Topic: considering switching from PC to a Mac (Read 10810 times)

minignome · « **on:** 07 Mar 2006, 12:30 »

Hey all, I'm thinking about switching from a PC to a Mac. I've always enjoyed the Macs but in the past year I've fallen out of most of my computer gaming which I needed a PC for. As far as switching to a Mac goes, do any of you have any recommendations? What's the deciding factor from one system to another? Anybody using a mac with the intel chips? Just a few questions I thought I'd throw out there to get some opinions on.

Thanks.

jhocking · « **Reply #1 on:** 07 Mar 2006, 12:42 »

Quote from: minignome

What's the deciding factor from one system to another?

Hm, maybe I should add this to my Flamewar! game...

mberan42 · « **Reply #2 on:** 07 Mar 2006, 13:01 »

www.penny-arcade.com/comic

minignome · « **Reply #3 on:** 07 Mar 2006, 13:24 »

hahah, thats pretty damn funny

nihilist · « **Reply #4 on:** 07 Mar 2006, 13:25 »

Sellout bastards!

the tree · « **Reply #5 on:** 07 Mar 2006, 13:38 »

Why buy a new system when there is a billion and a half free operating systems around. Ubuntu is awesome, it's damn easy to use and it's faster than a drunk twelve year old girl in rural essex.

minignome · « **Reply #6 on:** 07 Mar 2006, 14:07 »

well my current comp is about as useful as a paperweight at the moment. I'm able to check this out at work, but being able to do anything on a comp at home would be nice. Seems like a pretty good reason for a new computer.

Catfish_Man · « **Reply #7 on:** 08 Mar 2006, 00:29 »

Any specific questions you've got about Macs? I do Cocoa programming and Mac tech support, so I can probably answer

Re: Intel v. PPC

I'd definitely not bother with a non-Intel one. They're nice enough machines (<3 my powerbook), but they can't compare for speed in most cases. The mini is not going to be good for gaming (integrated graphics) but is otherwise a damn nice machine. The higher end ones actually have real graphics cards, but it sounds like that doesn't matter so much to you.

The other consideration is the new chips Intel has been hyping up; the initial benchmark numbers look very promising, and they're due out later this year.

est · « **Reply #8 on:** 08 Mar 2006, 01:30 »

also: if anyone turns this into a Mac vs PC flamewar instead of being helpful i'm just gonna delete their posts or something. every time this topic comes up people try to start shit. it gets old quickly.

Matteh99 · « **Reply #9 on:** 08 Mar 2006, 18:53 »

The new intel imac's are pretty decent gaming machines. http://www.barefeats.com/imcd2.html

They arn't going blow your mind or any thing but if you can find a game you want it will run well on one.

The mac mini on the other hand sucks for gaming. Intel integrated graphics suck. Yeah they are the high end intel graphics but that means that they just suck slightly less.

Why mac not windows? For me I love the easy to use apps like iMovie and iPhoto. I like that I can play with open source software. I like that if I do manage to mess up OS X I can run an archive and install keeping my user data and replaceing the system files. I like that there are very few viruses for the mac. (there was one the infected like 40 people and it require that you type in your administrator password to spread)

Gaming on a mac can be rough because there arn't as many titles out there and they tend to cost more.. However, I am not much of a gamer so that doesn't bother me.

Another interesting thing is with the intel chipset macs should be able to take advantage of linux software like wine letting them run windows games the same way linux users do. http://darwine.opendarwin.org/

I use windows because I have to. I use a Mac because I want to.

Eric

est · « **Reply #10 on:** 08 Mar 2006, 19:56 »

I think that the whole thing comes down to whether you're gonna be playing games on this machine or not. At the moment you've basically only got three choices in the Mac range if you want to get onto the Intel mac bandwagon: Mac Mini, iMac & MacBook Pro.

The Mac Mini isn't really a gaming machine, but unless you're doing some heavy graphic design or 3d work or something it should do just fine. Apparently the most recent releases in the Mini range are a bit more powerful than the first release ones, but they still only have passable video cards. Mind you, I've played plenty of games (including things like Warcraft 3) on a 3 or 4 year old Intel IGP motherboard with a 667mhz CPU and 256mb ram, so I guess that it also depends on the games you're likely to be playing.

Anyways, if you are thinking that you'll be playing some recent 3d-accelerated games you might want to spring for one of the new iMacs. as has been alluded to already up above, the Penny Arcade guys are getting onto the Mac bandwagon at the moment, and apparently World of Warcraft plays pretty well on the iMac (if that is any indication for you).

