Roustan wrote:
Once you go Mac, you never go Back...

This is true.  Been with MAC since their "performa series".  Had a windows laptop...it collected dust and I ended up selling it.

robert christopher wrote:
i dont pretend to be computer literate, so all i can say is my pc crashed all the time, i loaded and un- loaded, then re-loaded software all the time. my mac has not crashed in 3 years, never had to reload anything. very simple, just like me.

W.G. Rowland wrote:
I think you just summed up Mac's appeal better than Steve Job's advertising department or I ever will..

Mac, the computer for people who don't get it, but want to feel "in the know."

And dammit, that's NOT a bad thing..  (It's just not something to feel superior about, either..)

I see it more as 'the computer who don't want to spend quite as much time paying attention to what's in the box just to keep the box working'.

I use both. I've been in software for over 20 years, and have used many of the operating systems out there. I've also spent a lot of time dealing with a variety of desktop issues, from the terminal days (VT-100 anyone?) through current desktop and laptop systems to render farms of unix boxes.

The ones which required the least attention in order to keep functioning well were Macs.

Not "needed no attention to work perfectly", but needed less. Enough less that it was cheaper from an ROI standpoint to only use Macs for my home use. (My Windows machines were dedicated to whatever project or contract I was working on, and were restored to out-of-the-box status before each project started.)

Daguerre wrote:
The strength of the Macplatform is not the weak Intel processors that they are using (and you are right, that in going to Intel, the Mac has compromised its Photoshop performance to the level of the high end PC), but the power of the OS.  OSX is a fantastic operatiing system that has powerful features not found in Windows machines.

Tim Baker wrote:
Such as?  And will these also be absent from Vistas?

One feature which Vista does have is absent from OS X: hardware-enforced DRM.

While I'm entirely in favor of protecting the rights of creators, crippling the hardware with operating-system-level hardware queries doesn't seem like an intelligent way to accomplish it: performance and stability is compromised. (Well, you could replace all your hardware--monitors, drives, printers, etc. and replace them with compliant alternatives--if and when they become available.)

Would you like your printing to become erratic or hang because you're listening to some music or watching a video? Or have other drivers hang for that same reason?

Aaron S wrote:
On a Mac I can run:

Windows Programs
Mac Programs
UNIX Programs

On a PC I can run:

Windows Programs

That about sums it up for me, although I have one of each set up.

You can also run Linux on your PC.

Prodigal M wrote:
Start with comparable Mac and PC, erase the hard drives. You have a poster to layout using Adobe CS2, with text, bitmaps and vector art. There is a file you must download off the internet to complete the assignment. You must print a final from a .pdf file. All installation discs will be provided. I get the Mac, you take the PC. I will be walking in the sunshine by the lake well before you even get to the part where you try to figure out why your drivers don't work! By the way, have been using BOTH at work for 10 years. I have two Macs at home and if somebody GAVE me a PC, I would put it up on ebay. Other than that, I agree with you (sort of). Plus, iTunes works WAY better on a Mac, you can do things with it that PCs only dream of (yes, I know it's Apple software, why use anything else?)

I can top that theoretical deadline you give us.  I build and upgrade PCs all the time and once I decided to upgrade my PC:  new motherboard, cpu and video card.  I had my PC totally ripped apart when the artistic director of the dance company I do work for called.  She had a list of changes to a 20 minute video I was working on for an upcoming concert and she needed a copy of it for rehearsal in FOUR HOURS!  She detected an, "Aw crap!" undertone to my voice and asked if anything was wrong.  Naturally, I said no, everything was under control.  It was.  The motherboard and CPU went in without a hitch - I decided to put the old video card back in, just in case.  The computer booted up fine and I installed the chipset drivers.  Then I decided to go for it and installed the video card and its drivers.  I made the editing changes in Adobe Premiere, rendered the video, then exported it to DV and burned a copy on DVD with time to spare.  I'm guessing a Mac user would have been curled up naked in the shower rocking and weeping like a Lifetime television rape victim if faced with a situation like that.

