>
New Topic
>
Reply<
Esato Forum Index
>
General discussions >
Non mobile discussion
> Mac mini
Bookmark topic
yes,pc is more powerful and efficient , whereas mac is user friendly (and imo its for starters and non-power users)
--
Posted: 2005-04-07 18:58:55
Edit :
Quote
this discussion could go on forever
personally i dont think you can compare a mac to a pc
there totally different
i will know more next week when my powerbook arrives
happy days
--
Posted: 2005-04-07 19:05:15
Edit :
Quote
nickorooster Posts: > 500
Well, I can almost assure you you'll get more work done on a mac, 'cause there are less distractions.
But is that necessarily a good thing?
Nick
--
Posted: 2005-04-07 19:23:15
Edit :
Quote
i dont really care about specs too much
the powerbook i am getting has 512 ram, 80gb hard drive and is a superdrive
which i all i want
plus it is sexy
i might ave up some cash and buy mac mini too
--
Posted: 2005-04-07 19:47:38
Edit :
Quote
Quote:
On 2005-04-07 18:58:55, shyam335 wrote:
yes,pc is more powerful and efficient , whereas mac is user friendly (and imo its for starters and non-power users)
Dude.... Mac IS for power users..... not just for power users, almost 99% of the creative people out there who create music, movies and graphics use Macs. I never owned a mac in my life, but I will, I'm just waiting for Powerbook G5 to come out.....
One really have to use Mac to understand how powerful it is and how it works....
Go checkout this review from a PC user's perspective
http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2232
--
Posted: 2005-04-07 19:58:14
Edit :
Quote
nickorooster Posts: > 500
I use mac every day. G3s, G4s and G5S too.
No, macs are not for Power-users, they ARE for specialty groups though. Macs are generally more efficient with resources, which is good for graphics especially, the reason behind many of the graphics pros using macs.
However, for the price tag, macs are not worth it. If you were to get a 1.25Ghz mac, sure it'll perform better than many 1.8 or even 2Ghz PCs, but I can tell you this, It'll cost more. Macs are resource efficient, NOT finance efficient. You get more bang for your buck in PCs.
Oh but yes, they are generally sexier.
Nick
--
Posted: 2005-04-07 20:11:41
Edit :
Quote
Quote:You get more bang for your buck in PCs.
Yes, but to some/many people, buying a computer isn't just about how much "bang" you can get for your money... it's also about quality, workmanship, design, ease-of-use, the OS, the way it works etc.
PC geeks may want to have their PC constantly open installing all manner of gizmos, constantly tweaking things to make their processor run 0.1 degree cooler. Overclocking processors etc. But thats not the vast majority of computer users.
As long as the computer works and doesn't require much effort to get anything done, that's all many people want... and they don't want the operating system getting in the way of the job their doing.
As well as Macs I have to use PCs in my job, and they wind me up something rotten. Always asking me stupid questions everytime I click something. Or coming up with cryptic error messages like "TIdn6823JK.dll has caused a error - number 0FF00BC" - what the **** does that mean? Or requiring me to spend 10 times longer than the job itself takes, just trying to get the thing working.
Not everybody wants to customise thier computer! Change the desktop picture, change a few icons, add a few interface enhancements - that's most peoples idea of customisation...
Ok, everybody has their opinion on design, but since the original iMac in 1988, not a single PC manufacturer has made any kind of computer designs that have made people sit up and take notice.
Why does Apple get such a massively disproportionate amount of media coverage compared to its market share? It's partly because people who know about design and quality look up to Apple.
How many times in the past has Apple designed a new computer, gadget, piece of software, then 101 copycat PC designs have come out after? Apple innovates, and others follow.
There are lots of people who are willing to pay more for quality and design. That's why there are Rolls Royce and Robin Reliant cars, Bang & Olufson and Goodmans stereos. They both do the same job, but there's a huge difference in quality, workmanship, R&D and hence cost.
You can't compare Macs and PCs on cost alone, or power alone.
And to say Macs aren't for power users is simply naive. Macs are for everyone! But the majority of Macs are used in the video, film and publishing industries which require computers slightly more powerful than my Auntie Ethels word processing and e-mailing requires...
--
Posted: 2005-04-07 22:47:33
Edit :
Quote
PCs are for geeks.
MACs are for artsy fartsy people.
--
Posted: 2005-04-07 23:57:03
Edit :
Quote
nickorooster Posts: > 500
Surprisingly, i agree with almost everything joolsG4 said. I still dont agree that while apple innovates, others follow. Sure, you invented the mouse, but PCs have been on the fore-front since.
Nick
--
Posted: 2005-04-08 00:14:00
Edit :
Quote
actually the US military (well, some researchers who worked there) created the mouse and "windows" interface.
--
Posted: 2005-04-08 00:19:14
Edit :
Quote
New Topic
Reply
