Daguerre wrote:

Don't bring that kick-ass system into this.

C-64? Pleeeaasse.... Vic 20 or even a Timex X-50! Beat THAT!

Daguerre wrote:

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.

I agree.. it is about the end user when the rubber meets the road and whether or not their needs are met..

I just find it funny that even after posting references to back up what I said, there are those who still choose to believe what they want..  LOL

Gaylord Hill wrote:

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!!

Viruses are mainly written in visual basic, the same programming language windows apps are based on so the loopholes are inherent to every windows based application. We learned about those while I was trying not to sleep thru my C++ class.. So they get bit by the hand that feeds them.. funny how that works..

richard boswell wrote:
actually in my experience, most high time computer users use keypad shortcuts quite more than multiple mouse buttons, especially in retouching, where most high time users are on a tablet not a mouse anyway.  i suspect that if you took a high time pc user, and a high time mac user, set them to the same p-shop task, on equally fast machines.  with the set ups each user preferred.  there would be very little difference in productivity. 
however if you put two new users in front of two machines, one mac and one p.c. i would bet the mac persons productivity would eclipse the new p.c. users. 
macs are loved by people who do computer work but don't have the time or interest to be computer people. 

Microsoft never has understood grace and simplicity the way apple has. 

imo, no offense to anyone.

rich

The OPTION/COMMAND/CONTROL keys are the most underrated feature on the mac!

on my tablet, there are FWD/BACK buttons... the Pen itself has two buttons - I set one to "SPACE" and the other one to "ENTER".  Most professionals that sit with me can't figure out how I run through so many dialog boxes so fast.

From my personal point of view, the native keyboard layout on a mac is enough reason to pay the difference. That might not be the case for the average MM photographer. But as a graphic designer, animator and video production assistant, I definately think its worth it.

Gaylord Hill wrote:

The programming language for the Mac is UNIX. Quite ubiquitous and yet not many viruses...

Apple provides a customized/optimized GNU CC, with backends for C, C++, Objective-C and Objective-C++. For Java, two compilers are included: javac and IBM's jikes. Compilers for many other languages are available either precompiled (such as the XL Fortran Advanced Compiler from IBM), or can be compiled from source, which is not any harder in general than compiling the same source on, say, Linux or FreeBSD. The same goes for development libraries - it should be easy to compile many open source platform-independent / multi-platform libraries from source on OS X. Many important libraries and APIs are either included with Mac OS X, or are readily available (Gtk/Gtk++, Java, OpenGL, Qt, QuickTime, Tcl/Tk, X11R6). The system comes with several special purpose (and/or optimized) libraries as well, such as for Numerical Computing and Image processing (BLAS, vBigNum, vDSP, vImage, LAPACK, vMathLib, etc.)

A number of scripting languages are included in Mac OS X, such as AppleScript (including the AppleScript Studio IDE), Perl (Mac OS X "Panther" has perl 5.8.1), PHP, Python (Panther has python 2.3, with bindings to CoreGraphics), Tcl, and Ruby. Mac OS X also supports the Open Scripting Architecture (OSA), using which it is possible to get JavaScript (a port of Mozilla JavaScript) in the form of an OSA component. You can get support for more languages (Lisp, Scheme, ...) via Fink, and it should be straightforward to compile most of them from source, if desired. bash, tcsh, and zsh are the *nix shells included.

Just in case anyone was wondering...

Daguerre wrote:
Don't bring that kick-ass system into this.

UCPhotog wrote:
C-64? Pleeeaasse.... Vic 20 or even a Timex X-50! Beat THAT!

Man, I wouldn't even try!

Mark Sebastian wrote:
The OPTION/COMMAND/CONTROL keys are the most underrated feature on the mac!

We have left hands for a reason...  But i do like my 3 button mac mouse.

Perfect Pixels wrote:
I use a MAC at work exclusively (graphic designer).  I use PC's at home.  I have been build my own PC's for 7 years now and love the that I can build what I want not what someone else thinks I should have.

As an earlier poster said, MAC's are not very good on the internet as some online apps and such simply aren't written for the MAC.  After Internet Explorer 5, I have had varying degrees of success surfing the internet.  Safari is a complete joke. Firefox is usable but online videos are another matter.

Since Apple went to a UNIX based OS, it has been fairly problematic.  Hardcore MAC users will understand permissions problems, inferior PDF handling in Quark and other weirdness.  I could write a book on how much Apple forced an entire industry to change all of its coding to write new software twice in the last 5 years. Personally it makes me very cranky.

