In what way is a Mac better than a PC?

College Life
41

<p>Chronology, the problem here isn’t that Mac users aren’t coming up with adequate responses to your arguments, it’s that you’re extremely narrow-minded and refuse to accept any perspective besides your own.</p>

<ol>
<li><p>Foxconn - Literally no one besides you cares that Foxconn supplies both Apple and PC manufacturers and that Apple happens to have better quality control. From a consumer perspective, the end result is that Mac hardware is often longer lasting.</p></li>
<li><p>Hardware (not internals) - Since you seem unable to understand some of the “buzzwords” that juillet used, let me break it down for you. There are a lot of nice things about Mac laptops that cement the “premium” feel. The magnetic power connector (MagSafe). The backlit keyboard. The slot-loading disc drive (although optical media is getting more and more irrelevant). The touchpad…no touchpad can compare to the one on Mac laptops. Please see this article for more depth: [Why</a> Does Every PC Notebook?s Trackpad Suck? (Or Why Microsoft Is Building its Own Hardware) | PandoDaily](<a href=“http://pandodaily.com/2012/06/24/why-does-every-pc-notebooks-trackpad-suck-or-why-microsoft-is-building-its-own-hardware/]Why”>http://pandodaily.com/2012/06/24/why-does-every-pc-notebooks-trackpad-suck-or-why-microsoft-is-building-its-own-hardware/)</p></li>
<li><p>Battery life - Sure, PCs at the same price point may have more power hungry components, leading to worse battery life. The thing is, a lot of people don’t care about this explanation. Macs are powerful enough for most computing needs, so what people notice is that Macs have generally better battery life.</p></li>
<li><p>Support - Not everyone is a power user who can diagnose and fix every problem they come across. In fact, MOST people aren’t power users (who would have thought?). So when you respond like you did in point 4 of post #30, you’re completely missing the point. Most Mac users AND most PC users don’t know how to fix the problems they come across. Given this, Apple support is a very compelling option.</p></li>
<li><p>Cloud computing/home networking - You mentioned that the PC has better software for these purposes. What a great rebuttal to juillet. Here, let me try: The Mac has better software for cloud computing and home networking. Do I win, now? Seriously, though - state some examples, and then we can have a discussion. I think many Mac users enjoy the intuitive experience they have (things like AirPlay, FaceTime, iMessages, iCloud all work very well). I don’t doubt that there’s similar PC software with more features, but I think Apple does a pretty good job in the usability department.</p></li>
<li><p>Look and feel - Okay, so you care more about performance at all costs. Here’s a shocker: not everyone has the same opinion. Weight, aesthetics, and quality of construction are important factors to a lot of people.</p></li>
<li><p>OS - No OS X skin for Windows can come close to a native experience. I can’t believe you think this is a legitimate argument. And back to the Unix thing: “If I wanted the functionality of Unix, I wouldn’t be using a Mac”. Well, good for you. A ton of other people disagree. We like being able to use a stable, well-supported OS that also has the Unix backing we know and love. And what do you mean by “Macs can’t run Unix software by default”? There’s nothing preventing you from compiling most packages you would wish to use.</p></li>
<li><p>Development - To be honest, I don’t have much experience with either Xcode or Visual Studio (I mostly use vim + CLI tools), and I don’t particularly care about their respective merits. What I will say is that developing for a *nix toolchain is a lot more clunky on Windows, and you can only do iOS development using Macs (or Hackintoshes, I guess, but that’s an isolated use case). Also, “real programmers” are fluent in many languages. There’s no benefit in having misguided loyalty towards a narrow set of languages.</p></li>
<li><p>Retina display - “Retina Display is just a buzzword for high PPI display. High PPI is not exclusive to Apple, they are just the only ones doing it on a large scale so far.” So what you’re really telling me is that there aren’t very many options for a high PPI display except the ones provided by Apple.</p></li>
<li><p>SSDs - I don’t think you realize how much of a performance boost SSDs provide. They’re the single most useful upgrade after a RAM upgrade. Macs having them is a good thing (and more PCs should have them, too).</p></li>
<li><p>Resale value - Again, the explanations you come up with don’t alter the end result: Macs have better resale value. This is absolutely an important factor to keep in mind when purchasing a computer.</p></li>
<li><p>Application performance - For most purposes, Mac applications are generally good enough. I don’t know how much I can trust the tests you’ve performed (I don’t even know who you are), but ports are usually not as good as they are on their original platforms.</p></li>
<li><p>Price/performance - These two sort of go hand-in-hand. I think this is really the core of your argument. You don’t seem able to accept that a lot of people are willing to spend a few hundred dollars more to get Macs (or spend the same amount to get a Mac with lower specs). The thing is…there’s a lot more to a computer than raw specs, especially nowadays when there’s enough computing power on almost any machine for the majority of applications. With this in mind, other factors become more important (i.e. a lot of the points mentioned above, among other things). A lot of people are willing to pay a premium for these factors, myself included. Computers are the machines you spend a good chunk of your time using, so if you’re not a shoestring budget, a few hundred dollars more is well worth it to get the machine that makes you enjoy computing (whether that’s a PC or a Mac).</p></li>
</ol>

