Help me decide between a PC or a MAC
November 7, 2007 5:30 PM Subscribe
Please help me choose between mac or pc! I am planning to purchase a new pc. I found two that are within my price range and seem to be good choices. The problem is one is a PC and one is a Mac! Help me figure out which one is right for me. Here is a link to the PC and here is a link to the Mac. I am on a budget!
Here is the whole story! I've always used PC's but have been quite tempted to purchase a mac. I dropped my laptop a few months ago and it's been making strange noises and performing poorly so I think it is time to replace it. The laptop is an AMD Athlon 64 3200 498 mhz with 1 GB of RAM. I've been shopping around and am excited about one of the two options linked to above. Which do you think is the better choice for me? I am on a budget so I can't spend too much. Photoshop is a priority for me and I would like to do some video editing as well. Any opinions? I'm open to other computer suggestions as well. I can't spend over 700 dollars though. I already have a monitor/keyboard/mouse.
Thanks for you help!
Here is the whole story! I've always used PC's but have been quite tempted to purchase a mac. I dropped my laptop a few months ago and it's been making strange noises and performing poorly so I think it is time to replace it. The laptop is an AMD Athlon 64 3200 498 mhz with 1 GB of RAM. I've been shopping around and am excited about one of the two options linked to above. Which do you think is the better choice for me? I am on a budget so I can't spend too much. Photoshop is a priority for me and I would like to do some video editing as well. Any opinions? I'm open to other computer suggestions as well. I can't spend over 700 dollars though. I already have a monitor/keyboard/mouse.
Thanks for you help!
"Once and for all, proof that Macs are cheaper than PCs."
posted by ottereroticist at 5:38 PM on November 7, 2007
posted by ottereroticist at 5:38 PM on November 7, 2007
There was an article out today on saying that Macs give you much better bang for your buck:
http://machinist.salon.com/feature/2007/11/07/mac_price/
posted by UMDirector at 5:38 PM on November 7, 2007
http://machinist.salon.com/feature/2007/11/07/mac_price/
posted by UMDirector at 5:38 PM on November 7, 2007
You'll never find a mac user that switched to PC and was happy...
You'll seldom find a pc user switching to a mac that was unhappy...
This thread is doomed to partisan platform politics... but I was first!
posted by HuronBob at 5:39 PM on November 7, 2007
You'll seldom find a pc user switching to a mac that was unhappy...
This thread is doomed to partisan platform politics... but I was first!
posted by HuronBob at 5:39 PM on November 7, 2007
Ah Otter beat me to the punch....so here is another one from computer world on Vista vs. Leopard
http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9045689
posted by UMDirector at 5:40 PM on November 7, 2007
http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9045689
posted by UMDirector at 5:40 PM on November 7, 2007
First things first, make a full backup of your computer that's making funny noises... it's probably the hard drive about to die.
I have a macbook pro, and my girlfriend a macbook. They are both wonderful computers. Photoshop works great on macs, as is video editing. You will however pay a bit more than the equivalent windows based pc.
The 700 dollar mark is going to get you. That means you'll have to go used on the Mac if you get one, and that's always a dangerous proposition. If that budget is hard, go with the pc, if it is a softer budget, go with the lower end macbook, then upgrade the ram later when you get another few hundred.
The other thing to think about is that if you get a mac, you'll have to buy a new version of photoshop. That can easily tilt the money balance as well.
posted by cschneid at 5:40 PM on November 7, 2007
I have a macbook pro, and my girlfriend a macbook. They are both wonderful computers. Photoshop works great on macs, as is video editing. You will however pay a bit more than the equivalent windows based pc.
The 700 dollar mark is going to get you. That means you'll have to go used on the Mac if you get one, and that's always a dangerous proposition. If that budget is hard, go with the pc, if it is a softer budget, go with the lower end macbook, then upgrade the ram later when you get another few hundred.
The other thing to think about is that if you get a mac, you'll have to buy a new version of photoshop. That can easily tilt the money balance as well.
posted by cschneid at 5:40 PM on November 7, 2007
PC. I have spoken.
posted by jeffamaphone at 5:40 PM on November 7, 2007
posted by jeffamaphone at 5:40 PM on November 7, 2007
To everybody in love with macs, I am too. All I'm saying in my answer is that his budget restrictions, and need for memory and processing power leaves him in the undesirable used mac category. He's probably better off either buying a windows laptop now, or waiting till he has enough saved for a mac.
posted by cschneid at 5:41 PM on November 7, 2007
posted by cschneid at 5:41 PM on November 7, 2007
As someone who regularly uses both, I would go for the Mac, simply because it's much easier to install/ run Windows programs on a Mac than the other way around.
It can be handy for specific programs that don't exist on the other operating system.
(And if you do decide to go with Windows, seriously look into whether Vista or XP is a better choice for you; I work in technical support, and Vista is anathema right now.)
posted by quin at 5:48 PM on November 7, 2007
It can be handy for specific programs that don't exist on the other operating system.
(And if you do decide to go with Windows, seriously look into whether Vista or XP is a better choice for you; I work in technical support, and Vista is anathema right now.)
posted by quin at 5:48 PM on November 7, 2007
Unless you go used, it's like cschneid says, the Mac is a bit out of your price range, especially considering the specs you would want in order to run Photoshop and do video editing.
The base mac mini only has 1GB of RAM and an 80GB hard drive. Increasing the RAM will put you close to or over your alloted budget, and relatively speaking, it's going to be harder to do DIY harder to do upgrades on the mac mini anyway.
