-

Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

The "Get a Mac" Thread


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
141 replies to this topic

#1 of 142 Colin Runner

Colin Runner

    Agent

  • 38 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 24 2006

Posted July 19 2006 - 07:20 AM

It seems like lots of people go out and buy expensive PCs and accept the reality that they will have problems. Whether they get infected with spyware, crash frequently, or just plain don't work well, people with PCs have problems. I was one of these people just less than a year ago. Viruses and system slowdowns were plaguing my Gateway, and it was almost unusable! The internet stop connecting due to a Microsoft error, and I was almost to the breaking point. Posted Image

But then, one day I was trying to get advice online and someone made a comment about the Mac. I hadn't really heard too much about them, and I always thought that they were slow and didn't work with anything. I decided to give them a look, and I visited the online store. I fell in love with the iMac G5, the white all-in-one computer from Apple. How could they fit a whole desktop computer into the screen? After showing my dad it, and taking a trip down to the campus Apple reseller, we ended up with a new iMac!

Since then everyone who sees it wants one, but they are filled with misconceptions:
"Macs don't run anything that I use, like Word or Powerpoint." Actually, they run the whole Microsoft Office suite if you buy the Mac version, and it's pretty cool.

"Where are all the applications and files that should be on the desktop?" They are cleverly hid in the Dock, which can be made to disappear. It is a much nicer looking way of keeping apps at your fingertips. You can still put files on the desktop as well, if you're a slob.Posted Image

"But Macs are too slow, and they are for hippy graphics designers!" Actually, anyone can enjoy the Mac and OS X since it is so easy to use. Also, Macs are some of the fastest and most reliable computers out there.

"But what about virus software and spyware detectors, I can't find any for the Mac." That's because to date there hasn't been a single "wild" virus that could impact the Mac. The reason that the Mac doesn't have viruses is not because there aren't enough out there, but because the underpinnings and file structures of OS X are much more secure than Windows.

"So, what's the catch?" None really. It will take a little bit to adjust to the look and organization of OS X if you are a longtime Windows user, but there are plenty of good resources that will help you if you feel lost. Once you do make The Switch, there really isn't any going back! Posted Image


This was my experience and questions that I had when I switched, and I have since found that my productivity has increased greatly with my Mac. I haven't touched that Gateway in forever, because I never want to go back. I have made songs, created great movies, and started a website just with the software that came with it for free! When you boot it up for the first time, there are now ads, sludgeware programs, FREE AOL crap, nothing. Just the basics that you can expand on. Everything just works.

Here is a picture of my iMac sitting on my kitchen counter, as I'm typing this:
Posted Image
Posted Image
And the side view of the CD/DVD burner; it sucks up CDs into the computer.

I think that many people on this forum would benefit from owning a Mac, especially since it is really good with music things. I decided to write this without any connections to Apple, but instead because I feel that you would be better off with a Mac. If you find yourself wanting to learn more, a good place to start is HERE.

Thanks for reading!
Triathlete

#2 of 142 steveKlein

steveKlein

    Agent

  • 44 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 20 2005

Posted July 19 2006 - 07:30 AM

While I am glad that you are happy with your Mac, I will stick with a PC. Interestingly enough, I've *never* had a real problem with Windows... while my roommate's Mac seems to give him lots of headaches.

Add that to the wider support for Windows and not having to learn a new OS... and well, there really isn't a single good reason for someone like me to switch.

#3 of 142 Colin Runner

Colin Runner

    Agent

  • 38 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 24 2006

Posted July 19 2006 - 07:41 AM

As I said, it really is a personal choice. Some people just don't feel the need to change. That's fine for them, but for others that have problems or are looking for something different, the Mac is the way to go. Posted Image

It's strange that your roommate's mac is giving him problems, is it an older one? I've found mine to be extremely stable, although it has it's "quirks" now and then.
Triathlete

#4 of 142 Kimmo Jaskari

Kimmo Jaskari

    Screenwriter

  • 1,529 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 27 2000

Posted July 19 2006 - 08:16 AM

Quote:
"But what about virus software and spyware detectors, I can't find any for the Mac." That's because to date there hasn't been a single "wild" virus that could impact the Mac. The reason that the Mac doesn't have viruses is not because there aren't enough out there, but because the underpinnings and file structures of OS X are much more secure than Windows.

