# PC or Mac??



## crabby_the_frog (Jan 8, 2007)

I'm just curious to see how many people use what.


----------



## Horrorshow (Jan 8, 2007)

Windows. For several reasons.

I can build my own without having to sell my kidney.

I do both a lot of work /and/ play. And as far as I see, tablets work just as well on a PC as a Mac. Plus, I can use openCanvas. :]

I've used Windows for the vast majority of my computer life.
And I /have/ used a Mac; a good one at that. I just didn't like it as much.


----------



## crabby_the_frog (Jan 8, 2007)

Horrorshow said:
			
		

> Windows. For several reasons.
> 
> I can build my own without having to sell my kidney.
> 
> ...



Ahha, there was reason I called for PC/Mac... not Windows/Mac OS X

Easy solution, if you do indeed want to sell a kidney, is get windows running on an Intel-Mac. And there, we have OC working perfectly.


----------



## goat (Jan 8, 2007)

Pc              .


----------



## Wolfbreath (Jan 8, 2007)

Mac.

Oh.. Why then? Well.. It's like trying new gloves in the store. A few of them just fits better in Your hand than another pair of. My hands works better with these - maybe more expensive, but I like the quality of the leather and overall design. Stylish and applicable for all situations. No need for protective add-ons, weatherproof protector included.. and these feels good from the first use. And the gloves with the brand I've previously owned had an exceptionally long lifetime and durability. Simple as that.

/W


----------



## Lobo Roo (Jan 8, 2007)

Mac!

Because it rocks. Like Wolf said, I work well with these.


----------



## Horrorshow (Jan 8, 2007)

crabby_the_frog said:
			
		

> Horrorshow said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



But why bother?

Having Windows running on a Mac pretty much defeats the purpose of having a Mac in the first place, right?


----------



## crabby_the_frog (Jan 8, 2007)

Horrorshow said:
			
		

> But why bother?
> 
> Having Windows running on a Mac pretty much defeats the purpose of having a Mac in the first place, right?



Not so much, but by running Windows XP on my Macpro I get to use OC flawlessly. Agreed, Windows on a Mac does defy the purpose, but I only ever use my Windows drive for PC only games and PC only apps.

I just like it when I see people spending $2000+ on a PC gaming machine to run CS: Source, when a $600 Mac Mini can do it all anyway.


----------



## DruoxTheFurrinator (Jan 8, 2007)

crabby_the_frog said:
			
		

> Horrorshow said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Dun matter, The top-of-the-line Mac is nothing compared to a PC of the same price, it's almost a 1 sided battle XD PC Gamer did the comparison, the results were pretty predictable XD

Remember: Theirs was called the Muttnik.....come on....who could beat the MUTTNIK!?

lol


----------



## Horrorshow (Jan 8, 2007)

crabby_the_frog said:
			
		

> Horrorshow said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I know, but again, it's reduced to a matter of preference; it'd be pointless to drag on this debate. D:

But on a last note, I really don't think people like to game on Macs. :P


----------



## DruoxTheFurrinator (Jan 8, 2007)

Horrorshow said:
			
		

> crabby_the_frog said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yeah, macs arn't really geared towards gaming as much as PC's ^^ I would buy one if I was gonna draw, they're great with images and stuff, but I record music and stuff so I use a PC for the mega memory chips and stuff they've got @.@ Plus, I don't have to look at the "Rainbow Pin-wheel of Gay Fun" when I'm lagging XD


----------



## ADF (Jan 8, 2007)

I don't know enough about PC VS Mac to get into the whole debate thing, pretty much anything I say will probably be met with â€œon the contrary, the truth is blah blah blahâ€ and whatever I said would end up being wrong.

All I know is I can walk into any general shop, pick up any computer game and know it will install on my computer. All notable retail games are pretty much guaranteed to be compatible with a PC and no, running Mac to emulate Windows to do what I'm already doing on Windows anyway does not sound fun to me.


----------



## DavidN (Jan 8, 2007)

I feel that I would like Macs more if their owners didn't have to be such smug gits about it. A generalization, I know, but my wife's family subscribe to MacAddict, and the amount of digs its writers get in at the PC and their "stupid owners" is just off-putting.

I respect that the Mac is an incredible piece of hardware... but even though it's becoming more popular, I still haven't seen many of the programs that I actually use being released on the Mac platform.


----------



## crabby_the_frog (Jan 8, 2007)

Yeah, this is one debate which can't be solved through discussions.

IMO, Apple computers are better, JUST because I've been a faithful Mac user for the past 13 years.

I admit, PCs have their strengths, but for what I need I go for a Mac any day. I started this thread for a reason, however.

Not to debate which is better, but to generalize how many forum members use what. If I could, I'd add a poll to this, but i haven't the slightest idea how to.


----------



## brightlioness (Jan 8, 2007)

I use both. I have no prefference. I tend to be on the Mac while on this forum. 

Both of them work pretty well for basic internet, but the PC is better for flash stuff and games. But I always do music stuff on the Mac and I prefer writing on the Mac. And my writing music program is on the Mac ^_^

Basically, I usually spend more time on the Mac because A) where it is is more convienient and B) because other people tend to use the PCs


Crabby, edit the first post. Below the part where you type text are poll options


----------



## crabby_the_frog (Jan 9, 2007)

brightlioness said:
			
		

> Crabby, edit the first post. Below the part where you type text are poll options



Thanks!


----------



## Rhainor (Jan 9, 2007)

PC.

I'm a gamer, so I stay with what the vast majority of computer games are made for.  Plus, Macs just feel clunky and unintuitive to me.


----------



## WelcomeTheCollapse (Jan 9, 2007)

Mac.

For internets and downloading, I like the security (without having to have a virus app).

Plus, I'm in fucking film school. Of course I have a Mac. Final Cut Studio, Shake, etc.


----------



## sasaki (Jan 9, 2007)

To Crabby: Your title says everything. Obviously you didn't know to stop when you should have.

The topic alone is an invitation to flames.

Also, I use a PC because they're much more versatile, perform better then Macs, they're completely customizable, you get more for your money, and you can actually play games on them.


----------



## goat (Jan 9, 2007)

sasaki said:
			
		

> Also, I use a PC because they're much more versatile, perform better then Macs, they're completely customizable, you get more for your money, and you can actually play games on them.


