OT: PC or Mac?
I recently bought an Apple Macbook two months ago and I happen to love it. Way simpler than a regular old PC with windows and I have had no issues so far. After you figure out some of the different buttons and gadgets, it works perfectly. I also have Microsoft Word, Power Point, and Excel on it. I was wondering what other MGoBlog users were using. So what is it? PC or Mac?
November 3rd, 2009 at 8:53 PM ^
Depends on what you want to do. For home use, MAc. Using boot camp or virtual program like Parallels or VM WARE allows you to run PC software (you just have to buy Win OS and corresponding software). If you are business focused, then go windows.
The third choice is Linux such as UBUNTU.
On a side note, the Mac doesn't have the same problem with viruses etc that PCs have. Not that Macs aren't vulnerable. They are. But there is no money to be made in attacking Macs as the ownership of the os is ~8-10% of the market. PCs and the holes in Windows makes it a much easier and profitable target.
Given a few years, your PC will end up being your Phone or something ultra portable.
November 3rd, 2009 at 9:11 PM ^
that the number of attacks on Macs is climbing. Their lack of acknowledgment at the their susceptibility is one of the things that opens them to malware. I can't quote what the issue was, but months ago there was a HUGE security flaw in OS X.? that didn't get closed for months because Apple didn't want to acknowledge the fact there was an issue. The patch took forever.
I'm willing to live with somwhat more risk because I know how to use programs to protect myself.
November 3rd, 2009 at 8:56 PM ^
I'm a PC guy all the way. Personally, I absolutely hate Macs. But, having worked in tech. services for over 3 years now, I hate a lot of technology (but mostly I just hate users).
I'm going to be buying a new laptop soon (my desktop died). Definitely going the PC route. I'll put Windows 7 on there but I'm also a big fan of Kubuntu so I'll be dual booting that.
Unfortunately, for all my hatred of Macs I can't get away from them. About 50% of people where I work use Macs.
November 3rd, 2009 at 8:58 PM ^
for over 20 years.
Even if MICROSOFT did not overprice their products, they have horrible business practices that I do not support.
November 3rd, 2009 at 9:17 PM ^
There was a study comparing Mac OS prices with Windows OS prices and the verdict was that MS products are no more expensive and possibly cheaper than Mac.
The X.y versions of Apple's being sold as different versions are like MS's Service Packs which are free. If you look at the increased functionality of XP from when it was first released to it's EOL, the difference has been amazing.
I lived through XP, SP1, SP2, SP3 and it just got better and better. And I didn't pay for those updates over 9 years. I probably would have bought 4 or 5 Mac OS's over that same period of time. One copy of XP lasted significantly longer than one copy of a Mac OS would.
And I just bought a student copy of W7 for $30 (the Pro version which includes just about everything you could ask for, including all the fancy networking and virtualization stuff) and that'll hopefully last me another 5-8 years. Will OS X.? last that long and always get major updates every 1-2 years with incremental updates every couple months?
November 4th, 2009 at 12:47 AM ^
It is not true that OSX updates are equivalent to Service Packs. I've used OSX since its inception, and the user experience and functionality has advanced to a great degree with every update (possibly with the exception of Snow Leopard, which cost $50 for 5 licenses, and has tons of behind the scenes changes).
No Windows Service Pack included the kind of aesthetic and functional improvements that the OSX updates have . . . I'm talking about things like Spotlight, Expose, Dashboard, Time Machine, Boot Camp, Cover Flow, and the list goes on. The reason Windows has seemed so far behind is their failure to implement any similar features until Vista.
November 4th, 2009 at 12:52 AM ^
You definitely are not coming across as a dick or anything.
November 5th, 2009 at 9:11 PM ^
Really?
There have been over a dozen studies for the past decade or more that consistently show a MUCH lower total cost of ownership for Macs vs. PCs (running Windows).