Given your set of parameters, the PC seems to be the way to go in this case.
posted by roomwithaview at 5:49 PM on November 7, 2007
The base mac mini only has 1GB of RAM and an 80GB hard drive. Increasing the RAM will put you close to or over your alloted budget, and relatively speaking, it's going to be harder to do DIY harder to do upgrades on the mac mini anyway.
Given your set of parameters, the PC seems to be the way to go in this case.
posted by roomwithaview at 5:49 PM on November 7, 2007
yeah get the pc- hack leopard if you want it
posted by Large Marge at 5:50 PM on November 7, 2007
posted by Large Marge at 5:50 PM on November 7, 2007
You'll never find a mac user that switched to PC and was happy...
Here I am!
posted by Eringatang at 5:55 PM on November 7, 2007 [2 favorites]
Here I am!
posted by Eringatang at 5:55 PM on November 7, 2007 [2 favorites]
That means you'll have to go used on the Mac if you get one, and that's always a dangerous proposition...
I dunno about that. Buy it from an authorized reseller - I'm writing this on a powerbook g4 (768 mb ram, 100 g hard drive) that I bought refurbed about four years ago. Love it.
posted by rtha at 5:58 PM on November 7, 2007
I dunno about that. Buy it from an authorized reseller - I'm writing this on a powerbook g4 (768 mb ram, 100 g hard drive) that I bought refurbed about four years ago. Love it.
posted by rtha at 5:58 PM on November 7, 2007
You'll seldom find a pc user switching to a mac that was unhappy...
Eh, I've been pretty consistently underwhelmed since I switched to a mac a couple of years ago (though I will say I do love not having to worry about viruses, etc.).
That could be, however, because A) I cheaped out and got the low-end ibook with the dinky screen and dinky hard drive/RAM, and B) I use a much more powerful PC every day at work, so said dinky ibook sort of pales in comparison sheerly in terms of speed, bells and whistles, etc. Still, a friend of mine who also switched from pc to mac around the same time I did reports the exact same "eh" response.
posted by scody at 6:00 PM on November 7, 2007
Eh, I've been pretty consistently underwhelmed since I switched to a mac a couple of years ago (though I will say I do love not having to worry about viruses, etc.).
That could be, however, because A) I cheaped out and got the low-end ibook with the dinky screen and dinky hard drive/RAM, and B) I use a much more powerful PC every day at work, so said dinky ibook sort of pales in comparison sheerly in terms of speed, bells and whistles, etc. Still, a friend of mine who also switched from pc to mac around the same time I did reports the exact same "eh" response.
posted by scody at 6:00 PM on November 7, 2007
if you want a mac, buy a mac.
if you want a PC, keep your eye out for deals from Dell. They occur a couple times a month and are usually well-publicized by deal sites like FatWallet or SlickDeals.
For example, here was a Dell deal from a couple days ago that's $100 less than the Geeks desktop you linked AND comes with a monitor (the other specs are largely comparable).
Keep in mind if you have a monitor you're happy with you can probably get $70-100 on craigslist for the one which comes with your machine.
Wireddeals.com is a good website to get an overview of what the latest hot dell deal is.
I rarely see desktop deals from anyone but dell -- occasionally you will see discontinued desktops being blown out at Best Buy or Staples, etc for around $299-400, but it's usually worth spending the couple extra bucks to get the monitor, etc.
posted by fishfucker at 6:00 PM on November 7, 2007
if you want a PC, keep your eye out for deals from Dell. They occur a couple times a month and are usually well-publicized by deal sites like FatWallet or SlickDeals.
For example, here was a Dell deal from a couple days ago that's $100 less than the Geeks desktop you linked AND comes with a monitor (the other specs are largely comparable).
Keep in mind if you have a monitor you're happy with you can probably get $70-100 on craigslist for the one which comes with your machine.
Wireddeals.com is a good website to get an overview of what the latest hot dell deal is.
I rarely see desktop deals from anyone but dell -- occasionally you will see discontinued desktops being blown out at Best Buy or Staples, etc for around $299-400, but it's usually worth spending the couple extra bucks to get the monitor, etc.
posted by fishfucker at 6:00 PM on November 7, 2007
Mod note: a few comments removed - hey peanut gallery why don't you send your LOLs to MeFiMail and not fill the thread up with crap?
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 6:06 PM on November 7, 2007
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 6:06 PM on November 7, 2007
As a mac user: I'd say PC, but that's because I can do everything 5x faster with XP. I'm sure it's just because I used it constantly for 6 years, but I've been relatively unhappy with my MBP (for a myriad of reasons) for the last few months and regret buying it. The 'Mac is cheaper than PC' article at the top of this article is bunk if you buy your own parts and assemble it; you'll get MUCH better bang for your buck that way.
I'd say that my situation is rare, but my two best friends came to the same conclusion after owning Macbooks.
One very good point as far as Mac goes is that they retain their resale value like nobody's business, so you can sell it and get your PC for only minimal loss if you're unhappy. Personally, I'm giving OS X a few more months before I sell this sucker.
posted by p3on at 6:12 PM on November 7, 2007
I'd say that my situation is rare, but my two best friends came to the same conclusion after owning Macbooks.
One very good point as far as Mac goes is that they retain their resale value like nobody's business, so you can sell it and get your PC for only minimal loss if you're unhappy. Personally, I'm giving OS X a few more months before I sell this sucker.
posted by p3on at 6:12 PM on November 7, 2007
The Mac can't hurt, and it's a much sleeker system than the Gateway. Plus, if you decide you don't like OS X, you can pick up a copy of Windows and install that instead, while still getting the benefit of a small form factor PC.
