The Mac vs. PC debate

[skywise]

^ No, it will run windows just fine. Its just a pretty expensive computer to buy if thats what you want to run.

P.S. DD and Finder – When are you guys just going to admit that mac OS is better than windows and linux will ever be?

edit: I also, somewhat more seriously, want to comment on DD's endearing ability to criticize the elitism of the mac community while simultaneously flaunting his technical knowledge of computers so that we all know why his opinion matters more. Bravo!

 

[skywise]

Gotta love all the fanboys in this thread. Now go make my fucking double espresso.

Now thats an interesting thing to say for someone who is rumored to be crazy about his special imported coffee (and who took his namesake from a certain friendly face that lives in the dock of every mac user). :D

 

[skywise]

it's purely a tech debate and my argument is the same of all arguements.. know something when you speak, admit when you're wrong if you don't, or walk away quietly.

Thats where I disagree. An argument for a mac over a "PC" doesn't have to fit the criteria of a tech debate. Here's one:

Premise 1) Most people use a computer in order to achieve one of several different results in a more convenient fashion than they would be able to achieve the same result without a computer.

P2) Convenience is inversely related to the amount time and work a given person has to put into achieving a desired result.

P3) Mac OS makes many of the results desired by most people who use computers more convenient than Windows or Linux.

Conclusion: A mac is a better choice for "most people"

If you disagree with me about "most people" you can modify to "some people." I think that in reality, however, most people don't want to waste anymore time learning and working towards their desired results in an OS than they have to. You might disagree with P3 but I think that most people just want to use the internet, maybe dick around with some photos in an amature fashion, and listen to some music with as little maintenance as possible. I think mac OS makes these things more convenient than Windows or Linux.

Now, I'll add another argument:

P1) Computers exist to make lives of people more convenient.
P2) If a computer makes people's desired results more convenient to achieve than another then that computer is better for those people.
P4) If a computer is better than others for most people then it is a better computer.
P3) Conclusion: Computers w/ Mac OS are better computers.

All this, of course, assumes that money isn't an issue. And, by making this argument I'm not saying that a mac is only better than a pc at being more convenient when it comes to average joe things. I believe that a mac is the better choice of someone who wants to make movies (and do some other things) too. But, since I'm going for the best benefit for the largest amount of people, that's irrelevant. The reason I'm making this argument is because I think that something like this is what underlies a lot of the non-techy contributions mac users make to discussions that you feel are inappropriate (or whatever it is that you feel about them). An argument like this, however, is just as valid as one discussing technical aspects – especially in a space like 2nd opinion which is not, afterall, a non-beginner computer forum.

 

[rm-rf]

macs are for cool people

buy macs

so you can be cool

buy mac

buy mac

buy mac

so you

can

be

cool

this message bnrought to you buie acholoics of soem place asoociation

 

[skywise]

And I also want to add that it wasn't until very recently (namely, with the popularity of the ipod) that macs became "cool." There are quite a few people that appreciated the mac for the reasons that I mentioned in my earlier post when it was rather uncool to own a mac (you're still using a mac!?). In fact, I'd argue that most people that use macs now are the same people that used them when it was an unfashionable thing to do. If I'm not very much mistaken its not until very recently that the percent of mac users has started to climb and even then, it hasn't climbed *that much*.

I think posts like THE WOOD and some of Finder's are just examples of trying to rebel against something just because its fashionable at a particular moment. The core mac users, however, have proven consistent regardless of whats fashionable. Something tells me, however, that if macs were wildly unfashionable now except among THEWOOD's favorite metal bands or someone like Andrew Bird in Finder's case they might change their tune.

 

[psychetool]

That's quite true Skywise. While I may not quote technical statistics my opinion is still quite valid and just because some of you do happen to know tech specs by heart does not make MY USER EXPERIENCE any different. I'm not interested in quoting technical specifications to people, i'm trying to give them a down to earth perspective from somebody who does NOT need to use the computer for intensive technical work but rather for casual use of what Os x (Mac) is like. Besides the fact that now the mac can do literally ANYTHING a PC can do and more with Bootcamp/Leopard/Parrellels/Crossover.