Which doesn't even begin to calculate the billions of economic loss, and frustrated man hours dealing with viruses. Understand this: there has NEVER been a verified Mac virus discovered "in the wild." Period
Do Macs cost more? maybe on a couple models, Apple has always refused to play in the discount computer market, they don't make money in that space (and neither does Dell anymore) and they won't sacrifice quality. Spec a machine out vs the competition, including the software and decide for yourself.
I really didn't want to get in a bitchy nerd debate about this so I'll try to make this my only post.
The main thing I want to say however is something I notice all the time when PC or Mac debates crop up on the internet.
Most of the PC responses are people bitching about Apples initial hardware costs, or "I hate their touchy-feely marketing", or "Steve Jobs is arrogant".
Most of the Mac responders (who often use PCs/Windows all day at work) just mention how happy they are using a Mac.
Take from that what you will.
November 5th, 2009 at 10:45 PM ^
Your post is full of fail. I really don't want to get in a bitchy nerd debate about this so this will be my only post.
November 5th, 2009 at 10:51 PM ^
I don't want to get into a bitchy nerd debate, but your sig hasn't been updated in a while.
November 5th, 2009 at 11:01 PM ^
I was planning on doing it after this weekend.
November 3rd, 2009 at 9:10 PM ^
Definitely a PC. And on Windows 7. Life's good.
November 3rd, 2009 at 9:14 PM ^
I switched to a Mac when I started my photography business, and I don't plan on going back. I don't spend my time bashing Windows; I just prefer Mac.
I look at it the same way I look at the Canon/Nikon battle in the camera world. In both cases, there are those who are religiously devoted to one brand and actually hate the other. I think the whole thing is a little ridiculous because they're both functional: you can take good pictures with Canon or Nikon, and you can accomplish whatever you want on a Mac or a PC. For most people, it's just personal preference, and it's not that big a deal.
That said, PC users who shoot Nikon are anti-American terrorists who kick babies.
November 3rd, 2009 at 9:20 PM ^
I'm looking at a camera when I graduate and thinking about the new K-x. I'd like something with IS in the body instead of the lenses and I don't have any legacy hardware to worry about. According to the guy who does camera reviews for anandtech.com, the SDM for focusing in Pentax is just about the best thing on the market (if you get the rather expensive SDM lenses)
November 3rd, 2009 at 10:23 PM ^
I guess it depends on what you're planning to do with the camera. If you're not going to be a pro, the Pentax system would be fine (and the in-body stabilization will save you money). They, too, take fine pictures, just like Canon and Nikon. But if you're going to be a pro, Canon and Nikon offer a better range of bodies and lenses (particularly for more demanding photography like sports and wildlife).
November 3rd, 2009 at 10:39 PM ^
I'm looking for a non-professional, high level consumer DSLR. The only thing I have against the Canon is the lens integrated IS. From what I've read, Pentax is supposed have a new partner for making lenses and the new K-7 and K-x are supposedly (it sounds like) leaps and bounds ahead of where they used to be in terms of AF speed and accuracy as well as image processing speeds.
I've read a few reviews that paint it in an extremely positive light (the k-x, that is). I believe one said they currently have the best standard lens package of any of the manufacturers (the 18-55 and 50-300 option, not the 50-200) and that their image quality has improved significantly. The only negative I saw said there is a little distortion when panning using the camera in HD video and that AF doesn't work in HD video (no biggie, if I want an HD video camera, I'll buy one - decent consumer ones are cheap) That overall, it's a great option for someone without any current hardware and it has quite a few options that aren't available on cost-competitors from other manufacturers.
November 3rd, 2009 at 11:14 PM ^
If you're looking for a consumer SLR, then yeah, you'll be fine with that. If you want to get the most of out it, I'd buy with an eye towards upgrading to better (more expensive) lenses in the future, though; if they can package a body and two lenses for under $1,000, they're not the best lenses. But I think you'll be fine with the photos they'll produce.