<p>Anyways, I’m not trying to convince you that Macs are right for <em>you</em>. Clearly you’ve made up your mind on that. But I hope you realize that there are logical reasons that other people prefer Macs.</p>

<p>Finally, I’m kinda curious- why do you think a huge chunk of the tech industry (from startups to well-respected companies like Google and Facebook) uses Macs? Mull on that for a bit and let me know what you think.</p>

42

<p>I fear that this comprehensive rebuttal will do little good on this thread. The fact of the matter is that some folks compare the specs between Windows and OS X computers and cannot understand why anyone would pay more for a machine with similar or inferior specs. For these people, the overall user experience, build quality, screen quality, resale value, etc. have very little bearing on their bafflement over why anyone would choose a more expensive computer that on the surface does pretty much the same thing. Since they can’t understand the less-tangible aspects of the computer user experience, they are left grasping for answers such as Apple ‘hype’, Fanboi-dom, fashion fad bandwagons, etc. Trying to objectively detail the reasons for going with an OS X computer will never make the slightest dent in their way of thinking.</p>

<p>All I can do is say that I am willing to pay a premium for what I view as an enhanced user experience. If you aren’t willing to pay that premium, then by all means go another way - more power to you.</p>

<p>The interesting thing to me is that when Windows computer manufacturers build ‘ultrabooks’ to higher-level specifications, they end up with undeniably fine machines that cost pretty much the same as their Apple counterparts. At that point, you just pick the operating system that works better for you, and we can all quit jabbering about which is better, Ford or Chevy.</p>

43

<p>MADad is right, but this was never about conversion, it was about arguing from the beginning. Chronology has been lurking for a few weeks (so he says) and then joined to ask this one question. However, in asking this question he accepts no one’s response. Previously you conceded this “However, I agree that the Mac requires less maintenance. So far, this is the first benefit of the Mac.” If you’re telling us that a point needs your agreeance to be a valid benefit than you are either God or you have no intention of being objective.</p>

<p>No one can argue with you because of the logical fallacies you’re making. If Mac users haven’t proven anything, then you haven’t proven anything either, except that for the same specs a PC is cheaper than a Mac. Everyone already knows that though. You’re saying everything the Mac users have said is “either completely incorrect, misleading, biased, or just contradicting with known facts.” You do realize you asked for opinions as well as facts. Your original question was “In what way is a Mac better than a PC?” This question allows for subjective answers, so you can’t just disregard peoples opinions. Also, you can’t just nullify a point by scoping the debate to just the Mac. If using a Mac gives you a benefit, such as AirPlay, then it’s a valid point.</p>