Of course, if you wanted to go the whole hog and wanted portability + power for games you could go for the MacBook Pro. It's cute, it's powerful, and ~~I want to have its children~~ it's portable.

edscoble · « **Reply #11 on:** 09 Mar 2006, 03:57 »

Quote from: the tree

Why buy a new system when there is a billion and a half free operating systems around. Ubuntu is awesome, it's damn easy to use and it's faster than a drunk twelve year old girl in rural essex.

linux is not worth the hassle if you just want an easy system to run like Windows or OS X.

I'm thinking more of a drunk twelve years old girl in Loughborough.

edscoble · « **Reply #12 on:** 09 Mar 2006, 04:04 »

right let see, it's varies on your choice and what you do, especially for a living.

I used a Macintosh because I prefer it for everyday stuff such as music (iTunes), internet (Safari), word processing (Word), presentation (Keynote), making music (Garageband), etc.

I also used it every now and then for Photoshop because frankly speaking, using Photoshop in a Macintosh felt more comfortable and more creative than on the PC, however a PC do tend to have a faster operational speed, the Macintosh will felt fast, but in reality the operational speed is not as fast as Windows (until now when Apple switch to Intel).

However, I used my PC for work, and a bit of everyday stuff, I don't have an anti-virus in it, sound insane didn't it? it's not if you know how to set up a good firewall, you can be completely virus-free and spy/adware-free too, anti-virus software are there to find and destroy viruses, not to stop them going into the computer.

my Windows machine (A Dell Dimension 3.40GHz) is bloody fast and perfect for rendering and encoding, but for everyday stuff, if you don't want the hassle of setting up firewall/anti-viruses and rather just get down to web browsing and such, a Macintosh is perfect.

Linux being user friendly is a myth, sure it's free and very customisable, it's the 'customisable' the problem.

My Linux box run flawless if you don't touch the CD-ROM

My new Linux is brilliant, just don't click on the log-out button

you need to know what you're doing, unlearn what you remember from Windows/Mac and relearn everything again with Linux, and not everyone want to do that.[/i]

edscoble · « **Reply #13 on:** 09 Mar 2006, 04:05 »

Quote from: est

Of course, if you wanted to go the whole hog and wanted portability + power for games you could go for the MacBook Pro. It's cute, it's powerful, and ~~I want to have its children~~ it's portable.

first revision model is not worth the hassle, remember the first 12inch PowerBook? poor spec, very hot, limited RAM and such, the first titanium PowerBook? poor spec again, lower screen resolution, problematic, expensive.

Catfish_Man · « **Reply #14 on:** 09 Mar 2006, 09:48 »

Quote from: edscoble

Quote from: est

Of course, if you wanted to go the whole hog and wanted portability + power for games you could go for the MacBook Pro. It's cute, it's powerful, and ~~I want to have its children~~ it's portable.

first revision model is not worth the hassle, remember the first 12inch PowerBook? poor spec, very hot, limited RAM and such, the first titanium PowerBook? poor spec again, lower screen resolution, problematic, expensive.

The whole "buy the first model after a big change" vs. "wait for the next revision" debate is an interesting one. On the one hand, you get the snazzy new machine (3-4x perf boost is fine by me...), on the other you take any early problems with the new design in the teeth.
The main issue with the MBP seems to be some persistent problems with the right speaker. Irrelevant to me (I use headphones), but I can see how it would bother some people.

My goal right now is to stretch my 1GHz aluminum powerbook out to at least 4 years, and then get whatever's current. Reports of compile times on the new chips are making it hard to resist though... (Adium takes 15 minutes to compile on my system. A new iMac takes 2m49s)

SailorPunk · « **Reply #15 on:** 09 Mar 2006, 09:52 »

my first computer was a mac and i loved it. it was fab for everything (except gaming of course...though i could still play diablo). the only reason i did not get a mac laptop was that i could not afford it.

i find macs to be way more intuitive than pcs, but that may be just me.

nescience · « **Reply #16 on:** 09 Mar 2006, 11:00 »

Apple smartly positioned this MacBook Pro release just as an important service offer expired on the wildly popular iBook G3 Firewire. The Logic Board Extended Service Plan ran out in mid-January this year, meaning that a number of people who had been able to send their iBooks in for free to replace fuzzed-out logic boards (the product of an obscure but wide-reaching design flaw) now had to either pay up when their machine inevitably bit it again or try to upgrade. Then comes MacWorld in early February to tell us that Intel Macs have been bumped up by six months! How convenient!

Hell, it got me to buy a MacBook Pro.

Matteh99 · « **Reply #17 on:** 09 Mar 2006, 20:17 »

Quote from: nescience

The Logic Board Extended Service Plan ran out in mid-January this year.