Keep in mind that Microsoft does similar things but the effect is not seen for at least 2 OS changes down the road. i.e., Win 98 will work on XP and XP wiil work on Vista, but Win 98 may be twitchy on Vista. Conversly classic mode on the MAC is paramount to insanity most of the time and it took 18 months for Adobe to rewrite their software so it would be MAC Intel native. (I know that's a CPU change and not an OS change but still,  GRRRR!)

The only thing I would use a MAC for at home is if I started doing alot of freelance desktop publishing/production work.  I would do all the type, layout and output work on the MAC and do all the graphics work on the PC.

The only drawback to the PC I have is there is a 2GB functional limit on system memory.  XP says it will handle 4GB, but it doesn't.  Vista has changed that, but I will not use Vista for at least a year.

Anyway, the truth of the matter is buy what you like and based on what you will be doing primarily.  If you want the best internet/business/gaming platform buy a PC.

If you want the best graphical/video production platform, buy a MAC.

EDITED

By your very statements I can tell you haven't used a Mac in AT LEAST 2-3 YEARS. It's been that long since ANY MAC shipped with 'classic' (OS/9 for non-mac heads). That was OS 10.2. OS 10.4 is the current build of the OS and it's pushing 15-18 months at this point with OS 10.5 due by spring if not sooner.  The only people who use classic mode are people who use software by companies that don't exist anymore or stopped making a particular application for the mac (funny how everyone is starting to come back now).

Safari doesn't work well on some websites????? Point me to one! I surf all over the web and haven't encountered a web site Safari can't handle. Videos on websites? IF Safari doesn't handle it natively there is a plug-in to give it the capability to do so. You wanna talk about browsers that don't work right? Yeah, you guessed it: Internet Explorer. I have to work in Windows all day with my job and the minute I visit a site that uses JAVA, Windows wimps out like a dog with its tail tucked under its *ss. Give me a break! If the site uses JAVA and doesn't support Active-X you are S.O.L. Safari is a MUCH MORE standards-compliant browser than IE ever dared to be. If you were still trying to use IE on a Mac after OS 10.1 and you experienced problems surfing the web you got what you deserved. I can go to any site on the web with Safari and not have to worry about the site taking over my computer because of holes in IE big enough to drive an earth mover through.

Apple has not forced anyone to re-write their software twice in the last five years. If they had followed Apple's programming guidelines 7 years ago they shouldn't have any problems, all it takes is a few (very few) additional lines of code and a recompile of the source code. Apple pretty much made writing programs for the Mac processor agnostic since the start of the current millennium. Adobe's problem is that they never did a re-write of Photoshop 7 years ago and now they are reaping the 'rewards' of their shortsightedness.

OS X has been anything BUT problematic since going UNIX. UNIX has been around for more than 30 years for crying out loud! It (and it's variants/offshoots such as Linux) is the most stable, rock-solid operating system on the planet: PERIOD!

Point blank: you don't know what you're talking about.

Darqlord wrote:
By your very statements I can tell you haven't used a Mac in AT LEAST 2-3 YEARS. It's been that long since ANY MAC shipped with 'classic' (OS/9 for non-mac heads). That was OS 10.2. OS 10.4 is the current build of the OS and it's pushing 15-18 months at this point with OS 10.5 due by spring if not sooner...

You have to be careful in these debates.  You can lose your point with the distraction of faulty data!

The G5 Quad (Fall of 2005) runs classic mode. The G5 quads that I've built for my clients did ship with 10.4 and a classic installer.

Darqlord wrote:
...Apple has not forced anyone to re-write their software twice in the last five years. If they had followed Apple's programming guidelines 7 years ago they shouldn't have any problems, all it takes is a few (very few) additional lines of code and a recompile of the source code. Apple pretty much made writing programs for the Mac processor agnostic since the start of the current millennium. Adobe's problem is that they never did a re-write of Photoshop 7 years ago and now they are reaping the 'rewards' of their shortsightedness.

Actually, apple has 'forced' our developers through many changes that the Windows crowd has not had to endure.

To get our software to function optimally, apps need to be optomized for both the OS and the processor.  Apple has made major changes to each, forcing upon our developers extra coding liability without any financial return.

We went from the Motorola CISC architecture (680xx) to the first PPC, the 601 RISC chip.  From there we migrated from the Macintosh operating systems (Systems 1-9) into FreeBSD varient OSX.  And now from the PPC architecture to Intel.

