# Mac or PC?



## AeroCollie (Jun 13, 2012)

What do you prefer, Mac or PC? And why do you prefer it over the other.


----------



## CannonFodder (Jun 13, 2012)

AeroCollie said:


> What do you prefer, Mac or PC? And why do you prefer it over the other.


[YT]bm7JH1FT_yM[/YT]


Personally it's all about preference.  I prefer ubuntu cause that's what I'm used to by now.  Sure it took getting used to cause linux is not as user friendly as macs, but it is a good operating system.  My mom prefers macs.  The "which one is better" slapfight is stupid imo.  I dual boot windows 7 for steam though.

Honestly I used to rag on macs alot just cause my teacher is a hipster... I'm kinda wishing I hadn't of done that now.


----------



## Echo Wolf (Jun 13, 2012)

Not sure if this belongs in off topic or bits and bytes...
Anyway I much  prefer PC if not for the simple fact that I have used one since Windows  98. From what I have seen and heard mac seems to be used by people that don't really use computers much. No offense to anyone that uses a Mac Pc though they do have some really good pros to them.


----------



## Bipolar Bear (Jun 13, 2012)

*sigh*

Both. I like both.


----------



## AeroCollie (Jun 13, 2012)

Yeah I wasn't sure what category this belonged in so I put it in off topic. But This has been an everlasting debate between me and a bunch of friends, so I was just curious to what other people had to say.


----------



## Jashwa (Jun 13, 2012)

I think it's fine here in off topic since it's not a technical thing but just happens to involve technology. 


Also, everyone best keep it civil in here and not whip out your cocks and try to slap each other. 



That being said, Macs are too expensive for me and I don't see the benefits for that cost.


----------



## Pine (Jun 13, 2012)

I don't want to act like the whole "hurr durr PC master race" guy, but I've never seen any benefits from Macs other than being user-friendly and immune to viruses. I'd rather get a nice PC for half of the price.


----------



## CannonFodder (Jun 13, 2012)

Jashwa said:


> Also, everyone best keep it civil in here and not whip out your cocks and try to slap each other.
> 
> That being said, Macs are too expensive for me and I don't see the benefits for that cost.


You do realize this where you are right?

I don't use macs cause I don't have the money either.


----------



## Seian Verian (Jun 13, 2012)

Macs don't have near enough advantage over other PCs to justify the price. Like, I won't necessarily say they're inherently WORSE than Microsoft systems- However, frankly, uh, a lot of useful software is likely incompatible with it, and on the subject of the price... http://macromeme.com/dog/why-not-to-buy-mac.html


----------



## Aetius (Jun 13, 2012)

Relevant.

Also I use PC.


----------



## Vukasin (Jun 13, 2012)

I like both.

Mac's are better for media related programs, but PC's are better for games.


----------



## Unsilenced (Jun 13, 2012)

Switched to PC for college for better compadability, but it still annoys me when other windows users pretend that they're infinitely superior to mac users because they, in their PC master race glory, are not elitists. 


There is a serious gap in the logic there guys.


----------



## Jashwa (Jun 13, 2012)

My favorite claim is "Macs are for hipsters" when they're like the #1 selling computer.


----------



## Bark (Jun 13, 2012)

Jashwa said:


> Also, everyone best keep it civil in here and not whip out your cocks and try to slap each other.
> 
> 
> 
> That being said, Macs are too expensive for me and I don't see the benefits for that cost.




Yeah, now that it's not my Facebook status :v




I prefer Macs. I like the operating system much more. Love the sleek designs. Love the color quality. I'm really not into building computers or anything of that variety, so lack of customization doesn't bother me.The only thing I don't particularly love about them is that one of my favorite art programs, OpenCanvas, doesn't run on them. But for that I just run Parallels with XP. Oh, and the price. It sucks.

It's also fun to start cock fights just because I have a Mac, and on that basis alone v:


----------



## Kosdu (Jun 13, 2012)

Why pay so much for something that sucks with proccessing speed like that?
I suppose it's easy to access, and gets no viruses.

The stats for my home built PC that cost less than $1,800, and we bought the parts over the last couple of years. So cheaper now:

16gbs RAM (4x4 heat shield protected RAM
A fan and heat sink that is as big as my head
5 other fans, or 4. I forgot
600gb of system memory, 100gb for the iOS is a seperate drive, one of those flash drives.
1gb vRAM
Radeon card or something like that
a sweet case
3.9ghz, six core proccessor, easy overclocking
I think an audio card too, not sure on this one

For less than the cost of most configurations of macs. 


Seriously?


----------



## FoxPhantom (Jun 13, 2012)

PC, since it's easier to upgrade the thing, or replace something, too bad with Mac, it's hard to get into. 
Also been trying to get Ubuntu installed on to my slow laptop since it may need it.


----------



## CerbrusNL (Jun 13, 2012)

I play games, a lot.
It's only logical that I use a machine that runs windows natively.

(Don't you "you can play those on a mac!" on me, if 90% of my desktop use would require me to start a new OS on a mac, I'm just getting a machine with that OS)
Besides, price vs benefits.


----------



## Riley (Jun 13, 2012)

My experiences with Macs and their ilk have been that they constantly break down, have unnecessarily complex interfaces that are sold as "sleek" and "cool" when in reality they hide nearly everything a competent computer user would want to do, and the whole things are riddled with baffling design choices that I can't imagine a rational person ever defending.  

Keep in mind that this anecdote is from just a single Mac, some sort of Power Station Super Deluxe Eighty Trillion Dollar Workstation EX Pro, I believe.

Program windows could not maximize.  The maximize button didn't do anything.
Programs would shut down if you clicked outside of their respective window.  Keeping in mind that the windows couldn't maximize, I think I had to restart Flash about once every time I tried to scroll the canvas down, because the mouse wasn't very responsive, which resulted in a lot of misclicks.
Trying to find a way to fix this proved futile, as hardware and peripheral operations weren't listed in any known system menu that was accessible.
Playing a 3 megabyte Flash file lagged the system so badly that I couldn't effectively preview the project.

That was at an art workshop for a high profile college they were trying to get me to attend.  Not very impressed.

Other times I used a Mac was back when they did that absurd thing with putting all the parts really close together behind the CRT screen and not providing adequate cooling or venting, so that one overheated just about every day it was in use.

Every single Ipod my brother/friends have had have routinely broken shortly after purchase, and any replacements broke after that.  In one instance, my friend had 3 different Ipod Touches-That-Aren't-Iphones within the span of two months, and eventually just gave up trying to get Apple to send him a working one.

And I also play videogames, so that's another, less personal reason.


----------



## Kaamos (Jun 13, 2012)

I've had this Macbook I'm on right now for almost five years now and it  hasn't failed me once. Granted, I probably wouldn't even have it if I didn't get  it for free, but still, it's a fine laptop. 

edit: And the trackpad on it is better than pretty much any other ones I've used.

I'd just use Windows because that's what pretty much every video game I play requires.


----------



## Rilvor (Jun 13, 2012)

Windows works just fine for me and what I do, so I see absolutely no reason to bother with a Mac.


----------



## Elim Garak (Jun 13, 2012)

PC all the way, less expensive. MAC has no advantage,  there's viruses out there for Mac. A variant of Flashback used a known java exploit that was fixed on other systems 2 months prior. Apple is responsible for updating java on Mac. The hardware has a higher failure rate. They lie about the legal 2 years warranty in the EU. Their hardware is dangerous (See exploding and igniting iphones and issues with their magsafe adapters)


----------



## Commiecomrade (Jun 13, 2012)

I personally prefer the PC because it's less expensive and I love building my own stuff, but I wouldn't get all offended if someone prefers a Mac.


----------



## Xipoid (Jun 13, 2012)

I use both PC and Macs, and I greatly prefer Macs. The thing with Macs today is the gestalt. It is more than just a bunch of computer parts stuck together with an OS. It operates in such a way to remove itself from the process. That is to say, it does not interfere with what I am actually trying to do on the computer. PCs on the other hand are often painful to use. It's like they are constantly fighting you, and you have to battle with it to finally arrive at the desired product you wanted. On a Mac, it just does what I want I need it to do without any kind of false pretenses or hangups.

I can certainly see the extra thought and care that went into the design of a modern day Mac (and I mean more than the physical design), where the same considerations are notably absent from PCs. A PC is just a bunch of computer parts stuck together with an OS running it. There isn't much else to it in my opinion. Now, this is not to say that any one Mac is perfect or defect free, just the same that any one PC is a pain in the ass to use. That's basic statistics. You cannot draw a meaningful conclusion with a sample size of one (or two or three or four...). In spite of all this, I do not understand how rabid people can become over Macs and PCs. In the end, they're computers. Who gives a shit


----------



## BouncyOtter (Jun 13, 2012)

I love my Mac.  I've never had problems with it, which is the reason I switched to a Mac in the first place.  The computer I had before it went through 5 hard drives in a year.  It was a terrible experience for me.


----------



## NerdyMunk (Jun 13, 2012)

Pine said:


> Macs other than being user-friendly and immune to viruses.