If you want to see what it's like to have a Mac, the Mini is a great first step.
posted by SemiSophos at 6:15 PM on November 7, 2007
If you want to see what it's like to have a Mac, the Mini is a great first step.
posted by SemiSophos at 6:15 PM on November 7, 2007
Response by poster: Thanks for everyone's help! I am thinking of going with the mac mini. Should I get the 1.83 ghz one and add 1gb of ram (exceeding my budget by only a little!) or would i be better off getting the 2.0 ghz one and keeping the ram the same. I have an external hard drive already so hd space isn't a huge issue. Either option would be faster than my current computer right? I am assuming the mac mini would run photoshop a little quicker than my current setup. Is that correct?
posted by austinlee at 6:25 PM on November 7, 2007
posted by austinlee at 6:25 PM on November 7, 2007
Response by poster: Is it possible to upgrade the ram myself? It looks like the mini might be tough to open. Does it make more sense to have it done by apple?
posted by austinlee at 6:43 PM on November 7, 2007
posted by austinlee at 6:43 PM on November 7, 2007
with your budget, you get the best bang for your buck out of a PC.
the Mac mini uses laptop processors, hard drives, and RAM; all of which affect PS performance negatively. That PC you linked to is pretty solid; you might also be interested in checking on retailmenot.com or supercoupon.com to see if you can knock some more off the list price.
on preview: get more RAM vs faster processor, for sure. also, is your external drive firewire? If so, I think it could be used as your scratch disk, making things run a little smoother in PS.
posted by heeeraldo at 6:43 PM on November 7, 2007
the Mac mini uses laptop processors, hard drives, and RAM; all of which affect PS performance negatively. That PC you linked to is pretty solid; you might also be interested in checking on retailmenot.com or supercoupon.com to see if you can knock some more off the list price.
on preview: get more RAM vs faster processor, for sure. also, is your external drive firewire? If so, I think it could be used as your scratch disk, making things run a little smoother in PS.
posted by heeeraldo at 6:43 PM on November 7, 2007
Response by poster: The external drive is firewire. I will try that for sure! Thanks for the tip.
posted by austinlee at 6:54 PM on November 7, 2007
posted by austinlee at 6:54 PM on November 7, 2007
PC - Macs are pretty and shiny, but you'll get more machine for your buck with a PC. I use windows, mac, and linux on a weekly basis, and macs aren't any better at getting things done, IMO. YMMV.
posted by chrisamiller at 6:58 PM on November 7, 2007
posted by chrisamiller at 6:58 PM on November 7, 2007
You'll never find a mac user that switched to PC and was happy...
OH HAI I HAS REAL COMPUTER NOW!
On a serious note: that bang for the buck article didn't discuss how much computer you got for your money, but how much you could get by selling the computer you got for your money. That sort of calculus worked out real well for houses.
posted by TheOnlyCoolTim at 7:04 PM on November 7, 2007
OH HAI I HAS REAL COMPUTER NOW!
On a serious note: that bang for the buck article didn't discuss how much computer you got for your money, but how much you could get by selling the computer you got for your money. That sort of calculus worked out real well for houses.
posted by TheOnlyCoolTim at 7:04 PM on November 7, 2007
The Mini is very, very limited in terms of how much RAM it can take and what you can hang off it. You have almost no expansion ability, and the components on it are very slow, relatively speaking. It has a lot of CPU power for your dollar, and it's tiny and almost silent, but the limited expandability could be an issue.
The Mini will also be quite a lot slower than the PC, because its internal hard drive is for a laptop... that means it consumes little power and makes little noise, but it also spins and transfers data slowly. Macs really live and die on their hard disk performance, and the Mini is badly crippled in that area, IMO.
If you were more upscale, getting into the iMac price ranges ($1200ish), I'd suggest going that way, as you get a nice monitor, reasonable hard drive, and reasonable amount of memory. Expanding PC memory past 3 gigs is quite difficult, so the iMac memory limitations aren't that big a deal, relatively speaking.
But down in the $700- range, I think you'll get more bang for your buck with the PC.
Avoid Vista if you can; stick with tried-and-true XP. Vista is for Microsoft's benefit, not yours.
posted by Malor at 7:07 PM on November 7, 2007
The Mini will also be quite a lot slower than the PC, because its internal hard drive is for a laptop... that means it consumes little power and makes little noise, but it also spins and transfers data slowly. Macs really live and die on their hard disk performance, and the Mini is badly crippled in that area, IMO.
If you were more upscale, getting into the iMac price ranges ($1200ish), I'd suggest going that way, as you get a nice monitor, reasonable hard drive, and reasonable amount of memory. Expanding PC memory past 3 gigs is quite difficult, so the iMac memory limitations aren't that big a deal, relatively speaking.
But down in the $700- range, I think you'll get more bang for your buck with the PC.
Avoid Vista if you can; stick with tried-and-true XP. Vista is for Microsoft's benefit, not yours.
posted by Malor at 7:07 PM on November 7, 2007
Given that you have $700, and you need Photoshop, and you already have Photoshop for the PC, and Photoshop for the Mac will cost you $649, the choice would seem pretty clear. Unless you want to buy a Mac so you can run Windows programs under Windows using a mouse with not enough buttons, of course.
posted by Hogshead at 7:08 PM on November 7, 2007
posted by Hogshead at 7:08 PM on November 7, 2007
Also, another shout-out for the thank-the-powers-I-don't-have-to-use-a-Mac-any-more crowd.
posted by Hogshead at 7:21 PM on November 7, 2007
posted by Hogshead at 7:21 PM on November 7, 2007
Best answer: Should I get the 1.83 ghz one and add 1gb of ram (exceeding my budget by only a little!) or would i be better off getting the 2.0 ghz one and keeping the ram the same. I have an external hard drive already so hd space isn't a huge issue.
