Mac or PC?

[DesDownunder]

Not that I would in anyway want to start a war over which is better I thought you might be interested in these 32 reasons why PCs are better than Macs.

Excuse me, I have to go lock myself and my PC in the bunker.

[Cole Parker]

You, sir, are brave, or foolish.

Your attack by a rabid racoon is imminent.

Hide man. Hide!

C

[Camy]

I use both. Go me.

[Tanuki Racoon]

12 - Microsoft?s on your team

And with that, I rest my case. The Mac is better than the PC. Because Microsoft is NOT on our side.

Point. Set. Match.

And we already had this thread.

[JamesSavik]

PC hardware + Mandriva Linux =

[Bruin Fisher]

Help me out here, guys. My inclination is with James Savik. PC hardware is cheap, easily interchangeable and nowadays remarkably reliable. Linux according to all the experts is great.

I'm running four computers, and at present three of them run WinXP and one keeps crashing on me because it's running Vista. I would like to abandon Microsoft altogether. I have Linux as an OS, Firefox etc as internet apps, OpenOffice as an office suite and I couldn't be happier. My printer is a Canon multifunction that I don't think I could get to work under Linux, and my camera comes with software utilities to convert its raw image files to JPG which won't run either. And the book-keeping software I earn part of my living with, Quickbooks, only runs under Windows. In addition I have some other stuff, a TV tuner that lets me record TV programmes to hard disk, a webcam I use with Skype, stuff like that. Everything works under Windows except when Windows itself doesn't work (XP is not bad but Vista stinks in my experience) but I'm a novice with Linux and I'm pretty sure even if I was an expert there would be some of my stuff that wouldn't be working under Linux.

How do you guys run Linux? Do you just sacrifice all the gizmos that come with Windows drivers but nothing else (MP3 players, mobile phones etc)? Or am I missing something?

I have run Linux, Fedora and latterly Ubuntu, for a trial period, and I can see why people like it, but I can't commit to it unless I can do everything I need to do with it.

[Tanuki Racoon]

I must clarify. For those of you running PC's that use Unix/Linux, I have no objection. My real objection is to Windows.

A proper question would be Windows vs Mac.

Bruin, the issues with Linux, as you have seen is the driver software. But more and more 3rd party drivers are out there.

I run both MacOS, Windows XP, and Linux on my Mac. Triple :) The Windows is so I can run Procomm so I can connect to the server at work. Linux is for geek-factor. The MacOS is for USING my computer.

[Camy]

I've played with Ubuntu, but I've never seriously thought about using it as a sole OS. I use my mac for things 'arty' and the PC for day to day things: the reason being I have so much stuff on the PC and I'm lazy.

One thing still astounds me. In the early days of music production the de facto computer was the Atari 1040. This ran with 1Mb of Ram for everything (and could run on 512 Kbs). Nowadays you can't run squit without at least 1Gb of Ram ... and that's just for the OS. Why?

[Bruin Fisher]

I had a pretty cool office suite complete with spell check and stuff running on a BBC Micro with 32Kb of RAM. The search and replace could do stuff it's almost impossible to do with modern software, like cleaning out spurious line breaks automatically while leaving double line breaks as paragraph breaks. And it started up before your finger had left the power switch.

Nowadays everything's bloated. The Adobe PDF reader is now a 33.5Mb compressed download, while the alternative Foxit Reader is just 3Mb and arguably as good. Sure, today's software has more functions but I believe most of the bloat is stuff like graduated fills on buttons and other pretty 'window(s) dressing'.

So you guys don't rely on Linux, then? Does anyone rely on Linux as their sole OS? I want to know if it's possible, without unacceptable compromises.

[Tanuki Racoon]

Nowadays you can't run squit without at least 1Gb of Ram ... and that's just for the OS. Why?

Really lazy programmers. And that's the truth. Programmers are not what they used to be. The use libraries with 50 functions but only need one. So you get code that isn't needed. It's bloatware. A good programmer (raises hand) will code his own shit rather than use an entire library to do something silly. Plus modern compilers compiler for speed not RAM space. Bad programming. Really. I blame (no jokes) Visual Basic as the first program that created programs that were really huge and made tens of thousands of people think they were programmers.

I can write a sort routine in any number of languages off the top of my head AND write device drivers to format a disk. I can write in high languages and in native machine code. Nice, small code.

The search and replace could do stuff it's almost impossible to do with modern software, like cleaning out spurious line breaks automatically while leaving double line breaks as paragraph breaks.

TexEdit for the Mac will do this.

So you guys don't rely on Linux, then? Does anyone rely on Linux as their sole OS? I want to know if it's possible, without unacceptable compromises.

One of my friends uses Ubuntu and except for scanners can do whatever he wants. Scanner drivers seem to be an issue.

[Bruin Fisher]

I can write a sort routine in any number of languages off the top of my head AND write device drivers to format a disk. I can write in high languages and in native machine code. Nice, small code.

... and wear your underpants outside your trousers, no doubt?

One of my friends uses Ubuntu and except for scanners can do whatever he wants. Scanner drivers seem to be an issue.

That's just the sort of thing that frustrates me about Linux - what's the good of it if you can't use your scanner?

[DesDownunder]

I've looked at Linux and can't be bothered changing to it because, it demands yet another period of a learning curve to do what Windows XP already does for me with its myriad of available drivers and programs.