<p>This is a logical fallacy as well “In what way is a Mac better than a similarly priced PC if it obviously fails in performance?” A Mac doesn’t fail in performance. You’re purporting a distorted view by misrepresentation. The strategies you’re using are on par with me saying Macs are better for gaming than PCs because my favorite game is on Mac only.</p>

<p>sumzup gave a great response (I’ll get to that later). geek96 gave a great response in favor of PCs but I want to point something out:</p>

<p>An objective point in Macs favor is that getting Windows on a Mac is easier and usually performs better than installing OSX on a PC. Two strategies: Parallels to have Windows on a Mac is like using a virtual machine to have OSX on a PC. Both take performance hits. Bootcamp to boot to Windows on a Mac is like having a Hackintosh that can boot to OSX. Whereas Bootcamp always works, not all PCs can get a stable Hackintosh running, therefore you run into customization of PC possibly being a drawback. If you want to ensure running both Windows and OSX on a PC you have to look into what parts are compatible. However, an Intel-based Mac can always run Windows. One thing you cannot argue is that running OSX on non-Apple hardware violates the Terms of Service, thus in places that enforce that it is illegal. Conclusion: If I want to use OSX and Windows, then Mac is a better option.</p>

<p>Your point about programmers choosing a language other than Obj-C is stupid to say when real programs have jobs and have to program in a specific language, and real programmers program in Obj-C too. Any real programmer knows multiple languages. If you were to walk into many successful companies, such as Yelp or Skype, and say ‘No more programming in Obj-C. And we’re switching all our Mac machines to PCs.’ you’d be laughed out the door.</p>

<p>I like what juillet said. I think you misunderstood (read purposely misinterpreted) her point about the OS. She didn’t mention start up time. She’s talking about UX.</p>

<p>Your using Ad Hominem like argument fallacies by refuting someones claim they like Mac better by saying they’re a computer simpleton.</p>

<p>“I can tell you that you are overpaying for a simple service that you could have done yourself. People with very little computer knowledge need support, and if you fit in this category you shouldn’t even be talking about the PC.” - That’s not true at all. What are you gonna do if your display stops working (take your pick of hardware failure). Just open it up and replace the backlights or diffuser, or whatever? Computer experts wouldn’t even do that themselves, they’d replace it. And Apple makes that easy for the average consumer. Also, you say that a PC is better for the average user, but then you say that the average user shouldn’t even be talking about the PC because they lack basic computer repair knowledge. Wake up man. You might’ve meant something different but what you said contradicted yourself. Most average users don’t know about basic computer repair and maintenance so it’s their valid point to make that a Mac seems to be more reliable to them and they get better Support/Warranty.</p>

<p>And then you blame people “it involves YOU, the user.” If your argument that the PC is better for everyone is reliant on people having knowledge, “Take better care of your computers, learn the basics of computer maintenance and your PC should be able to outlast any Mac.”, then it’s a bad point. It’s like saying PCs are better but first you have to learn X, Y, and Z. For people that don’t know X, Y, and Z, which is the majority of consumers, then maybe Macs are better for them.</p>

<p>You haven’t refuted the Customer Service and Warranty points. You did not address it by saying people should know how to fix things. I know people that have had issues with their Apple products and sometimes they’re just replaced. A friend had his screen crack from a drop and they replaced the computer.</p>

<p>You don’t play by your own rules. You said “Sounds more like an opinion than a fact to me.” But you’ve presented your opinions as facts multiple times.</p>

<p>This is your opinion “Visual Studio 2012 is better than any similar software on the Mac such as Xcode.” When are you going to back this up with facts? This puts you on the same argumentative level as a fanboy.</p>

<p>Something else you said that is false “The only reason why there isn’t as many viruses for the Mac is because less people use it.” Also, it still stands that Macs are less likely to get a virus than a PC. Red herring fallacy.</p>

<p>Fact: [Apple</a> - The Story Behind Apple’s Environmental Footprint](<a href=“http://www.apple.com/environment/]Apple”>Environment - Apple)
PCs might be eco-friendly too, but if you claim that then provide facts</p>