On a blank hard drive, it takes about 50 minutes to install Windows XP and the motherboard manufacturer's CD (chipset drivers, built in ethernet, etc).  Unless the PC is filled with brand new, bleeding edge technology, the generic drivers Windows installs for some hardware (printers, scanners, drawing tablet) can get you up and working right away.  You can install the hardware manufacturer's drivers later.  As I have the installation disks for CS2, Adobe Type Manager and Type Library, Illustrator and Acrobat, I would be up and running with your theoretical job in a little over an hour.  BTW, the only reason you can't legally run OSX on a Windows PC is that the folks at Apple won't allow it.  Note that I said "legally".  Hehe...

I found out a long time ago that it doesn't pay to cut corners when building PCs.  The one I am currently using has an AMD dual core processor, 2 gigs of RAM, top of the line motherboard, PCIe video card, an 160 gig boot drive and a 300 gig slave drive used to hold video files during editing, DVD burner and an ancient internal Zip 250 drive that I keep around for laughs (hard to believe I once thought that I'd never need more than a few Zip disks to hold all my stuff) -- yet it was cheaper to build than a comparably featured Mac or even a "canned" PC from Dell or HP. 

I can't tell you the last time I had Windows go toes up on me.  Constantly crashing PCs seem to be a figment of Mac users imagination.  In ten years online I have had one virus that was fairly easily cleaned up (to be honest, I have seen other people's PC so infested with crap, the only answer was to format and reinstall everything).  Spyware is not that big a deal if you use protective software and keep it updated -- the price of having the software that runs most of the world's computers is that you are a bigger target.  Let Apple gain a toehold in home computing and see what happens.


iTunes -- I don't need no steenking iTunes!  I use a Creative Zen Vision M.  The black one.

Doug


The biggest difference between PC and Mac users is that PC users don't care if you use a Mac.

Kevin Connery wrote:
You can also run Linux on your PC.

Yes, however, it is much easier to not have to install another OS.

DHayes Photography wrote:
The biggest difference between PC and Mac users is that PC users don't care if you use a Mac.

Yes, because I've never ever heard PC users rag on Mac users.


Never!

Hamza wrote:
Steve Jobs said for many years, "Intel is the enemy, Intel is the enemy, (Steve Jobs got greedy), Intel is our friend!

Actually your confused, it wasn't Intel, it was IBM that Steve Jobs had a beef about.  When Apple started as a computer company, their main competitor was IBM.

Your confusion may stem from Apple's advertising when the G3 first came out.  Remember the TV commercial with the snail carrying the Intel processor on it's back?  That was the first public smackdown Apple made towards Intel.  And with due respect, the G3 was a far superior processor compared to what Intel was offering at the time.

Intel got all of it's computer vendors to display and mention it's name for any advertising it's vendors did.  This wasn't to compete against Apple, it was to compete against AMD.  AMD was and still is Intel's chief rival.  Apple more than likely felt it needed to toot it's processor horn because consumers were wondering where the "Intel Inside" was.

The G3 was introduced before Steve Jobs came back to Apple.  He had another computer company he was running at the time called Next.  Next computers ran on Intel processors.

Brian Diaz wrote:
Here's my major complaint about Apple:

They don't give you a right mouse button standard, and on a laptop, standard is the only option you have (aside from an external mouse).

On the left is a Mac of some sort.  There are a lot that look just like this.  On the right is my laptop's touchpad.  Notice that the right button is worn much more than the right button because I use it so much.



For that reason alone, I will not purchase a Mac.  I will not support such a company that ignores its customers needs so flagrantly.

If you really want to right click on a Apple laptop, and you only want to do so using ONLY the track-pad, and your willing to READ THE INSTRUCTIONS THAT CAME WITH YOUR COMPUTER, you would find that you can right-click by taping with two fingers on the track-pad or by placing two fingers on the track-pad and then click the track-pad button with your thumb.

The control key on the Apple keyboard has always worked as a right click button.

The idea here is simplicity.  This is why the one button mouse has lived for so long on the Mac platform.

Why introduce complexities that add to the cost of manufacturing, disrupt the design of the hardware and diminish the user experience.

