Macs vs Windows

Moneymaker

Swipe wrote: »

So you are left with perfectly functional hardware with no secure OS support. I know my new Nuc with it is current specs will last me for at least the next decade or longer on linux.

My PowerBook G4 1.67 GHz made in 2005 still works as well as it ever did. I don't need any "secure OS support" and never have. I recently replaced the battery and fitted larger capacity RAM and HDD. It should be good for another ten years.

prowla

Nada666 wrote: »

And as to the emboldened statement about OS X - that is rubbish and is the one thing everyone can deny. The core OS may be sound and solid but you cannot separate the bundled Applications and state of the Finder from the background OS. And they have had many very serious quality and interface 'decisions' over several recent iterations.

Oh.

Why would you want to separate the apps & UI from the OS?

Which interface decisions have taken away from the quality of the product?

Ben84 wrote: »

I'm thinking about durability most of all. They're easily matched by Toshiba and Lenovo/IBM. Thinkpads for example have exceptional longevity for most users.

I've got a couple of Lenovos, which are pretty good.

But I had one in my last job and it was a bit flakey, in all honesty; it was a hi-end one with a hi-res screen, but at times I found it would just freeze on me.

Ben84 wrote: »

Apple bring to computers the kind of design that B&O do with HiFi and TVs, very glossy and distinctive designs. Some people really love it, others are kind of unconcerned. Personally, my computer is a black plastic box that lives under my desk, next to the waste paper bin. However, the quality of components and construction overall is very good, it is reliable and will last (it's a Lenovo).

Hmm, comparing Apple to B&O isn't all that fair, since B&O don't make that great Hi-Fi; they are very much style over function. (I have a Naim Hi-Fi, which is really rather good.)

I couldn't use Apple if they were just a pretty box which didn't work very well.

Ben84 wrote: »

The things many users like about it are technically down sides for other users. The way things 'just work' and 'everything integrates so well' that I often hear can also be described as limited user control and low customisability. Apple control the user experience more than any other OS I know of. Suits some users and not others.

I quite like tweaking, but I find that OS X doesn't particularly need it.

I do use Firefox instead of the built-in browser.

Ben84 wrote: »

Support matters, but again, it's not a field completely dominated by Apple. Toshiba gave me a replacement charger when I was three months out of warranty once. I know of several companies with excellent support I've used multiple times, and there are probably a few more I don't yet know about.

Sure, but Apple have stores which you can make an appointment and walking and get your product fixed/replaced.

Though not a Mac, some time back my boy broke his iPod and an Apple Store replaced it FOC (out of warranty). That is quality post-sales service.

Ben84 wrote: »

This isn't really how it works. There is no single best computer out there, it just depends on what the user needs and wants. I understand some people are very happy with their macs, and that they suit some users perfectly, but it's worth noting they don't do everything. No single computer does. Nor do Apple have a monopoly on any single area. However, in many cases the final choice is about some design feature or aspect that sets it apart. A lot of people use windows for the extensive software catalogue, while others use linux for the customisability. These things can be defining features of choices.

I didn't (I think) say it was the best computer, I said it was the best quality product, ie. the overall package, taking into account the compute, the (hardware and software) styling, the support (hardware, OS), etc.

Me, I make a living implementing & supporting Linux & Windows systems in the cloud (AWS & Azure), and I have Linux, Windows & UNIX systems; it is based on that that I say Apple have the best quality product.

I like them all (except Windows 8!), and I can happily flip from one to the other, so I have no particular alignment; it's just that Apple feels like quality.

Ben84

Hi prowla, thank you for your interesting reply.

prowla wrote: »

Hmm, comparing Apple to B&O isn't all that fair, since B&O don't make that great Hi-Fi; they are very much style over function. (I have a Naim Hi-Fi, which is really rather good.)

I couldn't use Apple if they were just a pretty box which didn't work very well.

I was focusing mostly on the design side of things there. However, I do rate B&O very highly. Their stuff is pretty, but it's more than just that. I have a beovision from 1981 in the sitting room that has never been in for repair once. I also have a slightly newer one from '83 in the dining room, which has scart, which makes a large difference as you're not depending on a tuner with it. A surprising amount of people ask me if it's HD, which is a surprising thing to say about a 32 year old SD TV.

prowla wrote: »

I quite like tweaking, but I find that OS X doesn't particularly need it.

I love tweaking, having nothing to do would disappoint me. But I can entirely see the appeal of something that just works with not too much effort. Ultimately however, I expect for most users it comes down to how well the predefined things suit them. Not needing to change them may hide you from the potential down sides of not being able to change them.

prowla wrote: »

I didn't (I think) say it was the best computer, I said it was the best quality product, ie. the overall package, taking into account the compute, the (hardware and software) styling, the support (hardware, OS), etc.

I must have been reading it not as intended, but the two things sounded potentially much the same. Personally, I'm really enthusiastic about linux, but the hazard can be that to some people it sounds like I think it's best for everyone. That's really not the case. As good as it is on many points, it isn't right for everyone. It can be difficult to talk positively about the things I like and also keep the idea that there's no single best choice clear at the same time.

20aday

I've owned Apple products since the iPod Touch 2G and in that time I've had one iPhone which decided to 'kiss the pavement' (and was replaced FOC by the Apple Store) and an iMac which developed an LCD fault last year.

Was looking at a bill of approx. £450 to get it repaired until I used the SoGA and then Apple agreed to waive the amount.

Currently using a Mac Mini (late 2014) and whilst I can't upgrade the RAM/HDD it's fine for what I need it to do. When the time comes I can keep my monitor/Magic Mouse/Wired Keyboard, upgrade the unit and keep the Mini for something else.

Yes, Apple products are expensive, yes they do go wrong and yes you can more often than not get a similar spec item for less elsewhere but the customer service is generally brilliant.

Swipe

Moneymaker wrote: »

My PowerBook G4 1.67 GHz made in 2005 still works as well as it ever did. I don't need any "secure OS support" and never have. I recently replaced the battery and fitted larger capacity RAM and HDD. It should be good for another ten years.

I hope you realize that running obsolete versions of mac OSX means your OS is riddled with security vulnerabilities