# Mac Or PC?



## 1Valet PRO (Nov 2, 2005)

I need to replace my computer and iam not sure what to buy. In fairness i do need to use some microsoft run applications so i am likely to buy a laptop PC as a laptop would currently suit me. However i would also like to try out a mac for doing photo work and little videos etc. I know i can do this on a PC but this last PC i have had has been crap to be polite.

SO in short i would like people experiences on these machines to help me descide between.

1, Buy a high spec PC laptop
2, Buy a budget laptop plus a mac most probley a Imac.

any thoughts welcomed.


----------



## fjs (May 12, 2006)

The new cheaper MacBook comes out in September. Aluminium case like the Air, rumoured multitouch glass trackpad.


----------



## King Eric (Feb 27, 2006)

Once you go mac, you never go back 



Macbook with 2gb of ram owner and still flying faster than my top spec dell desktop which cost twice as much. Connected via HDMI to a HD screen so I have a desktop feel with wireless keyboard and mouse as well. Superb

I'm looking at an iMac currently to replace the Dell


----------



## Detail My Ride (Apr 19, 2006)

I switched over to Mac a month or so ago, and I won't ever be touching a PC again with a large barge pole if I can help it.

You will never look back, ever. But, in the incredibly unlikely event of you not liking Mac OSX, you can run windows on Mac also.


----------



## TeZ (Oct 28, 2007)

Can of worms, I went mac about 6 years ago, I just find it a choir to go back to my Pc for anything. Its all personal preference.

But in my honest opinion get a mac and not a cheap one ( if any of them are lol ) get a powerful one and you will be just stunned at the speed it can process everyday things such as Photos an movies.

TeZ

And BTW I even still use OS9 classic for some old fav's like Ps 7 .


----------



## Hair Bear (Nov 4, 2007)

King Eric said:


> Once you go mac, you never go back
> 
> 
> 
> ...





Gaz W said:


> I switched over to Mac a month or so ago, and I won't ever be touching a PC again with a large barge pole if I can help it.
> 
> You will never look back, ever. But, in the incredibly unlikely event of you not liking Mac OSX, you can run windows on Mac also.


Why though guys?

Genuinely interested......


----------



## Waxamomo (Jun 18, 2008)

I've got an iMac, 2.33 Dual Core Processor and 2GB ram, miles better than any other PC i've owned. As already said, once you go mac, you never go back!!

You can always buy Parallels and run windoes on your Mac? Then you have got the best of both worlds. Oh and get the 24 inch screen


----------



## Detail My Ride (Apr 19, 2006)

Everything just works (Except lexmark printers, I strongly advise not ever trying to connect anything mac with anything lexmark). Its so much simpler and smoother, and just for the fact you can say, I use a Mac. Its really quite difficult to explain!


----------



## TeZ (Oct 28, 2007)

I use one for the best reason, Graphics and design. 
At work I now also have a new intel G5 for Artios CAD which is a life saver compared to the " powerful " Compaq it used to run on.

TeZ


----------



## Neil_S (Oct 26, 2005)

Buy a Mac and dual boot Windows XP with bootcamp.


----------



## King Eric (Feb 27, 2006)

Hair Bear said:


> Why though guys?
> 
> Genuinely interested......


Because I work on slow **** PC machines all day at work, then I come home and have to use my Dell for certain things. Its glitchy, seems to love inviting virus' round to play and generally runs slow. Despite having a great firewall etc etc.

The Mac turns on in seconds and processes everything at superb pace...My photos are great on it and running an Iphone alongside it compliments it really well

I find it a bit lego which suits me down to the ground. Whereas my PC is like a complicated Meccanno set that I (because of being thick) cannot deal with


----------



## Sypher (Jul 16, 2008)

I became a mac convert at the beginning of the year. I switched my desktop pc to a iMac and was so impressed I swapped my notebook for a macbook air just two months later. The operating system is so much better (for me), always fast and never crashes.

You can install a Windows operating system via bootcamp or run Windows within OSX with other programs. Luckily I only need Office which you can get for OSX anyway.


----------



## Hair Bear (Nov 4, 2007)

King Eric said:


> Because I work on slow **** PC machines all day at work, then I come home and have to use my Dell for certain things. Its glitchy, seems to love inviting virus' round to play and generally runs slow. Despite having a great firewall etc etc.
> 
> The Mac turns on in seconds and processes everything at superb pace...My photos are great on it and running an Iphone alongside it compliments it really well
> 
> I find it a bit lego which suits me down to the ground. Whereas my PC is like a complicated Meccanno set that I (because of being thick) cannot deal with


I understand what you're saying KE, I'm just curious as to why they're so much better?

Is it 'cos the OS doesn't have all the bullsh!t running in the background? Mind you, if you can run Windows on it then I guess that can't be the reason?

Or is it better hardware? Are the components of a better quality/spec'?


----------



## TeZ (Oct 28, 2007)

You only truly know when you have one.


----------



## Hair Bear (Nov 4, 2007)

TeZ said:


> You only truly know when you have one.


No doubt mate, I'm tempted for sure :thumb:

I'm not questioning the difference, it seems everyone agrees that the Mac's are great performers. I'm genuinely interested in why they are.....the tekky type reasons :thumb:


----------



## ahaydock (Jan 4, 2007)

Mac all the way! Although you can boot into Windows, I doubt you'll want to once you've used OSX.

I switched about 6 years ago and have never looked back :thumb:


----------



## fjs (May 12, 2006)

Hair Bear said:


> No doubt mate, I'm tempted for sure :thumb:
> 
> I'm not questioning the difference, it seems everyone agrees that the Mac's are great performers. I'm genuinely interested in why they are.....the tekky type reasons :thumb:


The ultimate unit of abstraction is the pthread:

Processes: 85 total, 4 running, 4 stuck, 77 sleeping... 395 threads 20:29:56
Load Avg: 0.12, 0.20, 0.20 CPU usage: 8.00% user, 11.20% sys, 80.80% idle
SharedLibs: num = 2, resident = 8192 code, 0 data, 0 linkedit.
MemRegions: num = 46016, resident = 848M + 0 private, 411M shared.
PhysMem: 346M wired, 1084M active, 534M inactive, 1971M used, 77M free.
VM: 23G + 375M 780402(0) pageins, 401953(0) pageouts

PID COMMAND %CPU TIME #TH #PRTS #MREGS RPRVT RSHRD RSIZE VSIZE
21896 top 20.0% 0:10.23 1 18 93 988K 6316K 3836K 27M 
21869 mdworker 0.0% 0:00.18 3 50 283 2456K 42M 11M 91M 
21856 mdworker 0.0% 0:00.32 4 71 291 2628K 38M 11M 87M 
20779 AppleMobil 0.0% 0:00.22 1 42 460 6108K 62M 20M 134M 
20768 iTunes 0.6% 3:16.18 8 216 1025 27M 94M 73M 585M 
20766 usbmuxd 0.0% 0:01.62 2 26 95 784K 6148K 3940K 28M 
20764 iTunesHelp 0.0% 0:00.44 2 55 457 4116K 60M 19M 385M 
13341 SpamSieve 0.0% 0:14.66 6 121 732 10M 80M 42M 504M 
13319 scriptrunn 0.0% 0:01.95 1 63 563 5248K 67M 24M 461M 
13318 Mail 0.1% 12:04.55 17 439 1404 16M 113M 104M 611M 
13049 scriptrunn 0.0% 0:01.73 1 58 510 564K 66M 16M 428M 
12488 Safari 2.2% 5:09:22 16 336 7882 370M 136M 504M 1232M 
11692 bash 0.0% 0:00.02 1 14 42 332K 2360K 1172K 21M 
11691 bash 0.0% 0:00.01 1 14 43 8192 2360K 716K 21M 
11690 login 0.0% 0:00.04 1 17 224 28K 19M 5284K 47M 
11689 login 0.0% 0:00.04 1 17 224 52K 19M 5308K 47M

Above is a series of threaded process running harmoniously.