----------



## crabby_the_frog (Jan 9, 2007)

Just so you know, Sasaki, my user title is meant as a joke, or else i wouldn't of asked for it to be added.

Secondly, this topic isn't meant for flames at all, its a poll.

And also, PC aren't more versitile, nor do they preform better. You can customize a Powermac in any way you want, any Apple computer is worth the extra money, and ofcourse APPLE COMPUTERS CAN RUN ANY APPLICATION! 

So don't be saying PCs can play more games, that's a lie. You are entitled to your opinions, I'll give you that much. But don't go around flaming me based on opinion.



			
				blueroo said:
			
		

> Keep the discussion civil please.



Now do it.


----------



## goat (Jan 9, 2007)

more versatile & perform better


----------



## crabby_the_frog (Jan 9, 2007)

goat said:
			
		

> more versatile & perform better



Can you provide some factual evidence?


----------



## goat (Jan 9, 2007)

can you provide some factual evidence that macs are?


----------



## crabby_the_frog (Jan 9, 2007)

No. I say again: THIS IS OPINION.


----------



## goat (Jan 9, 2007)

"And also, PC aren't more versitile, nor do they preform better. "

doesnt sound like an opinion


----------



## WelcomeTheCollapse (Jan 9, 2007)

Heh, I think that if Macs could tap into the gamer market, Apple would have it made.


----------



## sasaki (Jan 9, 2007)

crabby_the_frog said:
			
		

> Just so you know, Sasaki, my user title is meant as a joke, or else i wouldn't of asked for it to be added.


For the record, you don't know when to stop.



> Secondly, this topic isn't meant for flames at all, its a poll.
> 
> And also, PC aren't more versitile, nor do they preform better. You can customize a Powermac in any way you want, any Apple computer is worth the extra money, and ofcourse APPLE COMPUTERS CAN RUN ANY APPLICATION!


It's a topic that often goes down hill very quickly. Especially when biases are the focal point of a discussion. Yes, thats referring to you.

However, I have to disagree with you on the versatility. You don't have an option to use AMD CPUs, there are a hand full of compatible GPUs, and you still need to use the proprietary hardware anyway. Thats not Versatility. If I can't choose the components that I want, it's not versatile.

As for performance, It's all about hardware. I could make a PC that out performs a Mac. In fact, I already have. I can get you some benchmarks this weekend to compare to whatever Mac you want.



> So don't be saying PCs can play more games, that's a lie. You are entitled to your opinions, I'll give you that much. But don't go around flaming me based on opinion.


Oh, so PCs can't play games? I'm lying that I can play Half-Life 2, F.E.A.R., CS:S, Oblivion, and several other titles at 3 digit framerates with full everything turned up (save Oblivion, which runs at the refresh). I think you're full of shit. You have no idea what you're talking about. This isn't about opinion, these are experiences and you lack evidence for any of your claims. If Macs are so great for gaming, why do so few own Macs, let alone use them for gaming?



> blueroo said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yeah, good one. You're not exactly civil either, mind you. However I am being civil. I'm not the one throwing hypocritical, biased opinions around. Posts #22 to #25 prove that quite nicely.


----------



## WelcomeTheCollapse (Jan 9, 2007)

sasaki said:
			
		

> Oh, so PCs can't play games? I'm lying that I can play Half-Life 2, F.E.A.R., CS:S, Oblivion, and several other titles at 3 digit framerates with full everything turned up...



You, sir, need to spend your money more wisely


----------



## goat (Jan 9, 2007)

like what should he spend it on? some people's hobby is cars (a bigger fuckin moneysink than computers), some people spend money on tickets to sports events, some people spend money on computers.


----------



## WelcomeTheCollapse (Jan 9, 2007)

I dunno. Is his house and car paid off? Does he have a mortgage? Any debt at all?


----------



## blueroo (Jan 9, 2007)

WelcomeTheCollapse, other people's personal financial lives are off limits. Not only are they irrelevant, but your argument is deeply flawed and is going to descend into flames. Don't go there please.

goat, sasaki, WelcomeTheCollapse, keep it PG-13.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Jan 9, 2007)

/me adds gasoline to the fire known as this thread.

Just giving observation.


----------



## WelcomeTheCollapse (Jan 9, 2007)

blueroo said:
			
		

> WelcomeTheCollapse, other people's personal financial lives are off limits. Not only are they irrelevant, but your argument is deeply flawed and is going to descend into flames. Don't go there please.



Got it, done.


----------



## goat (Jan 9, 2007)

get 'er done


----------



## sasaki (Jan 9, 2007)

blueroo said:
			
		

> sasaki, keep it PG-13.



I'll keep the S-word out of the forums next time. :3


----------



## Wolfbreath (Jan 9, 2007)

sasaki said:
			
		

> crabby_the_frog said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Hey, man! Cool down, please!

AFAIK this all was about gathering general poll about platforms people prefer to use - not about what is the best platform for application X or Y. Not for flamewars to vote the best platform ever developed, nor bashing or undermining other people's likings.

We all have our preferences, requirements and needs - and usually my friends does not exactly meet my owns. Why should I judge, diminish and squish them for that? Sound more religious debate to me.

Just please - keep Your mind in the business and just answer the poll, instead of debating the privilege using the 'best-evah-OS-ever-done'. You all know there's no such thing. And never will be.

/Wolfbreath


----------



## Phantomgraph (Jan 9, 2007)

I started to post this, then stopped, then started then stopped... This topic can easily turn into a flame war but I thought some folks might want to here a 'different' sort of opinion so I thought 'what the heck go ahead and post it...'

I chose PC for the poll, but I would rather have a Mac.

PC's are, well cheap.. bottom line and I'm a poor dwaggy, but I would much rather have a Mac. Operating system aside I think Mac's still use Motorola 6800XX series processors. I have a fondness for these processors as back in the stone age I programmed them in assembly {I issa OLD dwaggy}:8>

Since I don't run either OS-X or Windows (I run Linux which runs on either just as well) the only two reasons I stick with PC's is 1) The one I use was cheap.. I mean real cheap.. some one gave it to me. If someone would have given me a Mac I would be running that instead. 2) Internal parts are not only cheap, their easy to find for me. I live in the middle of no where.. the closest Mac shop is a four hour drive away. I kid you not.. I have piles of parts around here I got from the salvation army! One of these days thou I'm going to find a Mac there! {Dwaggy goes Joy!}:8>

Anyway my two copper.  (And right on Wolfbreath! =)


----------



## crabby_the_frog (Jan 9, 2007)

Good call, Phantomgraph.