Hahahahahahah. That's a funny joke.
My old Mac had a virus, kid you not. Though a disc update did eliminate that.
That Mac is still a POS and literally still freaks out when I am doing more than one thing in multiple apps to the point that it will crash that and then those apps will ask me to reopen them.
But if you want to buy a new Mac in which your old Mac is like from 2006: Guess what-
1. You have to buy a new Word (or Office) for Mac. The new Mac doesn't support PowerPC based apps (in case you want to Migration Assistant the apps from your old Mac to a new one). The new Mac Office costs around $100 from what I've seen.
2. If you have an old Photoshop, it won't read it (if it's PowerPC based). And I am sure you don't want to spend more money on another Photoshop.
Benefits-
1. Iphone/Ipod touch controls (two fingers to scroll, tap one finger to click, etc.)
2. Better performance (better than my old POS one)
3. Graphics cards/better graphics. You could get an iMac to solve that. But on my old Mac it played Minecraft really laggily.
---
Yet I still have my old Mac. I think I should have it so I don't waste more money on Photoshop or Office. And I can connect to that other Mac from this one so I can drop the Word of Office files onto this computer.


----------



## Judge Spear (Jun 13, 2012)

AeroCollie said:


> What do you prefer, Mac or PC? And why do you prefer it over the other.



I prefer PC. I feel they're more reliable. In both my computer graphics classes, we had brand new Mac models. Out of 16 Macs, 7 including mine kept getting choked up, crashing, freezing and we lost a lot of our projects because it would normally happen as we were in Illustrator or Photoshop. He had to work double time when it happened. Also, I just love video games. Not too many on Mac from what I hear.

EDIT: And NerdyMunk...I believe you.


----------



## Elim Garak (Jun 13, 2012)

Mac is far from perfect, they come with their own issues as well.
Viruses on OS X, Kernel Panic on Mac OS X, failures due bad hardware design, all kinds of breakage(I worked in Consumer and B2B support a couple of years ago, the amount of PCs we sold VS Mac and the amount of Macs coming back with hardware failure was way greater then the ratio of the sold and returned PCs). Never had issues with drivers, never had a virus myself. Whenever a PC came in for repairs it was either from some virus that was named HOTSEXWITHANIMALS.JPG.EXE which they executed manually or hardware failure on an age old PC or cheaper hardware(Medion PCs are terribad).

Let's list some issues.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Desktop_Bus
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MagSafe#Criticisms_and_defects


> Many users have reported (as of October 30, 2011) problems with the quality of the construction of the MagSafe cords, giving the product low marks on the Apple Store's website.[SUP][9][/SUP] Common complaints include plug separating from the cord, transformer shorting, and pin springs losing elasticity.[SUP][9][/SUP]It is even possible for the adapter to spark if it touches the side of one of the aluminium MacBooks as some of the connectors are short circuited.
> Several methods have been devised to protect the MagSafe from failure, including wrapping the cable with tape or sliding protective plastic around the cable.[SUP][10][/SUP]
> In 2008, Apple posted an official response acknowledging problems with MagSafe adapters, which include incomplete circuit connection and adapter's white insulation separating from the magnetic end of the MagSafe connector.[SUP][11][/SUP] Following the release of a Knowledge Base article, a class action lawsuit was filed on 2009-05-01 in the California Northern District Court's San Jose office, alleging that the MagSafe power adapter is prone to frayed wires and overheating, and as such represents a fire hazard.[SUP][12][/SUP] Apple has since released a new connector to remedy the defects.[SUP][13][/SUP]
> There had been a variety of reports of the newer MagSafe AC adapter not working with older MagSafe-powered MacBooks and MacBook Pros.[SUP][_citation needed_][/SUP] Apple released a firmware update in October 2010 that it claims resolves this issue.[SUP][14][/SUP] However the installer for the firmware update will not run on certain older MacBooks, which means that the firmware can not be updated. This in turn means that it is not possible to use the new MagSafe power adapter with these MacBooks. Currently it is not possible to buy new replacement MagSafe AC adapters (either from Apple or third-party suppliers) that work with these MacBooks, forcing owners to look for used original adapters.
> In 2011, Apple posted a support document regarding the strain relief problems with the MPM-1 ("T") style MagSafe power cables, and issued settlement offer for buyers of Apple 60W or 85W MagSafe MPM-1 adapter within the first 3 years of purchase.[SUP][15][/SUP]


http://i.imgur.com/CqJHJ.jpg
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/iphone-4-explodes-australian-flight-267072
http://arstechnica.com/apple/2012/0...atched-java-vulnerability-no-password-needed/


> Flashback.K, as the latest variant is called, is able to hijack Macs even when users don't enter an administrative password. Instead, it does this by exploiting a critical Java vulnerability classified as​CVE-2012-0507, F-Secure researchers wrote in a ​blog post. Although Oracle ​released a fix for the security threat in February, a patch has yet to be released for OS X users. That's because Apple distributes Java updates itself and the company has yet to make one for the specific flaw, or indicate when it plans to do so.​


http://aeolist.wordpress.com/2007/12/28/list-of-macbook-hardware-problems/ (PErson having issues, also in Comments)
http://www.geek.com/articles/chips/...rs-experiencing-hard-freeze-problem-20110321/
http://www.geek.com/articles/apple/...ct-warranty-to-2-years-across-europe-2012042/

And so on, PCs have issues as well, but remember you are paying generally 2x the amount of money for Apple Hardware.
Also the fact that Mac OS X is "better" for graphics is that there's some easy graphic design software on it, professional tools are also available on windows and consumer grade ones have plenty of alternatives. There perhaps used to be a small edge with the old PowerPC Architecture that Apple used pre 2006? before they switched to the x86/x86-64 architecture.


----------



## Sonlir (Jun 13, 2012)

PC


----------



## Schwimmwagen (Jun 13, 2012)

I used a Mac once, it was kinda cool.

But for the stuff I do, choose to do, need, and want, a Mac simply doesn't cut it for that. Power to those who enjoy their Mac, but you likely won't see me buying one.


----------



## Dreaming (Jun 13, 2012)

I've always used PC. I tried out my brother-in-law's Mac once, it was way too swavy.


----------



## Ikrit (Jun 13, 2012)

PC
and Linux to go

i don't see the point of a mac. they feel like a kids computer, complete with training wheels! 
if your one of those people who know nothing about computers,  then a mac might be for you


----------



## Zuckerdachs (Jun 13, 2012)

It depends on what you do. I'm assuming since you're asking in the first place that you don't know a whole heck of a lot about computers, so I'd say that my first suggestion would be to go with a Mac. I wouldn't say they necessarily are more user-friendly, but if you don't do much or know much they're the better bet. 

Some things to consider (and this is all from my personal experience):

-Pre-built PCs - especially Dells -are complete shit. Not only are they VASTLY more expensive, but some companies build their machines with proprietary parts. When these invariably break or go bad, you need to order new ones from the original company that cost several TIMES more than a replacement you could purchase from a site like Newegg. As an example, my first PC was a prebuilt Dell. The power supply went bad. You can buy an excellent and powerful power supply for around $100; because the connections in my machine were proprietary, the replacement from Dell that I needed to buy cost me over $300. For that much money, I would expect a power supply that could make my computer fly me to outer space. I also moved to an apartment that only had wireless internet; you can purchase a fantastic wireless adaptor for $25 (this is mine, and even though I've gone through a dozen more expensive kinds, this is the one that's served me the best and for the longest time), but the one I had to buy for my Dell cost $180 and wasn't even that good. If you want a good PC, have a friend help you buy the parts you need to build a new one. It will be much cheaper (I have a gaming monster that cost about $1000 to build - just watch for good deals on Newegg for a few weeks), you can guarantee that every single part will suit your needs, and it will be easy to upgrade as your needs change.

-Following this, it is my understanding that options for Macs are limited. They are fine (and some might say preferable) for basic home use - browsing the internet and doing homework assignments. If that's all you do, go for it. A lot of people love the minimalistic approach.

-Macs are admittedly fantastic for artists and musicians. They can be powerful for rendering and blahblahblah oh who am I kidding you can do just as much on a PC.

-Gaming on Macs is way, way behind. You can, with some work, make it so your Mac can run the same programs that PCs do ... but why not just get a PC for it and cut out the extra steps?

Tl;dr: Go for a Mac if you don't want to think too much about stuff. Go for a PC if you are willing to take a bit of extra time to consider its construction and care for it. It'll be more versatile and last longer. Also they come in other colors besides white.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jun 13, 2012)

Which ever works and does what I want it to do.


----------



## Randolph (Jun 13, 2012)

My computer is more of a toaster than a PC.


----------



## VenturedVulpes (Jun 13, 2012)

I resent it but my iMac is pretty good for what I need. If I hadn't gotten it for free from my high school I wouldn't have it.
Pros:
I dont need an external sound card for DJing and the latency on traktor is like 1.1 millisecond which is pretty dope.
It is built like a tank, it fell on me once and theres not even a scratch, thank god for my squishy human face.
As long as you keep it updated and organize your files, keep at least 10 gigs free and reboot once a week it never really slows down. All things you should do on a PC any way.
Like has been said before ALMOST no viruses. I scoff everytime I see a .exe randomly download from a sketchy site.
Spaces is neat not essential but multiple desktops is handy for hiding things.
Also Firewire 800 (I call it jesus in plug form)
Cons:
Its a Mac, goes without saying
Next to no games
I have to search for a program every time I want it to do one specific thing. (convert a video file, emulate this, let me see the damn code)
I have like 4 unzipping programs because archive utility is completely useless
It makes you retarded. The other day it took me half an hour to realize right clicking and dragging and dropping wasn't going to solve the issue on my friends PC.
Pretty difficult to modify in anyway
I hate .dmg with a fiery passion, akin to a hundred burning suns.