Actually, that's total hooey. Making a Mac virus is no harder than making one for Windows. It's just that virus writers would rather go after the massive installed base of Windows machines than the marginal Mac crowd so thus far Macs have been fairly spared.

That's both good and bad, for that matter; the whole spirit of complacency among Mac users about viruses and malware means that when someone finally bothers to go after Macs too, they'll do massive damage at first. The Windows crowd is already jaded and quite a few are already running malware detectors and virus filters.

To say nothing of if one already has invested in PC software; doing it all over for the Mac can get pricey.

And as for "What's the catch"? Posted Image

http://www.pvponline...rchive=20060718

Taking the liberty of direct-linking this comic. You should go to the link above and in fact look at some of the other strips on PVPOnline.com, hilarious stuff.

Posted Image
"If we do happen to step on a mine, Sir, what do we do?"
"Normal procedure, Lieutenant, is to jump 200 feet in the air and scatter oneself over a wide area." -- "BlackAdder 4"

#5 of 142 Joe D

Joe D

    Supporting Actor

  • 839 posts
  • Join Date: May 21 1999

Posted July 19 2006 - 08:27 AM

Mac's cost a lot more than a comparable PC, and if you are into gaming, PC is the only way to go.

#6 of 142 Mike Fassler

Mike Fassler

    Supporting Actor

  • 523 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 17 2004

Posted July 19 2006 - 10:50 AM

people have issues with pc's because they are clueless on how to protect themselves. they use unsafe netsurfing habits, they dont use AntiVirus etc.
Ive never owned a mac and never will. there isnt any real benefit to use one, and yes macs can get virii and stuff too.

#7 of 142 Todd H

Todd H

    Screenwriter

  • 2,049 posts
  • Join Date: May 27 1999
  • Real Name:Todd
  • LocationGeorgia

Posted July 19 2006 - 11:36 AM

I recently did the switch. I picked up a 20" iMac Core Duo and haven't looked back. I rarely use my PC now. The only thing I could see myself using a PC for is posibly games, but since I don't play PC games it's no big deal for me (of course, I could easily dual boot for games).

I have my iMac set to dual boot Mac OS X and Vista and it's no contest. OS X is the more solid operating system hands down. Mac OS X is the power of BSD with the beauty of the Mac interface, which to me is a winning combination. Will Vista get better when it comes out in the fall? Possibly. But as of right now it has a looooong way to go to even match OS X.

#8 of 142 Christ Reynolds

Christ Reynolds

    Producer

  • 3,597 posts
  • Join Date: May 06 2002

Posted July 19 2006 - 12:56 PM

Quote:
Actually, that's total hooey. Making a Mac virus is no harder than making one for Windows. It's just that virus writers would rather go after the massive installed base of Windows machines than the marginal Mac crowd so thus far Macs have been fairly spared.
actually, what YOU say is total "hooey". windows is far less secure than any major operating system.

the "marginal mac crowd" plus linux machines account for nearly 10% of users. can you explain why there are 30,000 known viruses for windows, and about 75 for mac and linux combined? shouldnt there be ~3,000 viruses for mac and linux?

surely the people who write viruses want to attack the widest base, but what else can account for the HUGE discrepancy in numbers? security of the operating system? no?

read this. windows is massively insecure, and is the main reason why there is such a problem.

CJ

And then when I feel so stuffed I can't eat anymore, I just use the restroom! And then I CAN eat more!

#9 of 142 Thomas Newton

Thomas Newton

    Screenwriter

  • 1,434 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 16 1999

Posted July 19 2006 - 04:07 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimmo Jaskari
Making a Mac virus is no harder than making one for Windows. It's just that virus writers would rather go after the massive installed base of Windows machines than the marginal Mac crowd so thus far Macs have been fairly spared.

That might have been true for classic Mac OS, but there's more to it than that with Mac OS X.

In Windows XP, and in Mac OS X, it is common for people to (automatically) log into administrative accounts. The administrative accounts on Windows XP give you access to everything. The ones in Mac OS X are more on the order of non-privileged ("peon") accounts that can do privileged things via the programs su and sudo.

Thus, if a piece of Windows malware wants to do something nasty to system files or the Registry, it can go off and silently trash your system. A piece of Mac OS X malware would have to get you to type in your password; without this, it would have no root-level access. If the request for a password came at an unexpected time, many users would suspect malware, and refuse to let the malware have it.