And Sasaki, I don't quite see where you're trying to take this. There is NOTHING at all saying that PCs don't run games.  I clearly say Macs can run more applications. Where you get the whole "Oh, so PCs can't play games?" (followed by the rant  about Halflife and such) is a mystery. I merely stated that, assuming you have a PC, any Intel compatable Mac can run Windows-only programs aswell as the Mac-only ones. I never said PCs aren't good for games.

And what do posts 22 and 25 have to do with anything? How is my stating an honest opinion "not being civil"?


----------



## crabby_the_frog (Jan 9, 2007)

I really don't want to start a flame war over this.

Why people think this brings up justification to flame is just odd. If you all want to refer to posts 1, 14, 21 and 25, this is my opinion.

It's a poll. If you use a PC, click PC. If you use a Mac, click Mac. We don't need another 100 page debate over something trivial. If you think my opinions that Apple computers are superior to those built by Dell/IBM/etc... then you may say so. But don't go on flaming please.


----------



## sasaki (Jan 9, 2007)

Wolfbreath said:
			
		

> blahblah blah



Look one post above your's. I think I've 'cooled down'. Whats your excuse for being late to the party? 8)


----------



## Wolfbreath (Jan 9, 2007)

Phantomgraph said:
			
		

> Since I don't run either OS-X or Windows (I run Linux which runs on either just as well) the only two reasons I stick with PC's is 1) The one I use was cheap.. I mean real cheap.. some one gave it to me. If someone would have given me a Mac I would be running that instead. 2) Internal parts are not only cheap, their easy to find for me. I live in the middle of no where.. the closest Mac shop is a four hour drive away. I kid you not.. I have piles of parts around here I got from the salvation army! One of these days thou I'm going to find a Mac there! {Dwaggy goes Joy!}:8>
> 
> Anyway my two copper.Â Â (And right on Wolfbreath! =)



Thanks for Your thoughts! First well-reasoned reply so far in this thread (I might have missed some..)

I like simple reasoning and comparsions using common likings with real life and household things instead of tagging in technical specs and terms. Other people buy Toyotas and another buy Mercedes - and both of them leads happily from point A to point B. Buy cheap - You get cheap. Spend more - You'll get some more. If you are ready and willing to live with such things and You are happy with that, it is not anything off from me. But I should remind - fully-featured Toyota with all bells and whistles is not actually cheaper than Mercedes by default. I'm selling Macs and custom-built PC's - and OEM build PC's with same preferences as comparable Mac's are not any cheaper. I do that for a living. A fact. And just to remind: We are using Quality Parts building our PC's - just as Apple does. 'Cheapest possible' just does not qualify in this. And if You are a honest citizen - You should buy Your operating system instead of downloading it from bittorrent nor copying if from Your pal - very few are counting this calculating the total cost of the system. With Macs this is included with purchase - legally.

At my work and leisure I feel getting more out of the pleasure using computers made by the juicy-fruit company. I have opportunity and privilege having a choice of both of them - and I prefer the Mercedes. Maybe It'll cost more by default - but I feel it more comfy. Well - I'm not into gaming and I admit there's a lot of more PC games available around. Mac games? mh... here at the edge of nowhere: Only from internet. Okay; You got me. I surrender.

What rocks Your boat, folks!

/W


----------



## sasaki (Jan 9, 2007)

Crabby, you started this thread because you didn't like that users reputed your claims that "Vista is a rip-off of OSX". I don't think there is any coincidence that this thread followed your replies.


----------



## Wolfbreath (Jan 9, 2007)

sasaki said:
			
		

> Wolfbreath said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Sorry - a bit late. I have a life, You know. ;-) 

I'd like to hear the 'best of the both worlds' instead of the endless debates as this kind of polls will inevitably lead to... 

/W


----------



## crabby_the_frog (Jan 9, 2007)

Here, here, Wolfbreath! Although there is one thing:



			
				Wolfbreath said:
			
		

> Well - I'm not into gaming and I admit there's a lot of more PC games available around. Mac games? mh... here at the edge of nowhere: Only from internet.



There are many Mac only games, and even though there are more PC exclusives, I say again: Apple computers can run PC only games aswell. It isn't a difficult way of thinking, really. If it runs on Linux, Mac OS X, Windows XP or even Vista, then any Mac can run it also.

I don't quite see where the whole "Oh look at me I can run Oblivion at 130fps!" thing has any point, my $900 iMac can do it also.



			
				sasaki said:
			
		

> Crabby, you started this thread because you didn't like that users reputed your claims that "Vista is a rip-off of OSX". I don't think there is any coincidence that this thread followed your replies.



Stop flaming me, Sasaki. Hypr started that thread, not you. Why you insist on making these claims is beyond me, but if you REALLY don't want to admit to being wrong, you don't have to.

IMO, Vista IS a rip-off of OS X. And nothing you say is going to change my opinion on that. All your arguments lead back to PCs having more gaming options, and that simply isn't true. Argue and debate some more of you want, but you can't change my opinions of Microsoft and Vista.


----------



## Lobo Roo (Jan 9, 2007)

Just wanted to say...it's opinion. Sasaki, chill, this thread isn't hurting anyone. Personally, I use Macs.


----------



## Wolfbreath (Jan 9, 2007)

crabby_the_frog said:
			
		

> Here, here, Wolfbreath! Although there is one thing:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Well - I know these things exactly; working with the "white and black side" since they're developed - 30 years. Just did not want to toss more fuel on the flames already burning.

I just love the Lemmings.

/W


----------



## crabby_the_frog (Jan 9, 2007)

LoboRoo said:
			
		

> Just wanted to say...it's opinion. Sasaki, chill, this thread isn't hurting anyone. Personally, I use Macs.



Yay!! Someone sees the purpose to this thread!



			
				Wolfbreath said:
			
		

> Well - I know these things exactly; working with the "white and black side" since they're developed - 30 years. Just did not want to toss more fuel on the flames already burning.
> 
> I just love the Lemmings.



