operating systems. The former two being nearly identical in that respect. No longer do people see the “blue screens of death.” So in this respect, you can count on Windows to run for long periods of time, without worry of a crash and all that goes with a crash, which used to be a problem with the legacy DOS-based Windows versions of 3.1, Windows 95, and Windows 98/Me.
Aside from stability, about all Microsoft has done is let you know that you should not delete the “Windows” folder, created a Web browser that is a magnet for security breaches, added Wi-Fi support, and some other trivial matters such as USB and Firewire support.
To search in Windows, it isn’t much of a stretch to say that you can’t find things any easier than you could eight years ago in Windows 98.
The process of installing applications or “programs” is the same as it was ten years ago.
By default, Windows does not offer you any protection from spyware being installed on your system. Windows is set up so that user privileges are at the super-user level, for Windows that means the default user-level is “Administrator.” This is a fundamental flaw in Windows, not necessarily that you are the Administrator, but the parameters of what the Administrator user is allowed to do, whether or not the user actually knows about it. This is why spyware and viruses get into Windows, because there is not a system of checks and balances.
If you run Windows, you absolutely need a current anti-virus system running in the background. As of a couple of years ago, it is absolutely necessary for you to be running one of the top-rated anti-spyware programs. If you are not running these programs, your Windows machine is nearly guaranteed to become infested with bloated software, malware, spyware, and viruses, all of which severely degrade the performance of your system.
If you run Windows, you need to be on top of things. You need to keep these protective applications current, and you need to check in with Microsoft to get the latest updates, because Windows’ code base is a complete disaster and riddled with holes (found and yet-to be found).
HOW ABOUT APPLE?
Everybody wants to know, should I buy a Mac? Is now the time? Brad, you said at your last update to wait six months. Do you still agree?
Since Tiger came out (Mac OS X 10.4), the Mac operating system is so much further along than Windows, that I really don’t know where to begin.
People are going to read this and think “Brad used to be objective. He didn’t bash Windows. Can I still trust him? He seems to be biased.”
No. I am not biased. Not in the least. Let me tell you. I use Windows XP at work for 40 hours a week. I also have Windows machines on my network, partly because my family has a business and there are some Windows-only apps that are necessary. Otherwise, the machines are at least two years old, and when they fail, I will be installing Macs. So basically, I know Windows as much as 99.9% of all users, the exceptions being the uber-geeks and high-level IT professionals. In short, I use Windows a lot, and I use the Mac a lot, so I feel that I can be objective, since I use both systems a lot of the time.
Tiger is an operating system that is based on an open-source core. Its core is incredibly stable, it is based on Darwin, which is a flavor of Unix and is partly composed of parts of OpenBSD (widely recognized as very stable). On top of that, Apple has built a GUI that is second to none. If you learn how to use a Mac, learn the nuances and slight differences between the GUI of the Mac and of Windows, you’ll come to the same conclusion as me. That the Mac GUI is superior, is easier to use, far more efficient, and it’ll make you more productive.
What about specifics?
If you want to install an application, you drop the contents of the mounted CD/DVD (containing the new app) into the “Applications” folder. Amazing, huh? It actually makes sense. If you want to remove an application from the Mac, you drag the application from the Applications folder and into the Trash. Any questions? No, you do not need to dig through the registry to make sure you have all the traces. You do not have to search the system for bits and pieces. It is gone.
Is the Mac affected by spyware? No. Why not? Because the GUI asks you exactly what you are installing, and you must enter the super-user password in order for any application to be installed. You don’t just click “yes” and then Realplayer and all its bloatware gets installed. This is a barrier to malware. You cannot avoid it.
Is the Mac affected by viruses? Technically, yes. But I can count on one hand the number of viruses that have infected Macs in the last five years. And you have to try very hard to infect a Mac with a virus. I do not run anti-virus programs on my Macs. There simply is not a need. Some people will tell you to run them. It’s a waste of money, your time, and your Mac’s resources. Don’t bother. Trust me.
How can the Mac make me more productive?
All of your documents will be in the Documents folder. If for some reason you cannot find a particular file, you use Spotlight. Spotlight searches your entire hard drive and any connected external drives for the file. It searches within files, using metadata. If you can’t find it with Spotlight, it’s not on your computer. Somebody on here will say, “yes, it is.” Okay, maybe 1 in 1000 times, Spotlight won’t find the file. Thanks.
I could go on about features of the Mac GUI that help boost productivity, but if I did that justice, this essay would never end. On Windows, if you want a particular utility to do a particular task, chances are good that you downloaded a third-party application to help you do that. On the Mac, many of the things that you wish to do on Windows are actually part of the Mac OS, and since that is the case, much is under the hood fundamentally, which just continues to make the system more stable and robust overall.
What kinds of problems will I run into running a Mac on a Windows network?
Or for that matter, in a Windows world?
Well, there are certain things that you will encounter that will be problems. It is difficult to get a printer shared on a PC that is connected with a USB cable, for example. Sometimes you will run into problems with files names, since Windows’ idea of file names dates to the 1980s.