90% (my guesstimate) of computer users don't want to be overwhelmed by something that the majority of them feel like they'll never be able to understand.  They just want it to work and do it's job so they can go home.  I'll wager that the majority of users will never use the right click on a PC or the control key on a Mac.

Brian Diaz wrote:
Here's my major complaint about Apple:

They don't give you a right mouse button standard, and on a laptop, standard is the only option you have (aside from an external mouse).

On the left is a Mac of some sort.  There are a lot that look just like this.  On the right is my laptop's touchpad.  Notice that the right button is worn much more than the right button because I use it so much.



For that reason alone, I will not purchase a Mac.  I will not support such a company that ignores its customers needs so flagrantly.

right-click on mac = tap the pad with two fingers

or..

keep one finger on the pad and click the button..

or..

CTRL+Click

not to mention, two-finger scrolling on the trackpad.

DHayes Photography wrote:
I can top that theoretical deadline you give us.  I build and upgrade PCs all the time and once I decided to upgrade my PC:  new motherboard, cpu and video card.  I had my PC totally ripped apart when the artistic director of the dance company I do work for called.  She had a list of changes to a 20 minute video I was working on for an upcoming concert and she needed a copy of it for rehearsal in FOUR HOURS!  She detected an, "Aw crap!" undertone to my voice and asked if anything was wrong.  Naturally, I said no, everything was under control.  It was.  The motherboard and CPU went in without a hitch - I decided to put the old video card back in, just in case.  The computer booted up fine and I installed the chipset drivers.  Then I decided to go for it and installed the video card and its drivers.  I made the editing changes in Adobe Premiere, rendered the video, then exported it to DV and burned a copy on DVD with time to spare.  I'm guessing a Mac user would have been curled up naked in the shower rocking and weeping like a Lifetime television rape victim if faced with a situation like that.

On a blank hard drive, it takes about 50 minutes to install Windows XP and the motherboard manufacturer's CD (chipset drivers, built in ethernet, etc).  Unless the PC is filled with brand new, bleeding edge technology, the generic drivers Windows installs for some hardware (printers, scanners, drawing tablet) can get you up and working right away.  You can install the hardware manufacturer's drivers later.  As I have the installation disks for CS2, Adobe Type Manager and Type Library, Illustrator and Acrobat, I would be up and running with your theoretical job in a little over an hour.  BTW, the only reason you can't legally run OSX on a Windows PC is that the folks at Apple won't allow it.  Note that I said "legally".  Hehe...

I found out a long time ago that it doesn't pay to cut corners when building PCs.  The one I am currently using has an AMD dual core processor, 2 gigs of RAM, top of the line motherboard, PCIe video card, an 160 gig boot drive and a 300 gig slave drive used to hold video files during editing, DVD burner and an ancient internal Zip 250 drive that I keep around for laughs (hard to believe I once thought that I'd never need more than a few Zip disks to hold all my stuff) -- yet it was cheaper to build than a comparably featured Mac or even a "canned" PC from Dell or HP. 

I can't tell you the last time I had Windows go toes up on me.  Constantly crashing PCs seem to be a figment of Mac users imagination.  In ten years online I have had one virus that was fairly easily cleaned up (to be honest, I have seen other people's PC so infested with crap, the only answer was to format and reinstall everything).  Spyware is not that big a deal if you use protective software and keep it updated -- the price of having the software that runs most of the world's computers is that you are a bigger target.  Let Apple gain a toehold in home computing and see what happens.


iTunes -- I don't need no steenking iTunes!  I use a Creative Zen Vision M.  The black one.

Doug


The biggest difference between PC and Mac users is that PC users don't care if you use a Mac.

off topic: why the heck did they rip your computer apart??

Robert Olding wrote:
Actually your confused, it wasn't Intel, it was IBM that Steve Jobs had a beef about.  When Apple started as a computer company, their main competitor was IBM.

Your confusion may stem from Apple's advertising when the G3 first came out.  Remember the TV commercial with the snail carrying the Intel processor on it's back?  That was the first public smackdown Apple made towards Intel.  And with due respect, the G3 was a far superior processor compared to what Intel was offering at the time.

