PC vs Apple

[John Stevens]

Looks like my wife and I will be buying a new computer soon. We've never owned anything but IBM-type PCs. I'd tend to buy one again, but I'm wondering whether there's any advantage to Apple computers in regards to virus protection and reliability.

Although we always use an updated AV program and keep the updates current, we've had two virus infections--one when the AV program didn't recognize the virus before the software company updated the profiles (that afternoon!) and the other when my wife first connected her brand-new laptop so she could download the AV update and Zone Alarm! The problem both times was that even after we supposedly got rid of the viruses and fixed the damage (with tech support from the computer mfr and the AV software vendor), the computers never worked the same again.

We also had a disappointing problem with a hard drive crash. Luckily we didn't lose any data because we back up regularly, but even after replacing the hard drive and downloading the newest drivers, the computer never worked like it did before the crash.

So you get the idea of what I'm trying to avoid. Anyone know whether Apples are better in these regards? Or can anyone point me to a good web site or discussion forum where this has been discussed? Thanks in advance.

[Mike Cutler]

John. I have an Dell 8100 running Windows XP, a 17" mac G4 laptop running Jaquar, and a Dual 2.0 G5 running Panther. I have a little bias toward the Mac's, but Windows XP is a very nice operating system.
The real advantage to me with the Mac's at this time is strictly numbers, by that I mean Mac only has about 8% of the market share, ergo all the little dirtballs out there writing malicous code are targeting the Windows based operating system and by enlarge ignoring the Mac's. Almost all of the harvesting programs, and popup advertiser are aimed at exploiting the Windows registry/operating system also.
As far as hard drive crashes go, I've experienced only one with a Mac. It was immediatly following the installation of Norton Internet Utilities. I don't use Norton any longer for the Mac. I've had three Windows system crashes, all were related to the Auto Restore feature and the Auto save function of MS Office creating ghost files and bringing the system to a dead stop. A simple device that all PC or Mac owners should have is an external Hard drive Enclosure in the event of a hard drive crash. After loading a new hard drive the old one is hooked up via USB/Firewire and the data can be removed, due to the fact that no boot sequence is required and the system sees the external hard drive as a Mass storage device. I've recovered two business computer's files and data with this device.
As I stated I like the Mac's alot. There is an initial investment in hardware that may be required. Your older Windows compatable hardware may not work with the newer Mac's.
The Newer G4's and G5's are shipping with some specific ATI and Nvdia Video cards,and there are really no after market video cards yet to replace them.
The Dual processor Mac's are having some issues with after market RAM. If your requirements will be somewhat RAM intensive, it's best to get the system shipped with the necessary RAM. The Mac gains alot of speed off of the backbus and can be a very RAM intensive system when optimized for speed.
To recover a Mac from a system crash is childlishly simple. You put in the system disc and start the machine up. The machine will run off the disc and reload the operating system at the same time. If you can work a CD drive, you can recover a Mac.
All of the Microsoft Office suites are available for the Mac, and switching files back and forth is seamless, although you may need to pay attention to the .doc template if the office suites are far apart in age.
The monitors for the Mac's are outstanding, and this is where I believe Apple left the others behind the 21",23" and 33" Cinema displays are absolutely stunning, especially when run with the ATI 9800 Pro video card for the Mac. I haven't been able to cycle them off of a KVM switch yet, but I tried a Belkin and may need to try a DR. Bott. It's an ADC/DVI compatability problem.
This was kinda long, but I hope I helped you out without sounding like a Mac Addict

[David Fried]

As they say "There is no silver bullet". The is nothing magical about an Apple that protects it. That said, very few folks develop exploits for them because their such a small portion of the market. The new macs with OSX are very stable and easy to use. OSX is a variant of Unix - very stable unlike Windows. One of the things that discourages spyware folks is the mac needs to prompt you for a password before those things can install hence it doesn't happen.

I only had a PC because I needed MS Office to talk to the rest of the world and I needed Unix (Linux) for work. I switched to a iBook last June. I have Office and the Adobe suite for mac, Unix without rebooting, and virtual PC for when I need a PC (rarely). Since June the machine has not hung or crashed. Not once. The only applications that have crashed have been MS!

I wouldn't go back!

[Jeff Sudmeier]

With virtual PC and the Office suite for Macs, there isn't really a disadvantage to a mac. In fact, right now I am typing on one. I use both a PC and a Mac for my job. I like both equally. The Mac for certain things and the PC for others.

[Chuck Wintle]

John,
One factor in favor of PC's is their cost vs the Mac's higher cost. I have always wondered why Apple do not lower the price to be more competitive. It comes down to personal preference and what you are used to.

[larry merlau]

i too am in favor of macs, they are easier to use and in my opinion are more stable, have used one for over 15 years. mosty graphics but file transfer and making of new brochures or manuals are also very user friendly. never had avirus either have heard of one other customer that lost there files due to a virus but it came from apc originally. the new system 10 software is supposedly better than the older versions. just a old guys opinion

[Tim Morton]

Looks like my wife and I will be buying a new computer soon. We've never owned anything but IBM-type PCs. I'd tend to buy one again, but I'm wondering whether there's any advantage to Apple computers in regards to virus protection and reliability.

As a lifelong mac owner, you will have to explain this "virus" thing I keep hearing about...never had to worry about that.

John,
One factor in favor of PC's is their cost vs the Mac's higher cost. I have always wondered why Apple do not lower the price to be more competitive. It comes down to personal preference and what you are used to.
Reply With Quote

Check out the mac mini....under 500 bucks....can't get much cheaper than that, and if you wait a couple month's it will ship with os10.4

[Chuck Wintle]

As a lifelong mac owner, you will have to explain this "virus" thing I keep hearing about...never had to worry about that.