Not really according to apple's site you get a 3 year warrenty on your g3 iBook logic board. Since the G4 ibooks came out in around Oct of 2003 there are still a few g3's that are covered untill Oct 2006

Eric

nescience · « **Reply #18 on:** 09 Mar 2006, 20:25 »

Oh dear. It seems that they have extended it since last I actually looked at the plan. No matter, my machine finally failed for a different reason.

When my machine was first fucking up, the hard end-date for the repair plan was January 20th, 2006 or something. Well, good for those folks who still have the old G3 clunkers.

torg · « **Reply #19 on:** 10 Mar 2006, 01:14 »

Quote from: est

also: if anyone turns this into a Mac vs PC flamewar instead of being helpful i'm just gonna delete their posts or something. every time this topic comes up people try to start shit. it gets old quickly.

Quote from: edscoble

linux is not worth the hassle if you just want an easy system to run like Windows or OS X.
Linux being user friendly is a myth, sure it's free and very customisable, it's the 'customisable' the problem.
My Linux box run flawless if you don't touch the CD-ROM
My new Linux is brilliant, just don't click on the log-out button

I don't know what distrubition you are using, but I am pretty sure, that you, sir, dont have a clue, what you are talking about.
There is no problem if you know what you are doing, but that also applies to Windows and any other OS on this planet.

I haven't seen much of Mac OS X, but what I've seen makes it certainly a better choice than Windows (except for the gaming).

Personally I am using Gentoo Linux for everything except gaming and I just love it. I'd like to try a Mac at some point because of Mac OS X (preferably on a Laptop), because you get a system that's easy to use and secure but also has a decent command shell. From what I've heard so far the Intel Macs seem to be the better choice.

est · « **Reply #20 on:** 10 Mar 2006, 03:58 »

Quote from: ed scoble

post ...

Quote from: ed scoble

another post ...

Quote from: ed scoble

yet another post ...

you've been doing that a bit lately. can you please just put everything into the one post?

edscoble · « **Reply #21 on:** 10 Mar 2006, 04:51 »

Quote from: torg

Quote from: est
also: if anyone turns this into a Mac vs PC flamewar instead of being helpful i'm just gonna delete their posts or something. every time this topic comes up people try to start shit. it gets old quickly.

Quote from: edscoble

linux is not worth the hassle if you just want an easy system to run like Windows or OS X.
Linux being user friendly is a myth, sure it's free and very customisable, it's the 'customisable' the problem.
My Linux box run flawless if you don't touch the CD-ROM
My new Linux is brilliant, just don't click on the log-out button

I don't know what distrubition you are using, but I am pretty sure, that you, sir, dont have a clue, what you are talking about.
There is no problem if you know what you are doing, but that also applies to Windows and any other OS on this planet.

I haven't seen much of Mac OS X, but what I've seen makes it certainly a better choice than Windows (except for the gaming).

Personally I am using Gentoo Linux for everything except gaming and I just love it. I'd like to try a Mac at some point because of Mac OS X (preferably on a Laptop), because you get a system that's easy to use and secure but also has a decent command shell. From what I've heard so far the Intel Macs seem to be the better choice.

well, put it this way, out-of-the-box Windows and Mac are generally idea, Linux is more of an alternated than a replacement, and I have used Linux, from Ubuntu, MkLinux to Yellow Dog, clearly it's idea for professional used, not consumer.

the uni server here are a mixed of Linux and Windows 2003.

torg · « **Reply #22 on:** 11 Mar 2006, 05:19 »

There are a lot of distributions that work perfectly out-of-the-box, some are even easier to install and work better than Windows XP. it all depends (like for windows) on the hardware you're using. So please don't make generalisations. Especially as there are people that started with Linux and find Windows XP to be horribly user-unfriendly. You're making generalisations that based completely on your personal experiences and I doubt that you are qualified to judge ALL distributions with their various window managers, configurations and package management sytems.
And btw. minignome asked for opinions about Macs, so you are way off topic...

edscoble · « **Reply #23 on:** 11 Mar 2006, 06:31 »

Quote from: torg

There are a lot of distributions that work perfectly out-of-the-box, some are even easier to install and work better than Windows XP. it all depends (like for windows) on the hardware you're using. So please don't make generalisations. Especially as there are people that started with Linux and find Windows XP to be horribly user-unfriendly. You're making generalisations that based completely on your personal experiences and I doubt that you are qualified to judge ALL distributions with their various window managers, configurations and package management sytems.
And btw. minignome asked for opinions about Macs, so you are way off topic...

generalised? well right now the most user-friendly are in fact Windows and OS X, I'm not loyal to an OS like some people (especially the Mac people), what I know is the Macintosh and Windows are both awfully familiar (since they're both literally from Xerox).

