PC v. Mac Attitude

PC Attitude: Fastest, best only; 10 mHz is worth any extra money you have to pay; actual needs don't matter, so get what you actually want.

Mac Attitude: Get what you need, not what you want.

Discuss.

i dont need a mac at all. i could have spent half the money on a wintel box that would do everything i need. i bought a mac specifically because i wanted one.

tortoise said:

i dont need a mac at all. i could have spent half the money on a wintel box that would do everything i need. i bought a mac specifically because i wanted one.

Click to expand...

That's pretty much how I felt when I purchased my MBP.

I look at it this way - I NEEDED a machine that would just work for me without the plights of malware and robust OSes. I WANTED a well-designed computer. Therefore I got what I needed AND wanted.

caveatipss said:

PC Attitude: Fastest, best only; 10 mHz is worth any extra money you have to pay; actual needs don't matter, so get what you actually want.

Mac Attitude: Get what you need, not what you want.

Discuss.

Click to expand...

Both are somewhat of a generalization, but….

The PC attitude you have listed is a direct result of Intel’s years of brainwashing. The "Mhz Myth" is real and even Intel had to admit it in the end, hence the end of that ad campaign. Lots of folks in the PC world are just now realizing that a slower clock speed chip can actually run faster and more efficient than a higher clock speed chip, depending on the efficiency of the design. Intel is finally starting to design and produce chips that are both efficient AND fast.

The Mac attitude is a result of the PPC chip speed consistently being lower than the Intel side, but the chips generally being more efficient and more powerful at a lower speed. Mac users traditioanlly have upgraded machines much less often than PC users, parly becasue we realized that the PC worlds need for speed in line of BS. If what you want is the fastest Mac out there, then buy it, I did, but just like the PC world, there is always something better, newer or faster in the works. No matter how long you hold out, eventually you will no longer have the "cutting edge" machine. That's ok, as long as what you have still does what you want, does it really matter?

On a side note, this is one of those subjects that has the potential go south real quick if we don’t strive to keep it from doing so.

yes i think that the difference stems from intel and amd constantly making faster and faster chips and releasing them on practically a daily basis so in order to keep up with technology you might need to purchase even those 10mhz in order to stay up to date.

ppc chips were released less frequently so such purchasing practices werent really necessary.

just my opinion
-chris

It doesn't matter what kind of computer it was, I got all of my computers out of want.

caveatipss said:

PC Attitude: Fastest, best only; 10 mHz is worth any extra money you have to pay; actual needs don't matter, so get what you actually want.

Click to expand...

As mentioned above by Baggss that's not really true, and most gamers would know this who are generally the crowd that's pinned with that stereotype. This is why most gamers will choose AMD over Intel, though apparently with the Conroe this could all change. However, AMD is bound to have something "better" in the works already.

caveatipss said:

Mac Attitude: Get what you need, not what you want.

Click to expand...

I must admit, one thing I have had a problem with is trying to figure out what I need. The Mac OS is a Unix based system that generally takes more RAM than a Windows, so I figure if anything more RAM is a plus. However, I still would like a rather high end processor so I could keep it for two or more generations down the road, like I see many Mac users doing.


In short, most switchers would probably go for the higher end processor and not even think so much about the RAM. I, having previous knowledge about Unix and a little research on Mac, know better but others wouldn't. You notice a BIG change in a Mac with 512Mb of RAM and a Gig of RAM even on the same exact system other wise. Atleast from my experiences in store. Almost the same difference as I see between the older PowerPC Mac Mini and the Intel Mac Mini. Atleast from my experiences in store with them.


However, going from say a Mac Mini to a MacBook Pro, PowerBook, or Power Mac G5 is like day and night. So it's not to say that RAM is everything on a Mac. The processor can give a nice swift kick to your OS too.

I Want to also mention: I was until now definitely one of the PC gamers with the thought that I needed the cutting edge. So I am not criticizing anyone! Far from it, I am describing myself lol.

Well the PC thing is akin to cars. You can buy a brand new car, or buy one a year old which might not have the front fogs, or alloys of the news one, but you'd save a packet. You are an idiot if you buy a brand new processor and graphics card at £350 a piece - the trick is to stay one step behind. I upgrade my PC every three years or so. You probably need to upgrade your Mac every 5 years, but the initial outlay is expensive. £1200 for a new IMac? Expensive and you could build a new PC for a fraction of that. But then again you won't need to buy another for years.

It's the games market that drives the PC scene though and that's the reason for upgrading. I use a Mac all day for graphics and my PC at night/weekend for games. Reversing the two would be no good, so everything's great for me. Apart from XP - after a day of using Tiger, I can't be doing with the Duplo of operating systems.

Alvin Meister said:

You are an idiot if you buy a brand new processor and graphics card at £350 a piece - the trick is to stay one step behind. I upgrade my PC every three years or so. You probably need to upgrade your Mac every 5 years, but the initial outlay is expensive.

Click to expand...

THIS is the smartest advice I have heard on the subject in a long, long time.
I do the exact same thing. Something a step or two behind is not obsolete and unuseable. Even if someone does wait and wait and wait and wait for the next biggest, baddest and greatest update... that update will only be replaced with something else in a relatively short time.
Sure, people will counter this thinking with.."well, then it will last longer" or "it won't go totally obsolete as quickly" (or some other wording, pick your favorite) if they wait for and get the shiniest and newest.

The bottom line is that your computer is only as obsolete as YOU make it.
If it does the job and you are happy with the results, who cares if it is a G3 Pismo PowerBook? If you think your computer is old then it will become old... it is really as simple as that.