It was reported that the major developers, Adobe, Macromedia and others flat out refused to rewrite their apps into Cocoa.  This is what prompted the creation of Carbon, coding by which as little as 10% of the code needs to be native to OSX in order to run in the OSX environment. Now that would make the app run in OSX, but it would not necessarily allow it the speed and efficiency of a true Cocoa application.  It seems to take many years to optomise these huge apps, and get them fully native.

Having said that, my 2 year old Mac system will still open a 1GB Tiff image in 4.9 seconds.

Darqlord wrote:
...OS X has been anything BUT problematic since going UNIX. UNIX has been around for more than 30 years for crying out loud! It (and it's variants/offshoots such as Linux) is the most stable, rock-solid operating system on the planet: PERIOD!...

Actually, there a lot of embedded OS's that are more stable on the planet.  [EDIT: most people will find that both Solaris and Irix will be more stable as well than OSX, though their imaging functionality is insignificant]  OSX has had its share of difficulties, though not many remain. The OS may be UNIX, but not all of the apps are.  And that is mostly where we get into problems with OSX.  Is it very stable? Yes.  Is it Rock stable? No.  Is it finished? No.

Linux is neither a varient nor an offshoot of FreeBSD.

I love Macs too, but we've got to keep calm heads, and not get too excited about this stuff. Me included. 

Jami Lea wrote:
Why does everyone have to debate in here anyways?

Because photographing models (or being photographed) in a forum is kind of difficult?

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?

I am an NLE editor, I use Sony Vegas..Has all the same bells and whistles of FCP..I bought a G5 last year because I thought I needed it to hand in the business world as far as editing, and sharing files with thpose using macs.

As it turns out my custom ASUS smokes the G5 and I havent as of yet had to switch over to FCP to meet customer needs when it comes to editing video and film.

All my programs run smooth and my PC smokes. I would agree MACS do well for those who no little to nadda about computer maintenence, however over the long haul a mac will develope issues for those who do not know how to maintain a system.

My G5 is collecting dust and I am about to sell it.

Bottom line, when you are speaking of high end systems the differences vanish.

Darqlord wrote:
By your very statements I can tell you haven't used a Mac in AT LEAST 2-3 YEARS. It's been that long since ANY MAC shipped with 'classic' (OS/9 for non-mac heads). That was OS 10.2. OS 10.4 is the current build of the OS and it's pushing 15-18 months at this point with OS 10.5 due by spring if not sooner.  The only people who use classic mode are people who use software by companies that don't exist anymore or stopped making a particular application for the mac (funny how everyone is starting to come back now).

Safari doesn't work well on some websites????? Point me to one! I surf all over the web and haven't encountered a web site Safari can't handle. Videos on websites? IF Safari doesn't handle it natively there is a plug-in to give it the capability to do so. You wanna talk about browsers that don't work right? Yeah, you guessed it: Internet Explorer. I have to work in Windows all day with my job and the minute I visit a site that uses JAVA, Windows wimps out like a dog with its tail tucked under its *ss. Give me a break! If the site uses JAVA and doesn't support Active-X you are S.O.L. Safari is a MUCH MORE standards-compliant browser than IE ever dared to be. If you were still trying to use IE on a Mac after OS 10.1 and you experienced problems surfing the web you got what you deserved. I can go to any site on the web with Safari and not have to worry about the site taking over my computer because of holes in IE big enough to drive an earth mover through.

Apple has not forced anyone to re-write their software twice in the last five years. If they had followed Apple's programming guidelines 7 years ago they shouldn't have any problems, all it takes is a few (very few) additional lines of code and a recompile of the source code. Apple pretty much made writing programs for the Mac processor agnostic since the start of the current millennium. Adobe's problem is that they never did a re-write of Photoshop 7 years ago and now they are reaping the 'rewards' of their shortsightedness.

OS X has been anything BUT problematic since going UNIX. UNIX has been around for more than 30 years for crying out loud! It (and it's variants/offshoots such as Linux) is the most stable, rock-solid operating system on the planet: PERIOD!

Point blank: you don't know what you're talking about.

Thank you for NOT reading my post.  I stated right off that I use MAC's EVERYDAY for my job.  And your right we are still using 10.2.7 I believe as we need it for an older version of Quark.  Maybe Safari has gotten better, but based on what I have experienced it sucks.  Would consistantly crash when going to www.cnn.com.