This is a unix that, on the Mac, has been refined over 10 years. I have been around since DP4, when the Aqua window server appeared.

Leopard is very solid.

Plus points:

Applications are bundles. These are instantiated and linked at runtime to public and private frameworks. If you wish to delete an Application, you can just throw it away.

Customisation. You can tune the system from the command-line.

Minus points:

As of 9.0, you cannot build Darwin.

sysctl.conf is overwritten by /etc/rc

Competitors?

Well, the obvious ones

OpenSolaris

SuSe or Ubuntu

I find OpenSolaris difficult to configure, but you may do better.

HTH


----------



## 1Valet PRO (Nov 2, 2005)

Does anyone here use Boot camp or parrells and how easy is it can there be problems. 

the only really reason i need windows is so i can run my acounts package on it which interfaces with our on line shop etc very powerful program. 

also because you need to buy the windows software in addition to boot camp it seems the price would exceed a cheap PC laptop.

Anyway back to the original question does anyone use boot camp or parrells to good effect and what programs are you using through it?


----------



## 1Valet PRO (Nov 2, 2005)

fjs said:


> The ultimate unit of abstraction is the pthread:
> 
> Processes: 85 total, 4 running, 4 stuck, 77 sleeping... 395 threads 20:29:56
> Load Avg: 0.12, 0.20, 0.20 CPU usage: 8.00% user, 11.20% sys, 80.80% idle
> ...


Not likely as i have no-idea what any of your post ment.

Now i just feel stupid.


----------



## fjs (May 12, 2006)

1Valet PRO said:


> Not likely as i have no-idea what any of your post ment.
> 
> Now i just feel stupid.


That was not my intent. I am not sure what you desire.

Try

http://www.apple.com/macosx/technology/


----------



## nick_mcuk (Jan 4, 2008)

I just defected to a MAC BookPro from years of windows laptops....not regretting it one bit!

I even have VMWare Fusion so that i can have windows for the bits n bobs i have that wont work with a MAC.

So rarely use anything but the MAC side now though....


----------



## -ROM- (Feb 23, 2007)

I have both and both serve different purposes, i'd never be without one or the other, however from the mac point of view yes they are good, better than a windows PC in many ways, but they are not the HUGE leap forward most people claim them to be. It's almost like [email protected] syndrome, people assumed that they are brilliant as they just spent a lot of money on them and feel the need to justify their purchase. but in relation to the [email protected] comparison, daveKG's wax test proved things are not always so clear cut!

So in closing mac = very good, but maybe not as good as most people try to convince themselves.

As above this is coming from someone who uses both!


----------



## Imperial-blue-rs (Oct 1, 2006)

To be honest it's the experience as a whole - yeah I know I sound a right [email protected] how deep!, but from minimalist design, right down to even the simplest of icons the entire machine is simply a joy to use.
It's so straight forward it's a joke, anybody with knowledge of a PC will find a mac very straight forward to use.
In ease of use it's the equivalent of a Nokkia to say a motorola, its all just so much more slicker and user friendly, the OSX platform is rock solid and there are far less viruses if any that I've come across to be honest in the 14+ years i've used em.
I'm a graphic designer and can honestly say that no pc can touch a mac on the creative side of things plus you can run windows on boot camp and run them more reliably then on a pc or so I've heard?
My new mac at home is a 24" imac and runs like a dream and my work machine is a top of the line mac pro.

Have butchers and see what you think of the OS you should see what I'm waffling on about

Cheers
Mark

http://reviews.cnet.com/macintosh-os/mac-os-x-10/4505-3673_7-32058772.html


----------



## Hair Bear (Nov 4, 2007)

rmorgan84 said:


> I have both and both serve different purposes, i'd never be without one or the other, however from the mac point of view yes they are good, better than a windows PC in many ways, but they are not the HUGE leap forward most people claim them to be. It's almost like [email protected] syndrome, people assumed that they are brilliant as they just spent a lot of money on them and feel the need to justify their purchase. but in relation to the [email protected] comparison, daveKG's wax test proved things are not always so clear cut!
> 
> So in closing mac = very good, but maybe not as good as most people try to convince themselves.
> 
> As above this is coming from someone who uses both!


Fair appraisal that mate :thumb:


----------



## Griff (Aug 11, 2007)

One more thing to bear in mind is software have a look in pc world for mac software, Main reason I went back to a pc, however I still have my mac in the back room anyone wanna buy an Emac? lol
Tom


----------



## 1Valet PRO (Nov 2, 2005)

fjs said:


> That was not my intent. I am not sure what you desire.
> 
> Try
> 
> http://www.apple.com/macosx/technology/


Tung and cheek.

thanks for the link


----------



## swiftshine (Apr 17, 2008)

fjs said:


> The ultimate unit of abstraction is the pthread:
> 
> Processes: 85 total, 4 running, 4 stuck, 77 sleeping... 395 threads 20:29:56
> Load Avg: 0.12, 0.20, 0.20 CPU usage: 8.00% user, 11.20% sys, 80.80% idle
> ...


??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
:lol::lol::lol::lol:


----------



## Chris_R (Feb 3, 2008)

Hair Bear said:


> I understand what you're saying KE, I'm just curious as to why they're so much better?
> 
> Is it 'cos the OS doesn't have all the bullsh!t running in the background? Mind you, if you can run Windows on it then I guess that can't be the reason?
> 
> Or is it better hardware? Are the components of a better quality/spec'?


No its the same hardware, what they do however is add 200 quid on top for the Apple badging, the build quality is also not better, possibly the opposite (have a look for discolouring of plastics or cracking of cases) The OS still has all that "bull****" as you want to call it running in the background, its the stuff that makes your computer work, without it running in the background you would have to do everything in a linear fashion - say you couldn't connect to your network and run a web browser at the same time, something always has to run in the background...

The way to decide is what you want to do with it and what you want to spend. That's all there is to the argument at the end of the day.
Spend £700 a get the Mac to surf the net and do a few emails?
Spend £300 get a PC and do the same thing?
Thats the problem, the entry price is too high for what they give you IMO.

I had the exact same question the other month, realised that the Mac would not do what I wanted but then people just carried on evangelizing about the Mac regardless.
I spent the same amount of cash on a far, far, far more powerful PC which will last me a lot longer and does what I need it to do and a whole heap more.