Intel got all of it's computer vendors to display and mention it's name for any advertising it's vendors did.  This wasn't to compete against Apple, it was to compete against AMD.  AMD was and still is Intel's chief rival.  Apple more than likely felt it needed to toot it's processor horn because consumers were wondering where the "Intel Inside" was.

The G3 was introduced before Steve Jobs came back to Apple.  He had another computer company he was running at the time called Next.  Next computers ran on Intel processors.

Just a couple of corrections--

NeXT computers were Motorola/PPC based systems.

NeXTSTEP 486 was the Intel port of the OS.

Jobs returned to Apple in 1996 during the reign of the PowerMac 9600.

The G3 was 1998.

DHayes Photography wrote:
I can top that theoretical deadline you give us.  I build and upgrade PCs all the time and once I decided to upgrade my PC:  new motherboard, cpu and video card.  I had my PC totally ripped apart when the artistic director of the dance company I do work for called.  She had a list of changes to a 20 minute video I was working on for an upcoming concert and she needed a copy of it for rehearsal in FOUR HOURS!  She detected an, "Aw crap!" undertone to my voice and asked if anything was wrong.  Naturally, I said no, everything was under control.  It was.  The motherboard and CPU went in without a hitch - I decided to put the old video card back in, just in case.  The computer booted up fine and I installed the chipset drivers.  Then I decided to go for it and installed the video card and its drivers.  I made the editing changes in Adobe Premiere, rendered the video, then exported it to DV and burned a copy on DVD with time to spare.  I'm guessing a Mac user would have been curled up naked in the shower rocking and weeping like a Lifetime television rape victim if faced with a situation like that...

I can't tell you the last time I had Windows go toes up on me.  Constantly crashing PCs seem to be a figment of Mac users imagination...

It doesn't seem completely wise to take down your primary workstation to rebuild it while the 'open' sign still hangs in your virtual window.

In any case, neither my PC's or my Macs have crashed much over the years.  I believe that either platform is stable if set up & used correctly.  It is fair to say that in my experience, I've had to take much more care when considering which apps or updates or devices to install on my PC systems than I did my Mac systems.

I also believe that the majority of users will not be ripping their machines apart to upgrade (let alone during business hours), nor would they know how to.  This is a consideration of a reatively small, but very energetic group of PC enthusiists.  And having built quite a few high dollar PCs myself, I am one of them.

This topic isn't really about who can build a pc faster, but, under which circumstances each platform is the wiser choice.

If you feel the need to pull your imaging workstation apart during the time a client may call with a job, then I am inclined to agree with you.  Under this circumstance, the PC is the way to go! 

UIPHOTOS wrote:
MAC's are the only true mutli tasking machines, there is not a pc on the planet that does..

I would genuinely be interested to see some white papers, specs, etc. to back this up. Last I checked, all processors multi-task. It is fundamental to the functionality of a kernel. The efficiency with which a given processor architecture does it (multi-task) is why more than one architecture exists, what drives the competition, and what has given rise to the multi-core chips. Until the advent of multi-core architectures, only SMP systems were capable of multi-processing..which is a similar, but slightly different beast. Regardless, whether you have one processor or 20, a MAC/PC/Sun/HP machine, all processors multi-task.

For the record, my editing station is a PC, but I am not a fanboy. I am a UNIX admin by trade and think that PCs suck ass compared to UNIX based OS (and yes, I know that OS X is based off of FreeBSD). My only reason for not going MAC, aside from cost, is that I have my learning plate full at the moment and I think that going to a new OS would all but bring me to a crawl. And being a UNIX guy at heart, I am afraid that I would become addicted

UIPHOTOS wrote:
MAC's are the only true mutli tasking machines, there is not a pc on the planet that does..

Not sure what you're smokin', but..

My PC multi-tasks just fine thank you very much.  Dual-Core AMD FX-60. I can run Photoshop on one core and run Illustrator or anything else on the other core, AT THE SAME TIME, thus the definition of mukti-tasking and does so without complaining.