And The entire graphics industry (again this is my job) had to do a rewrite for OSX (that's why they had to offer classic as an option, so the OLDER software would still run properly) and now have to rewrite AGAIN to run properly (natively) in the new Intel-based systems.

If you have never had any permissions problems or weird system snafus, you are either lucky or a liar.  Maybe in an everday consumer world they are more stable, but in the graphics world, they are not.

Yes I would agree that UNIX is very stable, but since Apple is using it somewhat like Microsoft used DOS to support the GUI, things are just a bit off and will get better over time. Again I am not using 10.4, so things may have stablized since 10.2.  I started using MACS in 1999 while getting my graphics degree and the first day, after te teacher said MACS NEVER crash, it crashed about 5 times in the next 2 hours. I have yet to see one not crash.  So get off your high horse and face the fact that both systems have their drawacks.

And yes Virginia, I do know what I am talking about.

Daguerre wrote:

Actually, there a lot of embedded OS's that are more stable on the planet.  But OSX has had its share of difficulties. The OS may be UNIX, but not all of the apps are.  And that is mostly where we get into problems with OSX.  Is it very stable? Yes.  Is it Rock stable? No.  Is it finished? No.

Linux is neither a varient nor an offshoot of FreeBSD.

I love Macs too, but we've got to keep calm heads, and not get too excited about this stuff. Me included. 

Thank you for supporting my point.  Much better stated.

Monica Jay wrote:
I don't like the mouse, but that can be changed...

I am a PC guy with no regrets or intent to switch. Most mice blow, Mac or PC.

Razer makes great gaming mice that can't be beat for photofinishing. One of the best features is the ability to change mouse sensitivity on the fly. Hold a button down, turn the mouse wheel and now you can worked with fine precision. If you happen to game on occasion, all the better!

Aesthete Studios wrote:

I am a PC guy with no regrets or intent to switch. Most mice blow, Mac or PC.

Razer makes great gaming mice that can't be beat for photofinishing. One of the best features is the ability to change mouse sensitivity on the fly. Hold a button down, turn the mouse wheel and now you can worked with fine precision. If you happen to game on occasion, all the better!

Logitech G5 Laser gaming Mouse.  On the fly, but you don't have to hold down an extra button.  Fits great in the hand.

Perfect Pixels wrote:
Thank you for NOT reading my post.  I stated right off that I use MAC's EVERYDAY for my job.  And your right we are still using 10.2.7

You can not hold a discussion in 2007 about an operating system from 2002.  Why not just say 'PCs are so slow-- our 486 computer is a slug! We can't get anything done on it!'.  And the internet browsing is HORRIBLE!'?  wtf?

Vance wrote:
...As it turns out my custom ASUS smokes the G5 and I havent as of yet had to switch over to FCP to meet customer needs when it comes to editing video and film.

All my programs run smooth and my PC smokes. I would agree MACS do well for those who no little to nadda about computer maintenence, however over the long haul a mac will develope issues for those who do not know how to maintain a system.

"My system smokes yours" is a fairly useless waste of your typing skills.  If you'd like to convey the idea that your Asus system is 'smokin', drop in your test numbers.  What time did the G5 render, and what time did the PC render?  Then we can see your definition of smokin.

Travis Price wrote:
The big thing I hear about Macs VS PCs is from repair men. PsC breakdown more often but are easy to fix. When a Mac breaks down it takes longer to fix and may costs more.

my $.02

My Mac recently had a complete and total system failure, it is still under warranty though. Originally, they thought they were going to physically need to replace the hard drive, and wasn't gonna cover it because of a ding in my case where the HD is. So that was first gonna be £147.

Then, the day before Christmas (in other words, about a week before they said it'd be ready), I got an email saying that they only needed to format and reinstall everything, so it was only gonna be £47.

Then, I go to get it, and go to pay, and the computer however, decides that my total price is going to be £0. So I was pretty happy about the whole thing.

Jami Lea wrote:
I was a PC gamer for 6 years and learned to build my own computers.  When I got together with my b/f, he uses Mac b/c he is a professional bass player.  I used it for 7 months and now, I think PC is crappy.  I will  never go back to PC.  You should definitely go with a mac.

And Mac is crappy to someone who uses Unix (Silicon Graphics).  Whatever works for one might not work for others.  PC isn't crappy, it has too many components (build by too many vendors and so many softwares out there.