----------



## Captain Howdy (Jun 13, 2012)

PC's. Operating system doesn't matter so much, as long as I can continually upgrade my computer...Which Macs cannot do without an initially high cost, leaving no room for additional parts price...And I'm pretty sure they don't like you customizing Mac's.


----------



## Leafblower29 (Jun 13, 2012)

PC. Computers to me are a tool, not some shiny toy used for dicking around a coffee shop on Facebook and Twitter. Unless you are tech illiterate or you REALLY need to use an OS X only program, you shouldn't get one.


----------



## Nineteen-TwentySeven (Jun 14, 2012)

I have no preference toward one or another. Admittedly, I like my 2009 Macbook Pro because it's fast, it runs cool and quiet, can store 750GB of crap, and it has a gorgeous 17" display. However, I also like my custom-built 6-core gaming PC because it's fast, runs cool and quiet, can store 1TB of crap, and has a gorgeous 23" display. I probably use the PC more because most of the time it's more comfortable to sit upright and use a real keyboard and a real mouse.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jun 14, 2012)

Leafblower29 said:


> PC. Computers to me are a tool, not some shiny toy used for dicking around a coffee shop on Facebook and Twitter. Unless you are tech illiterate or you REALLY need to use an OS X only program, you shouldn't get one.



Same goes for any computer, not just PC's.


----------



## Term_the_Schmuck (Jun 14, 2012)

Use Mac by default because of my line of work.  Used to have a PC laptop but that crapped itself and died after three years.


----------



## Cain (Jun 14, 2012)

PC, mostly 'cause my gaming rig is something I would _never _trade for a Mac.


----------



## wheelieotter (Jun 14, 2012)

I use Macs at home, because i want to. Didn't buy it for gaming, and the only trouble it's given me was a hard drive failure(Seagate) and when I bought some mislabeled ram from Fry's. I've upgraded it several times, just lift the lever on the side and it opens right up.
I use Windows at work, because I have to. I can't even try to log onto Triumph's website on anything other than IE, and a lot of BMW's site won't work right on anything other than IE.
That said, my next computer will run Windows for gaming, and I'll probably set it up to dual boot OSX for general computing (hackintosh). I want to use whatever is the best tool available for the job at hand, and to hell with anyone who cares what system I use or why.


----------



## CynicalCirno (Jun 14, 2012)

Hardware:
As far as I know macs are very expensive and have cheap parts.
They just look pretty.
The specs aren't always what they seem, and even if they do - the manufacturer destroys it all.

Building a computer by yourself is probably the safest bet. If you don't know how - learn, as it will help you if you have further problems with your computer and don't want to be ripped off for nothing(As in, replace working part for extra cash). You generally get the better parts out of the category you select with the proper knowledge, perhaps even getting the best results.


You know, you might never have any problems with Mac, but that's probably because you don't actually use anything that takes a lot of raw processing power. What are you, artists? Photoshop takes some memory, but not too much. Unless you're deep into ultra settings in games, or are an editor of the sorts(Short videos, movies, models, programming, engine, Demoscene!) you probably won't have any need for an actual powerful computer.


Software:
Isn't MacOS written in UNIX? Last thing I heard about it is that Apple have been hiding for a long time that their OS can actually be called a distro.
I don't know too much about it, but if "user friendly" means simplistic...

Windows is pretty much a default, but I'm gradually moving away from it. It feels as if Windows's growth has stopped and it has nowhere to move on.
As I'm gradually moving away from Windows, I'm getting closer to the many linux distros, still thinking about which one to use as a main one.
As far as I heard, it uses your hardware more efficiently than Windows, meaning better results for the same price. The only drawback is limited support for executable files, but once that barrier is passed, not much will stop me from dumping Windows.


Mac really has no way to charm me, plus every part you wanted then installing it on your own is really fun. You can just _screw around_ them all day long!


I mostly heard all of these from others, but they convinced me enough to build a liquid opinion.
P.S. I recommend Commodore, Amiga and ZXspectrum!


----------



## Xenke (Jun 14, 2012)

Both.

Each has functionality that I wish the other had.


----------



## AeroCollie (Jun 15, 2012)

Thanks for all the input guys!


----------



## PenningtontheSkunk (Jun 15, 2012)

I like both but I prefer the PC because it less expensive and I don't think is necessary to pay over 1k for a computer or even a laptop. PC is the one that works for me and I'm happy with that.


----------



## Cocobanana (Jun 15, 2012)

It really depends who you are and what you're looking for. Of the two, I think everyone can admit that Apple products have simpler and, therefore, easier interfaces. The Macbook is to the non-nerdy public the same as the Wii was to the non video-gaming public. It's a great gateway drug, and Apple is also more of a social thing because of how much easier it is. Windows computers are typically more powerful from my understanding and if you know your way around a computer it's the best choice. Right now I use a Windows but have an old macbook I still use to make music on.


----------



## Criminal Scum (Jun 15, 2012)

I like Apple's mobile os, but I like to play games, so my desktop is a pc (win7).


----------



## Elim Garak (Jun 15, 2012)

Mac is cool for sitting at star bucks writing a book that wouldn't get published while wearing dark big rim glasses while listening to a band nobody knows and complaining about the 1% on Facebook. 
Windows is easy to use. Oh and what OS x is is a fucked up work from BSD.


----------



## CodArk2 (Jun 16, 2012)

I like both, I prefer mac. 

Both have their uses, and in spite of what some will tell you, neither is better than the other. 
PC is cheaper and has more games. Mac is more reliable and easier to use. PC has a shitty file system and tends to be less reliable/ Macs are expensive and have fewer games. 

Both have fans that hate on the other platform, make stupid statements  based on old knowledge and act like its a fact today )macs have 1 button mice! windows blue screens all the time! macs are all white ! PCs are all beige boxes! macs are priced three times what a PC is! Macs have no games!PC users are stupid and poor! mac users know nothing about computers, and i could go on and on, all are false).

Dont judge a computer based on its users. because windows and mac both have idiotic fanboys that hate on the other platform, make stupid statements based on old knowledge and act like its a fact today (macs have 1 button mice! windows blue screens all the time! macs are all white ! PCs are all beige boxes! macs are priced three times what a PC is! Macs have no games!PC users are stupid and poor! mac users know nothing about computers, and i could go on and on, all are false). Are elitist, while accusing the other side of being so (this is much worse on the PC side though), and just generally are not nice people all around.

Judge a computer based on what you yourself wat it to do and your mone, then buy accordingly. My choice was mac, but PC is an ok choice too, just not the right one for me and many others.


----------



## Captain Howdy (Jun 16, 2012)

You can't deny, CodArk, that Mac's cost more...I can literally go to the Apple website, and go to the Alienware website, build the parallel specs and Mac will cost upwards of 500 more.  And if you've used a computer more than once in your life, the difficulty of using a computer from ANY brand is not difficult. The


----------



## Nineteen-TwentySeven (Jun 16, 2012)

Lastdirewolf said:


> You can't deny, CodArk, that Mac's cost more...I can literally go to the Apple website, and go to the Alienware website, build the parallel specs and Mac will cost upwards of 500 more.  And if you've used a computer more than once in your life, the difficulty of using a computer from ANY brand is not difficult. The


Can't be any harder than the days of DOS. After 30 minutes of typing getting nowhere I accidentally formatted a boot image of it in a virtual machine.


----------



## Captain Howdy (Jun 16, 2012)

Nineteen-TwentySeven said:


> Can't be any harder than the days of DOS. After 30 minutes of typing getting nowhere I accidentally formatted a boot image of it in a virtual machine.



You sure told me?

Sorry, Grandpa.


----------



## CodArk2 (Jun 16, 2012)

Lastdirewolf said:


> You can't deny, CodArk, that Mac's cost more...I can literally go to the Apple website, and go to the Alienware website, build the parallel specs and Mac will cost upwards of 500 more.  And if you've used a computer more than once in your life, the difficulty of using a computer from ANY brand is not difficult. The



Macs do cost mor, but apple haters tend to exaggerate the price difference. I said two years ago that a computer with similar specs the Mac will not cost much more, and was shouted down with " no macs are three times as expensive as PCs" over and over. alienware is much less reliable than macs are and tend to have a high breakdown rate.I would rather spend the extra 500 and have a computer that will actually work instead of being returned to the manufacturer for some technical problem.

I also did not say that windows was hard to use,I said it was harder to use than macs. Having extensively used both operating systems and taught others to use them it's an easy statement to make. Windows is a more difficult is to use. And the file system on Mac os is much easier to navigate.


----------



## greg-the-fox (Jun 16, 2012)

Well it depends on a number of things.