<p>ALF is right, but because you have a hard time understanding other peoples’s points, I’ll supplement some from sumzup:

  1. Foxconn point is on par with saying a Ford Mustang is on par with a Saleen Ford Mustang. Same car so same performance, right? No! The Saleen performs better, which is analogous to higher quality.
  2. I’m guessing you’ll respond to the Hardware claim by saying ‘PCs could have those things’. Well Macs could also be priced cheaper if Apple went crazy. So lets not say what could be. Focus on facts of the present (you said that yourself).
  3. Battery life - When you previously refuted battery life by saying PCs are more powerful, that’s Red herring fallacy again. You provided a cause of PCs having less battery life but didn’t refute the point that Macs are superior in this aspect.
  4. Expanding look and feel to construction: I like the aluminum body (MacBook Pro) and it feels sturdier than my PC (Dell 15R). You said “Not much of a difference because heavier usually means sturdier.” which is such a stupid generalization to make. Go onto YouTube and watch drop videos. A heavier plastic laptop will break more than a lighter aluminium laptop.
  5. “So you are claiming that the hours I spent reverse engineering software yesterday was pointless?” - Tell us more about your reverse engineering. Otherwise your claims mean nothing and I will claim that software available on both platforms performs better on the Mac.</p>

<p>You offered two cases, so I’ll offer my own case (on par with the argumentative strategies/fallacies you’re using):
Case 3: A student S is about to attend college C. College C has a requirement that all students must have a Mac computer.
Case 3 conclusion: Student S purchasing a Mac is better.

  • Hey look at that, Macs just won! Because only my opinion matters lolz *</p>

<p>In conclusion, if this thread was about conversion or helping people pick the right computer for them, then I would recommend PC to most people.</p>

44

<p>If you’re buying a new computer for college, one option is to choose the infrastructure of the college or major, if you decide that it matters and you otherwise don’t care. But I think most would buy a new model of what they’ve been using, unless they’re unhappy with it.</p>

45

<p>

</p>

<p>As much as I come off as an Apple fanboy in this thread, I completely agree with you on this. I’m well aware that Macs aren’t the best option for many people, and I’m hesitant to have people waste money on account of my recommendation. So I only strongly advocate Macs to people who I know would actually gain measurable value from getting Mac.</p>

<p>However, Chronology’s posts in this thread are so egregiously wrong that I had no choice but to respond.</p>

46

<p>@psydent i mentioned windows’ benefits as someone asked above in the thread…I am using both OSX and Windows and I must say, after using OSX, I only log into windows for gaming. For all other works,I am solely commited to OSX.</p>

<p>The fluidity and user experience of OSX is not beatable yet.If one has the amount to spend,he’s not gonna be wrong in buying a mac</p>

<p>But when price point is a concern, surely PC is a way to go.</p>

47

<p>In case my post was too long, I agree with both sumzup and geek96.</p>

<p>@sumzup: One of my project leads is an Apple fanboy and I don’t think you come off as one. Apple fanboys say stuff like less options are better because it shows design focus :eek:</p>

<p>@geek96: I find myself the same, committing to Mac after years of PCs. I just wanted to elucidate the ‘Use Both’ position, and inform people a little more about considerations and pros/cons to the Dual Boot and VM/Parallels options.</p>

48

<p>^True. Dual booting on a PC is kind of tough but once its done; everything works like breeze</p>

49

<p>^ What makes it tough? Can’t someone just buy MacOS X and a PC dual boot product and install both on their PC?</p>

50

<p>^You have to figure out if your components will play nicely and do some fiddling.</p>

51

<p>^ Sounds like something about zero percent of PC users would be able to do.</p>

52

<p>^ that sounds like the judgmental crap Chronology would say about Mac users. </p>

<p>For legal reasons, I have never done this, but if anyone wants to learn more: [tonymacx86</a> - UniBeast: Install OS X Mountain Lion on Any Supported Intel-based PC](<a href=“http://www.tonymacx86.com/61-unibeast-install-os-x-mountain-lion-any-supported-intel-based-pc.html]tonymacx86”>http://www.tonymacx86.com/61-unibeast-install-os-x-mountain-lion-any-supported-intel-based-pc.html)</p>