You may also have problems accessing a virtual network, via VPN. Most of the time, it works, but not without some tinkering. Most networks run today are run on Windows Server or Linux.
There will be some technical issues using a Mac on a Windows network, but for the most part, these are limited to file sharing issues, device sharing issues, and really technical network protocol stuff.
If you’re wondering how a Mac handles web browsing or opening Microsoft Word documents, don’t worry. A Mac handles those tasks exactly the same as a Windows machine. Same with Excel, Powerpoint, and many other types of files, such as video formats, audio formats, image formats, and many other standard file formats or codecs.
WELL THEN, IF YOU SAY A MAC IS SUPERIOR, WHAT IS STOPPING ME FROM SWITCHING?
The first issue is what I will call “the software question.”
Aside from web browsing and playing music or burning CDs, you need to consider what types of tasks you plan to use your computer for. If you intend to use Adobe software, or Macromedia software, or MS Office, you need to consider that you will have to buy new, full versions of those applications to run on the Mac. Because your Windows versions will not work. This could mean thousands of dollars, just this issue.
Then again, buying a Mac may save you money on software, because it comes with so much quality software. You have heard of the “iLife” suite. iLife consists of a photo management application, a movie maker application, a DVD authoring application, a website development app, a rather highly sophisticated music authoring app, and a music player/burner (iTunes, which you may have heard of). All of these applications are suitable for 99.9% of consumers. If you buy a Mac and you want to do these types of tasks, you don’t need to buy any additional software.
Another issue is the Intel situation. In 2006, Apple switched its entire line of computers over to Intel chips. You can no longer buy a brand new Mac that doesn’t have an Intel chip inside. This is great, because Intel’s chips are much better suited for personal computers than were Transmeta’s or IBM’s workstation chips.
The problem with Intel is that any software that is not written for the x86 architecture will not run on Intel Macs, at least not without an emulator. Nearly all software currently available for the Mac is Intel-native, but there are two significant holdouts: Adobe and Microsoft. Both companies say they intend to release Intel-native versions of their Mac software sometime in 2007. If I had to guess, I would say that Adobe should have its line out by mid-2007 and Microsoft may stall a bit and wait until later in the year.
From what I have read, trying to run PowerPC Adobe apps on Intel Macs is not practical. However, I have read that running MS Office on Intel Macs is quite viable. The disparity is easy to understand if you consider that Adobe apps are power-hungry programs that involve using very large files and a lot of processor power. MS Office is just a word processor, a spreadsheet, and a slideshow maker. I have been told that running the PowerPC version of MS Office on Intel Macs is not a problem. But would I shell out $300 for MS Office when in a few months, a new version will come out that is the real deal? I would not. But then, I don’t have an Intel Mac.
Why should I buy an iMac when I can get a desktop PC from HP for $600? Good question.
The premium that you are paying is mostly for the Mac operating system. However, chances are fair that the components in an iMac are better quality than in that HP PC, and the iMac probably has better technology. Not by much, but for example, your bargain-basement PC is going to have integrated graphics, a relatively small hard drive, probably not a DVD burner, doesn’t come with a monitor, doesn’t come with the software that Macs have, and almost certainly has an inferior chip (likely an Intel Celeron versus an Intel Core 2 Duo).
Do you want a machine that is going to last, that is going to make you more productive, is going to take far less time to maintain? Then buy a Mac. If price is the overwhelming driving factor for buying a new computer, then I say you should go out and buy a Windows XP box from HP for $600. Otherwise, look at a Mac.
COMMENTS ABOUT LINUX…
Is Linux practical for an average consumer? Close, but not yet. Ubuntu is one of the more user-friendly distributions of Linux, but even it is not enough user-friendly for the average consumer. Things are still a little too technical in nature, in terms of the GUI. An intermediate-level consumer could use Linux. However, where will you save money?
About the only place you can buy a Linux machine is from Walmart. Don’t buy that machine. Really, the only way to run Linux on a contemporary machine is to buy a Windows machine and replace the Windows with Linux. Now, that makes sense if you want the hardware and insist on Linux, but economically, it doesn’t make any sense, because you are paying for Windows anyhow.
Until PC vendors begin selling Linux-ready boxes or Linux pre-installed, I can’t recommend this as an option for consumers.
COMMENTS ABOUT MICROSOFT WINDOWS VISTA…
I subscribe to eWeek, Infoworld, PC Magazine, and Macworld magazines that specialize in talking about information technology, including hardware and software. I read many online forums, visit Slashdot multiple times each day. I feel that I have a good handle on the pulse of IT in our world.
In general, my prediction is that Windows Vista will be a disaster. For certain, it will be a disaster until the first service pack is released around a full year after its launch. Its launch is slated for “early 2007,” but I would be surprised if we see copies shipping before June 1. An optimistic launch date is March 1, 2007.
Why will Vista be a disaster? Well, Microsoft is trying to mimic many of the things that Apple has accomplished with its Mac OS, except that Microsoft wants to incorporate those features into a code base that is 15 years old. Essentially, this is Windows NT, version 2007. Windows NT was re-released as Windows 2000 in 1999, and basically, not much has changed since then. Microsoft wants to add bells and whistles that mimic many of those that are in Mac OS, but to do this, they will further bloat what is already mind-bogglingly bloated code. In 2001, you could realistically run Windows XP on 256 megs of RAM. The same operating system is Windows’ latest effort as of this post, but in order to run it comfortably, you should have a full gig of RAM.