Apple is really, really good at cramming a lot of hardware into a tiny package. They can do this because all of the parts are custom made for the machines, where PCs all have to use stock parts so they can NEVER compete when it comes to making a really slim and elegant, but still very powerful product. The major downside is that trying to get into a Mac and replace a part is a hell of a lot more work (but not impossible) whereas in a PC it would be much more simple. Your options are very limited, but the build quality is very good. I think Mac wins in terms of portable devices; laptops, tablets, etc. Really light, fast, great battery life, great screens, and fantastic user interfaces. Apple has mastered touch technology, both in terms of touch screens and trackpads. You won't find a trackpad on any PC laptop that compares to one on a Macbook.

When it comes to pre-built desktops, apple still comes out ahead in terms of quality. Yes the Mac Pro is extremely expensive but it is a workstation desktop, not a consumer desktop. (that's what the iMac is for, and try to find a more powerful all-in-one PC that is as slim) Similar PC workstation desktops to the Mac Pro are also very expensive, they are just for a different use group. But here is where the PC shines and completely destroys Apple... the ease and low cost to upgrade, and the ability to build a PC from scratch. Custom PCs are both far cheaper than pre-built PCs, and far, FAR cheaper than Mac desktops. You can completely outstrip a Mac in terms of power for very little cost. You can put absolutely anything into one and have complete control over everything that goes into your computer. Obviously you have to have quite a bit more tech knowledge to do this, but you could still buy a pre-built custom PC or hire someone to assemble one for you. A lot of people would argue that a custom PC is a necessity for gaming. But for off-the-shelf computers, I really think Macs are still best overall, especially for the layman with little tech knowledge.

As far as the operating system, both are good, but I infinitely prefer OSX. I'm biased because my dad has always been a big Apple fan and I grew up with Mac computers. It's just a really simple, intuitive, quick interface that doesn't get in the way and gives you the best workflow possible in my opinion. Yes Windows gives you a lot more control, but that's not to say Mac gives you no control, it's just a bit more hidden in the "advanced" options, and then you can always use Terminal for really advanced things (I would not recommend that unless you really know what you are doing) Windows Explorer is pretty similar to the Finder, I would say it's kind of a tie. But I HATE the Control Panel in Windows, it's a horrible interface. You really would not understand unless you used System Preferences in Mac, it is really one of my favorite things about the OS. 

Windows feels very, very cluttered and bloated with useless crap. Loooots of bloatware, especially if you get an off-the-shelf PC or laptop. It feels like a lot of Windows' "features" are designed to keep old people happy, and you have to turn it off because it gets in the way (sticky keys anyone?) The programs that come bundled with Windows just feel like the bare minimum for day to day tasks. The stuff that comes with Mac is a lot better, Mac has Preview, iPhoto, iMovie, Garageband, etc. It has the advantage of being geared for content creation out of the box. Pretty much any content creation software you can put on a Mac you can also put on a PC, so it's not like PCs aren't good for that too. But there's a few programs like Logic Pro and Final Cut which are industry standards now, and Mac only.

In terms of software compatibility and peripheral hardware, Macs are a gated community. It does make things run a lot more smoothly and safely, and you don't have to worry about drivers for every device on the planet, but this is the Mac's downfall. You will always get more general usability from a PC, it's just the way it works. You pretty much have to have a PC for gaming. Yes there are an increasing number of games for the Mac but it really is not enough to justify gaming on the Mac at all. Good luck finding any peripheral gaming devices which will work on the Mac. No surround sound, no Blu Ray support. Mac is getting to be pretty decent at 3rd party support but PC just blows it out of the water.

There's also the professional business environment, all Windows. Servers, all Windows or Linux. Though Macs are increasingly used for content creation professionally, it is still the PC's domain. The architecture industry for one (which I'm planning on getting into) is all PC, all Autodesk software for CAD, 3D modeling, etc is geared for the PC (some is available for the Mac though)

Overall, I would say I am a fan of using both for different functions. Get a Macbook Air or something AND build yourself a kick ass gaming rig, if you can afford it. The price on Apple products is the biggest deterrent, but I think it is there for a reason (and yes a large amount of it is marketing too) And though this might not matter to PC users, Apple's really damn good at appearances, and appearance does matter. I really wish more products focused on appearance, there are too many ugly things in the world. (maybe it's vain of me to say, but I think it's true) Apple introduced the idea that computers can be art, and I think that does have a place in the scheme of things.


----------



## BRN (Jun 16, 2012)

[yt]njos57IJf-0[/yt]


----------



## AshleyAshes (Jun 16, 2012)

Mac, PC, either way you're equally fucked when you finally knock the thing off the counter or something.


----------



## Captain Howdy (Jun 16, 2012)

CodArk2 said:


> Macs do cost mor, but apple haters tend to exaggerate the price difference. I said two years ago that a computer with similar specs the Mac will not cost much more, and was shouted down with " no macs are three times as expensive as PCs" over and over. alienware is much less reliable than macs are and tend to have a high breakdown rate.I would rather spend the extra 500 and have a computer that will actually work instead of being returned to the manufacturer for some technical problem.
> 
> I also did not say that windows was hard to use,I said it was harder to use than macs. Having extensively used both operating systems and taught others to use them it's an easy statement to make. Windows is a more difficult is to use. And the file system on Mac os is much easier to navigate.



Well it is true in some cases. A Macbook Air costs a grand, a good Netbook costs 300-400 (And an equally functional iPad costs 700-900)...So it is true in more cases than not. However a basic laptop may cost around 700, whereas a Macbook Pro costs minimum 1200. A solid PC (not advanced) costs 800-1100, the minimum iMac is 1200. The PC comes with oh...: An i7 processor (Mac = i5), 8gigs of ram (Mac = 4g), 1-2tb of memory (Mac = 500gb), blu-ray player, 4-8 USB slots, HDMI/DVI, and around the same video card, but maybe 1gb instead of 512 - Plus 650-900w so that you can upgrade in the future. They don't even offer an i7 iMac right now. They do have Quad cores for 2500, but you can get a Quad Core Windows machine for less than half that.

Now then, my point with Alienware was this - They are WAY overhyped, and while I've not explicitly had any problems with them, they are way overpriced as well...Just like Apple computers are, but yet are still somehow cheaper then those. I wouldn't advise anyone to buy an Alienware, was just using it for comparisons sake.

I don't see how the filing system in Windows is harder, though if you're doing something more complex than installing a cracked game, then maybe. If somebody can't follow the blatant and easy address trail, then they just need the 'Big Blue e' button on their desktop that automatically loads them to their email. 

(Also @Gregthefox, All-in-ones are more powerful than you think. You can get a mediocre quad-core for a grand from Costco, and upgrade it to better specs and still save money versus buying a Mac)

It actually took longer to write this post, then it did to find the prices of what I'm talking about - That's how easy it is.


----------



## Nineteen-TwentySeven (Jun 16, 2012)

Lastdirewolf said:


> You sure told me?
> 
> Sorry, Grandpa.


I should've worded that differently. That's what I get for posting late at night. I should say nothing could be harder than DOS. I had to use it when I modded a 120GB Western Digital drive into my 360, and I don't think I could've been more confused.



AshleyAshes said:


> Mac, PC, either way you're equally fucked when you finally knock the thing off the counter or something.


One thing I really like about my mac is the magsafe charger. That's saved it from a trip to the floor countless times, where tripping over the cord has sent my netbook flying several times now. Thank goodness for SSDs.


----------



## Elim Garak (Jun 16, 2012)

There's sleek laptops that cost way less the mac and are more powerful.
Also http://www.engadget.com/2012/06/13/retina-mpb-ifit-teardown/
You can't even upgrade the damn SSD or memory. What a joke.

Anyways after years of professional experience, Windows is the best for regular users and Pro, Linux is good for power users as well, Mac is good for children and people who are completely retarded beyond the average computer user.

There is no way you can justify the overpriced crap, subpar hardware, not only spec wise but also in actual construction and components used. The fall out rate is also way higher then say HP, Lenovo or ASUS.


----------



## CodArk2 (Jun 16, 2012)

Lastdirewolf said:


> Well it is true in some cases. A Macbook Air costs a grand, a good Netbook costs 300-400 (And an equally functional iPad costs 700-900)...So it is true in more cases than not. However a basic laptop may cost around 700, whereas a Macbook Pro costs minimum 1200. A solid PC (not advanced) costs 800-1100, the minimum iMac is 1200. The PC comes with oh...: An i7 processor (Mac = i5), 8gigs of ram (Mac = 4g), 1-2tb of memory (Mac = 500gb), blu-ray player, 4-8 USB slots, HDMI/DVI, and around the same video card, but maybe 1gb instead of 512 - Plus 650-900w so that you can upgrade in the future. They don't even offer an i7 iMac right now. They do have Quad cores for 2500, but you can get a Quad Core Windows machine for less than half that..



Macs are more expensive, but not as much as apple haters and the like say. Comparing a netbook to a macbook air is dishonest, macbook air is quite a bit more powerful than your average netbook. They are more like ultrabooks, which are quite a bit more expensive. Yhe least expensive desktop mac is about 500 bucks.The rest is just tech specs that only matter in e-penis comparisons. Macs function fine with what they have now. I just proves my point that the reason some hate macs is because they dont give the btagging rights in e-penis comparisons. (hurnng mine is bigger! mine is faster! mine has more!=e-penis)



Lastdirewolf said:


> I don't see how the filing system in Windows is harder, though if you're doing something more complex than installing a cracked game, then maybe. If somebody can't follow the blatant and easy address trail, then they just need the 'Big Blue e' button on their desktop that automatically loads them to their email.