DHayes Photography wrote:

I can top that theoretical deadline you give us.  I build and upgrade PCs all the time and once I decided to upgrade my PC:  new motherboard, cpu and video card.  I had my PC totally ripped apart when the artistic director of the dance company I do work for called.  She had a list of changes to a 20 minute video I was working on for an upcoming concert and she needed a copy of it for rehearsal in FOUR HOURS!  She detected an, "Aw crap!" undertone to my voice and asked if anything was wrong.  Naturally, I said no, everything was under control.  It was.  The motherboard and CPU went in without a hitch - I decided to put the old video card back in, just in case.  The computer booted up fine and I installed the chipset drivers.  Then I decided to go for it and installed the video card and its drivers.  I made the editing changes in Adobe Premiere, rendered the video, then exported it to DV and burned a copy on DVD with time to spare.  I'm guessing a Mac user would have been curled up naked in the shower rocking and weeping like a Lifetime television rape victim if faced with a situation like that.

On a blank hard drive, it takes about 50 minutes to install Windows XP and the motherboard manufacturer's CD (chipset drivers, built in ethernet, etc).  Unless the PC is filled with brand new, bleeding edge technology, the generic drivers Windows installs for some hardware (printers, scanners, drawing tablet) can get you up and working right away.  You can install the hardware manufacturer's drivers later.  As I have the installation disks for CS2, Adobe Type Manager and Type Library, Illustrator and Acrobat, I would be up and running with your theoretical job in a little over an hour.  BTW, the only reason you can't legally run OSX on a Windows PC is that the folks at Apple won't allow it.  Note that I said "legally".  Hehe...

I found out a long time ago that it doesn't pay to cut corners when building PCs.  The one I am currently using has an AMD dual core processor, 2 gigs of RAM, top of the line motherboard, PCIe video card, an 160 gig boot drive and a 300 gig slave drive used to hold video files during editing, DVD burner and an ancient internal Zip 250 drive that I keep around for laughs (hard to believe I once thought that I'd never need more than a few Zip disks to hold all my stuff) -- yet it was cheaper to build than a comparably featured Mac or even a "canned" PC from Dell or HP. 

I can't tell you the last time I had Windows go toes up on me.  Constantly crashing PCs seem to be a figment of Mac users imagination.  In ten years online I have had one virus that was fairly easily cleaned up (to be honest, I have seen other people's PC so infested with crap, the only answer was to format and reinstall everything).  Spyware is not that big a deal if you use protective software and keep it updated -- the price of having the software that runs most of the world's computers is that you are a bigger target.  Let Apple gain a toehold in home computing and see what happens.


iTunes -- I don't need no steenking iTunes!  I use a Creative Zen Vision M.  The black one.

Doug


The biggest difference between PC and Mac users is that PC users don't care if you use a Mac.

All well and good for the chosen few that tinker with computers. It is a noble art to be sure. Only so many hours in a day though so I must choose my battles. I would rather use my computer than take it apart and put it back together. I have two Macs at home, neither has ever caused me any grief. I have access to several Macs at work and could come in after my shift to use them if need be. A redundant system is a reliable system. If I am going to tinker it will be doing something I find fun in, like making the intonation on my 12 string guitar PERFECT at both ends of the string. Keep up the good work, guys like me need guys like you! I will continue to use Macs, have fun with your PC. It isn't the PC itself that I don't prefer, a plastic box is a plastic box. Macs might be prettier but I do not use them because they are pretty. I use them because most of my computer-related problems at work involve Microsoft software and the only cure for me is avoidance. You will not find Billy G's code on my plastic box! I have had crashes on Macs before but my favorite all time crash was the time the keyboard stopped working on the WinTel box I was using and then a prompt came onscreen informing me that the keyboard was not working and telling me what string of charectors to type in on my non-working keyboard to fix the problem!!!!! Some kind of sick joke?

UIPHOTOS wrote:
MAC's are the only true mutli tasking machines, there is not a pc on the planet that does..

Now I am all about the Mac, but Windows machines will task just fine for their purposes.  This is not a selling point for an average user.  It does not matter if tasking is hardware of software based.  It only matters if it works for the user.

Robert Olding wrote:
The idea here is simplicity.  This is why the one button mouse has lived for so long on the Mac platform.