Right you are, so I appologize. I just don't really think that using false information as "evidence" that PCs are superior should stay unchecked.

And Lemmings was awesome.


----------



## blueroo (Jan 9, 2007)

crabby_the_frog said:
			
		

> Apple computers can run PC only games aswell. It isn't a difficult way of thinking, really. If it runs on Linux, Mac OS X, Windows XP or even Vista, then any Mac can run it also.



If you explain how a Mac can run anything from Linux, XP, and Vista, you would go a long way towards proving your point.


----------



## CyberFoxx (Jan 9, 2007)

There really needs to be a "Both" option. I run Gentoo on both my Mac (A G4 700Mhz eMac) and my PC (A Celeron D 2.93Ghz). Sure I got it so I can dual-boot into XP *cough*Pro Corp*cough* when I need to play Guild Wars, but the Mac is just as useful, I pretty much just use it as a third screen (PC is running dual-head). But, coming from a purely Linux user standpoint, they're both equal to me. Both allow me to do the things I do on a daily basis quite well, check e-mail, browse the web, play music, watch videos, play games (Yes, there's games for Linux, and Linux PPC), and chat over the myriad of IM protocols.

One thing I have noticed, is that the G4 700Mhz compiles code a bit faster than the Celeron D 2.93Ghz. That'll help once I setup crossdev and distcc on it. ^_^

Also noticed I need to update the userbar in my .sig...


----------



## crabby_the_frog (Jan 9, 2007)

blueroo said:
			
		

> If you explain how a Mac can run anything from Linux, XP, and Vista, you would go a long way towards proving your point.



It's actually quite cool. The newer Intel-based Macs, including G4s, iMacs, Mac mini, G5s and Power Macs, have an ability called "Boot Camp".

Bacially, you can divide one of your hard drives into segments, and install another operating system onto it. Then, when you hold down a key on startup, you get the option to choose which environment loads. This yields me running Windows XP like on any PC, but it uses my hardware, built in iSight, etc as normal. So saying that PCs are better because they can play "Dawn of War", for example, doesn't really apply anymore. You can run system specific programs, transfer files between split drives, and even do work.


----------



## blueroo (Jan 9, 2007)

crabby_the_frog said:
			
		

> blueroo said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You are very confused. Power Macintosh, including the G4, G5, old iMacs, and old Mac Minis are based on the PowerPC platform. They can not run BootCamp. 

You are talking about running different Operating Systems in their wholeness. You have previously been implying that OS X could run Linux, XP, and Vista applications. You will want to speak more clearly in the future.

Multi-booting different operating systems is a possibility on any Intel/AMD hardware, regardless of whether it comes from Dell, HP, or Apple. The hardware is all identical now. The only comparisons to be made are between operating systems.


----------



## Lobo Roo (Jan 9, 2007)

*raises hand* Macbook can run Windows, I know that at least.


----------



## crabby_the_frog (Jan 10, 2007)

Actually, I was implying that a new age Apple computer could run said programs, not he operating system.

Back to the poll issue, it isn't OS X vs Windows, it's the Mac vs PC.

In all honesty, if there was a legit way to run OS X on a PC, I would consider buying it just to save the money. A few months ago there was the "G6" advertised on google, a bootlegged Dell running off of a Mac Mini motherboard, allowing it to run OS X.


----------



## Aikon (Jan 10, 2007)

I'm torn.  I love the versatility of the PC, but also love the fact that Apple is a really clean,, non-talky OS.  Windows Vista looks like it's going to have the same annoyances as it did from RC2.  Though the PC is admittedly cheaper, and they're upgradeable.   

I'm kind of playing the waiting game.  Apple was presumed to have released more info on Leopard today at MacWorld, no such luck.  When more info about Leopard is revealed I'm going to make my decision to buy either another PC or get a Mac.


----------



## crabby_the_frog (Jan 10, 2007)

Aikon said:
			
		

> When more info about Leopard is revealed I'm going to make my decision to buy either another PC or get a Mac.



If you can, I suggest finding a copy of the latest WWDC video. I'm sure you can bittorrent yourself a copy.

It's the usuial agrument for which to buy, however. What do you use the computer for? How much money are you willing to spend? Can you wait another 2 months?

IMO, if you have the money, go for a Macpro. They were just lowered slightly in price and are going down again in the next month or so, they're fairly powerful as is, and they can be upgraded with different hardware.

And yes, by having a computer such as a Macpro, you can run OS X and thus Mac native applications/games, emulate Linux, or Bootcamp yourself XP can thus run XP native applications/games.


----------



## WelcomeTheCollapse (Jan 10, 2007)

Aikon said:
			
		

> I'm kind of playing the waiting game.Â Â Apple was presumed to have released more info on Leopard today at MacWorld, no such luck.Â Â When more info about Leopard is revealed I'm going to make my decision to buy either another PC or get a Mac.



Speaking of MacWorld...

*New Thread!*


----------



## Aikon (Jan 13, 2007)

crabby_the_frog said:
			
		

> If you can, I suggest finding a copy of the latest WWDC video. I'm sure you can bittorrent yourself a copy.
> 
> It's the usuial agrument for which to buy, however. What do you use the computer for? How much money are you willing to spend? Can you wait another 2 months?



I use my computer for everything, but the reason I'm upgrading is because I want a system capable of running Vista or Leopard, also I use PHotoshop and edit video.  Also I just want a lot of new cool stuff to play with heh heh heh heh.

I'm willing to spend at most $2300.

Can I wait?  Sure.  Will I?  If I don't hear anything soon from Apple (by Jan 30th), no.  



> IMO, if you have the money, go for a Macpro. They were just lowered slightly in price and are going down again in the next month or so, they're fairly powerful as is, and they can be upgraded with different hardware.



I could get the standard 2.66 model, problem is I couldn't afford the extra RAM I'd need to run Photoshop, and speaking of I wouldn't be able to afford the upgrade to PS3.  

If I get a Mac it's going to be the 24" iMac w/ 2.33 processor and 2 GB Ram.  The screensize would be a blessing for me, and truthfully, 2GB of RAM would be fine for me for Photoshop (3GB or 4 would be perfect though).  I don't go nuts with history states and layers.  