A lots of regular people using computers nowadays have been at it for quite a while on Windows, they have a basic understanding of how things work, regular people do not know what it's mean to 'mount a drive' etc. as they shouldn't have to, they don't want to learn what 'home' mean in Linux and how it's differ 'My Documents'
when they met with a choice between Helix Player, CD Player, and Music Player? Does the Music Player not understand CDs? What does "Helix" mean?
it's more of an alternated than an replacement, user friendly? I put linux in my grandfather's PC and he's clearly puzzle and dislike the fact he have to 'unlearn' a lots of thing just to mess with Linux.

While Linux is perfect for running server and such, for a professional choice, Linux is the answer if you want a system to run the exact way you want it to, I have a Linux server, it's perfect for both OS (Windows and Mac) compatibility, but user-friendly? kinda a myth mate.

Valrus · « **Reply #24 on:** 11 Mar 2006, 06:37 »

Guys c'mon, they said don't turn it into a windows vs mac flame war and instead you turn it into a war that's not even related to the original topic?

edscoble · « **Reply #25 on:** 11 Mar 2006, 14:08 »

Quote from: Valrus

Guys c'mon, they said don't turn it into a windows vs mac flame war and instead you turn it into a war that's not even related to the original topic?

since it's a war? a war usually saying that PC suck and windows rock, a war usually saying accusation of something that aren't even true.

did I mentioned anything like 'I don't like Linux' or 'Windows sux" etc.? nah, I was stating the difference and why the 'user friendly' of Linux is a myth, but did I says it suck? nah, I'm an all-OS lad.

Bunnyman · « **Reply #26 on:** 12 Mar 2006, 17:12 »

Oh snap!

Linux being user friendly? Seriously, dawg, you gotta narrow that one down. KANOTIX? Hell yes. Slackware? Hell no.

SpacemanSpiff · « **Reply #27 on:** 12 Mar 2006, 18:02 »

Quote from: edscoble

A lots of regular people using computers nowadays have been at it for quite a while on Windows, they have a basic understanding of how things work, regular people do not know what it's mean to 'mount a drive' etc. as they shouldn't have to, they don't want to learn what 'home' mean in Linux and how it's differ 'My Documents'
when they met with a choice between Helix Player, CD Player, and Music Player? Does the Music Player not understand CDs? What does "Helix" mean?
it's more of an alternated than an replacement, user friendly? I put linux in my grandfather's PC and he's clearly puzzle and dislike the fact he have to 'unlearn' a lots of thing just to mess with Linux.

I don't really want to get off-topic too much here, but with the same reasoning you could say that Windows users can't switch to OS X. Every OS behaves slightly differently and Windows is not necessarily more logical.
Case in point: One of my flatmates has been using Linux exclusively for the past years but recently got interested in WoW. This guy has no clue how to use Windows beyond the simplest of things and is constantly confused and annoyed by its "illogical" GUI.

Also, Slackware is user friendly. It's the only distro I can use. Slackware rules.

As for switching from Windows to Mac: I've thought about it myself (the MacBook Pro is one nice machine) but in the end the fact that it has an EFI BIOS which means that Windows is a complete no-go and Linux is a fucking pain in the ass to install will most likely prevent me from getting one because I like playing some games every now and then.
And as of now, you can't play any games on the x86 Macs because all Mac games are PPC-optimized and the Rosetta emulation will slow them down so much that they'll either look ugly or are unplayable, at least the new games.

Oooh, huge edit!
If anybody here has an x86 Mac, could you download Darwine and test it with some classic Windows games like Starcraft maybe? Because if Wine works in OSX, the whole thing would become a lot more attractive again...

Mnementh · « **Reply #28 on:** 12 Mar 2006, 19:52 »

WoW is already universal binary, so it's native x86 on Mac. As for user friendly Linux distros, I'd have to say Ubuntu is cake to install and use.

Catfish_Man · « **Reply #29 on:** 12 Mar 2006, 20:34 »

Quote from: SpacemanSpiff

Oooh, huge edit!
If anybody here has an x86 Mac, could you download Darwine and test it with some classic Windows games like Starcraft maybe? Because if Wine works in OSX, the whole thing would become a lot more attractive again...

I've seen pics of WinZip and Mine Sweeper running... what else do you need?

pro_ · « **Reply #30 on:** 13 Mar 2006, 00:21 »

starcraft is native to macos, sure you could test it, but why go throught the trouble of a full install when you could test it just as easily with minesweeper?

