I am other, because I am not an elitist and never have been. I use both macs and PCs and I fix both for a living. I support everything from consumers, businesses, networks, printers and other peripherals etc. I have more certifications than I can remember.

I like apple products and I like the OS, but IMO the company makes some dumb choices. I think steve jobs is very dogmatic about apple, and his vision is tunneled.

I personally use the PC a bit more because I like the fact that I built it myself, with all the parts I chose, and its configured to my liking. Here go the specs:

AMD 3400+ 64
1 gig of DDR 400 ram
10k rpm SATA drive, 74 gig (raptor)
ATI 9800 pro (will be upgrading that soon)
M-aduio sound card

The system is smoking fast and can run many heavy 3-D games at over 100 FPS. I also do some digital video and audio manipulations on it.

I also own an ibook g3 800 running OS 10.3 on it. I like the mac OS very much, I think its solid.

However, I would like to clear up some myths about windows machines and PCs. I have about an 10 computer network in my house (my roomates and msyelf), which consists of both macs and PCs, and also I have win xp pro, panther, and linux running. My first PC I ever built, I built back in 1997 (im only 24yrs old!) and guess what, it still runs the original load of windows 98 and suse linux on it. Thats right it has NEVER crashed. I always see lots of mac elitists telling me how much PCs suck and they always crash, then they bring their mac into me because of kernel panics or bad hardware or whatever the case is. Both machines are equally easy to use, and both have the same failure/crash rate. I know this because I support both types of machines and both types of clients (buisness and consumer), and I see them both on a regular basis. If they worked perfect I wouldn't have a job. My current windows box has been running for over a year now with no crashes and so has my mac. More people use PCs than macs, and most people do not know how to properly use and maintain a computer.

My main headache with mac os x is the networking side. I can get all my linux/unix/windows clients hooked up fine, but for some reason there is always a mac that needs my personal attention. I will be the first to come out and say that 95% of computer problems are user related or cause by ignorance. However, the networking support was suppose to be vastly improved in Tiger, which I do not own yet. I have worked with it but just recently.

Bottom line is, I will always use a PC especially with these new dual core procs coming out, those are gonna rock. However, even though I like a mac I will never be a lifer. I am biased and I have to fix my own stuff, and like to fix my own stuff. Apple machines are by far the most annoying to take apart and fix compared to PCs. I could list all the design faults I run into with them but hardly few would probably understand where I am coming from. They do not design their machines to be serviceable, they design them to have a specific look, even if that look makes it a pain in the butt to service. I also like to keep my personal systems customized to do what they need to do. I don't have all the third party options a PC has with a mac.

Honestly, I would like to see mac clones again (used to have one myself) and I would also like to see apple developing an OS for non PPC hardware so I can load Mac OS X on a PC and play all my games and build it with the exact hardware I want in it.

Most of you will probably disagree with most that I say, and for the record I am not bashing macs, I think they are ok machines and they get their jobs done. I am just not an elitist.

I agree with you on many points that I have an understanding of. I don't have the background to comment on most of them, however.

In the 'Not a Complaint, but a Clarification' category:

When I voted 'Lifer', I interpreted that vote as "I've been with Macintosh all my life, so I'm not a switcher of any kind." not that 'I'll always be with Macintosh because I'm too much of an elitist to use Windows.' I have and do use Windows occasionally, but not enough to speak with authority on bad or good. I think that this was the intended definition of 'Lifer'

I'm probably the only guy on the planet that actually put off switching to Macs because of all that tiresome Mac evangelism.

Back in the eighties I got utterly sick of designers & printers sneering at anything without the cute little apple logo. It gave me the impression that Mac users were just misguided snobs. I used to think (still do, actually) that it's the work produced that counts, rather than the badge on the computer..... so my first machine was a pc.

Then I started work in a Mac-only studio. As soon as I actually used a Mac I saw what all the fuss was about. I shamelessly changed my opinion, and to this day have a foot in both camps.