<p>Read the comments to get a better idea. Common problems are wifi not working, graphics issues, and sound and video not working properly (an example would be YouTube playing back at ~10 FPS with an equal audio stutter).</p>

53

<p>^ How does someone who knows nothing about the insides of a PC (99+% of computer buyers) figure out if your components will play nicely and do some fiddling? Is it also illegal? If so, that sounds like another reason zero percent of PC buyers would try it.</p>

<p>Zero percent leaves room for thousands of experts who could do it.</p>

54

<p>^ I think that’s too much of a generalization. Many more consumers know about the basics then 10, or even 5, years ago. There’s lists online for component compatibility and most of the fiddling takes place in software, such as getting drivers for the Hackintosh. Maybe you thought modifying hardware components? That would hypothetically put it out of more peoples reach.</p>

<p>“Is it also illegal? If so, that sounds like another reason zero percent of PC buyers would try it.” - You do know that if only 10% of TPB torrent users are in the USA then over 15 million unique Americans torrent every month?</p>

<p>You don’t need to be an expert to do it. You just have to risk failure and follow the guides after doing the research.</p>

<p>Back to the thread, I think this further shows that for people that want both OSX and Windows, a Mac is better than a PC because getting OSX stable on a PC can be really difficult. Getting Windows stable on a Mac is always easy.</p>