November 3rd, 2009 at 11:31 PM ^
It said they were good package lenses. I understand that doesn't mean they're going to be great lenses. I was looking at other upto 250mm zoom lenses and they look like they're in the $1000+ range in general.
I generally use dpreview.com to give me good, reasonable unbiased info as to what's nice and what's not. Their initial take is that it looks nice and of itself, it's pretty good. They don't have a full review of it up yet.
A friend of mine has an XSi and she likes it very well. The LiIon battery is a strong selling point in Canon. On the Pentax side, the K-7 is supposed to be very nice and can use the same lenses as the k-x, and the K-7 is supposed to have phenomenal weather and dust sealing. And then the K-7 uses LiIon batteries. So I'm not decided, I'm just looking. It's just that the K-7 is like $1200 for the body only and that's a little steep for someone who just wants a nice camera.
The negative of the T1i is lack of body IS. Negative of Pentax is no LiIon battery and smaller manufacturer. Positive of Canon is that it's supposed to be a good 'pro-sumer' DSLR. Positive of the Penatx is good weather sealing on upgrades and supposedly very good features (more than comparable from other manufacturers in the same price range) and in-body IS.
You're obviously a strong believer in Canon?
November 4th, 2009 at 12:39 AM ^
I've only used Canon, and I've been happy with it. I don't really have substantial experience with other brands, so my comments tend to be more specific in reference to Canon gear because it's what I use. So when people ask me what they should get, I say well, Canon has treated me well, so I'd recommend them.
Before you make any purchase, I'd make one big recommendation: handle the cameras you're considering. That may tip you one way or another, as one camera may feel better in your hands or one menu system and button layout may make more immediate sense to you. It can make a difference. I don't know the size of the K-x, but one complaint some have had with the Rebels is that they're too small -- they don't fit comfortably in some hands. I have very long fingers and never felt uncomfortable with the Rebel, but some just couldn't get used to it.
The K-7 would be more comparable to the Canon 50D ($1200ish); my primary camera right now is the 30D (the same level, but two generations older). My first SLR was the Rebel XT (the second-generation Rebel, I believe). I don't think it'd be worth it for you to put out the $400ish extra dollars for the higher-level body.
It sounds like the two features that have you going back and forth the most are in-body stabilization and battery type. In light of that, the question is this: how much do you expect to tax the batteries, and how often do you expect to need stabilization? How heavily do you expect to shoot on a regular basis, and what do you expect to shoot most often?
November 4th, 2009 at 8:20 AM ^
for the tips. I'm looking at a significant number of features including speed of focus and quickness to take pictures as well as rate of pictures and quality. It SEEMS like the cameras in the price range I'm looking at have all improved to the point they are very similar in many respects re:general usability. So I'm looking at features that may or may not be highly desirable.
I had originally wanted a Pentax because on the k200, they had weather sealing. Now that you have to step up to the k-7 for that feature, doesn't matter so much. When I started looking, it appeared that their focusing (quickness and reliability both) and picture processing were behind everyone else in the lower level cameras. Now, they've dropped the weather sealing but improved the internal workings of the camera, both mechanical and electronic, and reviews seem to indicate the K-x is very nice and competes well with Canon in those respects.
The battery thing concerns me as I have read some very negative reviews of AA batteries in the Pentax cameras. So the LiIon in Canon sounds very nice. I just want to have the IS feature to prevent losing good pictures to a little hand wobble.
And my intended use is that I would like to start traveling some when I get done with school and want a nice general use camera for landscapes/wildlife as well as normal family use.
Mostly I'm down to chosing between Canon and Pentax(I think) and I'm just looking at feature differences between the two. It appears that general usability in many situations the base cameras are very similar. So the main choices I'm looking at are the K-x with its in body IS but AA batteries (future possible high end with weather sealing) vs the Canon with its somewhat higher resolution, LiIon batteries, and in lens IS. But I'll wait for the DPreview article, read their take, and go out and have a look. The K-x is new enough that I'm not positive it's even shipping.