Nope, you're not. I certainly was. That and the stupid commercials with people that I definitely don't want to be like. "You're too stupid to use a PC? Here, try a Mac." My very first post here was a comparison of some real-life observations of the two, and how raving evangelism kept me from switching sooner.

5 years isn't that long... So what is the 'Mac way of doing things'? :confused:

What I meant by that was that there are different commands for doing the same things as on a PC, but there is also a more general meaning. I think it basically comes down to ease of use, which sometimes people confuse with being easy to learn or oversimplified. You may have some difficulty unlearning some of your PC ways but with time you'll appreciate the Mac way.

my opinion is biased, but I disagree. The more I work with apple hardware the more I dislike it, due to its overcomplicated design which is not practical to work on, but looks cool. The OS is dumbed down in some ways, but intuitive in others. Its not perfect, its not the best, its not the worst. That is how I view a macintosh. If you compare hardware power over price (bang for your buck) I would have to go with the PC side. They are way ahead of apple in hardware developement and thats why the market is on their side. With the way PC hardware is going with these new dual core processors coming out very soon apple will have an even larger run for their money.

Personally I would like to see apple grow and expand, it will create more IT jobs and give a diversity in the market. IMHO, apple as a company needs to change a few things to do that, but as of now I don't see them making that leap into the mainstream market. I have been using computers since about 1986 (when I was 6yrs old) to present, and have been in the IT field for over 6 years now.

I voted for "I switched prior to Aug 2002" but I should probably have voted for Other.

In March of 2002 I got my flat panel iMac and got rid of the Windows machine I was using. I still use that as my primary computer, but December of 2003 I built a PC and I'm running Windows 2000 on that. So I'm multi-platform.

Part of this is that I'm a software developer by trade. And finding jobs writing software for Macs is a lot more difficult than finding jobs writing software for Windows. So I want to be able to write programs on Windows to keep my skills sharp. Part of this is also the fact that I see advantages and disadvantages to both platforms. And part of this is that I wanted to build a computer with a nifty custom case.

So I switched in March 2002, then went to multi platform later. Yep, scratch one from "I switched prior to Aug 2002" and put it on the Other pile.

Update: Er, March 2002, not March 2001. In March of 2001 the flat panel iMac wasn't released yet.

Depends on the performance level. At the high end, Apple hardware becomes cheaper. I recently did a comparison between an Alienware high-end system and a dual G5. The Alienware machine was nearly double the price, and the dual G5 is faster.

Done and done.

Thats because Alienware marks up hardware like crazy. Part the system out through CDW and then order X quantity, I guarantee you will get it a LOT cheaper than a G5, which better overall hardware specs, you could probably even get dual procs. Generally take about 40% of the cost off the alienware and thats what you can build it for.

Like I posted earlier, just wait for the dual core processors to come out, then imagine running two dual core processors, the results should out perform most hardware on the market. However, thats just what they are currently guessing and we will not know until it happens like 6 months from now.

Sure, then add a few hundred dollars for anti-virus and anti-spyware packages, plus the cost of all your down time (thousands?) when some gets by your attempts to stop it. :p

Thats funny I have all my PCs up and running and on the internet 24/7 and I have no virus or spyware problems. Also, NAV is 30 dollars OEM and spysweeper is 19.95 OEM, so I don't see where you get this few hundred dollars from. If you are building a new system you can add the OEM packages. I also run a securely setup cisco router (yeah i got a cisco router...) which really does not let many threats into my network reguardless of what OS I am running. So, really when it comes to security the OS only sets up the basic grounds for security and the rest of it is up to the user to define what can enter network traffic, be downloaded, etc. If you know how to run a computer, yours will barely ever crash. Been running win xp on a unit since the release in 2002, not a single crash on it yet, nor a single virus.