----------



## rorton (Jun 29, 2006)

things i like about the mac:


It just works!!! You can plug devices in, and they just work, no real messing with drivers
Its stable
Install of applications is a doddle, drag the .app file into your applications folder and away you go (i know bigger apps like photoshop and office have an installer)
Simple to remove apps (remove the 'single' file that is installed in the apps folder and its gone!) no dll files spread throughout your machine, conflicting with other files.
Apple make the hardware and the software, so its guaranteed to work. Windows has a tough time as it is expected to be installed on a million and one different combinations of devices.
The OS is what makes the mac special. The hardware is a WinTel box (as it can run windows) 
The OS is a pleasure to use. Its so simple that coming from a windows background, the main 'gotcha' is trying to work out a way of doing something that you would in Windows, where a similar task is much simpler on a mac
The laptops 'sleep' much better than a windows box. Just close the lid on a macbook, and it sleeps. open the lid again, and in seconds, your off and working again.

As others have mentioned, its quite hard to explain, but once you own one you will understand what the fuss is about.

Granted you can find a £300 laptop to surf the net and send emails, but once you have invested in a laptop (mac or PC) then why restrict your use to just that? The extra investment ensures a more then capable device that can run windows (for the odd apps you may need to run on Windows) and something that you can do pretty much any task you throw at it.


----------



## isherdholi (Sep 18, 2007)

Surprisingly, nobody thought "Mac or PC" was referring to "Makita or Porter Cable" :lol:


----------



## isherdholi (Sep 18, 2007)

I currently use a PC. I have a dual boot system with Windows XP and Ubuntu 8.04 Linux

I do find Ubuntu alot more satisfying to use than Windows. I find Windows to have too many problems, and these seem to accumulate with time as well.

The good thing about Linux (and I suppose this applies to Mac as well) is that there is no need to have anti-virus running in the background, and also, the file system used for the hard drives does not suffer from fragmentation, so you don't need to worry about defragmenting the hard drive. This is something the Window's FAT32 and NTFS file systems both suffer from (the former moreso than the latter)

I haven't actually used a Mac before (apart from the MacOS that runs on the iPhone), but I would be willing to give it a try, especially since they're not as overpriced as they used to be. For the kind of person that doesn't want to spend time fixing problems, or configuring various different things to make it work (the latter applies to Linux as well as Windows) then Mac looks like it could be the way forward.

To summarise, in petrolhead terms: -

A Mac is like a good, reliable Japanese car.

A PC is like an Alfa Romeo.


----------



## withoutabix (May 28, 2008)

ill put my bit in

for as long as i can remember i was using pc's since i was like 9/10 im now 20

about a year and a half ago my pc gave up so decided to try a mac having never used one before and in all honesty it the best decision i ever made like others on here its hard to describe what makes them so good and i too found it hard to justify the price against similar specced desktop pc's but i bit the bullet and went for the bog standard imac £800 when looking at pc's £800 seems very high for what you actually get BUT and its a huge but the difference in speed and its ability to run programs so smoothly is unbelievable when compared to similar specced desktops in fact my dads pc has twice as much ram as my imac and when i need to use his it just feels so slow and laborious and even the internet on my mac is twice as fast as his desktop and it comes from the same wireless router. another plus point for me is how it manages multiple programs with ease i cant run Football manager/safari/itunes and msn without it ever slowing up they are a joy to use also theres no alt-return-delete malaky if things go wrong because things wont go wrong ive never had to force reset the mac ever!! they take about 10mins to get used to and lets face it they look the dogs danglies!!

honestly i think mac's runs rings around most pc and will prob never go back


----------



## isherdholi (Sep 18, 2007)

withoutabix said:


> theres no alt-return-delete malaky if things go wrong


Do you mean ctrl-alt-delete ?


----------



## isherdholi (Sep 18, 2007)

It seems that this "Mac or PC" thread is predominantly a "Mac or Windows" thread. I wonder how many people who used to use a PC and now use a Mac, have tried using a non-Windows operating system on their PC prior to jumping ship over to Mac.


----------



## Chris_R (Feb 3, 2008)

isherdholi said:


> To summarise, in petrolhead terms: -
> 
> A Mac is like a good, reliable Japanese car.
> 
> A PC is like an Alfa Romeo.


Huh?
I see some of the comparison, a Mac is after all made from low quality plastics LOL
A PC like an Alfa though? I don't get that at all, as most of them have generic designs which are hardly iconic like the Mac stuff.


----------



## jamest (Apr 8, 2008)

Well a Mac is a PC.

Go to an Apple store and try one out, see if you like it.

If you need to use Windows apps maybe you should forget about the Mac and get a Windows based PC or get a Mac with Boot Camp to cover both situations.

It will always come down to personal preference, just because a lot of other people like Macs doesn't mean you will.

The only thing that puts me off Macs in general is the arrogant stubborn user who thinks they are better than everyone else who uses Windows, they seem to think they are part of some higher group of people who are united as one. If you can get yourself past that bull****, then you may actually be able to enjoy a Mac.

Many people bad mouth Windows without thinking through the differences.

Apple have OSX running off a unix kernel (modded I think?) where as Windows has it's own kernel (basically the engine of the OS I suppose). Windows has to work on a lot more configurations than OSX does. OSX is sold to work on a select few amount of hardware setups, Windows is supposed to work on 99% of them, to do that, you are going to make it bloated. If Microsoft were in the same situation as Apple with only needing to get it to work on a few hardware setups I am sure they would be able to make Windows a lot faster and more stable.

By now you have probably stopped reading this...I know I would of..


----------



## arcdef (Apr 17, 2008)

Gaz W said:


> Everything just works (Except lexmark printers, I strongly advise not ever trying to connect anything mac with anything lexmark). Its so much simpler and smoother, and just for the fact you can say, I use a Mac. Its really quite difficult to explain!


i got my wireless lexmark working fine with it, just make sure its connected to the wifi before you try and print or you have to re install:wall:

in all seriousness though my mac has NEVER crashed, every time i use a pc new or not it crashes is unbelievably slow and i get some stupid virus warning none of which is a problem on the mac, sure it costs more but its better built and just works better, the adverts dont lie....for once!!


----------



## Sypher (Jul 16, 2008)

At the end of the day a computer is a tool to do a Job(s) you need doing. If you are into games or your primary processes require Windows specific software, then a mac would be a bad choice. Choosing a cheap pc that isn't powerful enough to run your software would equally be a bad choice.

I don't agree with macs having a cheap build though, mac pros, imac's, macbook pros and the macbook air are all made from aluminium and have a very good build quality.


----------



## jamest (Apr 8, 2008)

arcdef said:


> in all seriousness though my mac has NEVER crashed, every time i use a pc new or not it crashes is unbelievably slow and i get some stupid virus warning none of which is a problem on the mac, sure it costs more but its better built and just works better, the adverts dont lie....for once!!


My Windows PC has never crashed. People say PCs (Windows) are worse when they compare a £300 PC to a £700 Mac.

All the prebuilt rubbish from Acer, Asus, Dell, HP etc are all made using the cheapest hardware they can get their hands on to make a profit and then install additional bloatware on the PCs to get some money from the companies that want the bloatware on the PCs.

Apple on the other hand select slightly better hardware and charge a little extra to make their profits, as such they are more reliable hardware wise.

Most Windows crashes are caused by third party software or a hardware problem because your PC manufacture cheaped out on components.