November 4th, 2009 at 1:52 PM ^
That last point about the K-x not having been released yet leads to something else to consider: if you can wait, it may be good to let the K-x circulate and see what strengths and weaknesses consumers find. With one camera still unreleased, it's a little bit harder to compare the two at this point because you don't really know if one lives up to its promises.
It'd also be good to judge the sensor quality of both cameras -- side-by-side, if possible. Megapixels don't translate into quality; a good 10mp sensor is better than an okay 15mp sensor. (I'm actually a little mad at camera manufacturers for using megapixels as pure marketing hype.) Put 100% crops at various ISOs next to each other to see if one sensor produces better images. If they're comparable, it's no big deal; if not, then you have something else to consider.
As far as reviews go, I've decided a bevy of consumer reviews can be more valuable than one or two professional reviews because you can look for trends: if you see the same good or bad point being brought up by different reviewers, it's something to take note of. I use the reviews at fredmiranda.com, but they don't extend beyond Canon and Nikon, so I'm not sure where to go for similar Pentax reviews.
November 3rd, 2009 at 9:24 PM ^
Dell laptop, XP, but I got it for free.
Other than the occasional blue screen of
death, it's OK.
Ifj75, you can use that hammer the next
time you see "hit any key to continue"
November 4th, 2009 at 12:59 PM ^
Funny thing, about an hour after I posted my hammer desire my laptop completely shut down. I think it's just the power cord (and my battery's dead, but I'm not replacing a battery on a five year old laptop).
But for a second, I thought it knew....
November 3rd, 2009 at 9:36 PM ^
Just got a macbook pro and I love it as a supplement to my older PCs, but it just doesn't have the flexibility of the PC. A mac does just about everything I need it to, but I miss actually being able to find a way to fix a problem myself when one pops up.
On another note - I know 7 has multitouch support, but doesn't seem that too many windows machines have deployed the technology - I can't underestimate how awesome the multitouch gestures have been so far on the mac.
November 3rd, 2009 at 11:16 PM ^
HP tx2z. The entire screen is multitouch and rotates/flips down as a tablet, pen included. I have the older singletouch Vista version, and have no idea why HP hasn't marketed this thing better.
November 3rd, 2009 at 11:38 PM ^
Because Apple promised to sue the snot out of anyone who used any of its technology or ideas and they figured they owned multi-touch in all its forms. When that idea went by the way-side as unsupportable, Windows multi-touch things started coming. But there was a gap as companies didn't want to be sued.
November 3rd, 2009 at 9:38 PM ^
I love PC gaming.... I love windows 7.. mac sucks.. that is all.
November 3rd, 2009 at 9:38 PM ^
I use a Mac, switched about two years ago. I record a bit, and audio software simply runs far, far better in a Mac-based environment because most of it was designed for a Mac-based environment in the first place.
November 3rd, 2009 at 10:32 PM ^
Bought one 2 years ago and have loved it ever since. Only a few programs I used to use regularly I can't use now. But I set up my old Dell in the basement with the Apple Airport, Vonage, and a Roku player. Works well and the iMac picks up the Airport with ease over 2 floors, no loss in d/l speed.
November 3rd, 2009 at 10:42 PM ^
It's smooth, baby. I'm not an OS fundamentalist; I don't hate Windows or refuse to use it. In fact, I'll probably install it on my computer with Boot Camp.
I just prefer Mac OS X. I've also had better luck with the hardware. My iBook G4 (that I just traded in) lasted five years without a hitch and was in fine shape when I sent it off. I don't mind spending the "extra" money.
November 3rd, 2009 at 11:24 PM ^
I have become a Mac person. I will admit it. I was constantly using her laptop at home because of the ease of use. We used her teacher discount and got a Macbook Pro. Couldn't be happier.
