I've just bought an iMac and it's brilliant....

[bhaexpress]

its a pc.......

And ?

 

[bhaexpress]

To be fair, the latest iMac is hardly flourescent now is it? On th eother points I agree with you just about 100%, which is whay I will run W7 on mine if I buy one. And I cannot find anything a Mac can do that a PC can't, so it's about preference really, for the reasons I mentioned before.

I agree, there's not a lot between them most of the time. The problem with the Mac is that it can't do what a PC can do because so often the software just isn't available. There's a bit of software that my present employer uses for publishing web pages but in multiple languages. I'd be the first to say it's not the best package I have ever seen in fact I would call it pretty flakey at best. However, it's something that just isn't available on a Mac. The Mac's strength is also it's weakness. Whilst it is traditionally more reliable than a PC (not the case anymore) it's because all Mac software has to be approved by Apple as does the hardware. That's the big restriction. Cost is not the only reason why PCs outnumber Macs.

 

[sjamesb3466]

Do you all agree...I can't really see why you would use Windows after this....or am I missing something?

Parks

The main thing I do on a computer is play games, especially online and its not really possible to do that with a Mac. If I wanted to use alot of video/graphic/music editing software I would use a Mac but for gaming there is only one choice. Plus the new processor I just got (Intel i7 975) makes my naughty bits very very happy

 

[willyfantastic]

And ?

from what you wrote there, it seemed to me you thought i was talking about a mac, and not a pc, i may be wrong tho

 

[Goldstone Rapper]

I agree, there's not a lot between them most of the time. The problem with the Mac is that it can't do what a PC can do because so often the software just isn't available. There's a bit of software that my present employer uses for publishing web pages but in multiple languages. I'd be the first to say it's not the best package I have ever seen in fact I would call it pretty flakey at best. However, it's something that just isn't available on a Mac. The Mac's strength is also it's weakness. Whilst it is traditionally more reliable than a PC (not the case anymore) it's because all Mac software has to be approved by Apple as does the hardware. That's the big restriction. Cost is not the only reason why PCs outnumber Macs.

Hold on. Phil's just corrected you that the modern iMacs are hardly flourescent and you can't even acknowledge the fact that on this point, you've got it wrong. Instead, you go on regardless about the fact they "can't do what a PC can do." Didn't Phil also tell you that he can run Windows 7 on a Mac? Therefore, just about anything that can run on Windows 7 can run on a Mac, including that flakey piece of software your employer uses. It's also factually incorrect that all Mac software has to be approved by Apple. This may be true of the iPhone and the iPad, but it isn't the case as far as OS X for the Mac or indeed the software for Windows that can run on a Mac.

 

[shingle]

Once you've used a mac you'll never go back. Use from the box, intuitive and virus free, whats not to like. I've had a macbook for three years and an imac since December, and they're awesome. My 25mb photographic raw files are viewed and processed in seconds.

macs =

 

[parks]

The main thing I do on a computer is play games, especially online and its not really possible to do that with a Mac. If I wanted to use alot of video/graphic/music editing software I would use a Mac but for gaming there is only one choice. Plus the new processor I just got (Intel i7 975) makes my naughty bits very very happy

I am no expert, but if you want to play games (and watch HD movies) wouldn't you buy a Playstation?

The iMac doesn't run games as well as windows I grant you, but it is soooo good at everything else.....its worth the cash.

 

[Superphil]

Once you've used a mac you'll never go back.

Sadly didn't work out for me, twice.

 

[Goldstone Rapper]

Hold on. Phil's just corrected you that the modern iMacs are hardly flourescent.

Or fluorescent!

 

[auschr]

I like mac approved hardware

 

[blue'n'white]

I clicked on this because my PC is coming to the end of it's useful working life and I have been looking for a new computer. I have a laptop as well to be getting on with and I anticipate that i will use the new computer, whatever it may be, mainly for photos and for music. In that case I thought a mac would be best. However you won't get a straight answer from Apple store as they want to sell you a mac and you won't get a straight answer from PC world cos they want to sell you the most expensive.
Very frustrating.
OK then - in simple terms, money being no object (I wish), what's the best ?