55

<p>sumzup:</p>

<ol>
<li><p>I like high quality components put inside of my computer. If you like the lower quality components put into your computer that last just as long for a greater price, buy a Mac. You didn’t address the whole issue of Foxconn as a hardware manufacturer and how Foxconn’s components have one of the highest DOA rates out of all popular hardware manufacturers. Mac hardware lasts longer as a package, not as individual parts. Since there aren’t many models to choose from, Apple assembles working parts on a massive scale, while PC manufacturers have thousands of models to assemble, and they cannot test them as well as a Mac. I know an assembler who worked for Dell and HP, and he told me that many orders had parts with known comparability issues, but he was forced to build by order. If you want a PC that will last as long as a Mac, you should buy custom made PCs from companies that run extensive tests and benchmarks on every computer that they build, or perhaps build your own computer.</p></li>
<li><p>The only reason why I didn’t provide a detailed response to the trackpad was because its practically worthless to anybody who uses their computer for more than just a web browser. Am I going to play video games on a trackpad? Am I going to use 3D modeling software with a trackpad? Am I going to use image editing software with a trackpad? If you answered yes to any of the questions, buy a Mac. I’m not even going to argue with you on this issue, because in the end it comes down to personal preference. I do agree that masochists will enjoy the Mac trackpad more. MagSafe is just a cable with a magnet; Say goodbye to your hard drive. I found some slot-loading disc drives for the PC after a 3 second google search. Don’t forget that backlit keyboards are available for the PC as well…</p></li>
<li><p>Well if you don’t care about my explanation, I don’t care about your explanation too. I know that most Mac users are ignorant consumers, so of course they wont care about my explanation. Ultrabooks with the same specs as a Mac have the same or even longer battery life, generally because PCs are more efficient with their power distribution. Obviously, this will only give you a few minutes of battery life because battery life depends primarily on hardware, but this is something you should know if you cared so much about battery life. PCs are also powerful enough for most computing needs, BUT FOR HALF THE PRICE.</p></li>
<li><p>If you are not a power user, a $500 PC will work just as well for you. If that $500 PC breaks, the most you will pay for a single repair/part replacement is $75 at any local computer repair place. I still don’t see the reason of talking to Apple support if you can fix the problem up to 20 times before you reach the price point of a Mac, and chances are that you wont have any problems after the first 2 repairs. </p></li>
<li><p>I’m talking about PC to PC cloud software. I wont go into this issue too deep because “a lot of people don’t care about this explanation”, but why do you think Microsoft has a whole OS dedicated just for the purpose of having a network? Try Windows Server 2012 and connect all of your bandwidth heavy devices to the PC, and then try the same with OSX Server. You have much better control over your server(s) and any connected device on the PC.</p></li>
<li><p>Weight, aesthetics, and quality of construction are important factors of a PC Ultrabook as well as a Mac. However, if you don’t need the power of a $1000+ computer, you can buy a $350 PC in exchange for weight. No matter what way look at this, the PC is the better choice because you have more options.</p></li>
<li><p>I don’t want to go into the OS too much because both the PC and the Mac can run the same OS, and this makes it a battle of hardware, availability, and price. OSX skins on Windows 7-8 copy the GUI almost completely. “We like being able to use a stable, well-supported OS that also has the Unix backing we know and love.”- The Unix backing is almost completely worthless because if you want to use Unix like OS, you most certainly wouldn’t be using OSX, the most limited OS since Apple decided that it wanted total control over its users. Of course, you wouldn’t be using Windows either, but you would be using one of the many Linux distros that can be used on both Mac and PC. This puts OSX in the unwanted Unix distro category, while Windows gives you a totally independent OS. Basically, Windows + Linux > Mac + Linux.</p></li>
<li><p>“What I will say is that developing for a *nix toolchain is a lot more clunky on Windows”- Sure, but I don’t expect programmers to use a Mac for development. Why not use Linux? I believe that the narrow set of languages that I use can do any task better than all existing languages. Its not that I don’t know a lot of programming languages, its just that you don’t need most of them, especially Objective-C.</p></li>
<li><p>“So what you’re really telling me is that there aren’t very many options for a high PPI display except the ones provided by Apple.”- If you actually needed a high res display on a laptop (I doubt it), there are a dozen display manufactures that can design a display for your needs. There are more options for the PC, they just aren’t as widespread. Right now, most PC manufactures don’t see how making such a display would benefit them, and Apple is just tossing millions in production. </p></li>
<li><p>SSDs provide a huge performance boost. PCs can have SSDs too. My original argument was directed to someone who was comparing the speed of a Mac with a SSD, and a PC with a HDD.</p></li>
<li><p>Ok, but that just increases the price of a used product, making the Mac more expensive than previously thought. The higher the used price of a Mac, the higher the chance someone is going to buy a new Mac. Either way, the consumer loses money when buying a Mac, and future consumers lose money when buying the used Mac. Eventually, the extra money spent buying the used Mac is almost 5 times the cost of buying a used PC. Only anarcho-capitalists think that this is a good idea that benefits the consumer in the end. </p></li>
<li><p>Fine, I guess. You can always attempt to recreate my results. “Generally” doesn’t cut it for people who care about performance.</p></li>
<li><p>But you forgot to address the main point that a PC the cost the same as a Mac will have more features. Don’t forget that the premium that you pay for the Mac($600 if the PC costs $400) can also be paid for the PC as well. A $1600 PC will dominate a $1000 Mac in almost every noticeable way, but a $1000 Mac might only be slightly better than a $400 PC. Now that is something that you should think about when you buy a computer; the more money you spend, the better PC you can get, but if you buy a Mac you wont notice the improvements that much.</p></li>
</ol>

<p>I built a Mac mini server at work for the same reason every other company uses a Mac. Its basically assemble and leave, there is very little maintenance involved(One of the only benefits of a Mac). However, if I actually wanted a high performance computer, there is no way that I would get a Mac.</p>

56

<p>^^ Looks like we mainly disagree on the percentage of all PC owners willing and able to research, fiddle and violate in order to run MacOS X on a PC; I think it’s way low, you think it’s higher. Oh, well. :)</p>

57

<p>Psydent, you understood the whole concept of fallacies incorrectly. All fallacies used by both me and Mac users were almost entirely ignored because they had a minor, or even commonly accepted truth behind them. This means that if I present my opinions as facts, they are generally regarded as facts by people who I expect to be arguing with.</p>