If storage is a nonissue, you'd be paying $200 for the ability to burn DVDs, and an additional 166 MHz. I wouldn't do it.
Either option would be faster than my current computer right? I am assuming the mac mini would run photoshop a little quicker than my current setup. Is that correct?
It definitely should. Intel hit a home run with the Core 2 Duo: it outperforms many higher-clocked chips, and uses less power to do so. For instance, this article at Tom's Hardware shows a 2.4 GHz Core 2 Duo consistently benchmarking faster than a 2.8 GHz Athlon 64 FX-60.
You'll also be moving from a single core (Athlon 64 3200) to a dual-core chip, which will greatly speed up operations that can be done in parallel, and will prevent the computer from locking on things that can't.
Is it possible to upgrade the ram myself? It looks like the mini might be tough to open.
Replacing the ram yourself is a bit of a pain, as it is with any small form factor PC, but a putty knife is all you need to crack the case open. Apple charges $150 for 2GB of RAM, while Micron will sell you the same RAM for $60. Let the size of your fingers and your comfort poking around inside a computer guide your decision.
You may be able to compromise by buying the RAM direct and having an Apple Authorized service center install it for you, but I would check before hand....
posted by SemiSophos at 7:29 PM on November 7, 2007
If storage is a nonissue, you'd be paying $200 for the ability to burn DVDs, and an additional 166 MHz. I wouldn't do it.
Either option would be faster than my current computer right? I am assuming the mac mini would run photoshop a little quicker than my current setup. Is that correct?
It definitely should. Intel hit a home run with the Core 2 Duo: it outperforms many higher-clocked chips, and uses less power to do so. For instance, this article at Tom's Hardware shows a 2.4 GHz Core 2 Duo consistently benchmarking faster than a 2.8 GHz Athlon 64 FX-60.
You'll also be moving from a single core (Athlon 64 3200) to a dual-core chip, which will greatly speed up operations that can be done in parallel, and will prevent the computer from locking on things that can't.
Is it possible to upgrade the ram myself? It looks like the mini might be tough to open.
Replacing the ram yourself is a bit of a pain, as it is with any small form factor PC, but a putty knife is all you need to crack the case open. Apple charges $150 for 2GB of RAM, while Micron will sell you the same RAM for $60. Let the size of your fingers and your comfort poking around inside a computer guide your decision.
You may be able to compromise by buying the RAM direct and having an Apple Authorized service center install it for you, but I would check before hand....
posted by SemiSophos at 7:29 PM on November 7, 2007
I use PCs at work, Mac at home. I love the Mac.
True story: my stepdad got sick of his Windows laptop's problems (less than a year old) and threw it in the trash. For real. Threw it right away. Then went out and bought a Mac Mini. He has been thrilled with it.
posted by The Deej at 7:41 PM on November 7, 2007
True story: my stepdad got sick of his Windows laptop's problems (less than a year old) and threw it in the trash. For real. Threw it right away. Then went out and bought a Mac Mini. He has been thrilled with it.
posted by The Deej at 7:41 PM on November 7, 2007
I prefer PCs, I have a mac mini and don't really care for it.
That said... if you end up with the Mac... you simply MUST upgrade the RAM. A Mac without sufficient RAM is the single most infuriating computer experience I've ever had.
posted by toomuchpete at 8:13 PM on November 7, 2007
That said... if you end up with the Mac... you simply MUST upgrade the RAM. A Mac without sufficient RAM is the single most infuriating computer experience I've ever had.
posted by toomuchpete at 8:13 PM on November 7, 2007
Mac, if for no other reason than it gives you a choice.
I prefer OS X to Windows, but if you decide it's not for you, you can always install Windows on it instead. If you buy a non-Mac PC, you don't have the option of installing OS X on it.
posted by chundo at 8:31 PM on November 7, 2007
I prefer OS X to Windows, but if you decide it's not for you, you can always install Windows on it instead. If you buy a non-Mac PC, you don't have the option of installing OS X on it.
posted by chundo at 8:31 PM on November 7, 2007
Oh, and it looks like Amazon has the 1.8 GHz Mini for $30 less than the Apple Store after a mail in rebate. [via]
posted by SemiSophos at 8:32 PM on November 7, 2007
posted by SemiSophos at 8:32 PM on November 7, 2007
Once you've had a Mac, you never go back.
I've used both and occasionally have to use a PC for work but I love my Macs. I've got an ancient but still very usable Powerbook Pismo in my kitchen on a wireless network and an aluminum 15" Powerbook on my desk.
I will never spend a dime to buy a PC but I will happily plunk down reasonably large sums of cash for a nice Mac.
And, as several others have noted, you can run Windows on a Mac, you cannot run OS X on a PC. Flexibility goes a long way.
And yes, max out your RAM, it is the cheapest upgrade you can buy.
posted by fenriq at 8:45 PM on November 7, 2007
I've used both and occasionally have to use a PC for work but I love my Macs. I've got an ancient but still very usable Powerbook Pismo in my kitchen on a wireless network and an aluminum 15" Powerbook on my desk.
I will never spend a dime to buy a PC but I will happily plunk down reasonably large sums of cash for a nice Mac.
And, as several others have noted, you can run Windows on a Mac, you cannot run OS X on a PC. Flexibility goes a long way.