  I remember back when I was in university, Mac users alway diss Intel Processor.  Now Mac is using Intel Processor and it is faster than their PowerPC processor.

  Also, Mac's new OS is based on Unix.  Have you ever tried to run Linus or other Unix OS on PC?  I can tell you this, it is more reliable (and don't crash, assuming that you are using good hardwares) than Mac.

  If you want a PC that won't crash as often, get Asus, Abit, and other good PC mother board.  Then us good graphic cards with correct drivers.

  I have used Mac, PC, Unix (Sun Solaris), Silicon Graphics and Steve Job's (NeXT) machine (Intel based on Unix OS).

   ChanStudio

Dreamscapes NRazorblade wrote:
I've been using Apple's since '88 and i will never use anything else. I have an Alienware Area 51 7500 and i use it to hold up my framed work that i haven't put up as of yet.

I've use all types of computers, i still go right back to my Apple's. Are PC's good? if that's the power you need, i need the power of an Apple.

I have noticed that most Mac user either 1: don't know enough about computers out there (PC, Sun, Mac, Atari (old machine) etc.. or 2: Very narrow minded.

  Every computer has its own strength and weakness.  No one type jof computer is perfect.

Perfect Pixels wrote:
The only drawback to the PC I have is there is a 2GB functional limit on system memory.  XP says it will handle 4GB, but it doesn't.  Vista has changed that, but I will not use Vista for at least a year.

EDITED

If you are talking about Windows reserving 2GB of memory for Applications and remaining 2GB for Kernel there is a way to change it. You can add /3GB switch in your boot.ini file i.e. multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINDOWS="Microsoft Windows XP Professional" /noexecute=optin /fastdetect /3GB and it will make 3GB of RAM available to your Apps and 1GB for Kernel. Photoshop will see and make use of 3GB of RAM, and I have it running this way for some time now and everything is fine.

As far as MAC vs. PC debate……………….MAC’s before the Intel was aked to join used to be slower and much more expensive than PC’s but this is not the case anymore. In my opinion PC’s are much more flexible as far as hardware and software options especially if you are IT Professional as I am, but for “regular” user who just wants to have his Photoshop dedicated machine MAC’s are simpler and more user friendly than PC’s.

Perfect Pixels wrote:
And The entire graphics industry (again this is my job) had to do a rewrite for OSX (that's why they had to offer classic as an option, so the OLDER software would still run properly) and now have to rewrite AGAIN to run properly (natively) in the new Intel-based systems.

If you have never had any permissions problems or weird system snafus, you are either lucky or a liar.  Maybe in an everday consumer world they are more stable, but in the graphics world, they are not.

Yes I would agree that UNIX is very stable, but since Apple is using it somewhat like Microsoft used DOS to support the GUI, things are just a bit off and will get better over time. Again I am not using 10.4, so things may have stablized since 10.2.  I started using MACS in 1999 while getting my graphics degree and the first day, after te teacher said MACS NEVER crash, it crashed about 5 times in the next 2 hours. I have yet to see one not crash.  So get off your high horse and face the fact that both systems have their drawacks.

And yes Virginia, I do know what I am talking about.

Well Virginia, thank you for not reading my post either. Like I said if you're still using 10.2, you don't know what you're talking about.

If the software was not written using COCOA as Apple has been suggesting for 7+ years then, yes, programs had to re-written CORRECTLY to work on Intel processors. Again, Adobe DIDN"T follow Apple's suggestion back in 1998/1999 when they first started working on OS X

I have never stated that neither system had drawbacks I only stated that you don't know what TODAY's version of OS X and Safari can do, so get your head out of the sand and get informed.

Chan Studio wrote:
And Mac is crappy to someone who uses Unix (Silicon Graphics).  Whatever works for one might not work for others.  PC isn't crappy, it has too many components (build by too many vendors and so many softwares out there.

I remember back when I was in university, Mac users alway diss Intel Processor.  Now Mac is using Intel Processor and it is faster than their PowerPC processor...

I got a chuckle out of this one.  Remember, the OP is looking for a Photoshop machine.

When I started my imaging business in 1992 on my Mac Quadra 900, all fortune 500 advertising was done either on Scitex or quarter million dollar unix boxes like Crosfield's Colorspace or Hell's DaVinci systems.

I took a ton of imaging work away from the big press shops Like Anderson Litho and Contenental Colorcraft who were all running the big dollar retouch stations, because on the Mac I could do the job as fast. 1992.