A £700 Windows based PC with no third party software will be equal to a £700 Mac. The only problem being the PC will slow down over time when you use it due to it not clearing out the crap it creates, where as the Mac will slow down but no way near as fast as the Windows PC will as the OSx kernel is a lot better than the Windows kernel.


----------



## dominic84 (Jan 27, 2007)

> Apple have OSX running off a unix kernel (modded I think?) where as Windows has it's own kernel (basically the engine of the OS I suppose). Windows has to work on a lot more configurations than OSX does. OSX is sold to work on a select few amount of hardware setups, Windows is supposed to work on 99% of them, to do that, you are going to make it bloated. If Microsoft were in the same situation as Apple with only needing to get it to work on a few hardware setups I am sure they would be able to make Windows a lot faster and more stable.


Thanks your last two posts have saved me time in posting and really hit the nail on the head :thumb:


----------



## -ROM- (Feb 23, 2007)

jamest said:


> My Windows PC has never crashed. People say PCs (Windows) are worse when they compare a £300 PC to a £700 Mac.
> 
> All the prebuilt rubbish from Acer, Asus, Dell, HP etc are all made using the cheapest hardware they can get their hands on to make a profit and then install additional bloatware on the PCs to get some money from the companies that want the bloatware on the PCs.
> 
> ...


Just to add to that, yes windows PCs will slow down more quickly but a little maintenance every couple of months and it will be as fast as day 1!


----------



## jamest (Apr 8, 2008)

rmorgan84 said:


> Just to add to that, yes windows PCs will slow down more quickly but a little maintenance every couple of months and it will be as fast as day 1!


I am not entirely convinced. It will run faster than it does with no maintanence but I am never able to get XP to the same speed as it was from the initial install.

I do PC repair in my spare time and one of my clients computers was really slow, I ran CCleaner and then Defraggler and told him to keep doing it each week while he made a cup of tea or had dinner. He is extremely happy with the results, but from what I have heard Mac users don't need to do this, although I am sure they have the option of doing it.



dominic84 said:


> Thanks your last two posts have saved me time in posting and really hit the nail on the head :thumb:


People just need to learn to see things from both perspectives before they critise something.

Edit: This is why I dislike the Apple community - Link


----------



## isherdholi (Sep 18, 2007)

Chris_R said:


> Huh?
> I see some of the comparison, a Mac is after all made from low quality plastics LOL
> A PC like an Alfa though? I don't get that at all, as most of them have generic designs which are hardly iconic like the Mac stuff.


I meant in terms of reliability, and the amout of effort needed to get it up and running. Recent Alfa's are not as bad though, but the stereotype still exists.


----------



## -ROM- (Feb 23, 2007)

jamest said:


> I am not entirely convinced. It will run faster than it does with no maintanence but I am never able to get XP to the same speed as it was from the initial install.
> 
> I do PC repair in my spare time and one of my clients computers was really slow, I ran CCleaner and then Defraggler and told him to keep doing it each week while he made a cup of tea or had dinner. He is extremely happy with the results, but from what I have heard Mac users don't need to do this, although I am sure they have the option of doing it.
> 
> ...


I last formatted & reinstalled XP 6 months ago, and it hasn't slowed down one bit! Filters in Photoshop etc still run as quickly as day 1, it boots just as quickly, etc etc.


----------



## jezza (Dec 28, 2006)

fjs said:


> The ultimate unit of abstraction is the pthread:
> 
> Processes: 85 total, 4 running, 4 stuck, 77 sleeping... 395 threads 20:29:56
> Load Avg: 0.12, 0.20, 0.20 CPU usage: 8.00% user, 11.20% sys, 80.80% idle
> ...


I bet you were able to set the timer record on the VCR too! :lol:


----------



## JasonRS (Aug 8, 2006)

I run both Windows and OS X (MacBook Pro)

I'm happy with both (can crash both too btw) I use XP on my desktop PC and the macbook is my portable.
For Virtualisation on the Macbook look at using VirtualBox ( http://www.virtualbox.org/ ) because it's free ( proper free, not I can get a serial number from the net free) and very good. If you're going to buy one, go for Parallels.

OS X has one really annoying trait that windows doesn't have - I can remove a USB memory key on windows, and it just works, on the Mac, it gets all moody and tells me I should have ejected first.

OS X handles application install / removal beautifully though.

I've also spent a lot of time working with other desktop OS's, but wouldn't have them at home far too much time faffing about getting package x & y on the machine before I can run application X.


----------



## Johnnyopolis (Oct 25, 2005)

1Valet PRO said:


> Does anyone here use Boot camp or parrells and how easy is it can there be problems.
> 
> the only really reason i need windows is so i can run my acounts package on it which interfaces with our on line shop etc very powerful program.
> 
> ...


I use an iMac 24" as well as a 15" Mac Book Pro. I have been using macs for about 5 or 6 years now and I vowed that one day I would run my entire business on them.

Well I am pleased to say this is now Reality and by using Parallels I am running Sage Line 50 via windows with OSX so unlike bootcamp I dont have to keep on rebooting to get into windows. I also use spaces so one of my spaces is for windows. As well as this I am able to browse with a combination of Safari/Firefox/Internet Explorer which is great for testing the website.

I am responsible I believe for King Eric buying his as well as a few other people.... My imac hasnt been rebooted in over 100 days and is still going strong..! My MBP connects to my iMac with ease and they all share a HP Laserjet printer as well as a HP Multifunction printer.

My latest aquisition is an airport. This enables me to plug it in in the garage and attach a set of speakers and wirelessly send all my tunes direct from my imac. I can also control this from my iphone so if I want to listen to the latest bee gee's album I just select it on the iphone, tell it to play in the garage and hey presto! You can have up to 10 of these airports so you could beam music round the whole of your house. I dont think windows does this. 

It may cost more for a mac, but the residuals are also more too...! I had my G5 for 5 years.... now you only need to ask dubnut how good it is 

Johnny


----------



## Grizzle (Jul 12, 2006)

Johnnyopolis said:


> I am responsible I believe for King Eric buying his as well as a few other people....


Incl me :thumb:


----------



## L200 Steve (Oct 25, 2005)

Johnnyopolis said:


> I am responsible I believe for King Eric buying his as well as a few other people....


+ Me:wave:

Mac mini + Iomega 750gb mini max + Pana TH50PZ plasma - detailing world never looked so good.

3 x Macbooks for family wide mac loving fun.

Bless you young 'opolis, for showing us the light:wave:


----------



## Detail My Ride (Apr 19, 2006)

Johnnyopolis said:


> I am responsible I believe for King Eric buying his as well as a few other people....


Me too :thumb:


----------



## Johnnyopolis (Oct 25, 2005)

Awww shucks... Thanks guys! 

Steve - Cant wait to "pop over" and see the setup!


----------



## Detail My Ride (Apr 19, 2006)

New idea. DW Mac Owners Meet! :lol: :lol:


----------



## Grizzle (Jul 12, 2006)

Gaz W said:


> New idea. DW Mac Owners Meet! :lol: :lol:


:thumb:


----------



## -ROM- (Feb 23, 2007)

we can have a show & shine!:lol:


----------



## dubnut71 (Jul 25, 2006)

Johnnyopolis said:


> Awww shucks... Thanks guys!
> 
> Steve - Cant wait to "pop over" and see the setup!