How about the forced upgrades apple does to its clients? Don't have a DVD drive, well too bad tiger is going to need it. Oh you want OS 9 support for your older mac, well too bad not gonna happen. Even though I don't like windows 98, microsoft still supports it. Then you want to upgrade your OS, well now you will have to upgrade ALL of you applications. That adobe suite you just got last year on your OS 9 rig, yeah its not gonna run in OS X, so you will need to replace it. On the linux and windows side of things, you can actually use older apps in the OS; and if you wish to purchase the newest app out there, you usually don't have to be running the newest OS, like you do with a lot of apple products. I had a whole graphic design firm that wanted to run OS 9 and photoshop CS, and they couldn't. They were not ready to migrate to OS X at the time, and were forced to purchase a few newer servers to run it. The artists were happy because they got a ton of new stuff, but the buisness side wasn't.

Oh wow my 13 month old mac has a bad mother board which costs 900 dollars to replace? Then you have to pay someone to come on site or drag it to the nearest AASP, which when comes to offical service centers and support apple has less of it out there, and no one has the parts on hand because they are too expensive to stock. Lets see about down time compare to a PC, where your IT guy can go to any local computer shop and pick up parts for it that day. Apple computers do not have that luxury. Then the part ends up being back ordered and you have to wait 6 weeks for it. This has happened to me many times with apple computers. The back order part is honestly not that common, but has happened several times in the past, and its mostly with their all in one units (imacs and emacs).


Now, the plus side of having a mac, is there are no viruses out there, spyware and trojans are a huge minimum compared to a windows envrioment. I think apple only has around a 9% market share (last I checked back in feburary or march) so they are way less used than the PC. Now if you break down the OSes windows is used the most, therefore hackers target it the most. I gurantee once apple reaches a fair share in the market (if they ever do) then this will be a non-issue because hackers will write exploits for the apple on a regular basis. Until that happens though, that will be a plus for macintosh users. Also, I really like how the user is set up in the mac os x enviroment. I set up all my os x boxes so that all the data that the user will save and configure will all go to their users folder, then I have them back up their users folder over a network share. This is pretty easy and most poeple catch on to this fairly quickly. So, OS X is easier to get around in, in some respects, but its simplicity also makes in unappealing to me at times. Its a duality thing, but I will give the plus side more points over the negative in that situation. My experiences with keeping users data easily organized have been the best with OS X so far, and I will tip my hat to them for that. However, that IMO, does not make them superior to the rest of the computer world.

I don't have time to cover every point you brought up, so I'll just cover the above.
First, just because you've managed to get yourself a Cisco router and build yourself a fortress around your PC, you shouldn't expect that most people can. Obviously, they can't. Most are going to pay the $70 for NAV and probably more than that for other "solutions." By the way, that cost is just for the first year, so you have to multiply it by the number of years you expect to own the system, minus some discount for renewal if you can get it.

Forced upgrades? Hmmm, what's happening with NT? Want to run OS 9 Apps? Most will run fine in Classic. What do you do if you want to run Windows 3.1 or 95 apps? Run them in NT? :D Yes, I know you can't. I just couldn't resist the sarcasm.

The last one I find particularly amusing. I can't remember ever seeing a PC user get his computer back in the same week, let alone the same day! I've seen IT guys take a PC away and not even look at it for months. They get away with that because the user's expectations are so low.

Used PC's from 1994 - 2000. Bought a blue iMac (450 MHz G3 / DVD) in 2000. Can't use a PC since. Have bought 9 macs in the last 5 yrs.

That was my whole point. Security is depended upon the users, not the OS or the hardware. You can have the top of the line PC/Mac, top of the line networking routers and switches, and if you don't configure it properly, its pretty much worthless.

This goes with any system configuration. Also NAV for the PC retails 49.99, I sell both the OEM and the retail boxed version for my clients. PCs are getting cheaper and cheaper and the macintosh is still staying at a higher price. I have built very powerful machines for both mac and PC clients. The highest end PC I built was around $9,000, and the highest end mac was around $13,000.00.

The PC had dual athlon mps in it. 5 Gigs of ram, two high end video cards (I thinkthey were O2, or maybe some higher end matrox - can't remember) Raid 0 +1 SATA 10k RPM, Adobe suite software, Dual 30" sony LCDs.

The mac I built was Dual G5 2.5, 6 gigs of ram, one extra 200 gig HD, 2 30" cinema displays, final cut pro, and adobe suite, and one of those top end DDL Nvidia video cards (6800 I believe).

