Members alphajerk Posted February 2, 2007 Members Share Posted February 2, 2007 microsoft doesnt build computers. they are in the software business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted February 2, 2007 Members Share Posted February 2, 2007 microsoft doesnt build computers. they are in the software business. Thanks. I didn't even catch that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members alphajerk Posted February 2, 2007 Members Share Posted February 2, 2007 it is what gave them the leverage over Apple in the first place. MS has ALWAYS been dominant over Apple with SW. Apple is generally better with HW, BUT a high end PC can easily be built with much better parts than even Apple uses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Antman261 Posted February 2, 2007 Members Share Posted February 2, 2007 Iunno, to me a windows computer seems a bit like a frankstein of computing, a mish mash of parts in the hope that it'll all work together! Whereas mac's are more of a designed product with an operating system in mind. There' less variables and that means less room for error. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members alphajerk Posted February 2, 2007 Members Share Posted February 2, 2007 and more cost for what you get... and there is still PLENTY of error. its pretty hard to put together a PC and not have it work... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members deanmass Posted February 2, 2007 Members Share Posted February 2, 2007 So.....(gulp) Anyone who has had to maintain large quantities of both platforms knows which is superior... A windows desktop/windows client pairing works fine, provided you buy the server, SMS and exchange. With it you get print and file services, systems management (i.e. server based lock down) and email/calendering. A mac based desktop/server pairing get you the same thing, but, everything is included in the price of the server with an unlimited client license. Microsoft charges ala carte. Apple tosses it all in, allowing you to buy more hardware (i.e. clustering servers or more user stations) rather than dropping cash on software. So considering the above, if you had a 50 user office for salespeople, they are gonna need email/Office apps/web/print/etc, there is NO comparison between cost, or maintainability. Considering all of this, much of it was NOT true prior to OSX. OS 9 was a bit of a train wreck, and Microsofts mass lock down options were usually third party add ons. People get too hung up on the platform. I know another guy (who is my personal 'work' hero) who is parapalegic, and has his district all mac. So, on top of overcoming his handicap, he over came an overwhelming PC bias in a school system. He did it by convincing them to bring in a corporate psychologist to evaluate actual needs and usage patterns, and when it came time to tell the tale, mac's came out on top for the intended use, ROI and inception cost. Now, none of this means beans if you are on your own with 1 machine. Use whichever. Choose your software, then choose your platform. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ernest Buckley Posted February 2, 2007 Members Share Posted February 2, 2007 Just for the record... I purchased my first PC in 1988 or somewhere along there. It was a 386 I believe, I used it first for Word Processing and then eventually I realized I could use it for MIDI. What a concept that was! Then I bought another PC several years later and it was OK but it always felt foreign to me. I eventually and reluctantly switched to a MAC in 2000 after many years of being on a PC and the only reason I switched was because most of the musicians I was working with owned MACs. I made the move and for the first several weeks, it felt strange but then something happened... I felt the machine was an extension of myself. Something I never felt on a PC. That is why I love MACs. To this day I use PCs at the office and though I know my way around it, I feel like I`m working with mittens on. Just attaching a file to an email is a multi layer process where on a MAC, you just grab it and put it where you want it. be lucky,EB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members alphajerk Posted February 2, 2007 Members Share Posted February 2, 2007 Just attaching a file to an email is a multi layer process where on a MAC, you just grab it and put it where you want it. ummm, i dont think you do know your way around a PC then. you can grab and drop into an email, you can copy and paste into an email, you can attach from an email, you can right click and send via email. these are all WAYS, not STEPS. hell, you dont even need your email open to send a file through your client. as for networking... i maintain a decent number of machines per network, as many as you cite. there is one big advantage of pure PC networks is interoperability. i run mixed networks too... i dont think there is any cost advantage running a pure mac network. OSX actually lets mac's play on networks now, OS9 was a bitch and a half [although i ran those networks as well]. i have 7 machines running at my house... thats a little more than 1 machine, and its a mixed [pc/mac] network. