Mac vs. PC

Colleges and Universities A-Z Dartmouth College
21

<p>At the risk of sounding like a Microsoft fanboy, I will say the following in favor of getting pc over mac.</p>

<p>-I can get a comparable pc for about 2/3 the price of a macbook pro.
-Apple does not want you to be able to upgrade your computer's hardware or mess around with it in any way.<br>
-Macs do not necessarily run more smoothly than PCs. If you know what you are doing, it is relatively easy to protect a PC and make it run more efficiently. Get a good PC and run a clean install of Vista and it will be fine.</p>

<p>And btw, dropping $600 for a 20" monitor is insane! Most 24" monitors on the market cost less. Get a mac if you want the get gauged by apple.</p>

22

<p>1) Although Apple products have historically been more expensive, that is not really the case anymore for most of their products. Dell (and other PC manufacturers) are very good at marketing; they sell you with a computer that runs at a decent speed with a decent amount of memory. The Apple computers with similar processors and memory ARE more expensive on the surface, but less so if you look at what makes up an Apple machine. If I were to configure a Dell entry-level laptop to have the SAME features as the equivalent MacBook, the Dell would be MORE expensive by about $500. Although I have not done the test with a MacBook Pro, I would assume that it's the same thing. In addition to better hardware inside the computer, the hardware looks better and is much more durable. Don't believe me about the price thing? Configure the two computers yourselves at Dell.com and Apple.com and look that the prices! Also, the Macs come with full software (iLife) that would cost a few hundred dollars (for comparable software) if you wanted it on a PC.</p>

<p>2) Apple allows you to upgrade your memory (up to 4 GB). The MacBook Pro also has an expansion port. What else are you realistically going to add?</p>

<p>3) They do run more smoothly than PCs... just swing by the computer help desk at Dartmouth on any given day and see how many PC users are complaining about losing their data, viruses, etc. Why deal with "knowing what you're doing" and why invest in virus protection software when you can use the Mac to connect to the same internet without worrying about viruses.</p>

<p>The monitor was expensive, but it is a professional HD display used for image editing. Admittedly, the Cinema Display was more expensive than comparable monitors.</p>

23

<p>I vote for a Mac because Blitzmail, which you will be on A LOT!, is prettier on a Mac</p>

24

<p>Dartmouth provides you with antivirus though...and there are free solutions.</p>

<p>PC: Accidental Damage, onsite repair by Dell technicians, compatible with Windows applications.
Mac: Shinier, Mac OS X, Less prone to viruses.</p>

<p>Take your pick.</p>

<p>Honestly, I LOL at choosing a Mac for the GUI of BlitzMail. A) I've seen both (yeah, I know students there) in use, and while the Mac OS X version may be "prettier", that's hardly a valid reason to pick a Mac.</p>

<p>For those who don't know, BlitzMail is the Dartmouth email system launched in 1988. That's right, it's 20 this year. It's "archaic" according</a> to the director of technical services at Dartmouth. They've been trying to get rid of the client for years but the students are really attached to it. Dartmouth has been trying to get everyone to switch to IMAP mail for YEARS (basically the same: all your email is kept on the server, it's the same for whatever computer you go on) and to use LDAP (in mail clients like Outlook & Thunderbird, Mail.app, and others) which performs identically to the Dartmouth Name Directory in BlitzMail.</p>

<p>For people who don't know how or don't want to spend the time to troubleshoot Windows, or are virus prone, or want a sleek machine can get a Mac.</p>

<p>People who are more comfortable on PCs or have a need for Windows specific apps can go with Windows...</p>

<p>
[quote]
1) Although Apple products have historically been more expensive, that is not really the case anymore for most of their products. Dell (and other PC manufacturers) are very good at marketing; they sell you with a computer that runs at a decent speed with a decent amount of memory. The Apple computers with similar processors and memory ARE more expensive on the surface, but less so if you look at what makes up an Apple machine. If I were to configure a Dell entry-level laptop to have the SAME features as the equivalent MacBook, the Dell would be MORE expensive by about $500. Although I have not done the test with a MacBook Pro, I would assume that it's the same thing. In addition to better hardware inside the computer, the hardware looks better and is much more durable. Don't believe me about the price thing? Configure the two computers yourselves at Dell.com and Apple.com and look that the prices! Also, the Macs come with full software (iLife) that would cost a few hundred dollars (for comparable software) if you wanted it on a PC.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Really? I'd like to see this comparison. Is this factoring in applicable tax and shipping on each? Equivalent length and type (in-home/mail service) of warranty? </p>