And yes, max out your RAM, it is the cheapest upgrade you can buy.
posted by fenriq at 8:45 PM on November 7, 2007
I have used laptops exclusively for years. I don't understand the performance issues regarding "slower performance." I'm a professional IT person, I do lots of disk and CPU intensive stuff, and don't feel I hurt for speed in any activity.
That being said, I use a Windows laptop at work and a Macbook Pro at home. Both have Intel Core Duo processors (the Mac's is faster). Both machines are great. I like my Windows laptop, but I love my Mac. I also know a number of Mac users, not computer pros but heavy users nonetheless, who have Mac Minis and are very, very happy with them.
To me, the Mac is the ideal machine. It has consistent, proven hardware. OS X is smooth. The Mac just works. With its Intel processor, it can run OS X and Windows (I use both Bootcamp and Parallels). This gives you the best of both worlds...if you need maximum power and speed in Windows, boot to the Bootcamp partition and run Windows. If you need good speed and to be able to share data between Mac and PC in realtime, your Bootcamp partition can be booted by Parallels from within OS X, thereby wasting no hard drive space (you can install your Windows version of Photoshop on Bootcamp and run it in Parallels as if it was a Mac application. Eventually you can get Mac Photoshop and ditch Windows.
By all means, no matter what you buy, get as much RAM as you can afford. In these days of dual cores and multi-gigahertz speeds, RAM is far more important than processor speed.
posted by lhauser at 8:59 PM on November 7, 2007
That being said, I use a Windows laptop at work and a Macbook Pro at home. Both have Intel Core Duo processors (the Mac's is faster). Both machines are great. I like my Windows laptop, but I love my Mac. I also know a number of Mac users, not computer pros but heavy users nonetheless, who have Mac Minis and are very, very happy with them.
To me, the Mac is the ideal machine. It has consistent, proven hardware. OS X is smooth. The Mac just works. With its Intel processor, it can run OS X and Windows (I use both Bootcamp and Parallels). This gives you the best of both worlds...if you need maximum power and speed in Windows, boot to the Bootcamp partition and run Windows. If you need good speed and to be able to share data between Mac and PC in realtime, your Bootcamp partition can be booted by Parallels from within OS X, thereby wasting no hard drive space (you can install your Windows version of Photoshop on Bootcamp and run it in Parallels as if it was a Mac application. Eventually you can get Mac Photoshop and ditch Windows.
By all means, no matter what you buy, get as much RAM as you can afford. In these days of dual cores and multi-gigahertz speeds, RAM is far more important than processor speed.
posted by lhauser at 8:59 PM on November 7, 2007
just bought a macbook after 15 years of PC purity. Don't miss windows or the PC experience. Not even a little.
posted by Chris4d at 10:59 PM on November 7, 2007
posted by Chris4d at 10:59 PM on November 7, 2007
If you are really looking for bang for your buck, and can live without the portability, go with a desktop PC. If you watch the deal sites fish linked to and are willing to upgrade your parts (not hard at all), you can keep incrementally upgrading PCs and stay close to cutting edge performance for very little cash. In any case I agree with fish' advice about watching for a good Dell deal.
I think of Mac's like BMWs. Well engineered for usability and performance, but not really oriented for the guy on a budget, the extreme performance enthusiast, or the guy that wants to customize his gear. For someone who just wants it to work and is willing to pay not to have to think about it, I think they are ideal. In general, I recommend that people who aren't interested in tinkering with computers go with whatever the person who helps them out is most familiar with.
From the article trying to claim Macs are cheaper than PC's:
"After just a year or two of use, a Windows machine gets so gummed up with spyware, viruses and other nasty stuff that it seems malicious to ask anybody for money for the thing."
Please. If it's not obvious to you that this guy is an idiot, then a Mac is probably the right choice.
posted by Manjusri at 11:43 PM on November 7, 2007
I think of Mac's like BMWs. Well engineered for usability and performance, but not really oriented for the guy on a budget, the extreme performance enthusiast, or the guy that wants to customize his gear. For someone who just wants it to work and is willing to pay not to have to think about it, I think they are ideal. In general, I recommend that people who aren't interested in tinkering with computers go with whatever the person who helps them out is most familiar with.
From the article trying to claim Macs are cheaper than PC's:
"After just a year or two of use, a Windows machine gets so gummed up with spyware, viruses and other nasty stuff that it seems malicious to ask anybody for money for the thing."
Please. If it's not obvious to you that this guy is an idiot, then a Mac is probably the right choice.
posted by Manjusri at 11:43 PM on November 7, 2007
I have a Windows PC (XP), a Mac laptop (last-gen powerbook) and a Linux PC (Debian.)
I use XP for audio recording and convenience (when I don't feel like rebooting to answer AskMe questions, say), I barely use the Mac at all, and I love my Linux box.
Which proves nothing, because people are different. So!
If you buy an Intel-based Mac, you can run Windows on it. Or OSx. Or Linux. Or all at once. If the price is not a concern, I think that makes it your only real choice, because it is the only one that gives you a choice.
posted by davejay at 12:07 AM on November 8, 2007
I use XP for audio recording and convenience (when I don't feel like rebooting to answer AskMe questions, say), I barely use the Mac at all, and I love my Linux box.
Which proves nothing, because people are different. So!