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ryst Posted February 2, 2007 Members Share Posted February 2, 2007 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil O'Keefe Posted February 2, 2007 Share Posted February 2, 2007 I fear it's like death and taxes... try as you might, there's just no escaping it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gus Lozada Posted February 2, 2007 Share Posted February 2, 2007 This should be a sticky ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members alphajerk Posted February 2, 2007 Members Share Posted February 2, 2007 mac only has 4.7% of the market btw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted February 2, 2007 Members Share Posted February 2, 2007 Just attaching a file to an email is a multi layer process where on a MAC, you just grab it and put it where you want it. I use both Macs and PCs, and it's just as easy on either one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members audioicon Posted February 2, 2007 Author Members Share Posted February 2, 2007 microsoft doesnt build computers. they are in the software business.Oh really? I did't know that. Well sorry, I was referring to operating systems.Say there was an operating system developed/confugured for DAW.You go to a store buy a DAW and it's loaded with an OS configured for music recording.The reason I mentioned the MAC clone is because everytime Microsoft developes a new platform, people are quick to say it's a copy of a MAC OS.Like they are saying now about Vista.Audioicon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted February 2, 2007 Members Share Posted February 2, 2007 Say there was an operating system developed/confugured for DAW. You go to a store buy a DAW and it's loaded with an OS configured for music recording. RADAR... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members alphajerk Posted February 2, 2007 Members Share Posted February 2, 2007 Oh really? I did't know that. Well sorry, I was referring to operating systems. Say there was an operating system developed/confugured for DAW. You go to a store buy a DAW and it's loaded with an OS configured for music recording. The reason I mentioned the MAC clone is because everytime Microsoft developes a new platform, people are quick to say it's a copy of a MAC OS. Like they are saying now about Vista. Audioicon you know, THAT is a good point. and BOTH are guilty as sin about bloating the OS. there is a version of XP running about 300mb that is so streamlined down....seriously, i do wish BOTH companies put out pureOS's with absolutely no frills. that would be sweet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted February 2, 2007 Members Share Posted February 2, 2007 I could do without the Paperclip Person and Bouncing (or Swooshing) Icons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members chipmcdonald Posted February 2, 2007 Members Share Posted February 2, 2007 Some points: - PCs have market share because from a hardware standpoint they're much more open. It's easier to apply one to a unique circumstance - like and oddball Point of Sale requirement, or something that needs a specialized hardware solution. Likewise, it's easier to put "stuff" on them. Which is also why it's a much, much bigger hill that MS has to climb dealing with a ridiculous amount of hardware combinations and possibilities vs. Apple's close-ended hardware. That can be seen as a weakness or a plus. IMO, it's a plus: I don't like the way Apple subsumes the process, while at the same time taking the high road of protecting the user from himself. I like that there's a lot of oddball hardware things you can do with the PC architecture, and I'm glad we're not in a sterile all-Apple world. - Because there's a WHOLE lot more PCs in use, it only follows there will be more people with problems. - If M$ made Windows as closed off from the user as Apple, there would be a lot less "problems". - A lot of Apple users I know are not "power users"; they bought an Apple because they weren't "computer geeks" or some such, and likewise are not asking much from their computer; - Conversely, of the Mac users I know that I would describe as "power users", they seem to have *more* problems than I did, pre-XP. - Of course there's more viruses being written for the platform that is more prevalent - and likewise, there's more people on PC's that have virus problems. ------------------------------------------------ My audio box that runs XP, that *isn't* hooked up to the Net, hasn't crashed in the years I've had it. This computer has gotten slow because I'm slutty with it, and run oddball firewalls or whatever - but it also hasn't GPF'ed. In fact, I would say that if the average XP user were to set his machine up as locked-out as a Mac - meaning, things couldn't be tweaked, the registry couldn't be messed with, you couldn't let it get to running with only 20mb of drive