Associate
- Joined
- 4 Oct 2012
- Posts
- 530
Just wondering why people prefer apple over windows. I know they look nicer and why do many pros use macs? just a random questions would like to hear youre inputs thanks
Why Mac over pc
- Thread starter thekhalida1
- Start date
Elegant design with nice little features, apps like garageband and imovie come with it and the option to dual boot or use a virtual machine to run windows too. That being said, desktop-wise I would get a PC but probably stick with apple for the laptop. Generally the products are overpriced in my opinion.
Historically I think its because designers used QuarkXpress which was originally only available on Mac, and had the best PostScript and TrueType support on that platform. Macs have therefore always tended to be regarded as the mainstay for graphics designers.
Nowadays I think its more to do with marketing and innovative designs. Applications wise there isn't much between PCs and Macs, especially since the latter became intel-based.
Nowadays I think its more to do with marketing and innovative designs. Applications wise there isn't much between PCs and Macs, especially since the latter became intel-based.
Soldato
I like the fact that I've got access to a decent shell underneath the pretty GUI.
Oh, and I develop for iOS - so kinda need OS X for that too.
Oh, and I develop for iOS - so kinda need OS X for that too.
- Joined
- 4 Oct 2012
- Posts
- 530
Why do you prefer windows
Talking about the software (as this is the biggest differentiator with Macs and Windows machines), I prefer the Mac because in my experience, virtually all the time it "just works" (I've had very few issues with Mac OS X as a whole, compared to my Windows experience which was pretty poor) and it works as I expect it to (Windows feels unnecessarily complicated and "cobbled together", for want of a better phrase. OS X just feels more...polished, again, for want of a better word).
Worth stressing that these are my own opinions, and that they are going to be largely due to my experience (all my computing life, since Mac OS 8) and preferences. If I were a happy Windows user, I certainly wouldn't move to the Mac just because it is the "cool" thing to do (as most people seem to nowadays). Windows 7 is a very good OS, and quite frankly, aside from preferring the Mac experience, there is little reason to switch from one to the other. Ultimately, both can do the same things.
Worth stressing that these are my own opinions, and that they are going to be largely due to my experience (all my computing life, since Mac OS 8) and preferences. If I were a happy Windows user, I certainly wouldn't move to the Mac just because it is the "cool" thing to do (as most people seem to nowadays). Windows 7 is a very good OS, and quite frankly, aside from preferring the Mac experience, there is little reason to switch from one to the other. Ultimately, both can do the same things.
Soldato
For me it's aesthetics and perceived build quality.
Soldato
It's a BSD unix with better, more stable accelerated desktop than any unix or linux ever delivered.
Based on hardware that can run windows with just a reboot, no other windows desktop can do the reverse without a lot of hacking and hassle.
Doesn't run out of power as quickly as regular windows boxes do. Let me explain better. I type this on 2008 Mac Pro. Two physical processors. Four cores each. DDR2 memory. ATI 4870 graphics. Nothing extra ordinary. Nothing than I7 couldn't beat to oblivion in any benchmark. Except. It's on my desk for 5 years. The OS runs as fast as it did the first day. It's as stable as it was the first day. It's still runs all the games available to my OS on Steam as it did five years ago. It's as good for video work, fun, browsing and leisure as it was five years ago.
That HAS - hardware acquisition syndrome, that you get on windows boxes, where you feel the need to change graphics every 6 months, CPU every 9 and motherboard every 12? Completely gone. Vanished. I'm cured. During last five years, I added more drives and swapped primary hdd to SSD. That's about it.
Based on hardware that can run windows with just a reboot, no other windows desktop can do the reverse without a lot of hacking and hassle.
Doesn't run out of power as quickly as regular windows boxes do. Let me explain better. I type this on 2008 Mac Pro. Two physical processors. Four cores each. DDR2 memory. ATI 4870 graphics. Nothing extra ordinary. Nothing than I7 couldn't beat to oblivion in any benchmark. Except. It's on my desk for 5 years. The OS runs as fast as it did the first day. It's as stable as it was the first day. It's still runs all the games available to my OS on Steam as it did five years ago. It's as good for video work, fun, browsing and leisure as it was five years ago.
That HAS - hardware acquisition syndrome, that you get on windows boxes, where you feel the need to change graphics every 6 months, CPU every 9 and motherboard every 12? Completely gone. Vanished. I'm cured. During last five years, I added more drives and swapped primary hdd to SSD. That's about it.
The triple-OS functionality is quite significant for me (Mac OS, Windows and Linux). I am a very heavy user of my MBP and it's basically my main work tool, so attributes such as its speed, lightness and battery life give me small productivity gains which add up over the course of weeks and months of working 
Having said that, I really think Windows has come on leaps and bounds in the last 5 years, and I'd have absolutely no problem using Windows 7 as my main OS on a suitably powerful / light PC laptop. Unfortunately I don't get on with Windows 8 but I'm sure MS will bounce back with something better suited to non-tablets again
Having said that, I really think Windows has come on leaps and bounds in the last 5 years, and I'd have absolutely no problem using Windows 7 as my main OS on a suitably powerful / light PC laptop. Unfortunately I don't get on with Windows 8 but I'm sure MS will bounce back with something better suited to non-tablets again
Soldato
FLAME ON!!! lol
IMHO, there's only a very small amount of people that are actually heavy users the operating system, such as renaming files, moving files, setting permissions et al.