My argument has never been that the hardware is better, or that it is cheaper - my argument has been that it is a GREAT tool to get everything you need to done gracefully and problem free. I have been using the operating system since Os 6, sat in front of my first mac almost DAY 1 when they were released. (1980's) It's not a 'fad' for me, I have been using mac since they were black and white on my APPLE II. I don't even get where this whole 'fashion/popularity' argument comes into play at all, since we are talking about USING A COMPUTER HERE - not buying a fucking suit. Anyone who purchases a Mac/iPod just to go along with the crowd if they don't actually think it's the best option for them is worse then a fanboy, they are a downright idiot. People who choose to pay extra for luxury are not fools, they simply want their lives to be easier and don't mind paying a couple extra bucks to make it so. If the money is there, and it's not a big deal, why would you purposefully use a system which is known to wreak havok on novice users instead of choosing something that would undoubtedly work easiest and best for you ?

I compare it to buying a car where you can purchase all the parts for cheaper and assemble it yourself too, but shit - that's going to take some work, learning, and most of all precious time. I don't want to bother with that shit. I might even be able to build a BETTER CAR for CHEAPER if I do the work myself, but i'm not interested in building a fucking car and learning every little thing - I want to hop on the freeway and cruise down to the beach without having to put install all the safty belts and airbags myself then read the manual 10x and probably STILL over along the way because i'm still learning about the car.

How many PC users come to me with their bullshit problems ? Too many... Way too freaking many...

How many Mac users come to me with their problems ? Zero, and I know plenty of Mac users.

'Nuff said.

 

[dr seuss]

Once again, i don't know where all these error messages and reboot people are getting are coming from. I seed 50 torrents, edit video, play music, and so forth. I haven't rebooted in 2 weeks.

This argument is pretty absurd. German cars, american cars, japanese cars. They all go forwards and back these days, and they all drive on the same roads. They're nothing more than flavors at this point.

Apple users sacrifice price (and yes, you do. Don't cite a single price you were quoted on dell, look at the aggregate. Go price the parts, that show my computer got built). That extra money goes towards a computer that is designed to be idiot proof, and still robust enough to satisfy professionals.

Windows users enjoy a massive software library, and market forces acting on their hardware suppliers. They sacrifice stability because of the very very wide support.

Does anybody really want to argue like the people nobody talked to in high school about which corporate entity they most closely associate with?

+1000

 

[alasdairm]

^ +1001

i use win2k on a crappy old 800MHz dell and it's plenty fast and rock solid. i can't remember the last time i had to reboot.

if you need a pc, get a pc. if you need a mac, get a mac. if you want a pc, get a pc. if you need a want, get a mac.

berating or condescending to somebody else - especially somebody you do not know - about their choice of tool, that says more about you than it does about their choice of tool...

alasdair

 

[skywise]

^^ I suppose thats a valid enough opinion. From the point of view of a stockholder, however, I would just call the attitude you hate so much 'good marketing' and pricing "the only way a company like apple has survived against giants like ibm and microsoft." Note that in the only market that apple is *the* major player in (portable media players) it is extremely competitive in its pricing.

Also, I can't help but notice that if these are your criticisms (attitude and pricing) then it seems to undermine the spirit of your giant post in which you defended your opinion stating:

"of all the people coming into this debate supporting OS X, the only person who gave one cent of tech insight from a mac perspective is TheDea.org. Not you, not psychetool. and that's quite typical"

and

"and where as i think even people on this site... could all have a decent debate or discussion about technology where i'd shut my mouth and sit back and passively listen... i'm not about to let someone who knows how to swipe a credit card at a store discredit 4 years of college, 3 years professionally, and countless hours of personal education and obsession. sorry. Not all opinions are equal. And i know my place on the totem pole and when to shut my trap'.

Technical insight and all of your qualifications are completely irrelevant to something like attitudes among social groups and corporate pricing. If you had mocked apple's software on a technical level (which you didn't and won't right?), then you might be right to criticize the less educated for arguing about things they don't understand. It would also then make sense to cite your education and experience as evidence for why your opinion on this matter is better. Unless, however, that degree and experience is in sociology or some other relevant field then your opinion on the attitudes of apple and their customers probably is equal to or less than mine (and I'm no expert). Similarly, unless you have some special know-how in comsumer economics I fail to see why your opinion matters more on pricing.