Both systems were built by the same client as demo machines for their audio/video buisness. Also, they had to spend some money before the new year for tax reasons, so they had me build both machines. I built the PC completely OEM, and the G5 I built through our sales side. Both machines were awesomely fast, and both were definately top end. Both performed about equal. The PC I was able to get a 0+1 SATA raid in it, two video cards (both had SLI which is DDL on a mac) and it was still several thousand dollars cheaper. Now, I didn't add the cost of video toaster on to the PC, because that company already owned several licsences for it.

I know that some studios do use Macs for their audio/video stuff but its still an overall 9% market share. I like working with mac clients who want to manage a small lab with ease and manage all their data their designers do with ease. Mac OS X is ideal for that. Its easy to have them just keep up to date back ups of their user folders on a network share. If I get them into retrospect its even easier with automated back ups. Also, I think that disk warrior is one of the best disk utilities out there over any 3rd party utility for any OS.

My opinion is, if Apple ever wants like a 50% market share they are going to have to change a lot of things, and I don't see them doing so. Mainly how they do business, and the design of their machines should get some tweaking. Mainly the plastic snap parts and the fact that some of their laptops have like 80+ screws to get to the hard drive, which is ridiculous. They should also come to use some standardized parts. Things like optical drives, RAM, powersupplies, etc should just be standard and be available to pick up at any local computer hardware store. The mac os x should have native support for all those optical drives out on the market. I can get a dual layer 16x DVDRW drive for like 50 dollars for a PC. It would never work in a mac but it will work in a PC no problem, windows and linux, doesn't matter it works in both. I want apples to get out into the mainstream market. There are not many certified apple technicians (my company only has two, and I am one of them) out there compared to PC techs/admins/IT guys. If the macintosh gets big and out in the market, then I have a better career opportunity, since I already support both types of machines/users. Also, there are things that I really like about OS X, that I think windows should implement as well. If apple had a bigger market share you would see probaby more competition between the OSes, and then you would see them offer similiar features/structures. Basically, what I am saying is, I want apple to change how they do buisness so they can get a bigger market share. I by no means hate apple computers, I am just not an elitist. I also by no means want a one sided market share. More competition would be better for lots of reasons.

Also to clarify something to cwtnospam win95 apps will run on win xp, if it will not run natively you can run it in windows compatability mode, which generally works fine. My comment about forced upgrades was how if you wanted to run photoshop CS per se, you could only run it in OS X. So, if you had lets say, a design lab of macs running OS 9, you then were forced to upgrade all of them to OS X to run the newest apps. Where on a PC if you ran win2k, you were not forced to upgrade to XP to run PS CS. I don't expect people to be able to do the things I do, thats why I have my job, and thats why I get paid. To do the things others don't want to mess with, or don't understand it.

You can agree with me, or agree to disagree with me at this point, I no longer really care.

I see, so you're comparing the cost of parts to build it yourself to the cost of a complete system ready to run out of the box with loads of great software. Good comparison.

It's the old ignore the total cost of ownership and only look at the cost of the box ploy. :D
tlarkin, When CAlvarez and I agree on something, it's time you rethink your position. ;) Not that we care if you disagree, either. :eek:

I believe that would be a first, no?

When you talk about price, you have to consider the cost of time. For you as an end user, you may find it acceptable, and even enjoyable to research and build your own system. That's all fine. It's how I started in this business 20-some years ago. I have no patience for it any more, it's no longer fun to build computers, and I can bill a LOT more than the price difference for a ready-to-run computer. A computer is a tool to let me make money designing and installing networks and servers. If I was in construction I probably wouldn't forge my own hammers and nails either.

My clients can spend money for a tech to build and support machines, or they can buy ready to run machines. All of them find that the latter is cheaper in the long run, whether they are Macs or Wintels. I could make more money building machines, and I do build some servers (different cost/benefit), but it would be unethical to take their money for something that has a poor ROI.

I never thought I'd live to see the day. :D