It is harder, I have used both. Macs have a logical file system, windows puts things all over the place. Bits and peices of a programs files can end up in 5 different places on a computer. I have used both operating systems, windows was harder to find things in than mac os was. 




Elim Garak said:


> Anyways after years of professional experience, Windows is the best for regular users and Pro, Linux is good for power users as well, Mac is good for children and people who are completely retarded beyond the average computer user.
> 
> There is no way you can justify the overpriced crap, subpar hardware, not only spec wise but also in actual construction and components used. The fall out rate is also way higher then say HP, Lenovo or ASUS.



You are likely an IT guy. Only one of those would say something so...stupid. Windows is best for regular users? Please. Macs are easier to use for the basic user than windows is. The average user does not care about how much RAM they have, or their processor, or the ports on it, they just want something that will work. Macs work. Windows works but with a lot more handholding.

I am a mac user and i know more about computers than many people, saying macs are for children or retarded people shows you likely have never used one and know nothing about them. They can be quite complex, just as much as windows or linux.I find it funny that the people that dont like macs find it necessary to attack mac users as being children or retarded, then turn around and call mac users elitists.

Yjen you go into the spec thing, which is mostly for e-penis comparisons, but dont actually matter much now a days. on their desktops they are a bit behind , nto so much on laptops, but they dont play GAMEZ!!!11!! so they are worthless to the children...i mean windows users. 

I am not on a crusade to get everyone using macs, but you seem to be on on one to make everyone use PCs. It isnt your money and isnt your choice, so dont attack people who make different choices as being retarded or children, it makes you sound arrogant, pretentious and snobbish, just like the supposed mac users you hate.


----------



## Elim Garak (Jun 16, 2012)

Hahah, Windows works fine for people with basic intelligence, like I said, I work in a rather high IT position, The questions and issues coming from mac users are way more retarded then the average windows user. 
Also, like I said it's not just the specs but also lifetime of the device, Apple uses rather terrible capacitors compared to say Asus. There is no real more user friendly Ness with Mac OS x, perhaps only basic drivers but most users bring their systems to a shop for reinstall and in both systems. Apple has also lied for years about the warranty, instead of the EU law's 2 years they listed 1 year with offers to increase the warranty. Apple has often told their employees to lie about current issues till they couldn't anymore due the pressure.


----------



## BRN (Jun 16, 2012)

Elim Garak said:


> Hahah, Windows works fine for people with basic intelligence, like I said, I work in a rather high IT position, The questions and issues coming from mac users are way more retarded then the average windows user.
> Also, like I said it's not just the specs but also lifetime of the device, Apple uses rather terrible capacitors compared to say Asus. There is no real more user friendly Ness with Mac OS x, perhaps only basic drivers but most users bring their systems to a shop for reinstall and in both systems. Apple has also lied for years about the warranty, instead of the EU law's 2 years they listed 1 year with offers to increase the warranty. Apple has often told their employees to lie about current issues till they couldn't anymore due the pressure.


Citations? :s


----------



## Elim Garak (Jun 16, 2012)

www.thenoisecast.com/2011/05/the-first-stage-is-denial-apple-customer-service-denies-malware-exists/

http://www.google.nl/url?sa=t&sourc...?newsid=3348755&ei=WyrdT-PICZGa-waC9MD2CQ&usg
mobile.macworld.co.uk/mac/news/?newsid=3348755

There's a lot of examples I linked earlier this thread. About hardware defects. 

Also sorry for the terrible formating, phone battery is almost empty.


----------



## NatasAisaka (Jun 16, 2012)

PC.


Because **** Mac.


----------



## CodArk2 (Jun 16, 2012)

Elim Garak said:


> Hahah, Windows works fine for people with basic intelligence



So does most any computer, including a mac. Macs are not any harder to use than a PC, and because I have used both extensively., in my experience they are easier to use.



Elim Garak said:


> like I said, I work in a rather high IT position, The questions and issues coming from mac users are way more retarded then the average windows user.



Most IT people tell others to buy windows and linux, not because they are better, but because they dont know how to use macs. Most IT people have an overbearing ego and act hostile to anything that threatens to crush it. For macs, its because IT people know  little about them but want to appear to know everything about computers, so they tell people to use windows and linux because its what *they* know how to use. Then make up a million other excuses to try and justify their dislike, or outright hatred. Macs aren't for everyone, but neither are PCs or linux computers.

As for questions, I am guessing they were things like how to start up applications, or use the file system or turn it off, or where the disk drive or power button were. Most are so used to windows when they come to macs they expect it to work exactly like windows and panic when it doesn. Course they made the first mistake: asking an IT guy, when often IT people know little or nothing about macs. They would be better off using google, asking a mac owning friend, or going to the apple website for help.Likely ythe most common "issue" is people pressing command-alt-control 8 and freaking out when their screen color flips. Once someone actually figured out how to use a mac (which usually doesnt take too long), they tend not to need much help.




Elim Garak said:


> Also, like I said it's not just the specs but also lifetime of the device, Apple uses rather terrible capacitors compared to say Asus. There is no real more user friendly Ness with Mac OS x, perhaps only basic drivers but most users bring their systems to a shop for reinstall and in both systems. Apple has also lied for years about the warranty, instead of the EU law's 2 years they listed 1 year with offers to increase the warranty. Apple has often told their employees to lie about current issues till they couldn't anymore due the pressure.



Most macs last quite a while, i still have some working that are about 11 tears old, and i am not an isolated case either. Not all macs last that long, but most last quite a while. They certainly dont break down all the time, just as windows computers usually dont.

http://www.slashgear.com/asus-now-more-reliable-than-apple-says-study-2438719/
http://hothardware.com/News/ASUS-More-Reliable-Than-Apple-But-Lenovo-Bests-Them-All-/

From a small amount of searching, the study were 3 years ago and measured  the three month reliability. Apple will repair or replace any computer with hardware issues if its under a year old. As for user-friendliness, thats subjective. I personally find OSX much more user friendly than windows, but someone that has been usinfg windows for 20 years would likely say windows is easier and more user friendly. its not really possibly to say one operating system is easier for all, but in genenral i have found teaching people to use mac os is much easier than teaching them to use windows os.


----------



## Leafblower29 (Jun 17, 2012)

AshleyAshes said:


> Mac, PC, either way you're equally fucked when you finally knock the thing off the counter or something.


Some computers are better than others when it comes to that. Lenovo ThinkPads and MacBooks are known for being drop resistant. I once saw someone drop a ThinkPad down a flight of stairs and it survived. It had an SSD so everything was okay storage wise, but if it had an HDD that would be gone for sure.


----------



## Captain Howdy (Jun 17, 2012)

CodArk2 said:


> Macs are more expensive. Comparing a netbook to a  macbook air is dishonest, macbook air is quite a bit more powerful than  your average netbook. They are more like ultrabooks, which are quite a  bit more expensive.
> 
> It is harder, I have used both. Macs have a logical file system, windows  puts things all over the place. Bits and peices of a programs files can  end up in 5 different places on a computer. I have used both operating  systems, windows was harder to find things in than mac os was.



Yes, Mac's are expensive. We JUST WENT OVER THIS. 

Mac's are  still more expensive than Ultrabooks too, at least when regarding  Bestbuy.com (sells both Apple & Windows products) - I can still do  similar with different websites too and come to the same conclusion. 

I  have extensively used both too - You keep swinging that around like the  e-peni you're talking about, and it seriously doesn't matter. 

I  don't see how going "C:\program files" is difficult, unless you install  everything to the desktop? Every program I've installed is there, and  most, if not all pieces of it are there. How is this difficult? 

I  know that the CACHE on programs can log elsewhere, but almost all users  don't need that, and opening up a search and finding out where that  is...Is ridiculously easy. I dunno HOW you manage to install programs in  more area's than one, so that's on you. 

Maybe that's why PC's are harder for you?


----------



## CodArk2 (Jun 17, 2012)

Lastdirewolf said:


> Yes, Mac's are expensive. We JUST WENT OVER THIS.
> 
> Mac's are  still more expensive than Ultrabooks too, at least when regarding  Bestbuy.com (sells both Apple & Windows products) - I can still do  similar with different websites too and come to the same conclusion.
> 
> ...



First off, I fail to see why my opinion on macs or PCs is the only one that needs to be debated. You are not going to convince me PCs are better, and i am not trying  to convince you or others macs are better, just not as bad as you make them out to be.

Most ultrabooks with similar specs are the same price as apple stuff.  In some areas PCs dont compete  with macs either, so comparison is moot.

Most people that hate macs have not used them, they hate them based on what their friends say. Almost all mac users have had to use PCs, most PC users have not used macs. Most of the mac haters use stuff from over 10 years ago and act like its still true today. It does matter because it means most mac bashers are ignorant of what they are bashing. I dont bash windows because ive used it, i dont like quite a few things about it, but the IS itself is fine for most uses. The users are fine as well.  The only group here attacking system users and Operating system here are the windows/linux users.

As for the file system, anyone who has used a mac HFS file system would look at windows file system like it was designed by retarded monkeys. It puts files all over the computer. And when i had a windows computer, i didnt want all my programs on the desktop.