 

[Beach Hut]

Dell was 5 years old so bought a Mac - simples

 

[Superphil]

OK then - in simple terms, money being no object (I wish), what's the best ?

LOL . That is a question for which there will never be an answer.

 

[Bozza]

As I've posted before, and I wasn't going to join this bloody thread, it is my belief that for a home machine doing home-y things* a Mac is very, very hard to beat. But spec for spec, that Mac will cost you a bit more than an equivalent PC.

I couldn't do all of my day job on my Mac (although I could do 95% of it easily, and 100% with Parallels or VMWare to run Windows and Windows apps), but I wouldn't want to do my home stuff on a PC. Horses for courses. Simples.

(* I consider homey things to be email, web browsing, photo storage and manipulation and music storage. And you'll want to do these things with the minimum of fuss and minimum risk of harm to your machine, your files or your family.)

 

[bhaexpress]

Hold on. Phil's just corrected you that the modern iMacs are hardly flourescent and you can't even acknowledge the fact that on this point, you've got it wrong. Instead, you go on regardless about the fact they "can't do what a PC can do." Didn't Phil also tell you that he can run Windows 7 on a Mac? Therefore, just about anything that can run on Windows 7 can run on a Mac, including that flakey piece of software your employer uses. It's also factually incorrect that all Mac software has to be approved by Apple. This may be true of the iPhone and the iPad, but it isn't the case as far as OS X for the Mac or indeed the software for Windows that can run on a Mac.

You don't know that much about computers do you ? A lot of PC apps have to run native. Granted they aren't the best bits of software ever written but they are not available to Macs period. Oh it's true that not all software doesn't have to be approved by Apple, it's just that things like the very widely used Windows Messenger don't run with the same functionality. I have nothing against Macs but lkike a lot of PC users I can't see why Mac users think they are so much better when in fact they aren't, that's my point.

 

[bhaexpress]

As I've posted before, and I wasn't going to join this bloody thread, it is my belief that for a home machine doing home-y things* a Mac is very, very hard to beat. But spec for spec, that Mac will cost you a bit more than an equivalent PC.

I couldn't do all of my day job on my Mac (although I could do 95% of it easily, and 100% with Parallels or VMWare to run Windows and Windows apps), but I wouldn't want to do my home stuff on a PC. Horses for courses. Simples.

(* I consider homey things to be email, web browsing, photo storage and manipulation and music storage. And you'll want to do these things with the minimum of fuss and minimum risk of harm to your machine, your files or your family.)

That's exactly the point, it's a matter of choice at the end of the day. VMWare is an interesting point, not so long ago I was using a Mac running VMWare to run Vista, it did it flawlessly but it was a rather expensive machine. It was in fact the only Mac in the building and it belonged to the IT Manager who was a Mac fan.

 

[Superphil]

You don't know that much about computers do you ? A lot of PC apps have to run native.

My understanding is that Windows 7 will run natively on Macs, therefore all Windows 7 software will run on it, including full versions of Messenger etc. I'm not talking about running a virtual environment on OSX, but a ground up install of W7 on the Mac computer (using Bootcamp or similar). You then have the option when booting up to boot either OSX or Windows OS and use it natively.

 

[Bozza]

You don't know that much about computers do you ? A lot of PC apps have to run native.

You've lost me. Any Windows software can run natively on a (modern Intel) Mac. You install Windows on your Mac, either via Parallels or VMWare. Alternatively use Bootcamp whereby you boot straight into Windows and there's not a sniff of OS X anywhere near.

 

[bhaexpress]

You've lost me. Any Windows software can run natively on a (modern Intel) Mac. You install Windows on your Mac, either via Parallels or VMWare. Alternatively use Bootcamp whereby you boot straight into Windows and there's not a sniff of OS X anywhere near.

Not really sure what this was running from a Mac standpoit but it was not running Vista native.

 

[bhaexpress]

My understanding is that Windows 7 will run natively on Macs, therefore all Windows 7 software will run on it, including full versions of Messenger etc. I'm not talking about running a virtual environment on OSX, but a ground up install of W7 on the Mac computer (using Bootcamp or similar). You then have the option when booting up to boot either OSX or Windows OS and use it natively.

Yes but if you buy a Mac and run WIndows, why buy a Mac in the first place ? Because it looks pretty ?