November 4th, 2009 at 1:24 AM ^
After suffering with two Dell laptops, I now have a MacBook and I'll never go back to a PC. I had always hated Macs until I started using them in the Fishbowl my junior year and realized how much better I liked the Mac OS than Windows. It took a little while to learn how to use a Mac, but it was totally worth it.
November 4th, 2009 at 1:24 AM ^
I have two, an ancient Dell laptop and a one-year-old HP desktop. The laptop runs XP, and the desktop would be running Windows 7, if it weren't currently sitting in a box on my floor because I don't have a desk.
We had a lot of Macs on my college and grad school campuses, and I found them frustrating and not particularly intuitive. Plus my boyfriend works with PCs, so I can get mine fixed/upgraded for nothing more than the wholesale cost of new parts whenever I want.
November 4th, 2009 at 2:56 AM ^
Since I am no computer programmer and would consider myself relatively not so tech savvy I like the simplicity of macs. I guess there are advantages and disadvantages of both.
November 4th, 2009 at 8:45 AM ^
It's literally amazing how cleaner, simpler, and less prone to virus' it is.
November 4th, 2009 at 1:57 PM ^
I've used both quite extensively, and I have good and bad things to say about each.
That said, I almost exclusively use notebooks, and I could never see myself getting anything other than a ThinkPad or a Panasonic Toughbook. That said, I tend to lean more towards PC because its more standard on these platforms, though IBM/Lenovo have always been pretty good about supporting Linux which I use occasionally on my X61.
I think Unix is where it's at. All modern Mac operating systems are Unix based. But with Mac, you're locked into a certain architecture. The sturdiness of a Mac notebook pales in comparison to something like the ThinkPad, and for someone like myself who is constantly moving/traveling this is very important. The easy answer is just to use Linux, because then you get the stability of the Unix system in the body of a tank (I love my T60 :) )
November 4th, 2009 at 11:17 PM ^
In my experience they tended to alternate between reasonably solid models and somewhat crappy models. My last Thinkpad tended to overheat--the vents clogged appallingly easily. I had the motherboard replaced and numerous other problems. Interestingly, I noticed it was a problem when I couldn't compile a kernel without the machine crashing. I don't remember the model (it was a work machine).
The best contrast was about ten years ago between the 380D/380XD models, which really were tanks, and the 390E/390X. I'm usually pretty easy on laptops, but the hinges on my 390X's display broke away from the base with the keyboard. Nearly all of my colleagues with one of those models had similar problems.
November 5th, 2009 at 10:16 AM ^
I have the same issue with my ancient powerbook G4. There is a known trackpad temperature sensor issue that Apple is refusing to acknowledge. The faulty sensor keeps sending my powerbook into in sleep mode from false overheat signals. There are three ways to fix the issue; 1. Buy a new topcase, which is $500 through Apple, 2. Open up the topcase find the sensor which is about 5 mm wide and solder it off, or 3. comment out the line of code referring to the sensor in the kernel and recompile it. I chose option 3. However, when apple sends out updates to OS X, part of the upgrade process fixes any inconsistency compared to the default code. So I have to go through the fix everytime there is an update. With Snow leopard out now, i am hoping the os x updates for Leopard are starting to become few and far in between.
November 5th, 2009 at 10:25 PM ^
Interesting, I had that problem too. But I had it solved rather easily by just sending it off to Apple. Of course, that was three years ago and the thing was under warranty. It definitely was annoying when it was happening though.
November 5th, 2009 at 2:23 PM ^
That's interesting about the hinges. FWIW, IBM has been using steel hinges for a while. I can (and often do) pick up my computer by the top of the screen, swing it around to another desk, and set it down without any problems.
Heat seems to be about the only consistent problem I run in to with Thinkpads. That said, I think people are a bit too pick in that regard. Laptops get hot. And if we're on the heat subject, Mac's get VERY hot in my experience.