On a mac the cache is in library caches. Most other things are in application support. Istnt too hard. Windows needs uninstallers to get all the files it puts everywhere. Most that have used both find mac file system easier to use, I certainly do.


----------



## Commiecomrade (Jun 17, 2012)

Xipoid said:


> I use both PC and Macs, and I greatly prefer Macs. The thing with Macs today is the gestalt. It is more than just a bunch of computer parts stuck together with an OS. It operates in such a way to remove itself from the process. That is to say, it does not interfere with what I am actually trying to do on the computer. PCs on the other hand are often painful to use. It's like they are constantly fighting you, and you have to battle with it to finally arrive at the desired product you wanted. On a Mac, it just does what I want I need it to do without any kind of false pretenses or hangups.
> 
> I can certainly see the extra thought and care that went into the design of a modern day Mac (and I mean more than the physical design), where the same considerations are notably absent from PCs. A PC is just a bunch of computer parts stuck together with an OS running it. There isn't much else to it in my opinion. Now, this is not to say that any one Mac is perfect or defect free, just the same that any one PC is a pain in the ass to use. That's basic statistics. You cannot draw a meaningful conclusion with a sample size of one (or two or three or four...). In spite of all this, I do not understand how rabid people can become over Macs and PCs. In the end, they're computers. Who gives a shit


But that's a great part! You shove all your custom and hand-picked components together, you install the OS, and the first time it passes POST you have a veritable orgasm of a feeling of accomplishment.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jun 17, 2012)

Elim Garak said:


> Hahah, Windows works fine for people with *basic intelligence,* like I said, I work in a rather high IT position, The questions and issues coming from mac users are way more retarded then the average windows user.



I find that quite insulting.



> Also, like I said it's not just the specs but also lifetime of the device, Apple uses rather terrible capacitors compared to say Asus.



Most likely a deliberate act so you as soon as the warranty runs out you have to spend thousands on a replacement system.



> There is no real more user friendly Ness with Mac OS x, perhaps only basic drivers but most users bring their systems to a shop for reinstall and in both systems. Apple has also lied for years about the warranty, instead of the EU law's 2 years they listed 1 year with offers to increase the warranty. Apple has often told their employees to lie about current issues till they couldn't anymore due the pressure.



Because Apple is a greedy corporation that engineers it's products to last the user until a short time period after the warranty runs out.


----------



## ArielMT (Jun 17, 2012)

There's too little difference between an Apple computer and a comparably equipped PC these days.  They're both IBM compatible, and they have been since Apple made the switch from PowerPC to x86.  In fact, since then, Macs tend to run Microsoft Windows better than most PCs.  (I still remember the laughable news that Windows Vista performed better on Apple hardware than the best OEM PCs.)

So the real question is which OS is better.  Windows is getting better under the hood, but Microsoft appear to be Zuning the user interface.  (Just look at Metro reactions.)  But even though Windows is getting better, it's still got a way to go before it sheds its 8-bit legacy and compares favorably to Unix.

The only significant strike I can find against Mac OS is the absolutely pitiful documentation, which has somehow exceeded PCs in the quest to ship as little useful help as possible.  I have noticed this most strongly in Mail.app, the standard email program bundled with Mac OS; Apple's own knowledge base doesn't document the user interface changes between versions, which makes fixing simple mail problems an exercise in frustration and guesswork.  Back in the day, Macintoshes came with among the friendliest getting-started guides in the home computer industry.



CodArk2 said:


> As for the file system, anyone who has used a mac HFS file system would look at windows file system like it was designed by retarded monkeys. It puts files all over the computer. And when i had a windows computer, i didnt want all my programs on the desktop.



I hope you mean HFS+, because HFS was so poorly implemented that, if a Mac lost power while a file was open, HFS would delete that file on the next boot.  The only other filesystem I've ever seen that would eat files like that was an early version of ext4, and I thankfully haven't discovered that from personal experience like I did with HFS.



CodArk2 said:


> On a mac the cache is in library caches. Most other things are in application support. Istnt too hard. Windows needs uninstallers to get all the files it puts everywhere. Most that have used both find mac file system easier to use, I certainly do.



That's because of two Windows legacies, the earlier of which had its roots in an MS-DOS legacy.

MS-DOS had no accepted filesystem hierarchy aside from the split kernel halves (io.sys, msdos.sys) and CP/M-esque shell (command.com) in the root directory, and everything else in the subdirectory "dos".  Everything was free to shove its components anywhere and everywhere, including in the root directory, with barely a grasp of filing.  Windows started as a GUI for MS-DOS, not an OS in its own right.  During that time, Microsoft gave Windows dynamically-linked libraries (DLLs) and the ability to store configuration in plain-text INI files, but encouraged stuffing them all unfiled into the same directory (for DLLs) or the same file (Win.ini).  I'm still to this day mystified that a multibillion dollar corporation could do such a poor job at file management in its cash cow.

Microsoft solved the INI problem with something arguably worse and undoubtedly more heavily abused: the registry.  This, more than DLL hell, is why Windows applications have to be married to the PC they're installed on, and why an uninstaller is required to divorce the application, instead of coming ready-to-use like Mac OS applications.  The closest modern Windows applications have come to Mac simplicity in installation and removal is "portable" versions of Windows applications.


----------



## AshleyAshes (Jun 17, 2012)

CodArk2 said:


> As for the file system, anyone who has used a mac HFS file system would look at windows file system like it was designed by retarded monkeys. It puts files all over the computer. And when i had a windows computer, i didnt want all my programs on the desktop.



I don't think you know what a file system is...   The HFS+ file system has NOTHING to do with what directories have what data there, nor does the NTFS file system in Windows.


----------



## Elim Garak (Jun 17, 2012)

AshleyAshes said:


> I don't think you know what a file system is...   The HFS+ file system has NOTHING to do with what directories have what data there, nor does the NTFS file system in Windows.


Also quite a few programmers, included good ol' Linus Torvalds commented on how crap the OS X HFS+ filesystem is compared to NTFS.

Let's not talk about ReFS that's coming out soon for Windows servers and later for clients.


----------



## BRN (Jun 17, 2012)

acronyms, the thread


----------



## Elim Garak (Jun 17, 2012)

SIX said:


> acronyms, the thread


Its better then saying Hierarchical File System Plus, New Technology File System, Resilient File System, fourth extended filesystem, Macintosh, Digital Visual Interface, High-Definition Multimedia Interface et al.


----------



## Vekke (Jun 17, 2012)

My choice is simple.

Windows because SAI

Oh, back when I had a MacBook I tried to install bootcamp to run SAI. Turns out Mac's harddrive was too fragmented for bootcamp by the time I got my hands on a way to install Windows OS, and where Windows comes with a way to manually defragment your harddrive, Apple just claims the computers automatically defragment, so any extra tools for when it misses a spot have to be paid for. The "user friendliness" in this case was in actuality just really, really frustrating  GIVE ME ACCESS TO MY OWN COMPUTER DAMN IT.

Also iMovie and Photoshop crashed a lot, with no warning. The only times I've had something crash on my el-cheapo Windows PC was when I was really pushing the limits of my RAM. 

Windows isn't some complicated beast, so I don't really get the argument that Macs are easier. The basic functions on both (internet, email, running programs, saving pictures etc) are pretty straightforward IMO. Not being a big techie, I find that Windows has a decent balance of user friendliness and the actual ability to control your own PC and figure out what it's actually doing if need be. Might just be what I'm used to though. After all, I had a mac for two years (it got stolen), but the rest of the time, ever since I was 11, it was all Windows.

The argument that Macs are better for artistic/media-based things is obsolete, too. Maybe that was so in the 90's, but lol I see people doing the same shit on both operating systems these days. 

Macs are prettier and more portable if you're into that sort of thing. I do kind of resent having such a clunky laptop, but it's also a cheap model, so!

I'll take either one over Linux though, groans. _I'm a digital artist_. Don't even talk to me about GIMP.


----------



## CodArk2 (Jun 17, 2012)

ArielMT said:


> I hope you mean HFS+, because HFS was so poorly implemented that, if a Mac lost power while a file was open, HFS would delete that file on the next boot.  The only other filesystem I've ever seen that would eat files like that was an early version of ext4, and I thankfully haven't discovered that from personal experience like I did with HFS.



Yes, i meant HFS+, i dont think mac OSX ever used plain HFS. though i think OS8 and older had HFS.





AshleyAshes said:


> I don't think you know what a file system is...   The HFS+ file system has NOTHING to do with what directories have what data there, nor does the NTFS file system in Windows.



Yes i know what a file system is. If the file system doesnt determine what goes where on the system, what does? I said i preffered the file system, as i find it easier to use, i prefer the way it is set up versus windows.


----------



## AshleyAshes (Jun 17, 2012)

CodArk2 said:


> Yes i know what a file system is. If the file system doesnt determine what goes where on the system, what does? I said i preffered the file system, as i find it easier to use, i prefer the way it is set up versus windows.



No, I really don't think you do know what a file system is.  The location of installed programs, the downloaded files, the library of pictures or music, the program config ect, they're all dictated by the *operating system*.  HFS+ or NTFS have squat to do with the deciding what directory locations are used for what data.


----------



## Greg (Jun 17, 2012)

Mac VS PC?
Why can't I have both? They both have their ups and downs.