space left, etc. etc. - you'd see no difference. Maybe, given how many people are using PCs, you might see less problems than people with Macs have. - M$ has messed up IMO by trying to add new crap into Internet Explorer that just seems to give hackers bait to attack it, with obvious results. - All of the added "features" M$ adds in, that Macs don't have, are responsible in great part for it's bad rap. If they'd focus on the core product more, and *adding* features less, this thread wouldn't be here. / have watched some very nasty Mac crashes // know people who sold their Mac because it wouldn't work predictably/// Need I bring up who makes the processor for Macs now?And what platform the video card technology originated on? Macs have moved closer to being PCs these days... and both platforms have moved closer to Linux on a low level...//// One day you'll be able to run both OSes on either machine, and what difference will that be...?///// "oops..." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ryst Posted February 2, 2007 Members Share Posted February 2, 2007 I fear it's like death and taxes... try as you might, there's just no escaping it. You're Abso-fuggin-lutely 100% correct, Phil.I should have also mentioned that the image in my last post was created on a Mac and uploaded from a Mac. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Alndln2 Posted February 2, 2007 Members Share Posted February 2, 2007 I should have also mentioned that the image in my last post was created on a MacJust when you think you've quit, they draaaaaaag you back in...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members deanmass Posted February 3, 2007 Members Share Posted February 3, 2007 Delete the actors folder on your hard drive, bouncing paper clips and Einstein goes away.. There are tremendous cost savings in a client/server environment Windows vs/ Mac. I agree in a home network/small studio, it really makes little difference. The network I administer is 700+ nodes, mixed. The XP machines and the OSX machines are easy. The 98/OS9 machines suck. But, when it comes to license costs, OSX blows the doors off Windows. Buy the server with Apple, the license for all the bells and whistles comes with. This is not a matter of opinion, it is an easily provable fact. Go look on the web...Apple servers come with the equivalent of the Microsoft Small Office server 'bundle' at no charge. If Microsoft were to bundle the server with all apps, flat price, this would change, but as of now, it is ala carte.Even with the educational prices I get, Windows is way more expensive per node. Cost wise, you are better off running Apple or Linux server back ends, and then not limiting your client. OS Agnostic is the goal for me business wise. But, my personal preference is OSX. The application, or in my case, the curricular need, should dictate the choice of client OS. Since the software application is the thing that fills the need, the OS is just the 'host', and since the OSX 'host' is much easier to deploy with the base server bundle on Apple products, this gives it the edge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members blue2blue Posted February 3, 2007 Members Share Posted February 3, 2007 I fear it's like death and taxes... try as you might, there's just no escaping it. That's why we so deeply appreciate the humor, good grace, and patience of our mods, here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members blue2blue Posted February 3, 2007 Members Share Posted February 3, 2007 Now... when you say (in a subsequent post) that this image was created on a Mac are you saying you started from scratch in a paint or 3D program -- 'cause that would be impressive. I mean, if I didn't know better, I'd say you probably started from a photographic image from somewhere and... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members John Sayers Posted February 3, 2007 Members Share Posted February 3, 2007 Some points:///// "oops..." Very good points. ------------------------------ Deanmass - I'd like to know what server this site uses as it's the only site I visit that goes offline for maintenance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Geoff Grace Posted February 3, 2007 Members Share Posted February 3, 2007 In fact, I would say that if the average XP user were to set his machine up as locked-out as a Mac - meaning, things couldn't be tweaked, the registry couldn't be messed with, you couldn't let it get to running with only 20mb of drive space left, etc. etc. - you'd see no difference. Maybe, given how many people are using PCs, you might see less problems than people with Macs have. Chip, I'm not sure what you mean by this -- you can do some serious tweaking to your Mac's UNIX underpinnings via the Terminal application. In fact, traditional Mac power users who are otherwise UNIX novices could really mess up their Macs this way if they weren't careful. But your point is well taken that there are two sides to every coin. Best, Geoff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.