Problem with the iMac is I could build a PC with comparable specs for much cheaper, screen and all.  What you're really paying for is the all-in-one factor, which is actually a deterrent to someone like me who likes to upgrade.  Which is the other problem, I like to tinker but taking apart an iMac looks like hell on earth (though not impossible).  But I would like to see what Leopard has in store...


----------



## crabby_the_frog (Jan 13, 2007)

Sounds like a plan. I'm rather fond of the iMacs myself, I just think a Macpro would be great since you won't have to buy all the parts now, you can save up and add more ram/harddrives/second dvd/etc.

Just don't fill all 8 slots for the ram with 512 cards and you should be fine. And you don't need that much RAM for photoshop, I used to run CS 2 using my G3 snow iMac, 600 mhz and only 640mb RAM, and it ran great.

And if you CAN wait, around this time of year Apple releases something new. Everything else should slightly drop in price soon, as a result. Plus I like the Macpro because you can give it a 512 video card, the iMac has a 128 or for extra, 256.


----------



## Aikon (Jan 13, 2007)

crabby_the_frog said:
			
		

> Sounds like a plan. I'm rather fond of the iMacs myself, I just think a Macpro would be great since you won't have to buy all the parts now, you can save up and add more ram/harddrives/second dvd/etc.



I was kinda hoping that at MacWorld they'd introduce the OctoMac so that maybe the 2.66 model would drop to the 2.0 price.  If that happened (or if it does soon) I'll be going w/ that probably.  



> Just don't fill all 8 slots for the ram with 512 cards and you should be fine. And you don't need that much RAM for photoshop, I used to run CS 2 using my G3 snow iMac, 600 mhz and only 640mb RAM, and it ran great.



I'm using CS2 on a Pentium 4 3.06GHz with 1 GB of high-speed RAM and it just doesn't cut it for me.  I'm working with 50 - 350 MB files.  

The other problem is my hard drive isn't fast enough.  I've got a Barracuda 7200.7 160GB drive and I use the scratch all the time (paint bucket).  With the iMac my only solution other than the main drive is a Firewire 800 drive, but I don't like using a scratch drive like that.  The nice thing about the MacPro or PC, you can add a second, third, or fourth hard drive.



> And if you CAN wait, around this time of year Apple releases something new. Everything else should slightly drop in price soon, as a result. Plus I like the Macpro because you can give it a 512 video card, the iMac has a 128 or for extra, 256.



I have to be honest I won't be gaming that much, as I only own a few games, and they're not exactly FPS killers (Zeus and SimCity4).  Both work with my Matrox G450 32 MB (aka Ol' Reliable)   I'd be getting the base card whatever way I go.  

Anyway, I dunno if I'm getting a Mac or not, I've been waiting since last August to get a new computer, I'm getting really itchy.  All I want to know is a damned release date, so I can get Leopard later for free.  They're ticking me off in that regard.  However, if I don't get a Mac, I'm trying to get my buddy one.  He makes up for it if I don't, heh heh.


----------



## Swampwulf (Jan 13, 2007)

Mac hardware

Running OSX, XP, and Ubuntu.

XP is for work, as I have to be able to access our web based office via IE6.
OSX for when I'm just 'enjoying' my computer.
Ubuntu because I'm slowly trying to learn *nix and it's a pretty simple interface.

Intel duo core processors rock my socks.


----------



## Swampwulf (Jan 13, 2007)

blueroo said:
			
		

> crabby_the_frog said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



With a new Intell based Mac you can either install XP or most any *nix based OS via a Virtual Machine such as Parallels, or you can do a 'hardware' install of XP with a piece of software called Bootcamp and use the boot loader to either boot natively into either OSX or XP.

Pretty simple stuff.
It's just the hardware to do it smoothly costs an arm and a leg.

Just an FYI.


----------



## crabby_the_frog (Jan 14, 2007)

Aikon said:
			
		

> All I want to know is a damned release date, so I can get Leopard later for free.Â Â



Well, you get 10.4 with a new Mac anyway, and getting 10.5 for free shouldn't be too hard once you get bittorrent running... :wink:


----------



## sasaki (Jan 15, 2007)

I took a break from this thread and this is my observation.

Crabby the frog says that PC vs. Mac isn't about the OS, because the Mac can run bootcamp, which only works on x86 architecture (not their older PowerPCs). So that means it's about the hardware, right? Well, if thats the case, it's the same hardware.

My guess is that you're comparing OEMs (assuming that you're not shifting through the OSs and the hardware for the sake of convenience). So, If I can build a PC that has the same hardware as a Mac, have I reached the ultimate Mac vs PC paradox? If not an OEM that offers their own OS, what relevance is there between the difference in platforms? Hell, a Dell equivalent OEM can pop up with their own OS derived from BSD and call it LOLCOMPUTER with premium prices and then there will be PC vs. Mac, LOLCOMPUTER vs. PC, and any other combo you can think of.

Had Apple still used their own hardware, there would be more relevance. For now, Apple is another PC OEM with their own OS, a line of MP3 players, and other accessories and so on.


----------



## crabby_the_frog (Jan 15, 2007)

Read the origional post, and shut up.

We don't need a flame war.


----------



## Rhainor (Jan 16, 2007)

crabby_the_frog said:
			
		

> Read the origional post, and shut up.
> 
> We don't need a flame war.



Your post in and of itself is a flame...plus you misspelled "original".


----------



## crabby_the_frog (Jan 16, 2007)

Heh, so I did. But then again, the 2 keys are right beside eachother....


----------



## Rhainor (Jan 16, 2007)

crabby_the_frog said:
			
		

> Heh, so I did. But then again, the 2 keys are right beside eachother....



Heh...

The only reason I noticed it, since I have a *touch* of dyslexia, was because when I had it in the reply text-entry area, Firefox flagged it as misspelled.


----------



## roxy (Jan 16, 2007)

I prefer the PC for the obvious gaming reasons. I've always wanted a Mac for general internet browsing, media applications but haven't had the money.


----------



## Silver R. Wolfe (Jan 16, 2007)

I have a desktop PC and a Mac lappy.

A nice desktop PC and an old Powerbook G3 Wallstreet lappy to be more specific. :3


----------



## sasaki (Jan 17, 2007)

crabby_the_frog said:
			
		

> Read the origional post, and shut up.
> 
> We don't need a flame war.



That was no flame. It's a legitimate question. Anyone, including yourelf are welcome to answer it.