1996 In an effort to stay efficient and competitive, Anderson Litho bought four $100,000 SGI workstations to take over the imaging workload from their Crosfield boxes.  This strategy failed.  SGI's just weren't designed for retouching.  Neither Photoshop nor Bolero ran efficiently on these big dollar machines.

1997 I was hired by Anderson Lithograph as a consultant to convert their imaging network from that of SGI and Crosfield workstations to Macs running Photoshop. 

We ran a test in the shop:  same image, do the same stuff to the image, save the image-- How long did that take?

Apple 9600/350:          15 minutes.
SGI/Mips10000/250:     31 minutes
Crosfield/8 processors:   75minutes

All SGIs were retired from imaging service and relegated to internet snooping since the shop doesn't do video, 3D or medical...  Its been a long time since efficient imaging has been viable on any SGI or Sun box.  I don't believe much Photoshop imaging gets accomplished on any Linux system either.

In other tests, The G5 Quad running CS2 is still faster than The Intel Xeon 3.0 Quad running CS3.

Chan Studio wrote:
I have noticed that most Mac user either 1: don't know enough about computers out there (PC, Sun, Mac, Atari (old machine) etc.. or 2: Very narrow minded.

I would say this about sums up the general computer population.

Daguerre wrote:
Actually, there a lot of embedded OS's that are more stable on the planet.  But OSX has had its share of difficulties. The OS may be UNIX, but not all of the apps are.  And that is mostly where we get into problems with OSX.  Is it very stable? Yes.  Is it Rock stable? No.  Is it finished? No.

Linux is neither a varient nor an offshoot of FreeBSD.

I love Macs too, but we've got to keep calm heads, and not get too excited about this stuff. Me included. 

I never said Linux was an offshoot of FreeBSD I said it was an offshoot (subset actually) of UNIX and there are a few varieties of UNIX.

I grant that there are imbedded OSes that are very stable out there but asking an OS to simply monitor the fuel mixture in your car (an over-simplification, I know) is totally different from what is asked of a desktop or server OS.

I only started using Macs in 1999. I came from the Amiga, so I'm hardly a mac-head. I did my research when leaving the Amiga and made an INFORMED decision based on my needs and where I thought Apple was going with OS X.

My problem with the discussion I've had with 'Virginia' is that he claims to have 'experience' with OS X and he's barely out of OS 10.2. He's using OS 9 to run Quark and Quark has been OS X native for nearly 2 years. The claim that Safari is unstable shows that his experience is old/limited.

Since the G5 Quad would have required me to sell my house I don't have one and wasn't aware that it still sold with 'Classic' mode. I DO KNOW that their 'consumer' models haven't sold with 'Classic' since 10.2.

Marko Cecic-Karuzic wrote:
They're expensive, everything for them is expensive, when Apple decides it's time to radically switch technologies they just up and leave everybody in the dust and very quickly the whole mac world abandons the technology that you have unless you upgrade to the new stuff.

Absolutely true! Since Mac is the pioneer on all of the new computer technology and PC just copies it. Like Bill Gates took the original operating system half ready from Apple that is why it is not so stable and easily attacked by viruses. Neither the hardware and the software was developed fully but they already jammed the market with it and people bought it since it was cheaper than Mac. It is like buying something that was made in China instead of made in Germany.Quantity instead of quality.
I  think for a real technical evolution we need that they'd come up with something so different and new that would leave us in the dust. Otherwise that won't be such a change just a couple of more fancier looking things both in hardware and software. In general it would be like our cars nowadays. They are 99.9% gas operated with the same basic system principles as they were when invented, except minor changes compare to how they should be by now.Hopefully the next few steps of Apple will really leave both Mac and PC users behind with some absolutely new technology, although unfortunately I think they won't do it because they'd be considering the market of users.

Thomasio wrote:
After a lifetime of PCs, I took the plunge and purchased my first Mac almost 2 years ago. I was worried about the "learning curve", but there isn't one. Mac is so intuitive that you will be a pro in no time.

PCs? Puh-LEEEZE!

T.

THIS is what I wanted to hear. I'm in the process of requesting a dream machine from an employer for in-house graphic design projects and all I know is PC. I don't want to be the guy producing layer comps in Photoshop but then stumbling about with a presentation for 10 execs because I'm on a MAC. So what's a few keystroke errors due to being programmed to hit Alt (PC) when I meant (Option) lol.