Alvin Meister said:

Well the PC thing is akin to cars. You can buy a brand new car, or buy one a year old which might not have the front fogs, or alloys of the news one, but you'd save a packet. You are an idiot if you buy a brand new processor and graphics card at £350 a piece - the trick is to stay one step behind. I upgrade my PC every three years or so. You probably need to upgrade your Mac every 5 years, but the initial outlay is expensive. £1200 for a new IMac? Expensive and you could build a new PC for a fraction of that. But then again you won't need to buy another for years.

It's the games market that drives the PC scene though and that's the reason for upgrading. I use a Mac all day for graphics and my PC at night/weekend for games. Reversing the two would be no good, so everything's great for me. Apart from XP - after a day of using Tiger, I can't be doing with the Duplo of operating systems.

Click to expand...

I am an avid gamer too, and plan to use my Mac for gaming.

One reason the Mac community doesn't update as frequent as PC's is because until the Intel switch their was no competition for them. Apple has always been able to dictate the pace at which their machines move forward because they make the software and the hardware. The PC world has never been like that because you have several companies always fighting to be the top dog in their certain market segment.

Just think about how different the PC world would be today if Apple had decided to license their OS to other manufacturers instead of letting Microsoft do it. Most likely Apple would be the standard and Microsoft would either be dust in the wind or the ones doing commercials trying to convince people to switch.

All I know is I love using my G4 Macs. Apple and everyone else can tell me they are old until they are blue in the face but nothing will take away from the fact that with CS2 Standard and Painter IX on it—I am sure to run both my current Macs into the ground nose first before I start thinking of an upgrade. it's much nicer just enjoying my time being creative than fussing over the newest thing. Besides, I'm the bottleneck in speed sometimes when it comes to my Macs :flower:

of course tonight I have not been able to draw any inspiration as I am dead beat!

Vicky

Alvin Meister said:

You probably need to upgrade your Mac every 5 years, but the initial outlay is expensive. £1200 for a new IMac? Expensive and you could build a new PC for a fraction of that. But then again you won't need to buy another for years.

Click to expand...

That time is very realistic and more or less what I have followed. Bought my first Mac (Performa 6400 200Mhz PPC 603e) in late 95, upgraded to a G4 400 in 2000 and then to my Quad last week. I generally plan on one interim upgrade in the life cycle of the Mac, upgrade meaning upgraded CPU and Graphics card.

While I could build a monster PC for the $3000 I just dropped on my Quad, I would end up upgrading it more than once in it's life, and I'd be stuck with Windows. As for Macs being "expensive" I think that is relative. Overall cost of ownership for a 5 to 6 year life span is cheaper or the same on the Mac, you simply pay more of it up front and less on the backside.

I spent $1500 last June on building my current PC and even now I am finding it dragging on the stuff I need to do. *sigh* Mind you XP is just messing around with me these days (system32 folder disappeared over night!)

Later this year I was going to upgrade it but now I'm just putting all that cash into a PowerMac/iMac.

D3v1L80Y said:

THIS is the smartest advice I have heard on the subject in a long, long time.
I do the exact same thing. Something a step or two behind is not obsolete and unuseable. Even if someone does wait and wait and wait and wait for the next biggest, baddest and greatest update... that update will only be replaced with something else in a relatively short time.
Sure, people will counter this thinking with.."well, then it will last longer" or "it won't go totally obsolete as quickly" (or some other wording, pick your favorite) if they wait for and get the shiniest and newest.

The bottom line is that your computer is only as obsolete as YOU make it.
If it does the job and you are happy with the results, who cares if it is a G3 Pismo PowerBook? If you think your computer is old then it will become old... it is really as simple as that.

Click to expand...

yes that is very smart - dead true!

deus_ex_machina said:

I look at it this way - I NEEDED a machine that would just work for me without the plights of malware and robust OSes. I WANTED a well-designed computer. Therefore I got what I needed AND wanted.

Click to expand...

that's how I looked at my mac, I NEEDED a computer, I WANTED something that was dependable and fast, that wouldn't crash or fail on me, and looked good. So, both were satisfied.

lil said:

All I know is I love using my G4 Macs. Apple and everyone else can tell me they are old until they are blue in the face but nothing will take away from the fact that with CS2 Standard and Painter IX on it—I am sure to run both my current Macs into the ground nose first before I start thinking of an upgrade. it's much nicer just enjoying my time being creative than fussing over the newest thing. Besides, I'm the bottleneck in speed sometimes when it comes to my Macs :flower:

of course tonight I have not been able to draw any inspiration as I am dead beat!

Vicky

Click to expand...

Yeah, that's the other thing. I plan to run my Mac into the ground, as not only was it an expensive machine, but I can't see myself parting from it. I don't care what othres say, I love it and will keep it quite possibly for the next eight years or so, unless I get a laptop later on for portability needs. In that case, it will still be a mac.

Just bought an X2 4400 HP machine with 2 GB RAM, upgradeable to 4 GB. I plan to try doing some Open Office development on it and I hear that a build takes 17 hours on a
new dual-processor Xeon server. I plan to use the system mainly using Windows XP 64-bit edition which I've been using for two years.

We still use our PowerMac G5 and I do dev work on it but this new system (which isn't
anywhere near the top of the line for AMD) is fast. And support 64-bits. Just like the
G5. I hope that Apple puts in the development efforts to keep my G5 relevant going forward.