----------



## CodArk2 (Jun 17, 2012)

AshleyAshes said:


> No, I really don't think you do know what a file system is.  The location of installed programs, the downloaded files, the library of pictures or music, the program config ect, they're all dictated by the *operating system*.  HFS+ or NTFS have squat to do with the deciding what directory locations are used for what data.





And here i thought files were controlled by the filing system,  would be logical after all: files controlled by the filing system. But whatever, just means I like how the OS handles all that better on mac OS than on windows.


----------



## Saiko (Jun 18, 2012)

On the topic of how the files are organized, I find Windows to be much more intuitive.

You have your C drive (along with others most of the time). Your C drive has a directory for your users, a directory for your programs, a directory for your OS, and anything other files and directories YOU want there. If you want something just for yourself, you put it in your user's directory. If you don't particularly care, put it in Program Files. It's a tree system. I haven't used Mac's file system a whole lot, but I haven't been able to see it as a comparably logical organization. Whether this is because of a lack of experience or inferior organization is to be seen.

Just from first impressions, though, it feels like the latter.


----------



## CodArk2 (Jun 18, 2012)

Saiko said:


> I haven't used Mac's file system a whole lot, but I haven't been able to see it as a comparably logical organization. Whether this is because of a lack of experience or inferior organization is to be seen.
> 
> Just from first impressions, though, it feels like the latter.



Mac files are organized in a hierarchical system. Basically you have Macintosh HD, which is your main folder. In that you have applications, which are the programs you use. cache, library, system and users, which links to personal stuff like movies, music, downloads, etc. Its not really a hard system to use, just is different than windows.


----------



## Sarcastic Coffeecup (Jun 18, 2012)

I prefer windows simply because it's simple enough and every game supports it


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jun 18, 2012)

Well, windows is not in my good books at the moment. I logged off fine last night, tuned it on this morning, went to the shop which took ten minutes, came back.....blue screen of death and all I had done was turn the fucking thing on. So I turn off, and turn on again, now it says NTLDR is missing. So now I am gonna have to swap had drives as I need to rescue files from it, and reinstall windows.


----------



## Elim Garak (Jun 18, 2012)

Randy-Darkshade said:


> Well, windows is not in my good books at the moment. I logged off fine last night, tuned it on this morning, went to the shop which took ten minutes, came back.....blue screen of death and all I had done was turn the fucking thing on. So I turn off, and turn on again, now it says NTLDR is missing. So now I am gonna have to swap had drives as I need to rescue files from it, and reinstall windows.


Sounds like a hardware issue, NTLDR usually means that the boot sector or other sectors on the HDD is damaged, why would you blame windows for that?
You might be able to patch it up by reinstalling the bootloader if its not the actual boot sectors damaged. It will fix it till something writes over the defect sectors on the HDD again.
Reinstall might do the same, however like I said, broken sectors is a ticking time bomb, it might run fine for a small while. Bad sectors also have the tendency to increase fast since the initial one.
There's guides all over the place, but they seem to ignore the HDD issue and just go like oh copy it again but believe me, It is usually broken hardware.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jun 18, 2012)

Elim Garak said:


> Sounds like a hardware issue, NTLDR usually means that the boot sector or other sectors on the HDD is damaged, why would you blame windows for that?
> You might be able to patch it up by reinstalling the bootloader if its not the actual boot sectors damaged. It will fix it till something writes over the defect sectors on the HDD again.
> Reinstall might do the same, however like I said, broken sectors is a ticking time bomb, it might run fine for a small while. Bad sectors also have the tendency to increase fast since the initial one.
> There's guides all over the place, but they seem to ignore the HDD issue and just go like oh copy it again but believe me, It is usually broken hardware.



It is the haddrive. I didn't know what NTLDR meant so assumed OS issue. I have tried using the drive as slave drive to etrieve files but no luck wont do shit so I have lost a lot of stuff Including someones project I was working on.


----------



## Elim Garak (Jun 18, 2012)

Randy-Darkshade said:


> It is the haddrive. I didn't know what NTLDR meant so assumed OS issue. I have tried using the drive as slave drive to etrieve files but no luck wont do shit so I have lost a lot of stuff Including someones project I was working on.


Yeah, I recommend multiple back ups next time, Both on PC and on external HDD, NAS or in the cloud(Google Driver or Dropbox).
Keeping things in one location is asking for losing the files =P


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jun 18, 2012)

Elim Garak said:


> Yeah, I recommend multiple back ups next time, Both on PC and on external HDD, NAS or in the cloud(Google Driver or Dropbox).
> Keeping things in one location is asking for losing the files =P



I do keep back-ups I just hadn't done one recent;y and wished I didn't put it off.


----------



## AshleyAshes (Jun 18, 2012)

Elim Garak said:


> Yeah, I recommend multiple back ups next time, Both on PC and on external HDD, NAS or in the cloud(Google Driver or Dropbox).
> Keeping things in one location is asking for losing the files =P



My desktop is RAID1, with a NAS/HTPC/MediaServer that doubles as storage for project files.  While most of the NAS is basically a Drive Pool (No safer than JBOD reallly), it uses mirroring on some folders in the drive pool to make for redundant storage.  All of my projects are mirrored on that thing. :3


----------



## Elim Garak (Jun 18, 2012)

Randy-Darkshade said:


> I do keep back-ups I just hadn't done one recent;y and wished I didn't put it off.


Automatic back ups ftw.
Just make a batch file that does a xcopy of a directory and task it.
That or use one of the thousands of programs available from the price of free to whatever.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jun 18, 2012)

AshleyAshes said:


> My desktop is RAID1, with a NAS/HTPC/MediaServer that doubles as storage for project files.  While most of the NAS is basically a Drive Pool (No safer than JBOD reallly), it uses mirroring on some folders in the drive pool to make for redundant storage.  All of my projects are mirrored on that thing. :3



In the future I'll make frequent back ups. instead of the occasional back up. I'm just glad that over time I'll be able to retrieve what I lost from the net. 

Thank fudge I didn't get very far with the project anyway. Also thank fudge my new copy of my CV/resume is attached to an email in my email client. 

The music I can get back, the art I can get back.


----------



## greg-the-fox (Jun 18, 2012)

I think the best solution is to have an external (or internal) hard drive set up for automatic backups on a schedule, so you never forget
Raid seems a bit overkill unless you're running a server
But I'm on a laptop, and lazy, so my computer is always yelling at me that I missed my time machine backups...


----------



## AshleyAshes (Jun 18, 2012)

greg-the-fox said:


> Raid seems a bit overkill unless you're running a server



How about if your a film and television student who doesn't want to scream out "SON OF A BITCH. D:<" when a hard drive in your editing workstation dies, and all your edits and project files died with it?  Even backups arn't a great solution here, since you may not make a backup after doing 8hrs of editing.  I'd rather just have a HDD blow out and still be fully operational because the HDD had a mirrored twin.


----------



## Nineteen-TwentySeven (Jun 18, 2012)

I've been wanting to set up a 2TB RAID0+1-NAS that we can backup our computers to a central location on a regular basis, but doing something like that would cost around $500 and my parents would not like that in the least.
I've been neurotic about backing up since a brand new 500GB Western Digital I stuck in my Macbook started dropping sectors like popcorn. I wasn't backing up since I figured that the WD would be more reliable than the 500GB Hitachi that came in it. That Hitachi drive is now my backup disk. It's been perfectly reliable, but after needing a warranty replacement for a crashed drive in the 1st week of ownership, I take it with a grain of salt.

In re: the file systems, I like how both systems are set up. They both seem perfectly logical, one's just logical in a different way. The only thing I don't like about the Macintosh HFS is that it makes some files difficult to access by hiding them (hosts file, for example). However, Windows makes files difficult to access by slathering them in security policies to preventing editing. So they both can infuriate power-users like myself, just in different ways. They both can be circumvented by some trickery, but I've found that Macintosh makes it easier (albeit with a bit of fancy software).


----------



## RainwoOlf (Jun 18, 2012)

*I think I prefer windows .. Pc ._.*


----------



## MegaRBLX (Jun 18, 2012)

For someone like myself, I prefer Windows because of it's larger support for games. I also just find it easier to use, but I think that applies for most of us.


----------



## Elim Garak (Jun 18, 2012)

Nineteen-TwentySeven said:


> I've been wanting to set up a 2TB RAID0+1-NAS that we can backup our computers to a central location on a regular basis, but doing something like that would cost around $500 and my parents would not like that in the least.
> I've been neurotic about backing up since a brand new 500GB Western Digital I stuck in my Macbook started dropping sectors like popcorn. I wasn't backing up since I figured that the WD would be more reliable than the 500GB Hitachi that came in it. That Hitachi drive is now my backup disk. It's been perfectly reliable, but after needing a warranty replacement for a crashed drive in the 1st week of ownership, I take it with a grain of salt.
> 
> In re: the file systems, I like how both systems are set up. They both seem perfectly logical, one's just logical in a different way. The only thing I don't like about the Macintosh HFS is that it makes some files difficult to access by hiding them (hosts file, for example). However, Windows makes files difficult to access by slathering them in security policies to preventing editing. So they both can infuriate power-users like myself, just in different ways. They both can be circumvented by some trickery, but I've found that Macintosh makes it easier (albeit with a bit of fancy software).