<p>Macs have become a lot more price competitive over the years.</p>

<p>The MBP has a bit more of a price premium though.</p>

<p>Photo app, try Google's Picasa. Not everyone is a video editor, and the rest of the software bundle is mediocre. I've used it myself. Beginner friendly, but pretty basic. iMovie is good for home movies though. Although whenever I go to use it at my school, I get the "Please</a> Restart Your Mac" black screen in six languages somewhere between 13 to 40 minutes after beginning it. Yeah, I've tried different Macs (newer iMacs and older eMac machines), and I've imported different videos (DV cam capture, AVIs, even cellphone video). I think the Macs are conspiring against me as a PC user, as no one else ran into these issues :D</p>

<p>
[quote]
2) Apple allows you to upgrade your memory (up to 4 GB). The MacBook Pro also has an expansion port. What else are you realistically going to add?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>The Dell Latitude has a very accessible hard drive bay, although I'll be forthcoming and say I don't know if this is true on the MB/MBP. The Dells are pretty user serviceable in my opinion if you want to upgrade. </p>

<p>
[quote]
3) They do run more smoothly than PCs... just swing by the computer help desk at Dartmouth on any given day and see how many PC users are complaining about losing their data, viruses, etc. Why deal with "knowing what you're doing" and why invest in virus protection software when you can use the Mac to connect to the same internet without worrying about viruses.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I disagree. Laptop hard drives fail in Macs as well as Dells (my relative with an MB had 3 HDs fail within one year). Dartmouth provides free anti-virus by Symantec- not bloated Norton, a lightweight and autoupdating antivirus. Windows Update is enabled by default unless the user opts out at the first bootup by clicking the giant red shield that says "Don't automatically protect my PC by downloading and installing the latest security fixes".</p>

<p>NOW, ONE BIG THING I WILL GIVE THE MACBOOK PRO: The build quality of the machine is much, much, much, much better than that of the latitude. I mean the physical exterior of the machine. It's a lot tougher and doesn't feel as cheap.</p>

25

<p>I personally think you can easily get the best of both worlds with a Mac. Here is a comparison between a standard-second tier Macbook with a customized HP.</p>

<p>Macbook[/url</a>] - $1299
[url=<a href="http://www.shopping.hp.com/webapp/shopping/load_configuration.do?destination=review&email_id=198399&jumpid=in_r329_emailconfig%5DHP">http://www.shopping.hp.com/webapp/shopping/load_configuration.do?destination=review&email_id=198399&jumpid=in_r329_emailconfig]HP</a> Pavilion dv2700t - $1119</p>

<p>As you can see, the difference is over $100. If you take into account the $100 student discount, the $100 towards a printer, and whatever summer sale Apple has (last year it was $200 towards an iPod), the $1199 you pay for a Macbook will be worth it. Also, factor in the fact that Leopard (included) is equivalent to Ultimate (+$160) rather than Home Premium (included). Note that the HP is larger (14"), and hence, clunkier, than the Macbook (13.3") at the exact same resolution (1280 x 800). And the fact that the reported battery life for the Macbook (4.5 hrs) is still greater than the Pavilion's high-capacity battery (4.25 hrs... look at those significant figures).</p>

<p>On to software...
iLife contains iPhoto, iMovie, GarageBand, iWeb, and iDVD. I haven't used any personally, but I chance a guess at it's better than whatever comes standard with MS (Paint, MovieMaker, Nothing, Nothing, Nothing).
iWork is just phenomenal. Pages, Keynote, and Numbers are fantastic (Numbers not so much)... The only area Office surpasses iWork is in price. $149 for Office (Word, Excel, Powerpoint), $79 for iWork (Pages, Keynote, Numbers). And if you really want it, you can just buy Office '08 for Mac, which is the same price as Office '07 for PC. Also, Adium is a great multi-chat client (AIM, MSN, Google Chat) for Mac... I have yet to use a half decent chat client that works with Windows. And that's one of many.</p>

<p>As for features...
Windows doesn't come close. Instant Search in Vista is a rip-off of OS X's spotlight (which is still much more responsive and useable). Flip 3D is Windows' take on Mac's Expose. Spaces, which offers multiple desktops (which Mac stole from Linux), is nowhere to be found on Vista. XP and Vista's screenshotting features are severely limited, while Leopard/Tiger allow you to select any portion of the screen to screenshot, as well as the option to save directly to .png.</p>

<p>As for upgradability, I see no need. Apple tends not to leave old users in the dust as Microsoft does. My friend's 7-year-old iBook still works fine (a period here would make any PC user gasp in surprise) with Leopard and iWork, without disabling any features. Regardless, you can easily upgrade RAM and your hard drive, and I would love to see anybody upgrade a CPU for any laptop.</p>