Yup - Me too!!!

I bought the Oppolis G5 with the 23" display(on a whim actually as I had only popped in to see him to but some Einsett stuff)

I then proceeded to buy 2 macbooks and do the King Eric 4mb upgrade - the simplest thing to do really.
I run a business off this set up and as a rule never shut the machines off just "sleep" them, much simpler.

I am sitting in a project office on a NHS site at the mo with people using laptops (client, consultants and architects)and they are all in awe of the sheer simplicity of my cheappy basic macbook. I bought a usb 3g stick, just whack it in and it works. I work with numerous wireless networks and networked devices for printing and storage at different sites, just look for them and they are useable, no drivers needed. 
So for that reason I can actually integrate into any job much easier than if I used a pc laptop.

I understand they are dearer for the technology inside the case and a £300 laptop would do the job but the first couple of hours lost due to crashing and lost productivity when faffing about with installing drivers / restarting things etc at a consultants rate and you see its a small price indeed!!!

I am not an absolute blind convert though and don't have an i-phone just because its got the logo but you can't fault the seamless integration they manage, far easier than a pc based equiv.

My 2 p's worth, HTH!!!!


----------



## jamest (Apr 8, 2008)

dubnut71 said:


> Yup - Me too!!!
> 
> I bought the Oppolis G5 with the 23" display(on a whim actually as I had only popped in to see him to but some Einsett stuff)
> 
> ...


Can't complain about anything you have written because Macs are better for a lot of people. But you know full well if Microsoft did what Apple do with Safari/iTunes/Quicktime there would quickly be a lawsuit against them.

But you pay for what you get, you spend that little extra and you should get that little extra which is what Apple have been doing and what Dell etc used to do.


----------



## kennethsross (Jun 19, 2008)

Gaz W said:


> New idea. DW Mac Owners Meet! :lol: :lol:


Pause for thought........

http://forums.bit-tech.net/showthread.php?t=151430

Well - I guess we're all fanboys for something or other :lol::lol:

Something else to think about:

Tuesday, August 05, 2008 7:16 PM/EST 
Should You Pay Twice as Much for a Mac?
News Analysis. Retail average selling prices for Windows notebooks are about half those of Mac laptops. Shall I repeat that?

[Editor's Note: This is a companion to another post at Microsoft Watch telling a different story from the same NPD data.]

On Saturday, Aug. 2, I got to wondering about Mac versus Windows PC pricing after seeing two HP notebooks on sale at the local Target. One of them, a 14-inch model, the HP DV2946NR, sold for $699.99 and packed 4GB of memory and a 320GB hard drive. Capacity for both features is twice that of the $1,299 MacBook-and shared graphics is 356MB compared with a meager 144MB for the MacBook. I wondered: If Vista notebooks are selling for so little and packing so much, how does this compare with Mac desktops and notebooks?

Today I contacted Stephen Baker, NPD's vice president of industry analysis, about computer average selling prices at retail. That HP notebook is right on mark: ASP for retail Windows notebooks is $700. Mac laptops: $1,515. Yeah, right, they're more than twice as much. But there's more: The ASP for Mac desktops is more than $1,000 greater than for Windows PCs, and Mac desktop ASPs were higher in June than they were two years ago.​
http://blogs.eweek.com/applewatch/content/channel/should_you_pay_twice_as_much_for_a_mac.html

or....

However, it's not all about the figures - what matters is the bang you get for your buck, right? Well, according to Wilcox the news isn't so great there either - while the performance on both side of the coin used to be pretty much even, the scales have tipped dramatically in favour of Wintel. Wilcox says that while it used to be the case that "Macs and Windows PCs of similar price [had] hardware features [that] were about the same," now "[the] situation has dramatically changed in the last six months, particularly the last three months."

As an experiment, Wilcox priced up equivalent systems from Dell and Apple in order to see what the actual difference in price was, rather than a misleading difference in average selling price. Ending up with a mid-range iMac and an Inspiron 518 desktop system, the specs were as similar as possible - 2.4GHz processor, widescreen TFT, basic graphics, and so forth. While the iMac had the edge in extras with 802.11g WiFi and Bluetooth 2.1 included as standard alongside a larger 20" display to the Dell's 19", the Dell certainly had the edge in specification: a Core 2 Quad compared to the weedier Core Duo in the iMac, 3GB of RAM compared to just 1GB, and a 500GB hard drive space compared to 250GB. Both systems came with the 'leading edge' OS from the respective companies - Windows Vista Home Premium in the case of the Dell and MacOS X 10.5 for the iMac.

The difference was plain to see - $1,199 for the iMac with its bells and whistles, but just $739 for the higher specification Dell. It's not the headline-grabbing $1,000 differential from the NPD data, but it's still a chunk of change - and all for wireless, Bluetooth, and an extra inch of screen.

As with anything, it's horses for courses - Mac fans will be quick to point out that the build quality is likely to be significantly higher for the iMac, and there's no denying that it's far more aesthetically pleasing. When you factor in that there are significantly more people singing Mac OS X's praises compared to Windows Vista, and perhaps the £230 difference doesn't seem so dramatic. It's still a big chunk of change, and with more people looking toward the grey-area solutions for running the real gem in the crown, MacOS X, on standard (and cheap) hardware it's a margin that Apple are going to be hard pushed to justify. Indeed, Wilcox concludes his article with the summation that "if Apple is going to continue its market share gains, or simply maintain that 8.5 percent U.S. share, prices must go down and configurations bulk up."​
http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2008/08/07/growing-disparity-in-mac-vs-pc-prigin/1

I guess I better be completely honest and open.... I jumped the other way! Yep, I know Mac users find it hard to swallow, but I'm an ex-Mac user, now committed to WINTEL. It was a long time ago, I had a Mac Classic - (search museum sites - you'll find it), and there was software I needed that would only run on a PC. It was 1992, and for the last 16 years, I've been Mac-less.

But to show that I can still be friendly to Mac users, I'll tell this self (PC-wise) deprecating joke. (brought to me with glee by my own personal Mac fanboy)

"What's an Intel chip doing in a Mac?"

"I don't know. What is an Intel chip doing in a Mac?"

"10 times more than it ever did in a Windows PC":lol:


----------



## Grizzle (Jul 12, 2006)

Interesting i bought a mac on sunday only opened it last night after having a serious think about what spec i could get for the same price and to be honest quite alot more i could have had, my current laptop has been having a few wobbles and just last year it went **** up near xmas and wouldn't boot up had to get a technically minded person to look at it lol.

Then just in the last few weeks its had a little wobble again about cache memory and other issues mostly its got very slow i didnt run games or store music on it only for emails and internet ocassional letter typing.

So far with the mac has been a new learning curve but i'm sure i will get there in the end the biggest thing is the touchpad and having to adjust to the scrolling with two fingers and no tapping the pad to select things (i dont know if this is possible any help would be great).

I have also ordered 4gb of ram for it too and with a little chat with Mr O it seems to be a doddle to put in also the manual guides you in how to install it too which i thought was handy seems as if they are ok with upgrades. The spec is pretty good but the ram is poor, other things that are pretty cool is the power cord being magnetic so if like me you get caught up in them all the time lol it simply snaps away to save you falling to the floor like a wet towel. 