Also, telling people to shut up is flaming. And your flip-fopping on the subject has my troll-o-meter off the charts.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Jan 17, 2007)

Does it count that I used to love writing stuff in Basic on old Apple IIes?


----------



## lolcox (Jan 17, 2007)

crabby_the_frog said:
			
		

> IMO, Vista IS a rip-off of OS X. And nothing you say is going to change my opinion on that. All your arguments lead back to PCs having more gaming options, and that simply isn't true. Argue and debate some more of you want, but you can't change my opinions of Microsoft and Vista.



Insert quote regarding Opinions, Assholes, and how everyone has 'em.



Moving forward:
They all suck.
I'd rather have a neural interface of some sort, but then we'd have to watch out for Ghosts.


----------



## sasaki (Jan 17, 2007)

lolcox said:
			
		

> I'd rather have a neural interface of some sort, but then we'd have to watch out for Ghosts.



Just don't look up free porn sites or you'll have adware in your head.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Jan 17, 2007)

sasaki said:
			
		

> lolcox said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



He'll be getting all those popups and doing a SPAMBUSTERS B#@$ Dave Chapelle attack

I just happen to like both platforms


----------



## darkdoomer (Jan 21, 2007)

:lol: you mean theres a difference ? 
me: PC forever. macs are overpriced machines, proprietary and have no originality/personality at all. 

plus, Apple make their best to choose shitty hardware since a moment.   i mean... letting down Powermac G5 systems for Bi-xeon pcs... what the fucking hell !


----------



## Kloudmutt (Jan 26, 2007)

dont care about technical stuff ive worked on both mac n pc and i found this:

mac are way too expensive
mac base hardware is better then pc sometimes
mac has almost no viruses =3 
pc has lotsa n lotsa games
pc has lots of models and brands

that woul be almost all so i have ma pc laptop and ma ipod 

besides the only huge mistake is that mac tv spots are designed to make you think mac is better than pc cuz if they really where thay wouldent need to


----------



## benanderson (Jan 28, 2007)

I have a Dell Windows computer... but I'm trying to become exclusive on Linux. Free, easy and it doesn't cost me a lung to do simple things like change the start button to something... less lame... =P


----------



## Celirya (Feb 12, 2007)

Macs are obviously furry computers. OS versions named after the big cats, and fantastic applications like Growl? C'mon, there's no real choice.



Serious response: I use a Mac because I like to use my computer, not worry about viruses and all, and I'm not a PC gamer. That easily makes OSX the OS of choice.


----------



## Wolf E. Urameshi (Feb 12, 2007)

I use a PC, but they're both good, really. It just depends on what you want to use it for. For example, if you want a super-special-awesome computer with MULTIMEDIA capability, go with a Mac. If you want a super-special-awesome computer for WORK, go with a PC and Windows. But if you want a super-special-awesome *I <3 that line lol* computer for BASIC USES AND/OR EXPERIMENTING, go with a Linux/Ubuntu/whatever. Yeah, they're that important. 

But in my case, yeah, PC.


----------



## Silver R. Wolfe (Feb 12, 2007)

Wolf E. Urameshi said:
			
		

> I use a PC, but they're both good, really. It just depends on what you want to use it for. For example, if you want a super-special-awesome computer with MULTIMEDIA capability, go with a Mac. If you want a super-special-awesome computer for WORK, go with a PC and Windows. But if you want a super-special-awesome *I <3 that line lol* computer for BASIC USES AND/OR EXPERIMENTING, go with a Linux/Ubuntu/whatever. Yeah, they're that important.
> 
> But in my case, yeah, PC.



Don't forget about the games.  If you want games, Mac is ftl.


----------



## Circlepaw (Feb 12, 2007)

Celirya said:
			
		

> Macs are obviously furry computers. OS versions named after the big cats, and fantastic applications like Growl? C'mon, there's no real choice.


I wouldn't quite call Growl a 'fantastic' 'application'.
No real need for random toasters popping up on my screen because I finished downloading something, got an instant message, and have new email all at once. I barely tolerate Firefox and its annoying toaster as is.

As for the big cat thing... I guess it's better than the naming scheme that Microsoft uses. I mean, come on, LONGHORN?! 




			
				Celirya said:
			
		

> Serious response: I use a Mac because I like to use my computer, not worry about viruses and all, and I'm not a PC gamer. That easily makes OSX the OS of choice.


I like to use my computer, as well. I don't worry about viruses at all. It helps that I'm intelligent enough to not just download anything and everything that floats on the internet (important! remember this). It also helps that I've at least done some hardening against what little has a chance at me.

Most importantly, I like to be able to run up to CompUSA or another computer store, buy random parts, and stuff them into the case of my computer, and expect them to work.
I've never really seen anyone do that with most of Apple's crates, so...

x86 for me, using Win2000 as my main OS, and FreeBSD as my backup.

//(paw)


----------



## crabby_the_frog (Feb 12, 2007)

In all honesty, if a PC could properly run OS X, I would probably scratch-build something for cheap. I keep seeing the posts "it depends on what you use it for", and I agree. I've made myself a G4 Power PC, running at 1.2ghz with 3gb ram and a 512mb video card, costing under $1200. But it isn't running with an Intel chip, so I'm lacking the whole "oh look at me I'm using OC and playing Oblivion" style I like. I use it (currently) for playing Starcraft, Photoshop work and surfing the net, thats about it.

Main summary ideas:

PCs cost a lot less
PCs can be customized easily
It's easier to find replacement parts for PCs
More people use PCs
People use PCs for work
PCs can run some Linux programs and any Windows software

Very high-end Macs can cost a lot
Newer Macs can flawlessly run any application
Macs can be customized, unless it's an iMac
Macs never crash, the program causing the problem merely quits
There are over 12000 viruses on the internet, Mac OS X isn't affected by them
Macs are used for multimedia, video editing, creating music, and work.

Tell me if I've missed anything.


----------



## Celirya (Feb 12, 2007)

Circlepaw said:
			
		

> I wouldn't quite call Growl a 'fantastic' 'application'.
> No real need for random toasters popping up on my screen because I finished downloading something, got an instant message, and have new email all at once. I barely tolerate Firefox and its annoying toaster as is.