Again, I'm struck by your ability to criticize elitism all the while flaunting your technical knowledge even when it is entirely irrelevant to your opinions on this debate. Oh, and "snooty attitude" doesn't sound so much as a reason for chosing one computer over another as it does for choosing why apple isn't the "corporate entity [you] most closely associate with."

 

[Pander Bear]

There's my problem with macs, right there.

I do have a problem with using Nelson Mandela and Ghandi. It's considerably more of a problem for me than say, using Fred Astaire to sell vacuum cleaners. If you need me to spell out why this is a problem, you should read some biographies.

I am, however, used to people doing anything for a dollar. I dislike the ads, including the more recent campaigns, for more than that. Apple sells the idea of being ahead of the curve, of being smarter, of being a radical, of being a free-thinker, and of being sophisticated. It's ironic that a closed architecture that does everything it can to hide away that a computer is actually a very complicated machine that can be a stepping stone to a greater understanding of how "things" in our modern world work (rather than just an appliance for communication, entertainment, and productivity). Though I know people have made that point before.

The problem is that apple is a superbrand that sells a lifestyle as much as it sells a computer. Macs don't make their users into what apple sells mac users as, same as Nike and Gatorade really don't sell the kind of transcendent, ecstatic experience they so often use in their ads. People buy things for irrational reasons like that every single day. We all have. The worst part is that the things we buy are never going to change who we are, or fill the holes in our lives.

So ya. I love how my ipod works, and that i get to listen to music anywhere. I sure as hell didn't like wearing apple's earbuds with it though, or the apple sticker that came with my ipod. People with Nike Swooshes on their cars, tux penguins tattooed on their arms, Louis Vuitton Bags, RAZR phones, and luxury SUVs aren't doing it for the sake of style. They're doing it because they don't like their own identity, and they've found a place to buy a readymade one.

Thats not everybody who ever used a Mac, or drank coffee at starbucks, or drove a volkswagen, but thats what those companies do. They lie to you. They prey on your insecurities, and give you less than what you're paying for, and make up for it in sentiment.

My generation has been the most marketed to generation in the history of the species. I don't want to force somebody to dust off the Pirates vs Ozone graph, but do you think its any coincidence that we're also the most medicated generation in the history of the species too?

 

[skywise]

I thought you were the one that didn't want to discuss reasons for and against identifying with a corporate entity?

Nonetheless, I agree that its in bad taste to use some of those people to sell a product.

I don't, however, see the irony you are referring to unless you're suggesting that being a user of open architecture *does* imply being ahead of the curve, being smarter, being a radical, being free-thinking, and being more sophisticated than someone who uses a closed-architecture computer for communication, entertainment and productivity (especially when productivity includes things like creating works of art).

I find your 3rd point about apple and other companies exploiting the holes in peoples lives is a little dramatic and not a real criticism of apple. If people have holes in their lives and think that apple (or nike etc.) is going to fill it then they have mistaken an attempt to catch their eye and show off a product for serious psychological help. Seems like we ought to be criticizing these holey folks for looking in the wrong place for help more than suggesting they blame their problems on "the man."

//shrugs. Apple is a corporation. They have good advertising and sell a good product. Their morality is, in my opinion, about on par with most reasonably successful corporations.

 

[skywise]

^^ I'm familiar. I still hold that their morality is about on par with most reasonably successful corporations.

 

[psychetool]

Right now, poison Apples full of chemicals (like toxic flame retardants, and polyvinyl chloride) are being sold worldwide. When they're tossed, they usually end up at the fingertips of children in China, India and other developing-world countries. They dismantle them for parts, and are exposed to a dangerous toxic cocktail that threatens their health and the environment.

So they are blaming Apple because OTHER people take their trash to China and dismantle it ?

In contrast.

http://www.apple.com/environment/

Apple has been named a “Forward Green Leader,” one of the top ten environmentally progressive companies recognized by the Sierra Club and its investment advisor, Forward Management.