So far its been pretty good i have had windows pc's for many years and got really fed up with the blue screens, and slowing performance i didnt follow the crowd that other people may do (GazW lol ) and looked at both when buying again.


----------



## Johnnyopolis (Oct 25, 2005)

You can double tap. 

Hit the Apple button top left.

Go to mouse.

There should be an option there to enable it.

Happy Days. 


 

J.


----------



## Grizzle (Jul 12, 2006)

brilliant  cheers


----------



## jamest (Apr 8, 2008)

Custom Detailers said:


> So far its been pretty good i have had windows pc's for many years and got really fed up with the blue screens, and slowing performance


I was happy with everything you said until the last paragraph. Don't blame Windows for the blue screens. 90% of blue screens are due to hardware problems.


----------



## beardboy (Feb 12, 2006)

JohnnyO is who made me get a MacBook too :lol:

He's cost us all a fortune - free Zaino anyone? 

Get a Mac, install Parallels, Bootcamp or VMWare etc and then have the best of both worlds :thumb:


----------



## Grizzle (Jul 12, 2006)

jamest said:


> I was happy with everything you said until the last paragraph. Don't blame Windows for the blue screens. 90% of blue screens are due to hardware problems.


Hmmm ok, so correct me if i'm wrong,

I've only used one printer (hp) with it, as said havent installed any games or random software either, so the hardware issues would be whats within the laptop? or am i picking you up wrong?

Graham


----------



## jamest (Apr 8, 2008)

Custom Detailers said:


> Hmmm ok, so correct me if i'm wrong,
> 
> I've only used one printer (hp) with it, as said havent installed any games or random software either, so the hardware issues would be whats within the laptop? or am i picking you up wrong?
> 
> Graham


The hardware manufactures such as Acer, Dell, Asus etc use cheap hardware which craps out, Windows tries to protect you from further damaging your hardware and in the case of Vista, try and save your work by giving you the blue screen.

Where as with Mac's, Apple charge more and use slightly better hardware which is more reliable. Apples major advantage is that it only needs to work on a few hardware configurations, which is Microsoft's downfall because it has to be able to work on pretty much any hardware configuration.

But for general Internet browsing and emails etc, I would say Apple will give you the better experience with a better user interface and more reliable hardware, but of course you have to pay a premium for it.

It's just one of my hates when Microsoft get blamed due to someone elses problem, in this case cheap hardware. A similar example is a few days ago the LED thread, someone had bought some cheap Chinese LEDs and announced that LEDs were crap. Buy cheap and you get crap (although this isn't always the case).

EDIT: And to actually answer your question, yes I meant the laptop itself rather than the software on it, although some blue screens can be caused by additional software. I have even had some old HP software cause blue screens before, although HP updated the software to fix that.


----------



## Grizzle (Jul 12, 2006)

Cool thanks for that its a Compaq laptop probably not the greatest mind you.


----------



## jamest (Apr 8, 2008)

Custom Detailers said:


> Cool thanks for that its a Compaq laptop probably not the greatest mind you.


They all cheap out. They all need to make a profit. It just needs one company to make some very good ones and make very little profit on them to get the others in to gear, unfortunatly they don't see Mac's as competition for some reason.


----------



## Serkie (Dec 8, 2007)

Recent Mac convert. I'm particularly enjoying the simple, uncluttered, logical interface that is OS X.

No complicated virus, firewall, spyware software eating up resources. Everything just works pretty much seamlessly. No crashes to date.

I use it mainly for web, editing pictures and video from DV & SD based camcorders. Which I might add it does flawlessly and without fuss, shame the same can't be said when I try to do the same on my Windows based Compaq.

I'm also running Parallels with an XP SP3 image for windows based stuff. I have a MacBook Pro 2.4 with 2GB memory and it runs perfectly especially in coherence mode which allows me to call Mac OS X applications from Windows & Vice Versa. In my eyes this is the Killer App Apple have needed to convert die hard Windows users.

Screen Capture of my desktop running Parallels in single window mode (you can run full screen).


----------



## Paul_W (Feb 11, 2006)

I've never used a current mac so this might be obvious. On a macbook/macbook pro you only have the one mouse button (unless you're using a usb mouse). How is the right mouse button recreated in windows through parallels/vmware or boot camp?


----------



## jamest (Apr 8, 2008)

Paul_W said:


> I've never used a current mac so this might be obvious. On a macbook/macbook pro you only have the one mouse button (unless you're using a usb mouse). How is the right mouse button recreated in windows through parallels/vmware or boot camp?


Never used OSX but don't you press the Apple button the keyboard.


----------



## beardboy (Feb 12, 2006)

Paul - On Mac's you can use 2 fingers on the touchpad, which is a right click - if it's turned on in sys prefs


----------



## Paul_W (Feb 11, 2006)

Yeah, I've read about the 2 finger thing. Just wasn't sure if that also worked in windows. Particularly if you're running windows natively.


----------



## beardboy (Feb 12, 2006)

Ah right - didn't realise you meant in Windows.

I'm not sure on that, as i've not had chance at doing it


----------



## JasonRS (Aug 8, 2006)

It gets passed through in parallels & virtualbox. Don't know about VMWare, because I'll not use their software.


----------



## GTIKris (Jul 19, 2007)

Back to the OPs original question. Depends on what you want to spend and what you will use it for.

Apple charge a premium for their systems and you can get an equivilent spec PC for a lot less. Now that Apple use INTEL processors and chipsets the difference in internal hardware quality is neglible although the Mac Book Pro cases are still some of the very best.

If you have come from a windows background, there is a slight learning curve with Mac OS and but it does do a good job of hiding the fact it is linux based under the hood. However, Vista SP1 is very stable and I know everyone is knocking it but I'm very happy with it. The main reason it hasn't taken off in a big way is that XP SP2 is so stable a lot of people don't see the point of getting on the upgrade trail for what they believe is a GUI overhaul. However, use if for a few days and I think you will be converted.

It used to be that if you want to do DTP and graphics work they would say that you should use a Mac, but this no longer rings true.

There are a lot of MS haters out there, but really they should be admired. The have maintained backwards compatability back to the Wintel dark ages and their OS's work with vast numbers of different hardware configurations out of the box. Apple does not have any of these headaches!

End of the day, you pays your money and you makes your choice. Both Mac and PC could do everything I needed, I couldn't justify the extra money for OS X and the Apple badge.


----------



## jamest (Apr 8, 2008)

GTIKris said:


> Back to the OPs original question. Depends on what you want to spend and what you will use it for.
> 
> Apple charge a premium for their systems and you can get an equivilent spec PC for a lot less. Now that Apple use INTEL processors and chipsets the difference in internal hardware quality is neglible although the Mac Book Pro cases are still some of the very best.
> 
> ...


Unix not linux:thumb:


----------



## ianFRST (Sep 19, 2006)

my laptops only 6 months old, and is already starting to slow down ALOT. 

its even starting to stop burning dvds now 

never really seen the interest in apple tbh, but since getting the iphone, ive started looking at macbooks :lol:

wheres the best place to go and play with one? i presume an apple shop? :lol:


----------



## jamest (Apr 8, 2008)

ianFRST said:


> my laptops only 6 months old, and is already starting to slow down ALOT.
> 
> its even starting to stop burning dvds now
> 
> ...