Most people are really application users, microsoft word is microsoft word on any operating system and even on linux platform the word processors borrows heavy from the feel of microsoft word. It really doesn't make a difference if the word processing on a mac, windows and linux machine.
Yes its the os the controls the memory, hdd access, network access for that program but if it does work it really doesn't matter.
Having said that if I could get windows infrastructure management software such as AD, GP editors, SCCM.. I would never need to use windows again.
OS X offers me a rock solid kernel, with an GUI that I've gone some custom to using windows just frustrates me now with the way they rename and move stuff about and windows 8 with the GUI FKAM, I just want to throw it out of a window.
IMHO, there's only a very small amount of people that are actually heavy users the operating system, such as renaming files, moving files, setting permissions et al.
Most people are really application users, microsoft word is microsoft word on any operating system and even on linux platform the word processors borrows heavy from the feel of microsoft word. It really doesn't make a difference if the word processing on a mac, windows and linux machine.
Yes its the os the controls the memory, hdd access, network access for that program but if it does work it really doesn't matter.
Having said that if I could get windows infrastructure management software such as AD, GP editors, SCCM.. I would never need to use windows again.
OS X offers me a rock solid kernel, with an GUI that I've gone some custom to using windows just frustrates me now with the way they rename and move stuff about and windows 8 with the GUI FKAM, I just want to throw it out of a window.
I find it easier to use and less annoying, also it supports a lot more apps that I use out of the box whereas with my Mac I have to mess about to get it to work or simply do without.
Saying that I do like the MacBook as a mobile powerhouse and the trackpad works well on a mobile platform.
Associate
For me it is the ecosystem. Everything just seems to work with everything. I love the way apps seem to all talk to each other seamlessly and I find the GUI to be more intuitive than Windows. I have run both operating systems for a number of years and have also found my mac to be more reliable. Having said that I wouldn't be too disappointed if I had to switch to Windows, as I think they are both great operating systems and users should just pick what works for them.
Soldato
I have a Mac book pro for work. It looks nice and that is all. Mac OSX is horrid, Windows 7, Centos, or Ubuntu are far better imo. As for the cost of it, I'm embarrassed my company would spend the best part of £2k on it
Cover the Apple logo with a Dell sticker
MW
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Aug 2003
- Posts
- 24,262
I much prefer the operating system to anything else.
It's stable, one app crashing or having trouble won't wreck the whole thing, and everything tends to work as it should with not a lot of messing about.
When there is messing about to be done, it tends to be quite easy.
More recently, the ecosystem and app stores have been the biggest things to emerge that I like, I started using Macs before iPhones, iPads, Apple TVs and all the app stores existed but they've only made it better imo. There's tons of great software on the app store that was much more expensive prior.
Hardware also. It's pretty.
It's stable, one app crashing or having trouble won't wreck the whole thing, and everything tends to work as it should with not a lot of messing about.
When there is messing about to be done, it tends to be quite easy.
More recently, the ecosystem and app stores have been the biggest things to emerge that I like, I started using Macs before iPhones, iPads, Apple TVs and all the app stores existed but they've only made it better imo. There's tons of great software on the app store that was much more expensive prior.
Hardware also. It's pretty.
Soldato
Just personal preference innit. Like why some people prefer VW to Ford or Ferrari to Lambo.
I did 'require' OSX for Final Cut Pro and Logic. I still use Logic but prefer Premiere to FCP now. Overall I prefer the design of OSX, and it's functionality is great/on par with Windows when you use Pathfinder.
I did 'require' OSX for Final Cut Pro and Logic. I still use Logic but prefer Premiere to FCP now. Overall I prefer the design of OSX, and it's functionality is great/on par with Windows when you use Pathfinder.
Soldato
A lot of the arguments against Windows are based on stuff that's so old you can usually date when person stopped using it and switched to Mac based on what they complain about. An application crash taking out the whole OS? Windows ME maybe.
Also, there is a lot of fuzzy logic and 'feel' involved that people really adopt or ignore depending on their particular point of view.
Does Windows have a lot of 'legacy code' or is it just supremely 'backward compatible'?
OSX is 'leaner and less complicated' yet is based on a Frankenstein kernel and the system requirements seem to be going higher and higher with each release? Not that it matters much.
People generally buy Macs because of their stunning designs and often by virtue of them NOT being a PC. That's why I bought my first Mac.
Also, there is a lot of fuzzy logic and 'feel' involved that people really adopt or ignore depending on their particular point of view.
Does Windows have a lot of 'legacy code' or is it just supremely 'backward compatible'?
OSX is 'leaner and less complicated' yet is based on a Frankenstein kernel and the system requirements seem to be going higher and higher with each release? Not that it matters much.
People generally buy Macs because of their stunning designs and often by virtue of them NOT being a PC. That's why I bought my first Mac.