Window security policies are easy to circumvent if needed,  just open file settings.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jun 18, 2012)

greg-the-fox said:


> I think the best solution is to have an external (or internal) hard drive set up for automatic backups on a schedule, so you never forget
> Raid seems a bit overkill unless you're running a server
> But I'm on a laptop, and lazy, so my computer is always yelling at me that I missed my time machine backups...



I think I'm going to start doing what I was doing in 2005, and saving files straight to the slave drive. I have both an external harddrive and an internal slave drive. I just neglected doing manual backups and never thought of setting up an automated task to do it.

Oh well, I didn't loose anything really important. Lost a bunch of furry art, nothing I can't get back. Lost the recent commissions my mate had done but I have those on my FA, lost my updated edited CV/resume but I attached that to an email and saved it as a draft so I can retrieve that easy, lost a bunch of music too but nothing I can;t easily download again.


----------



## AshleyAshes (Jun 18, 2012)

Who still uses the word 'slave' when refering to a hard drive? :X  Are we in the 90's again and no one told me?


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jun 18, 2012)

AshleyAshes said:


> Who still uses the word 'slave' when refering to a hard drive? :X  Are we in the 90's again and no one told me?



It's what I have always called it. o.o

Secondary drive sound better?

It does actually sound better.


----------



## I Am That Is (Jun 18, 2012)

Riley said:


> Program windows could not maximize.  The maximize button didn't do anything.
> Programs would shut down if you clicked outside of their respective window.  Keeping in mind that the windows couldn't maximize, I think I had to restart Flash about once every time I tried to scroll the canvas down, because the mouse wasn't very responsive, which resulted in a lot of misclicks.
> Trying to find a way to fix this proved futile, as hardware and peripheral operations weren't listed in any known system menu that was accessible.
> Playing a 3 megabyte Flash file lagged the system so badly that I couldn't effectively preview the project.



Just wondering, did you ever try simply repairing permissions? I have all kinds of computers at my house. I have a custom build gaming rig, a custom build hackintosh,  a Macbook, and an iMac (iMac was used, macbook from a friend). Personally, I have my uses for both of them, for example, I use my custom PC for gaming (duh) and I use the hackintosh for Unity3D and Lightwave3D mostly, and I use the laptop for travel, and the iMac for everything else. I dont see why people call macs over simplified. If you know your way around, you can do just as much on a Mac as on a windows machine.


----------



## BlueStreak98 (Jun 18, 2012)

I run PC. My phone is Apple, but Windows shall remain my desktop/laptop OS.


----------



## ArielMT (Jun 20, 2012)

Saiko said:


> On the topic of how the files are organized, I find Windows to be much more intuitive.
> 
> You have your C drive (along with others most of the time). Your C drive has a directory for your users, a directory for your programs, a directory for your OS, and anything other files and directories YOU want there. If you want something just for yourself, you put it in your user's directory. If you don't particularly care, put it in Program Files. It's a tree system. I haven't used Mac's file system a whole lot, but I haven't been able to see it as a comparably logical organization. Whether this is because of a lack of experience or inferior organization is to be seen.
> 
> Just from first impressions, though, it feels like the latter.



https://www.e621.net/data/d5/81/d58106e74d0ae256effb654e9b7e51f9.png

Also, why do drives have to be mounted above the root and accessed by arbitrary (and arbitrarily changing) single letters?  That's CP/M; that's the legacy of an OS that hasn't been used on PCs since the IBM 5150 of 1981, the original IBM PC from which all clones, compatibles, and modern Windows PCs sprang.  It's also CP/M legacy that dictates Windows 7 hard drives and SSDs have to start with letter C -- the third drive, not the first -- because letters A and B were reserved for floppy drives.  That survives in Windows 7 even though no big-name PC is sold with a floppy drive anymore.  There's nothing intuitive about that.

FHS, the filesystem hierarchy standard used by most Unix and Linux distros (Mac OS being a notable exception), is infinitely more intuitive, and even some of Apple's departures from FHS (such as /Applications, /Library, and /Users if my memory isn't completely failing me) are more intuitive still.


----------



## Nineteen-TwentySeven (Jun 20, 2012)

ArielMT said:


> Also, why do drives have to be mounted above the root and accessed by arbitrary (and arbitrarily changing) single letters?  That's CP/M; that's the legacy of an OS that hasn't been used on PCs since the IBM 5150 of 1981, the original IBM PC from which all clones, compatibles, and modern Windows PCs sprang.  It's also CP/M legacy that dictates Windows 7 hard drives and SSDs have to start with letter C -- the third drive, not the first -- because letters A and B were reserved for floppy drives.  That survives in Windows 7 even though no big-name PC is sold with a floppy drive anymore.  There's nothing intuitive about that.


That's one thing I never understood, why my floppy drive was A:\, my hard drive was C:\, my disk drive was D:\, and why of all letters my mapped network drive was Z:\


----------



## greg-the-fox (Jun 20, 2012)

All I know is that I pretty much know where every single file is on my mac, or at least how to find it, off the top of my head. I frequently use my library folder for instance, moving files around and shit (I'm a really anal micromanage down to the megabyte kind of guy because I have a small HDD)
In mac it looks very neat to me, in windows it's a complete mess inside the program files folders


----------



## ArielMT (Jun 20, 2012)

Nineteen-TwentySeven said:


> That's one thing I never understood, why my floppy drive was A:\, my hard drive was C:\, my disk drive was D:\, and why of all letters my mapped network drive was Z:\



Please pardon the storytime that follows.

Windows traces much of its filesystem lineage (at least how it's presented to the user) down the MS-DOS line.  While the last vestiges of DOS itself had been excised from home computing by Windows XP, Microsoft's first version of Windows NT (based heavily on VMS) for consumers, several legacy issues needed to be maintained because most Windows programs assumed a DOS-like system underneath the Windows interface.  Even Windows NT versions before XP needed to maintain this illusion, most famously so that middle managers could use their expensive Windows 3.1/Windows for Workgroups programs in Windows NT 3.5, and Windows 95/98 programs in Windows NT 4.0.

MS-DOS and every DOS-compatible OS, such as DR-DOS and OS/2, had no concept of filesystem mount points or unified filesystems.  Every disk drive had to be assigned a drive letter, and Microsoft made the decision that letters A and B would be reserved for the two floppy disk drives.  As an aside, there was no established requirement on how networked file shares should be mapped, but Novell Netware admins quickly learned that starting from the end and working backward with drive letter assignments made for the fewest headaches and all but eliminated the chance that a network share would conflict with a local drive.

As another aside, MS-DOS had no concept of nested directories until version 2.0, but convention had already established that programs use the slash ["/"] to indicate switches: "dir /w" to get a wide directory listing instead of the normal one, for example.  Using the slash for directory path separators, as Unix did, would lead to confusion, so Microsoft chose the less ambiguous backslash ["\"] instead.  That's why Microsoft's operating systems are almost completely alone in using the backslash as the drive/directory/file path separator.

Now, the reason drives A and B were reserved for the floppy drives is because MS-DOS assumed every system had at least two disk drives.  If this assumption wasn't made, then it would be impossible for users to perform basic operations like copying disks or copying files from one disk to another.  Since most IBM compatibles in the days of DOS were sold with only one floppy drive, not two, this assumption meant that MS-DOS had to emulate two drives: the one physical drive became two virtual drives, with MS-DOS telling users when to switch out the disk for Drive A: with the disk for Drive B: and vice versa.  Every version of MS-DOS from 1.0 through 6.22, and every DOS-compatible OS, made and documented this assumption.  When hard drives started being sold for PCs, this assumption had to be preserved, so they used the first available letter that wasn't either a real or virtual disk drive: C.

All of this happened because, when Microsoft got the contract to make an operating system for the IBM Personal Computer, they did what has since been recognized as Microsoft tradition: they bought an OS called QDOS from Seattle Computing (QDOS standing for "quick and dirty operating sytem"), which was a clone of CP/M specifically made for the 16-bit Intel 8086/8088 CPU.  (The actual CP/M was targeted mainly for the 8-bit Zilog Z80 or Intel 8080 CPU.)  Microsoft dressed up and rebranded the CP/M clone and licensed it to IBM for the PC, and the rest is history.

One more aside: One of the most legendary pivotal moments in computing history was IBM's decision to commission Microsoft instead of Digital Research for the PC's OS.  Had IBM gone with Digital Research instead, few things would be different today.  IBM would've shipped the actual CP/M itself instead of a clone trying to pass itself as not a clone.  Today's PCs would be using a GUI called GEM instead of Windows, with the same CP/M legacy issues.

Linux, Mac OS, and Unix also have some rather ancient legacies, some far older than CP/M, but of the three only Mac OS's is traced to an origin in low-power home/office computing.


----------



## Leafblower29 (Jun 20, 2012)

ArielMT said:


> https://www.e621.net/data/d5/81/d58106e74d0ae256effb654e9b7e51f9.png.


 Patachu.


----------



## Dj_whoohoo (Jun 22, 2012)

I'm on a Linux, I thought GNU?


----------



## Ruby Dragon (Jun 23, 2012)

Whatever I am doing alters what I want. For video editing, photo editing, and school projects, I liked OSx because the file system is so streamlined and minimalist. I like Windows for everything else because one can do practically anything on Windows.


----------