<p>If I based my entire argument around a fallacy, this thread would get minimal responses because everybody would consider me a “■■■■■”.</p>

<p>I have responded to most of the counterarguments. However, you completely fail:
[Argument</a> from fallacy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_fallacy]Argument”>Argument from fallacy - Wikipedia)</p>

<p>But your point might still be valid.</p>

58

<p>@vonlost: In reality I agree with you. A think a low percentage of people even know it’s possible, and a super low percentage would ever actually do it. I do think that anyone who really wants to have both OSX and Windows without having two machines could look into and attempt it. I do assert that this is a way in which Macs are better than PCs (my next post will have more).</p>

59

<p>I never said that because you made fallacies that your points are invalid (they could still be valid). I was pointing out that several of your methodologies of argument are "“either completely incorrect, misleading, biased, or just contradicting with known facts.” You’re displaying contrarian behavior, and say, “if I present my opinions as facts, they are generally regarded as facts by people who I expect to be arguing with.” It’s nice to know that you only expect to be talking to people that agree with you. It’s not an argument if everyone agrees. And then why ask the question in the first place? </p>

<p>You responding to the counterarguments is cool and all but you haven’t refuted them with proof (the same standard you asked for, right?), so your rebuttals have little significance. I don’t fail because 1. I present points that you have not refuted. 2. I didn’t say that everything you’ve claimed is false due to fallacies. Good try trying to use that against me incorrectly.</p>

<p>Let’s do this again:

  1. Doesn’t make sense: “lower quality components put into your computer that last just as long for a greater price, buy a Mac”. If they’re specced the same and last just as long, how are they lower quality? You’ve admitted “Mac hardware lasts longer as a package, not as individual parts.” We don’t need to address Foxconn because a Mac is always a package. A better package.</p>

<ol>
<li><p>I used 3D modeling software with a trackpad for a few weeks and it worked fine. On my Dell though. Point being saying that you wouldn’t use a trackpad for 1 task or a million doesn’t refute the claim that the Mac trackpad is superior. “I’m not even going to argue with you on this issue, because in the end it comes down to personal preference. I do agree that masochists will enjoy the Mac trackpad more.” Yes, personal preference, but no one said masochists, so who are you agreeing with for that next sentence? You’re just inserting judgmental crap.
“MagSafe is just a cable with a magnet; Say goodbye to your hard drive.” Disproving a point by using a scare tactic? Someone call the propaganda office. And just a cable with a magnet is superior to just a cable without a magnet.
For slot-loading disc drives and backlit keyboards, these don’t fit into just ‘Ways in which Macs are better’. It was presented as a pro for all Macs while it is a pro for some PCs that can be configured with them.</p></li>
<li><p>“I know that most Mac users are ignorant consumers, so of course they wont care about my explanation.” Wow, just wow. Sounds like “I have an explanation but you wouldnt understand.” If you’re a Southpark fan then “Yes, I have the tablets, but no I cannot show you. Trust me!”
“Ultrabooks with the same specs as a Mac have the same or even longer battery life, generally because PCs are more efficient with their power distribution.” Breaking it down, I don’t know if it’s true that PCs are generally more efficient with power. I quickly found a Sony - VAIO Ultrabook specced like a Mac for much less money, but I don’t know if it’s battery life is the same or better. Let’s say that it’s better. This is all fine. While it doesn’t help the ‘Ways in which Macs are better’ team, it doesn’t prove that Macs are worse.</p></li>
<li><p>“If that $500 PC breaks, the most you will pay for a single repair/part replacement is $75 at any local computer repair place.” Wrong. You’re smarter than this. A surge could fry the system. That means replacement. Component failures can cost hundreds to fix (less if you do it yourself), but Apple covers a lot of these things.
“chances are that you wont have any problems after the first 2 repairs.” Wrong. You’re smarter than this. (woah, deja vu). You might be mentioning beginning of life fail rate, but what about after the first 90 days when many PC warranties stop covering things [Bathtub</a> curve - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bathtub_curve]Bathtub”>Bathtub curve - Wikipedia)
Read the following and mantra’s comment mentions Apple