If you buy an Intel-based Mac, you can run Windows on it. Or OSx. Or Linux. Or all at once. If the price is not a concern, I think that makes it your only real choice, because it is the only one that gives you a choice.
posted by davejay at 12:07 AM on November 8, 2007
for what it's worth, i just got a mac mini 1.83 and upgraded the memory with the putty-knife thing. its really very easy if you're used to poking around inside computers, just go slow and be careful. and put your finger on top of the airport antenna when you unclip it or the spring'll go flying off.
i'm very happy with it - its a lot of computing power in a very small package. also, i have boot camp set up and windows installed on the other partition and both os work without any trouble.
posted by sergeant sandwich at 2:22 AM on November 8, 2007
i'm very happy with it - its a lot of computing power in a very small package. also, i have boot camp set up and windows installed on the other partition and both os work without any trouble.
posted by sergeant sandwich at 2:22 AM on November 8, 2007
I have both. I started as a Mac user jumped ship, then recently bought two Macs for 1) "Hey does this website look weird with Safari?" [yes] and 2) the wife's 1st generation ipod hated every XP box we hooked it up to. (maybe we should have replaced the ipod). I prefer the windows machines because I know them better and they are generally better machines for the price.
1) You get more bang for the buck on the pc side because the market is brutally competitive. The $2400 MBP I spec-ed out the other day (sorry hon. Not this year) is basically the equivalent of the $750 Dell Inspiron I'm using now. [no $.10 LED under the keyboard, but that's about it.] YMMV, but I have never seen a comparison that made the Mac competitive that wasn't hugely biased. (i.e. compare the 13" ibook to some weird Sony ultralite that nobody but CFOs buy, or comparing the MBP to Dell's "More money than sense" gaming laptops. If you stick to mainline business systems, it is no contest.
2) Your learning curve is differently shaped. On the pc, picture a single 35 degree angle. On the mac, basic stuff is a 15 degree line, but moderately complicated stuff (hack your hosts file) is a 60 degree line. The curve on Windows from easy stuff to hard stuff is moderately easy on basic stuff, moderately easy on advanced stuff. The Mac curve is trivial on basic stuff, hard on advanced stuff.
That you are even considering an (underpowered) Mac for this application makes me suspect that's what you really want. If it is that important to your self image to be a Mac user [ever seen a Windows tattoo?], rational argument isn't going to work anyway. Buy the Mac if that's what you want, but don't complain when you discover it is more expensive and less powerful than the vastly better developed x86 market.
posted by mrbugsentry at 6:13 AM on November 8, 2007
1) You get more bang for the buck on the pc side because the market is brutally competitive. The $2400 MBP I spec-ed out the other day (sorry hon. Not this year) is basically the equivalent of the $750 Dell Inspiron I'm using now. [no $.10 LED under the keyboard, but that's about it.] YMMV, but I have never seen a comparison that made the Mac competitive that wasn't hugely biased. (i.e. compare the 13" ibook to some weird Sony ultralite that nobody but CFOs buy, or comparing the MBP to Dell's "More money than sense" gaming laptops. If you stick to mainline business systems, it is no contest.
2) Your learning curve is differently shaped. On the pc, picture a single 35 degree angle. On the mac, basic stuff is a 15 degree line, but moderately complicated stuff (hack your hosts file) is a 60 degree line. The curve on Windows from easy stuff to hard stuff is moderately easy on basic stuff, moderately easy on advanced stuff. The Mac curve is trivial on basic stuff, hard on advanced stuff.
That you are even considering an (underpowered) Mac for this application makes me suspect that's what you really want. If it is that important to your self image to be a Mac user [ever seen a Windows tattoo?], rational argument isn't going to work anyway. Buy the Mac if that's what you want, but don't complain when you discover it is more expensive and less powerful than the vastly better developed x86 market.
posted by mrbugsentry at 6:13 AM on November 8, 2007
I have a Mac mini too and it's great for casual use. Compared to the PC at work, it feels just as responsive and capable. The only time it slows down is with CoverFlow and Spaces Expose in Leopard.
It's small, draws only 30 watts of power from the wall and only slightly audible from a metre away. The only immediate downside I see is that I don't think it can drive monitors larger than 22 inch at native resolution.
Also, just note that the Mac mini uses high-end notebook RAM and not regular RAM sticks.
posted by tksh at 6:16 AM on November 8, 2007
It's small, draws only 30 watts of power from the wall and only slightly audible from a metre away. The only immediate downside I see is that I don't think it can drive monitors larger than 22 inch at native resolution.
Also, just note that the Mac mini uses high-end notebook RAM and not regular RAM sticks.
posted by tksh at 6:16 AM on November 8, 2007
I have both. I started as a Mac user jumped ship [...]All three of these paragraphs contain errors; I'm a Mac lover but this is nonsense no matter who's reading it. Sorry.
1) You get more bang for the buck on the pc side because the market is brutally competitive. The $2400 MBP I spec-ed out the other day (sorry hon. Not this year) is basically the equivalent of the $750 Dell Inspiron I'm using now. [no $.10 LED under the keyboard, but that's about it.] [...]
2) Your learning curve is differently shaped. [...]
Crucially, 'bang for the buck' means something more than 'processor speed,' and between the advances in Tiger and Leopard and the fact that Macs run Windows natively (and faster, according to [ahem] PC Magazine, than any comparable Wintel machines), unless you're a serious gamer or need specialized software or work with a lazy IT department, you're probably gonna get a hell of a lot more out of a Mac. It's a better experience in every way, after you've internalized some small changes (like using Command instead of Control) and some big ones (like not having your machine crash every day or two). Switching costs will of course be nonnegligible.