Apple shop or a friend with a Mac.


----------



## Grizzle (Jul 12, 2006)

Ian have you tried CCleaner?? good tool.


----------



## Serkie (Dec 8, 2007)

ianFRST said:


> my laptops only 6 months old, and is already starting to slow down ALOT.
> 
> its even starting to stop burning dvds now
> 
> ...


PC World have them if you wanna have a play and better still they price match Dabs.com and will then give you 10% of the price difference off too.

Did this with my MacBook Pro and ended up getting it for £8 more than the cheapest internet online store I could find and I could just drive to my local store to collect it.


----------



## ipodsandguns (Jul 31, 2008)

the cheapest way to get any apple computer is if you are a further education student, so if you are a student or know a student, order from an on campus computer going through the education store and save the equivalent of tax.


----------



## jamest (Apr 8, 2008)

ipodsandguns said:


> the cheapest way to get any apple computer is if you are a further education student, so if you are a student or know a student, order from an on campus computer going through the education store and save the equivalent of tax.


Does that work the same way as Microsoft and Adobe that teachers also get discounts? If so, do you know any teachers?


----------



## Chester (Jan 15, 2007)

Paul_W said:


> Yeah, I've read about the 2 finger thing. Just wasn't sure if that also worked in windows. Particularly if you're running windows natively.


Try CTRL + click.

Apple don't like to admit to having a 'right' mouse button. They have all sorts of different terms and literature is often tripping up here. It's quite funny really! I use a Microsoft Intellimouse Explorer 2.0 with my iMac, and it's fantastic.

I've been using Macs on and off for about 3 years. I come from an IBM AS/400 and Microsoft Windows (insert every version and edition here!) background.

I bought my first Mac just as Leopard was released last year, replacing a much hated Sony Vaio FZ. It was a MacBook in white. First thing I did the very day I got it was increase the RAM to 2GB and fit a blazingly fast 7200RPM 200GB Hitachi hard drive. (Can you tell I like to modify?!). This should have got it up to the same kind of performance as the Vaio. No, it annihilated the Vaio! But not just doing similar tasks in OS X, but in Vista too.

I've now replaced my ultra-high-spec dual core AMD based Antec Sonata 2 which was running Vista Ultimate with a 24" iMac. Basically I want to become more aware of the underpinnings of OS X, and I also want to become qualified (to add the collection).

So how's my experience so far? Pretty much the same as Vista. It's a big big learning curve to get right into the detail. I've had similar stability problems with Leopard since release, nowhere near as bad as Vista, but at least both have settled down now. However, Vista is VERY resource hungry, fails too often with tasks I use every day. Whilst Vista's Aero interface is pretty, OS X 10.5 (Leopard) is just gorgeous, and easier to get into. MS apps on OS X are lack lustre with reduced features and compatibility than Win apps - e.g. Office 2008 doesn't support macros, Messenger doesn't have voice or video support.

I use computers for sound and music a lot. Windows XP has huge levels of software behind it, a lot of freebies. Vista, just don't go there! OS X, well, as long as spend time and have a play, you'll be surprised what you can get out of even Garageband, let alone some of the more hardcore apps like Soundtrack Pro.

However, for the most fun productivity, just look at Keynote (part of iWork). Oh, my, god! It's just groovy baby!

Games. Oh. Ah, well Apple's catching up, aren't they. If you want to play games, either buy a console to supplement the Mac, or buy a PC. Yes, you can play PC games on a Mac using boot camp, but they're better on dedicated hardware, especially with the variety of video cards for the PC. It's that clear.

Price. I have no idea where people are getting their ideas from. Have you seen the price of high end laptops from Sony, the Acer Ferraris, the Asus Lamborghini, IBM/Lenovo (ThinkPad T Series)? Once properly spec'd up (and I'm talking high quality materials, decent screens (LED backlit on the Air)), the price will be about the same as an equivalent Mac, if not the Mac will be a little cheaper, shown in god knows how many comparisons in magazines and top IT industry news, I've lost count. You get what you pay for with either a Mac or a PC.

So which is best. Neither. They both have advantages and disadvantages, clearly outlined here. Will I buy another PC for home use? Well, I'm lucky that I get to evaluate new kit almost every week, so I'll probably adopt another some day, but I doubt it'll run Vista.

Lastly. Have you seen the *Mojave Experiment*? Mmm, I wonder what these experts witnessed? What was the hardware do you think? Controlled scientific experiment with lab conditions?

Jon Honeyball from PC Pro mag runs a Mac Pro and VMWare Fusion to run virtual Windows servers for evaluation, and for a quick Vista experience. Ask yourself, why, when there are HP XW Workstations and Dell XPS workstations just as well equipped.

Last one: I've yet to find a Mac Mini beater. There's plenty of Windows clones, but I've not heard any running as silent as a Mini does. It's bliss. Caveats: don't give it pasty or the fans will spin up!


----------



## jamest (Apr 8, 2008)

Chester said:


> Last one: I've yet to find a Mac Mini beater. There's plenty of Windows clones, but I've not heard any running as silent as a Mini does. It's bliss. Caveats: don't give it pasty or the fans will spin up!


That isn't down to Microsoft.


----------



## Grizzle (Jul 12, 2006)

Nice read, I bought iworks o8 last weekend and you are right about pages its amazing i really like it, i've had to write a few letters the past week or two and this would have been mega handy.

Graham


----------



## ipodsandguns (Jul 31, 2008)

jamest said:


> Does that work the same way as Microsoft and Adobe that teachers also get discounts? If so, do you know any teachers?


yeah teachers get same discount i believe but i ordered as a student so dont quote me 100% sure


----------



## ipodsandguns (Jul 31, 2008)

jamest said:


> That isn't down to Microsoft.


it half is as microsoft dont design there os really with the hardware in mind where as apple do


----------



## jamest (Apr 8, 2008)

ipodsandguns said:


> it half is as microsoft dont design there os really with the hardware in mind where as apple do


Apple make the OS for a limited amount of hardware.
Windows is made to run on hundreds of thousands of different configurations.

Apple would be in the same situation if they opened up the hardware.


----------



## ipodsandguns (Jul 31, 2008)

thats true i guess, but the hardware is great for what the os is designed for


----------



## Grizzle (Jul 12, 2006)

jamest said:


> Apple make the OS for a limited amount of hardware.
> Windows is made to run on hundreds of thousands of different configurations.
> 
> Apple would be in the same situation if they opened up the hardware.


Are you really that much of a mac hater james??


----------



## -ROM- (Feb 23, 2007)

jamest said:


> Apple make the OS for a limited amount of hardware.
> Windows is made to run on hundreds of thousands of different configurations.
> 
> Apple would be in the same situation if they opened up the hardware.





Custom Detailers said:


> Are you really that much of a mac hater james??


He's correct if leopard was a standalone OS that run on all hardware like windows i bet microsoft would be the daddies!

It's the equivalent of car suspension design, it would be a piece of **** to design brilliant suspension if all the roads were as smooth as a racetrack, but in reality they are full of potholes.