Why introduce complexities that add to the cost of manufacturing, disrupt the design of the hardware and diminish the user experience.

Because it only "enhances" the user experience for inexperienced users, and slows down experienced ones?

Robert Olding wrote:
90% (my guesstimate) of computer users don't want to be overwhelmed by something that the majority of them feel like they'll never be able to understand.  They just want it to work and do it's job so they can go home.  I'll wager that the majority of users will never use the right click on a PC or the control key on a Mac.

Which means that the design limits the usability for the 10% most demanding users (using your guesstimate).

That probably explains why almost all of my Mac-using clients and friends use multi-button mice and tablets.

DHayes Photography wrote:
I can top that theoretical deadline you give us. I build and upgrade PCs all the time and once I decided to upgrade my PC:  new motherboard, cpu and video card.
[...]
I'm guessing a Mac user would have been curled up naked in the shower rocking and weeping like a Lifetime television rape victim if faced with a situation like that.

And so would a typical PC user.

Your comparison is cherry-picking; someone who has spent the time and effort to build and upgrade PCs all the time is not a typical computer user, no matter what system they end up using.

If you enjoy dabbling with the box, ignoring how much time you're spending doing it on a constant basis is fine--it just gets turned into 'hobby time'--but it still has an impact in terms of hours used during the day. As does the time spent learning how to fix, build, upgrade, maintain, etc. If you're being paid for that knowledge, that's great, but if your goal is to accomplish tasks with your computer instead of performing tasks to keep it running, ignoring those costs is specious.

Xtreme Audrey wrote:
I thought this was a thread about makeup.

I had owned PCs for 7 years.  I now use my husband's Mac, and cannot believe how much better they are.  I groan when I have to use my family's PCs.

Tell me about it.
I moved into the world of Mac about three years ago
and never plan on moving again.

Robert

Xtreme Audrey wrote:
I thought this was a thread about makeup.

I had owned PCs for 7 years.  I now use my husband's Mac, and cannot believe how much better they are.  I groan when I have to use my family's PCs.

Why is that?

Hamza wrote:

Unless you are using 'APPLE' Programs (Aperture, Final Cut Pro, etc..), how is this statement even valid?  Mac is 'NOT' the only computer company using the new Pentium 2 Duo Chip, it's just the most expensive!  The Mac's don't have the PCMCIA card to go mobile nationwide wireless!

You bring up price.. Just curious, and I'm taking a shot in the dark, but what type of car do you drive?? 

I've been using a Mac for 10 years and have never had an internet problem. And thus far I haven't found anything a PC can do that I can't do on my Mac. Oh yea, there is something, I don't have to keep hitting control-alt-delete because the damn thing crashed..

Keith aka Wolfie wrote:
...Oh yea, there is something, I don't have to keep hitting control-alt-delete because the damn thing crashed..

No, but many have had plenty of experiences hitting Command-Option-Escape.

Mark Heaps wrote:
...Mac's are more expensive that's true!

Actually, the low-end PCs are cheaper than the low-end Macs, but the high end PCs are dramatically more expensive than the high end Macs, similarly configured.

Kristina Mariah wrote:
this is interesting..........

not really.

Kevin Connery wrote:
If you enjoy dabbling with the box, ignoring how much time you're spending doing it on a constant basis is fine--it just gets turned into 'hobby time'--but it still has an impact in terms of hours used during the day. As does the time spent learning how to fix, build, upgrade, maintain, etc. If you're being paid for that knowledge, that's great, but if your goal is to accomplish tasks with your computer instead of performing tasks to keep it running, ignoring those costs is specious.

I do it because I can.  Give me a box of parts and an empty case and I can have a working computer in a couple of hours.  Years ago I decided I'd learn to "do it myself" after getting ripped off by a computer repair shop and have never looked back.  I don't spend countless hours tinkering.  The last upgrade I did was installing a new video card.  Popping open the case, pulling the old card and putting in the new one, closing the case, installing the new drivers and a nice app that came with it (a video encoder that uses the GPU to get the job done faster than using the CPU) -- took 15 minutes, tops.  About three months before the video card upgrade I put in a new power supply -- again, about 15 minutes.  The last major upgrade was around Christmas of last year when I installed a new dual core CPU, motherboard and power supply (I violated my own rule #1 and purchased a no name, actually store brand, power supply -- that's why I eventually had to replace it).  That took about an hour or so, mainly screwing the board and PS into a case obviously designed to be serviced by child labor in some third world sweat shop. 