That part was, obviously, a joke. I was more hinging on "hay guys there be a pawprint in mah menubar!" for gag momentum.



			
				Circlepaw said:
			
		

> I like to use my computer, as well. I don't worry about viruses at all. It helps that I'm intelligent enough to not just download anything and everything that floats on the internet (important! remember this). It also helps that I've at least done some hardening against what little has a chance at me.



Yeah, but when I use my PC, I have to have CONSTANT VIGILANCE when doing anything. Okay, so it's not that bad, and it's not even requiring of effort, but at least on the Mac I don't even have to care what i'm doing. It won't affect me.

Like I said, it's not like it's hard to be smart about things, but it's always nice not to have to use your brain.


----------



## Silver R. Wolfe (Feb 12, 2007)

crabby_the_frog said:
			
		

> In all honesty, if a PC could properly run OS X, I would probably scratch-build something for cheap. I keep seeing the posts "it depends on what you use it for", and I agree. I've made myself a G4 Power PC, running at 1.2ghz with 3gb ram and a 512mb video card, costing under $1200. But it isn't running with an Intel chip, so I'm lacking the whole "oh look at me I'm using OC and playing Oblivion" style I like. I use it (currently) for playing Starcraft, Photoshop work and surfing the net, thats about it.
> 
> Main summary ideas:
> 
> ...



Newer Macs can flawlessly run any application, if you want to drop a couple thousand every couple years. 

And Macs can crash, and I've seen many newer ones do it.


----------



## Rouge2 (Feb 12, 2007)

PC because most games can play on PC, but not my PC because it's so old.


----------



## robomilk (Feb 12, 2007)

I have a PC. But I _reallly_ want a Mac.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Feb 12, 2007)

No Open Canvas on Mac


----------



## Xipoid (Feb 12, 2007)

I enjoy PC for gaming and their widespread use.


Plus, I hate Mac's ad campaigns.


----------



## robomilk (Feb 12, 2007)

Arshes Nei said:
			
		

> No Open Canvas on Mac



Which part of the whole Windows emulation thing have you missed?


----------



## Xipoid (Feb 12, 2007)

robomilk said:
			
		

> ...Windows emulation...



Is it just me, or is that whole concept really redundant?


----------



## crabby_the_frog (Feb 12, 2007)

Rouge2 said:
			
		

> PC because most games can play on PC, but not my PC because it's so old.





			
				Arshes Nei said:
			
		

> No Open Canvas on Mac



I say again.. bootcamp = any program running on a Mac.


----------



## Silver R. Wolfe (Feb 12, 2007)

There is no Open Canvas on Mac OSX.  You need to use Windows for that.  While you can run Windows on Mac hardware, that's not what we're comparing right?  Specially since all Mac hardware stuff is just regular PC stuff, in shiny cases, configured to run OSX.

It's not longer a PC vs. Mac world, but a Windows vs. OSX type discussion.  When Mac hardware was PPC, there was a significant difference, however that is no longer the case.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Feb 13, 2007)

robomilk said:
			
		

> Arshes Nei said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Nice assumption there. You're assuming everyone who owns a Mac can use OSX or even an emulator to begin with. I know many users that have older Macs because they don't feel like buying a new one after plunking down so much money for the one they have.


----------



## robomilk (Feb 13, 2007)

Arshes Nei said:
			
		

> robomilk said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## DJ Chrome (Feb 14, 2007)

I'm usally on a personal computer, but I prefer Mac ;^^


----------



## CyberFoxx (Feb 14, 2007)

Well, after running Gentoo PPC on my eMac G4 700 for a while now since my initial post in the topic, I can give a more detailed responce:

Not sure if it's a "feature" of the PPC arch, but even if something is using 100% CPU, like Firefox trying to render a really complex page, it's still very responsive. Meanwhile, if I try the same thing on my Celeron D 2.93Ghz, also running Gentoo, the responsiveness starts to suffer. Then again, 512KB cache on the G4 compared to the Celeron's 256KB might be making that difference.

I still use my PC more for gaming though, alot of emulators arn't masked for PPC yet in portage. Also, Wine and Cedega arn't available for PCC as well. But stuff like browsing the web, e-mail, running aMSN, Azureus, XChat, etc, the Mac is perfect. I still use my PC for listening to music though, my SB Live! 5.1 is alot better than whatever the eMac has. I tend to switch between the two for watching videos, depends if the video has surround sound or not.

Pretty much, in the end I see both x86 and PPC as being equal. Now, if I can get more RAM, I'd be able to compare x86_64 to PPC. ^_^


----------



## sasaki (Feb 14, 2007)

If you're gaming, getting a mac is just... no. D3D > OpenGL.

Before you guys go off on how OpenGL is just as good if not better, here's some food for thought. D3D has better support and is better utilized by developers. OpenGL will never be widely used on computer gaming.

For all this crap about "Windows Emulation", It sucks. really, you dedicate half your resources to each OS running simultaneously, slowing it to a crawl. Even if it runs just fine, the windiows emulator will never be 100%. Now, what you're thinking of is Bootcamp, which is *NOT* Emulation, but a multi-boot application that allows you to run other x86 OSs (Windows and linux). So, I'd have to reboot every time I want to OC or use safari. Great logic, guys. I for one leave my computer on always and only reboot for installations/updates.



			
				silverwolfe said:
			
		

> There is no Open Canvas on Mac OSX.  You need to use Windows for that.  While you can run Windows on Mac hardware, that's not what we're comparing right?  Specially since all Mac hardware stuff is just regular PC stuff, in shiny cases, configured to run OSX.
> 
> It's not longer a PC vs. Mac world, but a Windows vs. OSX type discussion.  When Mac hardware was PPC, there was a significant difference, however that is no longer the case.



Fucking signed. I've had this discussion a lot, and Mac users claim "It's the hardware/software experience like Quick Time and iLife." No, sorry, same hardware. It's an OS/Software debate.


----------



## Celirya (Feb 14, 2007)

Sure am glad I don't use OC, since this one program seems to be the world's largest dealbreaker.

But seriously, who the hell cares? Use what you want to use, and trying to convince anyone else from the opposing side to like your OS more is like trying to convince PETA that hamburgers are actually pretty tasty. You're not going to get anywhere, and everyone's points for the most part only apply to their personal experience.