----------



## jamest (Apr 8, 2008)

Custom Detailers said:


> Are you really that much of a mac hater james??


No, I'm just not anti-Microsoft.

I guess I just like to stand up for the things people hate...such as Ford and Microsoft. But it will take a lot of viagra to stand up for Vanessa Felts :lol::lol::lol:


----------



## Grizzle (Jul 12, 2006)

jamest said:


> But it will take a lot of viagra to stand up for Vanessa Felts :lol::lol::lol:


Oh dear!! lmao.

I Actually like ford too.


----------



## JasonRS (Aug 8, 2006)

jamest said:


> Does that work the same way as Microsoft and Adobe that teachers also get discounts? If so, do you know any teachers?


I got student discount on mine, over the phone, and I'm only enrolled on a 6 week 'tog course.

Also, they didn't need any proof of enrollment etc, so it's open to abuse. You are limited to how much yo can buy each year though.

Back to the original question,

If you want simplicity & style but at a premium buy a mac.

If you want cheap, but occasional "issues" buy a cheap windows device.

If you want the broadest range of compatibility, with stability & performance, buy something high end from HP (Pavilion), Dell (XPS) etc and stick with Vista (they're built for that OS, not XP).

I have all 3 of the above, and work more on my MacBook Pro than anything else.

If security is an issue, be aware that Apple's OS X is renowned as the least secure OS currently in the market in it's default state (Apple have a 240 page security dcument for you to work through, and it's not simple stuff)

Pwn2Own macbook air compromised in under 2 mins.

http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/27/pwn-2-own-over-macbook-air-gets-seized-in-2-minutes-flat/

Bear in mind that the Vista notebook in the same competition took a further 7 hours the *following day*, after the rules were relaxed, and needed additional software (Adobe Flash) to be installed before it was compromised.

http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/technol...ally_falls_when_adobe_flash_is_installed.html


----------



## imacwalker (Apr 18, 2008)

mac hands down, bootcamp, everything ull everneed


----------



## Chris_R (Feb 3, 2008)

imacwalker said:


> mac hands down, bootcamp, everything ull everneed


Except a spell checker?


----------



## ianFRST (Sep 19, 2006)

JasonRS said:


> I got student discount on mine, over the phone, and I'm only enrolled on a 6 week 'tog course.
> 
> Also, they didn't need any proof of enrollment etc, so it's open to abuse. You are limited to how much yo can buy each year though.
> 
> ...


any decent free software available for the macbook to stop this? what comes on it out the box? anything?


----------



## imacwalker (Apr 18, 2008)

Chris_R said:


> Except a spell checker?


ironically that was typed up on a pc


----------



## JasonRS (Aug 8, 2006)

imacwalker said:


> mac hands down, bootcamp, everything ull everneed


So that's a Mac running Windows then....



Does anyone run a Mac without Windows on it in anyway e.g. no boot camp, no virtualisation, just plain old OS X?

Or is everyone using the pretty Mac's then running windows apps through virtualisation?


----------



## JasonRS (Aug 8, 2006)

ianFRST said:


> any decent free software available for the macbook to stop this? what comes on it out the box? anything?


Work through the 240 page doc from Apple, that's free and just takes the time to work through.


----------



## Sypher (Jul 16, 2008)

JasonRS said:


> Does anyone run a Mac without Windows on it in anyway e.g. no boot camp, no virtualisation, just plain old OS X?
> 
> Or is everyone using the pretty Mac's then running windows apps through virtualisation?


I only have OSX on mine, though I do have Microsoft Office for Mac. I did try going MS free and using Open Office which was good but not as good IMO.

The best thing about Macs for me is the quality of the screens, they are as good as Lacie or NEC, which can cost as much as PC by themselves.


----------



## jamest (Apr 8, 2008)

Sypher said:


> I only have OSX on mine, though I do have Microsoft Office for Mac. I did try going MS free and using Open Office which was good but not as good IMO.
> 
> The best thing about Macs for me is the quality of the screens, they are as good as Lacie or NEC, which can cost as much as PC by themselves.


Didn't realise Lacie made monitors.


----------



## jamest (Apr 8, 2008)

JasonRS said:


> So that's a Mac running Windows then....
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I think it is down to Microsofts dominance of the market has caused other software vendors to make their software for Windows, as such all the people that have been converted to Apple have realised that their software doesn't work, so they have had to switch back to Windows every now and then to do what they want.

As Apple's market share grows you should see this less and less as OSX should have a big enough market share to warrant having the software ported over to it or new software for it.


----------



## Chester (Jan 15, 2007)

Indeed that's true. I mainly jump back to Windows to use MS Money, that's all. Otherwise I'm happy with everything I run under OS X.

OS X has seen a very large increase in software vendors taking up writing and/or porting software since Apple decided to switch to Intel processors, making code easier to move over. However, take HP's April quarterly turnover against Apple's March quarter alone (3.76:1), and then factor in all of the other vendors and you see that they have a minute share of both the consumer and business markets. The take up of Apple products is incredible, but they've got a long way to go before market penetration overall worldwide reaches even 10%.


----------



## kennethsross (Jun 19, 2008)

jamest said:


> Didn't realise Lacie made monitors.


They're not marketed heavily. Tend to find them in design studios, etc. Apparently very accurate colour reproduction, but hefty price tag.


----------



## jamest (Apr 8, 2008)

kennethsross said:


> They're not marketed heavily. Tend to find them in design studios, etc. Apparently very accurate colour reproduction, but hefty price tag.


Oh right. Very interesting. I take it they make their own panels as opposed to using other peoples. As far as I know there are only 3 or 4 major LCD panel manufactures.


----------



## imacwalker (Apr 18, 2008)

i wouldn't say that boot camp was virtualisation, in the sense that it is not running os x in the background, you select using bootcamp at startup what operating system that your wanting to use, this means that the system is not running 2 operating systems at the same time, which used to slow things down.
it is just like owning a pc.
i was running os x all on its own for age's right up till i had to use some autodesk 3d rendering applications. that were only available for window's, 
my 2 year old macbook has seen better day's but it is still fighting strong,
i have to agree with you guys about the display's 
my dad's got a 22" cinema display hooked up to a old g4 tower, it makes spending hours infront of the computer that little more comfortable,


----------



## -ROM- (Feb 23, 2007)

kennethsross said:


> They're not marketed heavily. Tend to find them in design studios, etc. Apparently very accurate colour reproduction, but hefty price tag.





jamest said:


> Oh right. Very interesting. I take it they make their own panels as opposed to using other peoples. As far as I know there are only 3 or 4 major LCD panel manufactures.


Have a lacie blue 22 (22" CRT) very big and bulky but very good for accurate colour. Will get an equivalent LCD ine day but for the same colour accuracy you're talking a minimum fo £600 for a 24".


----------



## Bo2007 (Apr 3, 2007)

jamest said:


> Oh right. Very interesting. I take it they make their own panels as opposed to using other peoples. As far as I know there are only 3 or 4 major LCD panel manufactures.


there are indeed about 4 manufactures who make the panels, quality of the panels depend on who they sell to etc, the electronics that go behind the panel makes all the difference too.


----------