<p>I'll keep the mention of Vista's crash-prone nature short. I've never had personal experience with it, but that's because I don't think it's worth switching over to Vista. Ever.</p>

<p>To the PC-killer...
Bootcamp. Now that Macs run Intel, you can easily get Windows Vista or XP on a Mac. Thus, all compatibility, I'm-not-used-to-Leopard, Mac-crashes-for-me arguments are null.</p>

26

<p>Now that Macs have become compatible hardware-wise with Windows, the Mac vs PC debate is antiquated, at least for laptops. (I suspect the Mac monopoly on their own hardware is more of a PITA for desktop owners, since PC desktops have by far the most hardware flexibility when it comes to upgrading and whatnot.)</p>

<p>I don't think it's wise to adopt a very dogmatic view these days. It made more sense five years ago, and definitely a lot more sense ten years ago, but now the gaps between PCs and Macs have narrowed quite a bit. The only issue that stands out to me is that you can't run many Windows apps on a Mac OS. Viruses are a problem only if you're an idiot when it comes to computers, which unfortunately most people are.</p>

<p>The notion that PCs can't keep going is also a bit of a myth, I think. My aunt's office had a PC running Windows 95 for six or seven years - for all I know it's still going. I have quite a few computers that have been chugging since the early 2000s, all of them PCs. Upgrading is pointless - the last good Windows OS was XP, and before then if you had 98SE, the latest version of NT, or Windows 2000, you were pretty set.</p>

<p>Also, I wonder if one of the reasons why Apple provides so many applications out of the box is because there's less choice available when it comes to installing similar apps. I have a lot of flexibility with my software choices on a Windows OS, and certainly so with Linux (as long as you don't approach games).</p>

<p>So, in short, there's no real showstealing difference between Macs and PCs, and anyone dogmatically pushing for one or the other is probably ignoring major pitfalls/advantages for one or the other, while probably touting quite a few insignificant advantages. (Seriously, how many of us are ever going to need to select one portion of our desktop for a screenshot?)</p>

<p>You should be fine buying one or the other. If you have a tendency to screw your computer up, you might be slightly better off with relatively virus-proof Macs (emphasis on slightly - I don't know many people unhappy with their PCs, which shocked me since they mainly use Vista).</p>

27

<p>I agree that the differences between a Mac and a PC may have been bridged, so to speak, but I must politely disagree with some of your points.</p>

<p>It's true that some PC's may last longer than the rest of the pack, but my comment that "Apple tends not to leave old users in the dust as Microsoft does" refers to the operating system, not the hardware, though Macs tend to have better quality control. Looking through an old Consumer Reports magazine, Apple has had by far the best tech support as well as the fewest problems for its machines.</p>

<p>As for selection of applications, Mac may not have a wide variety, but what they have is more than sufficient. As I mentioned before, Adium is the by far the best multi-chat client I have ever used for any OS. On VersionTracker, there are over 100 different applications under Chat/IM/SMS. Important software, such as Photoshop and Dreamweaver, is built for both Mac and PC. Games, however, are an entirely different story. I personally don't game, but I'm sure booting into XP on your Mac just to play World of Warcraft isn't unreasonable.</p>

<p>I don't see any disadvantages to a Macbook, especially not price. I do, however, know that it is the attention to detail and "insignificant" features that makes a Mac significantly better than a PC. Furthermore, just because you do not utilize a specific feature does not mean it is insignificant.</p>

<p>Also, enough people are sufficiently unhappy with Vista for Microsoft to offer a downgrade to XP option.</p>

28

<p>
[quote]
Furthermore, just because you do not utilize a specific feature does not mean it is insignificant.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>The point I was getting at, really, is that it ultimately depends on the individual user. If you aren't going to use the features one operating system offers, why bother buying it? I personally rarely used the multiple desktops most Linux desktop/window managers offer, so to me that's hardly a good selling point for the Mac.</p>

<p>I don't like this constant insistence that one OS is better than the other. It depends entirely on your needs. Linux is more stable and more flexible than most operating systems; the *BSDs are themselves even more stable. That doesn't automatically make them superior. It depends completely on what your own needs are.</p>

<p>If you don't know what your needs are, IMO, it makes no big difference whether you buy a PC or a Mac. Both offer roughly the same functionality, and you can't go too wrong with either. "Attention to detail" and loads of insignificant features are not exactly showstealers, considering that just about anything useful you can do with one OS you can do with the other.</p>

29

<p>You guys are too tech-y for me.</p>

30

<p>I had long heard the prevalent thought that MAC users have far fewer service complaints than PC users - I posed this to the people who service the computers on campus and they said there is no difference in that regard.</p>