SpacemanSpiff · « **Reply #31 on:** 13 Mar 2006, 07:45 »

Starcraft's native? I haven't paid a lot of attention apparently.
That leaves me with the entire Homeworld series (I know there are Mac ports, but they're PPC only, at least HW2), SWINE and a couple of others.
Does anybody feel like trying it? SWINE is available as a full, legal download if you need a copy of any of these games...

And personally, I couldn't use Ubuntu for more than 2 minutes or my head would have exploded with rage. I've never seen a distro that's so hard to customize. Also: No root, for Christ's sake! No root!

edscoble · « **Reply #32 on:** 13 Mar 2006, 08:22 »

Quote from: SpacemanSpiff

As for switching from Windows to Mac: I've thought about it myself (the MacBook Pro is one nice machine) but in the end the fact that it has an EFI BIOS which means that Windows is a complete no-go...

actually Vista will run on the new Intel Mac because it can boot under EFI, so problem solved.

Windows Vista and OS X running on an Intel machine would be my dream.

nihilist · « **Reply #33 on:** 13 Mar 2006, 08:38 »

I'm not sure where you get your information from, edscoble, but it's looking like a no-go. Vista won't support EFI 1.1, which MacTels use. It will, however, support EFI 2.1 at a later date. Apple decided to use EFI 1.1 because 2.x won't be ready for a while yet. All other PC companies are going to use EFI 2.1. So Apple has run itself up an evolutionary dead-end, and locked out Windows.

Luke · « **Reply #34 on:** 13 Mar 2006, 19:17 »

Can I ask just one thing - why is the issue always referred to as "PC vs. Mac"? Since when is a Mac not a Personal Computer?

*doesn't have much else to say on the subject*

Bastardous Bassist · « **Reply #35 on:** 13 Mar 2006, 19:29 »

I'm going to have to agree with you there, Luke.

Anyways, I want to get a Mac at some point. My first computer was... Well, my first computer was a Commodore 64, but my second and third computers were Macs. As a result, their operating systems just make more sense to me. A lot of people who try it out say that Macs just end up being easier than Windows machines, but I can't speak on their experience.

My next box, however, will most definitely be a gaming machine, which means Windows. I'm not able to make these new games look as pretty as I'd like, which means it's time for a new computer. I'm playing a bunch of gigs, though, and should be making a reasonable amount of money. When I find out how much I have, I'll be back asking you more knowledgable people what hardware I should pick up.

Ozymandias · « **Reply #36 on:** 13 Mar 2006, 19:36 »

PC has long been a synonym for an IBM-compatible computer, ever since the 80s when this debate first started and IBM created the "PC" moniker.

Here's my opinion on Apple vs. PC:

Apples are very stable, pretty computers that are a bit overpriced for their power. The OS is designed for both a very user-friendly interface and hiding as much of the inner working as possible from the user. It's good for lots of artistic endeavors and multitasking on the fly. However, whenever something goes wrong, it goes wrong in a big way and errors tend to be fatal and the out-of-the-box philosophy causes a lack of upgradability.

PCs aren't as stable, but are extremely utilitarian. They can do anything you want because they're designed to do anything you want. They are fully upgradable and completely modular. However the price of this is that errors are a lot more common, so programs crashing happens quite a bit, though they rarely take the entire computer with them. Plus, you generally have to deal with Microsoft in your dealings which means lots more susceptability to viruses and security holes.

In the end, it always depend son what you want. If you use your computer just to surf the web, write papers, listen to music, etc. then a Mac is definitely a viable choice. If you enjoy gaming and having a computer that can conform to your individual needs, a PC is far superior.

In my dealings(I work in a computer lab with both), I far prefer PCs. Especially since I sometimes have to fix the darn things and a Mac is hell on earth to try to fix, though 'fixing' a PC is generally a temporary solution that doesn't fully fix the problem or symptoms.

est · « **Reply #37 on:** 13 Mar 2006, 20:37 »

pretty much everything that needs to be said has been said here. closing this so that it doesn't degenerate as all the others tend to do

Mnementh · « **Reply #38 on:** 13 Mar 2006, 21:06 »

But I need advice on how to put more gigabytes in my MACS.

THESE FORUMS NOW CLOSED (read only)

Author Topic: considering switching from PC to a Mac (Read 10810 times)

minignome

minignome

nihilist

the tree

minignome

Matteh99

edscoble

edscoble

edscoble

nescience

Matteh99

nescience

torg

edscoble

torg

edscoble

edscoble

Bunnyman

SpacemanSpiff

Mnementh

SpacemanSpiff

edscoble

nihilist

Luke

Mnementh