----------



## sasaki (Feb 14, 2007)

Celirya said:
			
		

> Sure am glad I don't use OC, since this one program seems to be the world's largest dealbreaker.
> 
> But seriously, who the hell cares? Use what you want to use, and trying to convince anyone else from the opposing side to like your OS more is like trying to convince PETA that hamburgers are actually pretty tasty. You're not going to get anywhere, and everyone's points for the most part only apply to their personal experience.



There are  lot of applications only available for windows. Also, D3D is the biggest deal breaker, actually. Hence why gamers still choose PC over Mac.


Also, to suggest this discussion end, you really don't belong in this thread.


----------



## Celirya (Feb 14, 2007)

Whoah, chill out, there. I know there's tons of programs that are windows only. I was just commenting on the fact that so many of the posts here mention OC as a big reason for Windows'ing. Maybe I should turn down the sarcasm a bit. Just maybe.

And actually, the thread's about what OS people use, not why and/or which is better. That's what the OP suggests, anyway. It's just inevitable that any thread of the like will quickly turn into an OS debate.

But the OS one chooses really does depend on what that person wants to do with their computer. If you want to game, have high compatability (and use OpenCanvas hehehe), use Windows. If you want a simple, elegant and mostly hassle-free experience, choose OS X (I just _know_ someone's gonna try to poke at that one!), and if you built your own machine, don't have the money for Windows or OSX, don't want to pirate, or just plain love open-source, use *nix. That simple. (EDIT: This is, of course, broken down to the most simple generalizations of the OS.)


----------



## Silver R. Wolfe (Feb 14, 2007)

Celirya said:
			
		

> Sure am glad I don't use OC, since this one program seems to be the world's largest dealbreaker.
> 
> But seriously, who the hell cares? Use what you want to use, and trying to convince anyone else from the opposing side to like your OS more is like trying to convince PETA that hamburgers are actually pretty tasty. You're not going to get anywhere, and everyone's points for the most part only apply to their personal experience.



Except, the point of a debate is to persuade the other party to see your side of the argument.  You might never be successful, but that's what a debate is for.

Of course you should use what you want to use, after all it's your own personal choice.  But it would be very ignorant for you to stop someone from informing you about an alternative that can do something just as well, if not better, than what you are using now.  After all, if there was something better... Wouldn't it make more sense to use it if you could?  At least, it doesn't hurt you to listen about it.

The more you know! *rainbows*

As for OC, many artists use it since not only can you share a canvas with other artists via an internet connection, but it also behaves very differently from Photoshop and Painter, allowing you to do things in it that are harder to emulate in other programs.  For a lot of artists, it can be a deal breaker.


----------



## CyberFoxx (Feb 14, 2007)

sasaki said:
			
		

> Before you guys go off on how OpenGL is just as good if not better, here's some food for thought. D3D has better support and is better utilized by developers. OpenGL will never be widely used on computer gaming.



Ya know, I remember back in the day when it was the other way around. Then again, I remember when it was said that Glide was supposed to be the 3D implementation of the future.



			
				sasaki said:
			
		

> For all this crap about "Windows Emulation", It sucks. really, you dedicate half your resources to each OS running simultaneously, slowing it to a crawl. Even if it runs just fine, the windiows emulator will never be 100%.



Tell me about it, I used to run Win2K in a VMware session for a while there, that was awful, no 3D acceleration! Then Wine got decently stable, and I started using it instead. Then I "procured" a copy of Cedega, for those games that just don't get along with Wine. Native APIs are so much better than emulation anyday.

Hey cool, MAME is marked stable for PPC. Time to compare it to the x86 version.


----------



## Option7 (Feb 14, 2007)

I actually use both, 'cause I'm a film student and we use Mac's for editing, but I don't have one at home. From my experience they're pretty good, but you can't do shit on them, PCs own for versatility IMO.


----------



## darkdoomer (Feb 18, 2007)

PC.


..but depends which mac.
Powermac 2x G5 @ 2.7 GHz = good.
Intel Centrino Duo based mac = fail.


----------



## Vgm22 (Feb 19, 2007)

PC, is what I use.


----------



## Dragoneer (Feb 19, 2007)

I use Windows Vista now. It's a PC... and a Mac!

. . .

Snoogins.


----------



## Poseidon_Simons (Feb 20, 2007)

there is no "both" option..
I use both


----------



## capthavoc123 (Feb 20, 2007)

PC. Has to be PC.

I would go Mac if I wasn't a gamer, though. But there just isn't much beyond Warcraft III and World of Warcraft that draws my interest on the Mac, and the little benefits apart from gaming that the Mac offers aren't enough for me to make the switch.

And since Vista is supposed to offer a more Mac-like experience on a PC anyways, the whole issue is kind of clear-cut for me.


----------



## crabby_the_frog (Feb 20, 2007)

Yes, I curse myself for not making a "both" and "other" option...

But this is also as I expected, there are a lot more PC users, but people who say they use a Mac list very good reasons (film student, for example )

Good stuff.


----------



## Ahkahna (Feb 21, 2007)

I demand a "Both" button. I use a pc and a mac.


----------



## darkdoomer (Feb 26, 2007)

there should be an "Other" option ( Sun, Sgi, )


----------



## The Sonic God (Mar 27, 2007)

Why should I use Windows? (PC does not always mean Windows-based computers.)

For over 15 years I've had nothing but problems with Windows. Setup, install, configure, maintenance... what good is a high-performance PC if the operating system's just going to bog it down?

I'm hardware-agnostic. Whatever. It's Windows that I have a problem with. Linux and Mac OS X. Linux is fast, but difficult to install. Mac OS X curiously seems to run faster on non-Apple hardware... I wonder why...?


----------



## amtrack88 (Mar 31, 2007)

I run dirt cheap servers/clients on a network where hardware is constantly failing. So PC for me. Operating systems have never been a huge problem for me. I'm one of the few people who have actually had a relatively good experience with Windows. Then again, I've never actually PAID for  a version of Windows, but lets not open that can of worms. I wish had the time to learn more about Linux. I installed and used Ubuntu on a 700 Pentium 3 machine for some time and I just loved it.

We have one Mac Mini though, I hate it, it's slower than hell. Then again it only has 256MB of memory, which seems to bring OS 10.3 to it's knees on that machine. I currently have it Folding@home. >>


----------