This type of protection has limits. A Mac OS X malware program could still trash files in the user's own directory (e.g., "delete all MS-Word files"). But that's a bit of an improvement over malware being able to trash all the user files and all the system ones!

#10 of 142 Thomas Newton

Thomas Newton

    Screenwriter

  • 1,434 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 16 1999

Posted July 19 2006 - 04:31 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe D
Mac's cost a lot more than a comparable PC

Depends on the model and the timing. When the iMac G4 (LCD screen, DVD burner) first came out, it was cheaper and better than the Dell alternative. When the 12" iBook G4 came out, it was virtually the only notebook available in the (small/lightweight, full-featured, cheap) category. Back then you had to pick two out of the three. Even the PowerMac G4s and G5s aren't so bad if you consider them as competitors for Unix workstations.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe D
if you are into gaming, PC is the only way to go.

A number of the major games have Mac versions. But even if we ignore that, can you say "Intel-based Mac" (iMac Core Duo or MacBook Pro preferred -- they have better graphics chips) and "Boot Camp"?

#11 of 142 Christ Reynolds

Christ Reynolds

    Producer

  • 3,597 posts
  • Join Date: May 06 2002

Posted July 19 2006 - 04:56 PM

if mac would let you build your own, they would become more successful overnight, imo.

CJ
And then when I feel so stuffed I can't eat anymore, I just use the restroom! And then I CAN eat more!

#12 of 142 Scott L

Scott L

    Producer

  • 4,466 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 29 2000

Posted July 19 2006 - 04:58 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas Newton
can you say "Intel-based Mac" (iMac Core Duo or MacBook Pro preferred -- they have better graphics chips)
Better than what? Looks like it has an X1600. That's a budget card (>$100) that is at the bottom of the benchmarks which Apple says is "screaming fast." Posted Image

Macs are fine for multimedia creation and are best at safe web surfing but don't kid yourself when it comes to games.

#13 of 142 Carlo Medina

Carlo Medina

    Lead Actor

  • 9,631 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 31 1997

Posted July 19 2006 - 05:00 PM

I grew up w/ Apple until 1995. Then because of work, I've switched to Windows and can honestly say that I'm an "advanced" or "power" user of it.

All this time I had 2 coworkers I was close with that were macheads. I always shook my head and thought of those things that are in that cartoon above. I really never felt the need to switch.

But I noticed something about the PC recently. Ever install a brand new WinXP machine and notice how damned fast it is? Then slap on some virus scan, a spysweeper, ZoneAlarm, etc. And next thing you know, that nice 3GHz 1GB RAM machine is a lot slower than it was before you put all those things on it. Sure, you could add more RAM, etc. But the sad fact is that with all the vulnerabilities on XP, you can deduct about (and I'm getting this from my IT friends who do this for a living) between 500MHz-1GHz of processor speed and 256-512MB of RAM from your PC when you have it fully protected. That means my 3GHz P4D 1GB machine runs like a clean-installed 2-2.5GHz 512-768MB RAM machine. Anecdotally speaking, I think they're right.

And let's talk about installs. Being able to "clean install" WinXP is a luxury most don't have. Because I work for a company that has a site license to WinXP Pro, I can install it fresh on any new PC or laptop that I own. However most users have to have the Home version loaded with extraneous programs that HP, Compaq, Dell, etc. pre-load on their machines. That in and of itself shaves some more performance off. I recently went to my uncle's house who had a brand new HP machine (2 months old) and it was spec'd out decently. Not top of the line, but not a slouch either. I was surprised at how sluggish it was because it was loaded with all sorts of crap from the vendor. Apple doesn't do that to you.

I recently bought a MacBook Pro. My first Mac in a over a decade. And that shouldn't really count because I always used my roommate's (in college) Mac, so this is the first I've owned outright. I bought it because I wanted a powerful, portable, graphically beautiful and still light laptop. My eMachines Athlon64 laptop was 8.5 lbs. This is 5.6. I also bought it because I had tried out Bootcamp on my friend's MBP. And the student store was having a sale for the top-end 15.4" MBP (retail $2499) for $1999 + free iPod (which went to my sis and knocked off another $180 from my price). It's a 2.16GHz Core Duo/1GB PC5400/256MB ATI x1600 monster. The closest WinLaptop I could come to it was the new Lenovo (Thinkpad) T60p (not the regular T60). I spec'd it out at $2300. So at that point a Mac wasn't a price premium anymore.