[EDIT: reddit was censored] Go to reddit and add this to the url /r/BuyItForLife/comments/16fu7t/what<em>does</em>bifl<em>think</em>about<em>refurbished</em>products/c7vorra</p></li>
</ol>

<p>I don’t have time for everything. Skipping to the things I talked about:</p>

<ol>
<li><p>“I don’t want to go into the OS too much because both the PC and the Mac can run the same OS” Not always. This is too much a generalization, and it doesn’t refute the point that Macs run both OSX and Windows better than PCs run both OSX and Windows.
“The Unix backing is almost completely worthless” In your opinion, ok, but I disagree. I like the similarities between my Solaris workstation and OSX for terminal and a number of tasks. Being off the Darwin kernel is a pro.
“This puts OSX in the unwanted Unix distro category, while Windows gives you a totally independent OS.” You cant put OSX in the unwanted Unix distro category because I and millions of other people want it. Here I’m not saying that it’s better but simply that because you find it unwanted (too locked down maybe?) doesn’t mean that’s true for everyone. Your point of, well just get real Unix then doesn’t address Apple development, one way in which Macs are better than PCs. Also, besides the fact this is a tangent from ‘Ways in which Macs are better’ maybe I missed your point about Windows, but how is Windows being independent (if that’s true) a good thing? They’re closed source and have many issues. For example I read an article where security consultants said that the new security settings for Windows (either Vista or 7) led to more vulnerabilities. Something about restrictions not allowing settings and files to be properly configured by system admins.</p></li>
<li><p>“You can always attempt to recreate my results.” The only thing we know about your results are that you claim PCs beat Macs. You never responded to my request to explain your ‘reverse software engineering.’</p></li>
<li><p>“But you forgot to address the main point that a PC the cost the same as a Mac will have more features. … A $1600 PC will dominate a $1000 Mac in almost every noticeable way” No, we did not forget to address this. Everyone in this thread has agreed with you that you get more performance bang for your buck by buying a PC. A more expensive PC will outperform a Mac. We all know that. But it will not be better in every noticeable way. There’s much more to notice than raw performance. These are all the ‘Ways in which Macs are better than PCs’ that we’ve presented.
“but if you buy a Mac you wont notice the improvements that much.” This is a general statement I agree with, but you’re contradicting yourself if you’re one of the people for which ““Generally” doesn’t cut it for people who care about performance.” Clearly you care about performance and benchmarking, so spending more to get the better Mac would surely be important to you, right?</p></li>
<li><p>Adding 14: You have not responded to why Google, Facebook, Skype (who was bought by Microsoft) use Macs. There are hundreds of people in those companies way more knowledgeable than you, me, or billions of other people. I’m not saying that because they do it, clearly it’s right. I’m not committing the fallacies of Appeal to Belief or Appeal to Common Practice. I am asserting that if these companies are using Macs then there are definitely ways in which Macs are better. I’ll even expand this to There are definitely ways in which Macs are better, so much so that the ways offset the higher price point for buying Macs.</p></li>
</ol>

60

<p>I think its useless to argue about mac vs pc. Chronology has set boundaries about Mac and PCs and he is not thinking beyond them.I am repeating again, The user friendliness,simplicity and fluidity of osx is unbeatable.
1.You think trackpads arent useful but many people who are working on Macs recognize different gestures on the trackpad which makes navigating through the OS easy
2.And who said Macs use lower quality of parts? I agree the parts might not be powerful as windows’ counterparts but the quality is top notch
3.If Macs were worthless, then why do many big companies rely on Macs?</p>

<p>If you things that Windows is better than Mac then so be it.Its your choice.There’s no need to prove that Macs are worthless and Windows is better.
The majority of the world isnt mad to invest in Macs. Think it through</p>