For a whole slew of reasons, you should buy a Mac - the best reason is called 'Windows Vista.' No matter. The easy way: head to an Apple store and play with a Mini for a half-hour. Ask one of the salespeople your questions. Try not to worry about the architecture or the sales pressure; just run some apps, edit a little video, actually use Safari (its latest incarnation is quite clean and quite fast) instead of hearing about it. Consider what integrated automatic backups with a neat, sensible GUI might mean to you. (Time Machine is maybe the most impressive thing about Leopard.) Look up Quicksilver and try out the command line (do you know any UNIX commands?) and ask about running Windows on your Mini.
Be blunt with the salesperson. Then head to Best Buy or wherever and do the same with one of the Windows demo machines, if you're allowed to. Try Vista if the machines aren't all locked. There's a reason the Apple Store lets you just sit down and use one of the machines for a half-hour; the experience is actually a selling point. If it costs $100 more, you can rest assured that over two years of use your $4/month is buying a lot of productivity and pleasure.
posted by waxbanks at 6:53 AM on November 8, 2007
I use a mac and a PC and I'd get a PC.
Between my wife and I we have two laptops and a desktop. I have a Mac at work. Of the three PCs none have ever been taken in for a repair. The Mac has.
In fact, if you read the applecare thread, it really seems like you need a warranty with a mac.
posted by drezdn at 7:04 AM on November 8, 2007
Between my wife and I we have two laptops and a desktop. I have a Mac at work. Of the three PCs none have ever been taken in for a repair. The Mac has.
In fact, if you read the applecare thread, it really seems like you need a warranty with a mac.
posted by drezdn at 7:04 AM on November 8, 2007
You know, I was hesitant to get involved. But I'll respond to the attack from the fanboy: where's the nonsense bub?
MBP: (specs and price from CDW just now).
• 2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo Processor
• 2GB RAM
• 160GB Hard Drive
• DVD+RDL/DVD±RW/CD-RW
• 15.4" Matte Antiglare Screen
2,499.00
Inspiron E1505
• 2.2GHz Intel Core 2 Duo Processor
• 2GB RAM
• 160GB Hard Drive
• 8X DVD +/- dual layer recorder
• 15.4" Ultrasharp SXGA+ display with TrueLife
bought for $750 seven months ago from a Dell reseller.
So, three times the price for 10% more CPU,an LED under the keys and a missing right mouse button?
but...but...but...
It is cheaper not because Mike Dell is a morally superior human being. It is cheaper because the PC market is competitive and the Mac market a monopoly. If there were 40 suppliers selling Macs, Macs would be cheap and Apple shareholders a lot less happy.
If you prefer to spend money on the Apple because it makes you feel like a member of the technological elite [and man, hats off to the Apple marketers who convinced people of that], fine, but don't suggest it is a choice made for reasons of economy.
posted by mrbugsentry at 7:21 AM on November 8, 2007 [1 favorite]
MBP: (specs and price from CDW just now).
• 2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo Processor
• 2GB RAM
• 160GB Hard Drive
• DVD+RDL/DVD±RW/CD-RW
• 15.4" Matte Antiglare Screen
2,499.00
Inspiron E1505
• 2.2GHz Intel Core 2 Duo Processor
• 2GB RAM
• 160GB Hard Drive
• 8X DVD +/- dual layer recorder
• 15.4" Ultrasharp SXGA+ display with TrueLife
bought for $750 seven months ago from a Dell reseller.
So, three times the price for 10% more CPU,an LED under the keys and a missing right mouse button?
but...but...but...
It is cheaper not because Mike Dell is a morally superior human being. It is cheaper because the PC market is competitive and the Mac market a monopoly. If there were 40 suppliers selling Macs, Macs would be cheap and Apple shareholders a lot less happy.
If you prefer to spend money on the Apple because it makes you feel like a member of the technological elite [and man, hats off to the Apple marketers who convinced people of that], fine, but don't suggest it is a choice made for reasons of economy.
posted by mrbugsentry at 7:21 AM on November 8, 2007 [1 favorite]
Since you're asking, I'd get a mac. I switched and never regretted it. It doesn't mean they're perfect, or better. It's just overall a better experience for me. You could get a mac and hate it. I think for the majority of people a mac is the better choice, but there's not guarantee that you'll be in the majority.
Between my wife and I we have two laptops and a desktop. I have a Mac at work. Of the three PCs none have ever been taken in for a repair. The Mac has.
Which means nothing. It's like saying "I bought a ford once, it broke down, fords suck". I've had three macs and never taken one to be repaired. I took many pcs in. Does that carry more weight than your experience? Or perhaps neither carries weight because those are just arbitrary examples?
If it is that important to your self image to be a Mac user [ever seen a Windows tattoo?], rational argument isn't going to work anyway. Buy the Mac if that's what you want, but don't complain when you discover it is more expensive and less powerful than the vastly better developed x86 market.
posted by mrbugsentry
You know, I was hesitant to get involved. But I'll respond to the attack from the fanboy
posted by mrbugsentry
If you prefer to spend money on the Apple because it makes you feel like a member of the technological elite [and man, hats off to the Apple marketers who convinced people of that], fine, but don't suggest it is a choice made for reasons of economy.
posted by mrbugsentry
Oh please. The biggest fan boy in here is you, using every cliche I've heard to put down mac users.
You weren't attacked. Someone disagreed with you. You respond, of course, by calling them a fanboy. You can't imagine that anyone would truly want a mac when compared with a pc unless they want to be part of the elite.
There are certainly obnoxious mac fans. There are also window fans, or mac haters, that are just as bad. You're proof. You have such trouble grasping the concept that the mac can be a better platform for some people without calling people fanboys, accusing them of trying to be a part of an elite group, or bringing up apple tattoos are your issues and have no bearing on reality. Have fun hating.
posted by justgary at 7:49 AM on November 8, 2007
Between my wife and I we have two laptops and a desktop. I have a Mac at work. Of the three PCs none have ever been taken in for a repair. The Mac has.