As for arty things being best on the Mac, I find the Windows programs not only more understandable, faster but again cheaper than many of the Mac offerings.

When I was working in a cinema, I put forward an idea, in 1999, to the manager that we should be running our advertising from a computer and not relying on old fashioned 35mm slides. The answer I received was that it was too expensive to buy a (Mac) computer just to do that, but they would look at making and transferring advertising onto a video VHS tape which we could then play on the Sony video projector.

Frustrated, I went home and created an advertising tape from a PowerPoint presentation. The finished (10 minute) tape contained not only the advertising but previews of our coming attractions as well as animations. The next day, (I had made the tape in about five hours from scratch) I ran the tape and the manager was delighted.

Now this organisation was a media resource centre for film makers. They had all the latest Macs and a ton of programs like After Effects and other media oriented programs for film editing etc. It took the head of their department 3 weeks to make a tape that was out of date before the Mac had rendered it let alone transfer to it a VHS tape, which had to be done over night. There was no animation and no soundtrack.

Once my PowerPoint tape was made, I could add or subtract a new segment in a few minutes and then record it onto the tape in real time. It took about 30 minutes of time to make the changes.

By 2002 a new manager decided that the advertising should be run from a DVD that he would make on the Mac "professional" editing programs. That was the end of the advertising. He couldn't make the advertising quickly enough to change it everyday as we needed. Clients who were happy with my efforts, stopped advertising and it all ground to a halt.

Eventually (2004) they bought me a Windows computer which allowed me to screen the advertising direct from the PowerPoint to the screen.

The Macs couldn't talk to the projector without some difficulty and in any case the Windows setup was about one third the cost. The Mac version of PowerPoint didn't allow the same degree of animation that I was using in the Windows version. All the professional editing programs they had, took hours to render what was available instantly, from PowerPoint.

Was their finished material better? It didn't matter how good it was because the projector was limited to VHS quality in any case, so all our images looked of the same quality.

Specifically, the professional film makers couldn't make the advertising as quickly or as satisfyingly on the Mac computer, as could be done on the Windows one.

To be fair to the Mac, I think I was dealing with bureaucratic idiot managers who just didn't understand their own industry, let alone how to get their head around what the Macs could achieve.

The point is that the PC could provide an end result easier and faster than the Mac for a fraction of the cost and time.

Oh and by the way, today's cinemas are running advertising and the movies themselves from PCs. Thankfully the video projectors are better than the one with which I had to contend.

I also think you have to find out if you are basically a Mac person or a Windows person and then use what best suits you.

Having said that, I would add that Windows Vista should be avoided at any cost. If you have to use it, at least turn off all the unnecessary GUI crap. This is an acknowledged performance boost equivalent to replacing the processor with a faster one or adding another gig of RAM.

The trouble is that if replacement hardware doesn't have the drivers for Windows XP then we will be stuck with Vista. At the moment that doesn't seem to be a problem.

[colinian]

I have no problem with Mac and Linux enthusiasts, or even those who think a computer platform or OS is a religion or some sort of political statement.

I've used Windows XP, Windows Vista 32 and 64, Mac OS-X, Various flavors of Linux, and UNIX at school. I use Windows XP Pro on my Sony laptop because that's what came with it and Sony doesn't provide an upgrade path to Vista without buying new hardware and there are enough unique hardware drivers that an off-the shelf Windows Vista will leave some hardware unusable. Foo! I use Windows Vista Ultimate 32-bit at home.

The Macs at school are problematic, maybe because they are abused. But the PCs at school don't have that problem. Since I only have to use Macs in the media labs, it isn't that much of a problem for me. There are a lot of peripherals that don't have Mac drivers, and there is a lot less software available for the Mac than Windows PCs. The other problem I find with the Macs is that Abobe software has problems running on Macs due to inadequate memory (2 GB systems). Photoshop often won't open large files with multiple layers; the Dell desktops (2 GB) running Vista Ultimate 32-bit or XP Pro have no problem opening the same files. I don't know or care if it's a Mac or Adobe problem; unless you're an OS junkie or a hobbyist a computer is a black box that has hardware that runs an OS and they are there only to run application software and peripherals. Let me repeat that: for almost all users a computer and an OS are there only to run application software and peripherals.

Linux is great as a network OS. It's better than UNIX because it's more widely used and has much better support for a LOT less money. Linux as a desktop OS has the same peripheral and software compatibility problems as the Mac.

I will continue using Windows as my personal OS because of device support and software availability. I have no problems with either my XP laptop or my Vista home PC. My dad has a Windows 2008 Server running in his office at home that networks all of our PCs. It's been flawless, as it was when it ran under Windows 2003 Server.

I'm a computer science major. I will be working in the IT field after I graduate. The business world is a PC world on the desktop and a mix of Windows and Linux servers for networking. I'm going to go with the flow; I'm going to follow where I can make the most money.

Colin

[Bruin Fisher]

Thanks guys. Lots of good advice here, and a pleasing lack of jingoism. It was particularly refreshing to read Colin's contribution - a computer science student who doesn't have an axe to grind...

Please accept my gratitude for your wisdom, folks!

[Merkin]

For a computer klutz like me, who has absolutely no ability to compare and contrast these OS and platforms, this discussion has been very informative. I thank you all for it. I have affirmed that I am truly a committed black box user, and now I can relax about that.

James