This begs the question…what is it going to take to run Vista? I’m not going to try to answer that question.
There will be changes to the GUI of Windows, finally, in Vista. But will they be for the better? From what I have seen, some of the changes will be welcomed, but as many of them will be disdained, and turned off, if possible.
I am not going to further speculate on Vista, because at this point, nobody really knows how it is going to function when it is released to the public next year. Right now, testers around the world are saying both positive and negative things. And to both extremes. So, we will see.
CLOSING COMMENTS…
Again, my ultimate conclusion is that an Apple Mac is the best computer on the market. I think it’s a great value. The premium that you pay will be amortized, as with any Mac, because you will likely use that Mac for at least three years. In comparison, if you buy a PC, I consider it a “technology fee.” I call it a fee because you are likely to replace that machine much sooner than a Mac, and because you are not buying a complete solution. After you buy a PC, you have to stop at Amazon and pick up a copy of Webroot Spysweeper, Norton anti-virus, and maybe ZoneAlarm Firewall.
The Mac OS is rock solid, its core is open-source and is very modern. Windows’ core is ancient and bloated from thousands of patches and band-aids to keep it relevant.
The Mac GUI will make you more productive. The Windows GUI has changed very little in more than ten years.
I highly recommend the Mac over the PC.
Yours, brad.
--- (previously noted update):
Because my objectivity has been challenged by certain people who chose to post comments attached to this essay, I am going to lay out my credentials.
+ use of the Windows operating system since 1996 (exclusively from 1997 to 2002). Extensively used Windows 95, Windows NT, Windows 98SE, Windows 2000, and Windows XP (Home and Pro). In addition, I have experimented with Windows 3.1 and Windows ME.
+ currently use the Windows XP Pro operating system a minimum of 40 hours per week during my day job.
+ maintain a small business network that includes three Windows machines (two 98SE machines and one Windows XP machine), and one Mac (iMac G5).
+ maintain two other Windows XP machines for immediate family.
+ maintain three Macs in all - two of them mine, one is a sibling's.
+ used System 7 for Mac from 1992-1996.
+ have used Mac OS X since 2002, including versions 10.1, 10.2, 10.3, and 10.4. OS X 10.4 is installed on the three Macs that I currently maintain.
+ I am trained to maintain Windows operating systems - cleaning them, tweaking them, and if necessary, wiping them (and cleanly installing the OS). I run corporate-grade anti-virus on all of my Windows machines. I run a PC Magazine's Editor's Choice anti-spyware application on all of my Windows machines.
+ I personally installed a small business local area network for my family's business that includes four computers - three Windows machines and one Mac. It is a wired/wireless hybrid network with a theoretical outdoor range of 300 feet, but I actually have tested and maintained a "very good" wireless signal from approximately 600 feet. The network spans three buildings that form a triangle and in all, cover nearly three acres. I run a Wireless G network, as of January 2007. I run a hardware firewall with updated firmware in front of the Internet.
+ I have had broadband Internet at my residence since 1999.
** I challenge critics of this essay to find people who have these qualifications. I am not proclaiming to be an IT professional, but that is not the point. The point here is that I have extensively, both in the past and currently, used Windows and Mac OS. Few people can honestly and legitimately make this claim. The people that are classified as "fanboys" (extremists/loyalists of their niche - Windows, Mac, or Linux) are usually ignorant of their competition. A Mac fanboy probably has not extensively used Windows in many years, and doesn't sufficiently know the capabilities of the operating system to support an argument. A Windows fanboy has perhaps seen screenshots of Mac OS at ArsTechnica or maybe even dabbled in an Apple Store. That person is not qualified to make this argument. If any group of computer users is qualified to make judgements about other operating systems, it tends to be Linux users.
+ I claim several high-level professional IT workers as good friends of mine. This doesn't bolster my below arguments, but it lets me know where my limitations are, and who I can go to if there is something I don't understand. I have the resources to accomplish nearly any task, with the assistance of my IT friends.
+ I have absolutely nothing to gain by arguing one way or another in this essay. I do not have any agenda whatsoever, aside from simply explaining my real-world experience and offering advice based upon it. I am not paid to write this review, I do not receive consideration from Microsoft, Apple, or any other company. Epinions pays its content contributors nominal amounts of money in the form of "revenue share," and on average, this amounts to about $10 per month for me. Be assured, I am not writing for the money.
+ this essay is intended to benefit people trying to make educated purchasing decisions. It should serve no greater purpose, unless those who have made up their minds wish to read this at their leisure.
Thank you!
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Epinions.com ID:
brad
|
 - Top 500 |
|
Member: Brad Engelmann
Location: Helen Township, MN
Reviews written: 156
Trusted by: 92 members
About Me:
brad@engelmann.us (email address)
|
|
|
© 1999-2008 Shopping.com, Inc.