Which means nothing. It's like saying "I bought a ford once, it broke down, fords suck". I've had three macs and never taken one to be repaired. I took many pcs in. Does that carry more weight than your experience? Or perhaps neither carries weight because those are just arbitrary examples?
If it is that important to your self image to be a Mac user [ever seen a Windows tattoo?], rational argument isn't going to work anyway. Buy the Mac if that's what you want, but don't complain when you discover it is more expensive and less powerful than the vastly better developed x86 market.
posted by mrbugsentry
You know, I was hesitant to get involved. But I'll respond to the attack from the fanboy
posted by mrbugsentry
If you prefer to spend money on the Apple because it makes you feel like a member of the technological elite [and man, hats off to the Apple marketers who convinced people of that], fine, but don't suggest it is a choice made for reasons of economy.
posted by mrbugsentry
Oh please. The biggest fan boy in here is you, using every cliche I've heard to put down mac users.
You weren't attacked. Someone disagreed with you. You respond, of course, by calling them a fanboy. You can't imagine that anyone would truly want a mac when compared with a pc unless they want to be part of the elite.
There are certainly obnoxious mac fans. There are also window fans, or mac haters, that are just as bad. You're proof. You have such trouble grasping the concept that the mac can be a better platform for some people without calling people fanboys, accusing them of trying to be a part of an elite group, or bringing up apple tattoos are your issues and have no bearing on reality. Have fun hating.
posted by justgary at 7:49 AM on November 8, 2007
This is the applecare thread I was referring to.
Which means nothing. It's like saying "I bought a ford once, it broke down, fords suck". I've had three macs and never taken one to be repaired. I took many pcs in.
I'm just providing personal experience.
posted by drezdn at 8:04 AM on November 8, 2007
Which means nothing. It's like saying "I bought a ford once, it broke down, fords suck". I've had three macs and never taken one to be repaired. I took many pcs in.
I'm just providing personal experience.
posted by drezdn at 8:04 AM on November 8, 2007
If you prefer to spend money on the Apple because it makes you feel like a member of the technological elite [and man, hats off to the Apple marketers who convinced people of that], fine, but don't suggest it is a choice made for reasons of economy.
Very true. After getting my first iMac, I was completely sold on Apple hardware. But that's just because the iMac is a fantastically designed machine, that fits a lot of performance in a tiny package and gets the hell out of your way on the desktop. Nobody sells better desktop hardware for the average user.
MacBooks, on the other hand... they have nothing special compared to the PC competition. The only real selling point is the brand and the integrated camera - but you can get much cheaper (and higher-performance) Dell laptops with a built-in camera now.
Of course depending on who you ask, OS X can improve your productivity greatly, which also weighs into the economics of it. But if you're planning on using Windows on it, yeah, there's no economic reason to buy a Mac; it's purely a design decision.
posted by chundo at 8:45 AM on November 8, 2007
Very true. After getting my first iMac, I was completely sold on Apple hardware. But that's just because the iMac is a fantastically designed machine, that fits a lot of performance in a tiny package and gets the hell out of your way on the desktop. Nobody sells better desktop hardware for the average user.
MacBooks, on the other hand... they have nothing special compared to the PC competition. The only real selling point is the brand and the integrated camera - but you can get much cheaper (and higher-performance) Dell laptops with a built-in camera now.
Of course depending on who you ask, OS X can improve your productivity greatly, which also weighs into the economics of it. But if you're planning on using Windows on it, yeah, there's no economic reason to buy a Mac; it's purely a design decision.
posted by chundo at 8:45 AM on November 8, 2007
You're in luck, there's a pretty good fry's deal today:
$299 3.0 GhZ (not dual core, obviously), 1.5GB RAM, 320 GB HD. (Fry's Link).
if you're still thinking about buying a pc, that one might fit the bill. Probably be about $350 shipped after taxes.
posted by fishfucker at 9:29 AM on November 8, 2007
$299 3.0 GhZ (not dual core, obviously), 1.5GB RAM, 320 GB HD. (Fry's Link).
if you're still thinking about buying a pc, that one might fit the bill. Probably be about $350 shipped after taxes.
posted by fishfucker at 9:29 AM on November 8, 2007
The only real selling point is the brand and the integrated camera
And the OS. You're missing the entire point most people switch to the mac. It's nice hardware plus the OS they want to use. Again, believing that most people would use a macbook simply because of the brand is insulting.
posted by justgary at 6:52 PM on November 12, 2007
And the OS. You're missing the entire point most people switch to the mac. It's nice hardware plus the OS they want to use. Again, believing that most people would use a macbook simply because of the brand is insulting.
posted by justgary at 6:52 PM on November 12, 2007
The Mini doesn't use laptop RAM. You can see the RAM in these photos. It does, though, only have a single slot for the RAM, thus limiting your expandability.
this thread is old and dead, but for the benefit of future readers, this is not true. the mac mini used to have a single slot for a full-sized DIMM. the current generation has two PC-5300 SODIMMs, which is the form factor you'll find in most modern laptops.
posted by sergeant sandwich at 9:45 PM on November 13, 2007
this thread is old and dead, but for the benefit of future readers, this is not true. the mac mini used to have a single slot for a full-sized DIMM. the current generation has two PC-5300 SODIMMs, which is the form factor you'll find in most modern laptops.
posted by sergeant sandwich at 9:45 PM on November 13, 2007
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by austinlee at 5:32 PM on November 7, 2007