Certainly they're not all perfect, but the T series has been pretty solid since it's introduction.
November 5th, 2009 at 10:06 PM ^
I ought to mention that IBM hasn't sold Thinkpads for a while now. They sold the brand to Lenovo. IBM is still involved with marketing and support for them, which confuses things a bit. Of course Lenovo was building them for a long time prior to the brand changing hands.
The heat thing is a concern, though, when components start to fail. Fortunately, later versions of Thinkpads have tended to fix problems founds in earlier versions.
November 4th, 2009 at 10:50 PM ^
a PC right now.
But I truly believe that Mac is a superior product. So much easier to use and gotta love the virus protection.
November 5th, 2009 at 12:49 PM ^
Assembled it myself, though it's several years old now - single core CPU, AGP mobo - except for the video card, which I replaced earlier this year because the old one died.
Been too lazy to assemble a new one. Mainly because it would require a vast cleaning project of all the stuff I've got piled on my table.
Far more games that I've played availabe for PC. If they ever came out for the Mac, it was much later. Also didn't see the point of spending extra money for a computer I couldn't really upgrade.
November 5th, 2009 at 1:09 PM ^
I bought a Macbook my sophomore year of college and loved it at first. I think it's great for students and normal every day users who just want to surf the Internet and create a couple Word documents. After some continued use, I realized that in terms of quality/reliability, these machines are no better than a PC - Apple is just good at creating that illusion.
My Macbook hard drive crashed 2 times in 2 years, with no possiblity of recovering my files (luckily I bought an external HD for backups after the first one). The screen flickers nonstop unless you toy with the brightness settings. Certain programs seem to function/not function on any given day. It is basically useless for anything I need to do for work unless you have Windows installed.
After my troubles, I just built my own desktop and bought a cheap HP laptop. As long as you don't do anything stupid, you shouldn't have any problems with a PC. Yes, not having to deal with viruses and such was a big plus for the Macbook, but I don't even want another Apple computer after all the hardware issues I went through. They're overpriced machines, and the only way I would buy another is if they were priced competitively against PCs.
Macbook side story: when my hard drive crashed, I knew exactly what the problem was and called support after the warranty expired. The support person wanted to charge some $680 to replace the hard drive. Then when I asked if I could just buy the hard drive from them and install it myself, they said it was $280 for an 80GB hard drive. I just got one off Newegg and replaced it myself for $60, and it worked fine. I'm sure other computer companies charge excessively too, but I've never had to call a PC company for a repair like this.
November 7th, 2009 at 8:12 PM ^
"in terms of quality/reliability, these machines are no better than a PC"
Consumer Reports says otherwise.
http://gadgetwise.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/05/04/consumer-reports-takes-a…
I couldn't find CR reliability ratings outside of CR's paywall, but CR says Apple's reliability is at or near the top of computer manufacturers.
I've used Apple products for years and never had serious issues. However it sounds like your Macbook needs some serious looking into. The problems you describe sound like more hardware issues, like bad RAM or a failing motherboard.
And now that I sound like a total Apple fanboy I will say that the next desktop I get will probably be a linux desktop. Apple's stuff is slick and the OS is nice, and some of Apple's software is really, really nice (iDVD and iPhoto, Aperture too) but I think I can do most of the things I need to be able to do on a linux box.
November 5th, 2009 at 8:32 PM ^
What is it? I believe your Apple is indeed a mac.
November 6th, 2009 at 3:21 PM ^
I just purchased a new macbook pro. The previous four years of arch school I used a dell laptop that finally bit the dust. I love the new mac, it has definitely increased my productivity. Instead on tweaking it, or monitoring performance, I just work with it. I have found its simplicity very liberating. Also, I use Adobe software alot, and I feel that it works better in OSX than in Windows.
That being said I do have a desktop running XP64 ( i chose this over vista) for AutoCAD and gaming.