I can't say enough about MacOSX. I really thought it was just a nice GUI disguising an inferior or simplistic OS. Wrong, wrong, wrong. True, if virus writers wanted to, they could take down a Mac. It is harder to do, though, than it is for Windows. But, since it's more work for less payoff, they're less likely to. The simplicity of OSX is beautiful, as is the GUI and the way it handles fonts. WinXP really never makes fonts (I do a lot of creative writing and have Adobe Font Folio) look like OSX does. Not even w/ CoolType (or whatever that font smoothing for LCDs is called). It's not even close. And that's not the only example of why I like OSX more, but it's a great analogy. Apple just seems to take pride in their OS and how it works and presents itself. Microsoft seems to be spending all of their resources patching up their OS from external attacks. Even the Beta 2 of Vista I've seen is at best equal to Tiger. And by the time that comes out, Leopard will be out as well--with all new code optimized for the Intel architecture I own.

Office on Mac works like a charm with Office on XP. So I can do all of my work completely on the Mac side. For those special XP only apps: Bootcamp is my answer. I've allocated a 25GB partition to it. And I can say even with the 3GHz Dells we have at work, this MBP is the fastest Windows machine I own. It's incredibly fast. And since it's a new install and I only have virus scan enabled (I'm using hardware firewall and don't do high-risk browsing/emailing from my MBP so I don't have anti-spyware on it) the XP side is snappier than my justifiably overprotected work and home PCs.

I suppose I could game on it, but I'm not really into games anymore. Becoming an old fogey I suppose, even though I'm just in my thirties. But people in the Mac forums (many of whom do own XP machines) have testified that they find gaming on the MacIntel hardware with XP very satisfactory.

Macs aren't for everyone. But they certainly aren't red-headed stepchildren to Windows machines any more. I currently own: 1 home WinPC, 1 WinLaptop, and work on a Win machine. All are within 1-3 years old. With the MBP + Bootcamp, my time on Windows machines will be diminished greatly. I'm actually considering something that 3 months ago would have been unthinkable. In 1-2 years when my home PC is due for replacement (usually 3-4 years is my cycle) I'm thinking of getting the 2nd gen iMac or the new MacPro. With the super large HDs they'll have, I can make huge Win and Mac partitions and do both from the same machine. And if a virus hoses the Win side, I can always retreat to the Mac side! Posted Image

XBox Live: TheL1brarian (let's play Destiny on XB1)


#14 of 142 Carlo Medina

Carlo Medina

    Lead Actor

  • 9,631 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 31 1997

Posted July 19 2006 - 05:11 PM

One quick addendum to address this:
Quote:
Better than what? Looks like it has an X1600. That's a budget card (>$100) that is at the bottom of the benchmarks which Apple says is "screaming fast." Posted Image

Macs are fine for multimedia creation and are best at safe web surfing but don't kid yourself when it comes to games.
Macs have never, never targeted hardcore gaming. Don't kid yourself that those graphics cards aren't "screaming fast" for 90% of the normal PC users out there. And don't kid yourself that gamers are representative of the average PC user, no matter how many noobs you and your buds frag online. Hardcore gamers and PC enthusiasts are the minority. Coincidentally, a small subset of them are the ones writing your viruses and spyware too.

The x1600 will never win FPS benchmarks tests, true. But for the average PC user, whom Apple is targeting, who uses their PCs primarily for: Office, Web, email, multimedia use like digital photos/videos, etc. The x1600 is more than enough. Especially when you compare it with what is on the average PC sold to average PC users, most of whom use built in video or the low-end nVidia or ATI solutions.

XBox Live: TheL1brarian (let's play Destiny on XB1)


#15 of 142 Scott L

Scott L

    Producer

  • 4,466 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 29 2000

Posted July 19 2006 - 05:31 PM

Fine, we both agree an X1600 is great for people who don't game. But kinda funny how Apple says this..

"...plenty of headroom for games, Dashboard widgets, games, even faster user switching, games, iPhoto full-screen mode, games, Front Row, games, and, well, games."