The video editing deadline came out of the blue.  I figured I had some down time as the concert was more than a week away and so decided to go ahead with the upgrades which I had been thinking of doing for some time.  I figured wrong.  My friend does have a habit of calling with last second deadlines and I have since learned not to do any tinkering until all the work is done.  That time she caught me with my PC down.

Doug

Hamza wrote:

Try uncompressing a Ram file or playing an old Real Video file...

The ONLY reason I use the MAC is Final Cut HD Studio!  Been using FCP for almost 10 years now, actually was one of the Original Beta Testers back in the day.  If it wasn't for that little editing program, there wouldn't be any reason for me to use a Mac today.

I would love to be able to get the new Nationwide Wireless Internet all the phone companies offer, but it's ONLY available if you have a PCMCIA card slot.  Mac 'HAD' it on the old G4 MacBook Pro's, but not on the new ones...bad move on Mac's part.

Other than APPLE programs, what can you do on a MAC that you can't do on a PC?

The reason there's no PCMCIA slot on the MacBook Pro is that Apple is using the new PCMCIA Express34 slot, 2.5  times faster and half the size of the older technology.

Jay Farrell wrote:
no viruses or spyware

LOL.That’s because the new generation has grew up with window based systems and that’s all they know how to hack now. My first computer was a Apple in 1988. Before the Windows revolution and takeover. Virus’s were plentiful and crashes daily. You can bet your best dollar if MAC was a better known system if would have more viruses written for it. And yes, MAC is susceptible to viruses just like Windows. All it takes is someone who knows the program language…

Robert Olding wrote:

Actually your confused, it wasn't Intel, it was IBM that Steve Jobs had a beef about.  When Apple started as a computer company, their main competitor was IBM.

Your confusion may stem from Apple's advertising when the G3 first came out.  Remember the TV commercial with the snail carrying the Intel processor on it's back?  That was the first public smackdown Apple made towards Intel.  And with due respect, the G3 was a far superior processor compared to what Intel was offering at the time.

Intel got all of it's computer vendors to display and mention it's name for any advertising it's vendors did.  This wasn't to compete against Apple, it was to compete against AMD.  AMD was and still is Intel's chief rival.  Apple more than likely felt it needed to toot it's processor horn because consumers were wondering where the "Intel Inside" was.

The G3 was introduced before Steve Jobs came back to Apple.  He had another computer company he was running at the time called Next.  Next computers ran on Intel processors.

Let's clear up the confusion. When Apple started as a company IBM was NOT their main competitor. It would be four years before IBM had personal computer product.

Also, the NeXT machines did not run on Intel processors, they ran on Motorola.  Although the company did do an Intel port of the NextStep OS they were out of the hardware business  at that point.

JM Dean wrote:

LOL.That’s because the new generation has grew up with window based systems and that’s all they know how to hack now. My first computer was a Apple in 1988. Before the Windows revolution and takeover. Virus’s were plentiful and crashes daily. You can bet your best dollar if MAC was a better known system if would have more viruses written for it. And yes, MAC is susceptible to viruses just like Windows. All it takes is someone who knows the program language…

The programming language for the Mac is UNIX. Quite ubiquitous and yet not many viruses. Just not enough Mac's out there for the virus writers to write a virus for. After all virus writers are after notoriety!!

I use both and the Mac is best overall!!

Kevin Connery wrote:

Robert Olding wrote:
The idea here is simplicity.  This is why the one button mouse has lived for so long on the Mac platform.

Why introduce complexities that add to the cost of manufacturing, disrupt the design of the hardware and diminish the user experience.

Because it only "enhances" the user experience for inexperienced users, and slows down experienced ones?


Which means that the design limits the usability for the 10% most demanding users (using your guesstimate).

That probably explains why almost all of my Mac-using clients and friends use multi-button mice and tablets.