Posted Image

#16 of 142 Carlo Medina

Carlo Medina

    Lead Actor

  • 9,631 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 31 1997

Posted July 19 2006 - 05:36 PM

Quote:
if mac would let you build your own, they would become more successful overnight, imo.
I used to think so too. But by evidence of those commercials they run (i.e. "we work out of the box, we work with just about anything, etc.) allowing DIY'ers to make Macs runs counter to that.

Personally I've built 4 PCs for myself and my girlfriend, and another 4 over the years for friends and relatives. They're great coming out of my hands, but after a while, they eventually have problems with them, whether it's OS based, driver based, incompatibility with new hardware, whatever.

Apple wants complete control over their hardware so that there are few variations out there for them to support. That's a big reason that OSX doesn't have near the problems that WinXP does: XP has to account for a billion variations of Windows machines, Apple does not.

I've actually come full circle. I used to think building my own PC and upgrading it as needed was the way to go, especially when I thought of myself as a gamer. But now I see that it only spreads out the cost, and every 3-4 years you need to totally overhaul things anyway, so I don't have a problem with the Buy A Mac Every 3-4 years philosophy that I used to ridicule. One thing Mac has done with the MBP is make memory and HD upgrades much easier, which is how you prolong the life of systems anyway.

XBox Live: TheL1brarian (let's play Destiny on XB1)


#17 of 142 Carlo Medina

Carlo Medina

    Lead Actor

  • 9,631 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 31 1997

Posted July 19 2006 - 05:40 PM

Scott,

Technically there's nothing wrong with that statement (though I admit I haven't seen it, and it does come across as annoying so it doesn't surprise me if gamers would find it irksome).

The x1600 is more than enough to play most any game at a reasonable resolution. It's not going to get the best FPS. It's not going to have all things enabled at 1600x1200. But it will play the latest games at reasonable settings.

So yes, the x1600 games.

If Apple said "it beats the pants off of any other video card or PC for gaming at high resolutions with all effects and antialiasing enabled" then I'd call BS on Apple.

Again, for 90% of the population, the MacIntels do game. And again, compared with what they usually get off the shelf at Best Buy or Circuit City, it games fairly well.
--------------

EDIT: Am I the only one who thinks it's hilarious (at Apple's expense) that they're using the geek male cheerleader from Dodgeball to be the "hip Apple guy"? I mean, hello, it takes more than that wimpy goatee to shed the sound of Patches O' Hoolihan calling him "queerbait" all movie!

XBox Live: TheL1brarian (let's play Destiny on XB1)


#18 of 142 Thomas Newton

Thomas Newton

    Screenwriter

  • 1,434 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 16 1999

Posted July 19 2006 - 06:40 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Christ Reynolds
if mac would let you build your own, they would become more successful overnight, imo.

CJ

Apple has custom-ordering via the Web.

If you're referring to Apple making it easy for you to avoid buying anything from them, I don't see Dell offering a complete line of parts for you to "build your own".

Neither was that IBM's goal. The only reason the clone market happened was that IBM wanted to get to market very quickly (they were playing catch-up with Apple and Tandy/Radio Shack), and that drove them to use components that others could easily buy or copy.

#19 of 142 Rommel_L

Rommel_L

    Second Unit

  • 355 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 25 2000

Posted July 19 2006 - 07:43 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas Newton
Neither was that IBM's goal. The only reason the clone market happened was that IBM wanted to get to market very quickly (they were playing catch-up with Apple and Tandy/Radio Shack), and that drove them to use components that others could easily buy or copy.
Deja vu!!! Apple/Mac is doing it now. Knowing they can't compete in the hardware wars, they're playing catch up in enabling their OS to be able to run all components Windows can. This will an interesting 12-18 months if OSX can catch up to WinXP/Vista in compatibility...

#20 of 142 RichP

RichP

    Second Unit

  • 295 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 26 1998

Posted July 20 2006 - 01:37 AM

Quote:
Actually, that's total hooey. Making a Mac virus is no harder than making one for Windows. It's just that virus writers would rather go after the massive installed base of Windows machines than the marginal Mac crowd so thus far Macs have been fairly spared.

Your ignorance is charming, but alas, it is still ignorance.

This is why Mac threads never work in places like this. The preconceived notions and complete ignorance and misunderstanding coupled with the propensity to ridicule something that one doesn't understand will always win out over rational research and understanding. Sad, really.


Back to Apple and Macintosh



Forum Nav Content I Follow