Check out the mac mini....under 500 bucks....can't get much cheaper than that, and if you wait a couple month's it will ship with os10.4

I have oftern wondered why mac owners never get viruses. It seems the target is Microsoft and the Windows OS but is it because they are the biggest?

[David Fried]

I have oftern wondered why mac owners never get viruses. It seems the target is Microsoft and the Windows OS but is it because they are the biggest?

In part it is a question of bang for the buck. Yes, there are more Windows machines out there so lets go for them. But it is design choices Microsoft has made that ignore security that make it possible.

[Brian Austin]

In part it is a question of bang for the buck. Yes, there are more Windows machines out there so lets go for them. But it is design choices Microsoft has made that ignore security that make it possible.

Actually, a lot of the 'secure' things ARE built into Windows 2000 and Windows XP, both Home and Pro. To make things easier for users, MS had them turned off by default. That's changed with Service Pack 2, which not only fixes a bunch of things but changes settings from 'off by default' to 'on by default'. Those of us who knew better have never had any security issues with PC's...and I've got WinXP and Linux on several machines.

As we said in the Army, Macs simply aren't a 'target rich' environment. There ARE hacks for Macs out there. Finding one is a pita, though, and why spend all that time trying to locate ONE Mac when you can find over 100 PC's with a simple network scan?

Hacks and worms are already available for cellphones using SMS and e-mail delivery. Watch for the following soon: exploits for iPods and network-enabled Tivo-like DVR's.

If it's on the network, it can be hacked.

[Bob Hovde]

John,
One factor in favor of PC's is their cost vs the Mac's higher cost. I have always wondered why Apple do not lower the price to be more competitive. It comes down to personal preference and what you are used to.

You pay for what you get. If you have the ability, you can buy the PC components and put together a cheaper machine, but if you put in all of the same things already in the Mac, it won't be much cheaper. That said, you might not need all of the things that come with the Mac. (Built-in modem and ethernet, internal Wi-Fi card, software like i-Photo, i-Movie, etc.)

I use a Mac at home and a PC at work, and I'm glad I have a system administrator to help keep the software working on the PC. Even with MS's Wizards, it's much easier to add things to the Mac.

Bob

[Jim Becker]

If you have the ability, you can buy the PC components and put together a cheaper machine

This used to be very true, but is no longer the case, for the most part. In some cases, it's actually more expensive to build! The commodotization of the PC marketplace has been a blow to the vendors who used to sell a lot of "build it yourself" components and many of the good ones no longer are in business, either. I actually looked at building again (I used to do it all the time) when moving to the last two PCs, including the one I'm typing on...and could not come up with anything comparable in cost to the Dell I bought.

As to the MAC vs PC question, Apple is doing real well these days and user interface technologies have improved to the point that they can functionally be a toss-up for the end user. To a certain extent, the same is starting to hold true for the Linux option. The bottom line, in my opinion, comes down to applications. If you own a number of expensive programs, switching platforms can be painful. The software vendors don't make it easy, either, even when they support both WinXP and MAC. Macromedia, for example, ships both versions on the same CDROM, but once you "pick" a platform, your license is only for that OS and you cannot transfer to the other, even if you drop kick the old machine into the river. This is the single reason that has kept me from seriously considering an alternative platform for my personal computing needs...although I've started to use open source products, such as OpenOffice instead of Microsoft Office. (I like Firefox, but will not switch from IE until someone comes up with a spell check feature like IESpell...it's the little things that kill you!)

Now, if you don't have a big investment in applications, you can more easily switch OS platform with less pain!

[Michael Ballent]

...although I've started to use open source products, such as OpenOffice instead of Microsoft Office. (I like Firefox, but will not switch from IE until someone comes up with a spell check feature like IESpell...it's the little things that kill you!)

I know that Firefox does not have an extension like IESpell out yet, but there are so many features that bring it up to a whole new level. The AdBlock extension will zap advertisements from web sites, and has kaboshed pop-ups, and once you use gestures to move around a site you will just smile. Right click slide left takes you to the previous page, make a lower case b and you have just book marked the page. Of course there are tabs instead of all those windows occupying acreage on the screen

Just to keep in line with this post I would say that Windows XP is very stable (especially compared to previous versions) The Mac population is too small for the bad guys to worry about. One thing to keep in mind is that since Apple pretty much handles everything regarding the Mac experience from creation of the box to the OS that is running on it, you can be fairly certain that a Mac will almost always be more stable than an equivalent XP machine. MS (as much as I do not care for them) has done a pretty good job considering all the devices that it supports and still maintains backward compatibility to old hardware (mostly) Apple has been bad in the past about backward compatibility sometimes even with software. I know that I can probably play some of my old programs on a modern machine to this day, I would be surprised it the same holds true with Mac.

If you decide to go the Mac route, take a look at the new Mac Mini. If you are not really doing hard core computing I think that you will do well with that machine. It connects to you USB Mouse, USB Keyboard and your existing Monitor. I would recommend to at least upgrade to 512MB of RAM the 1GB option is just way too much $$$.

Best of luck on your decision... Unless you want to run Linux at home

[John Miliunas]

There are numerous points cropping up in this thread. For starters, the BIG virus issue thing. As stated, most believe it's the popularity thing for hackers to hit MS. So, Mac users feel totally safe. Mark my words, though, one of these fine days, such a lackadaisical methodology in the Mac camps will yield a virus capable wiping out their systems before they even know it! Then there's the stability issue. As was stated, I would certainly hope that the Macs are very stable, due to their hardware configuration. Ahhhh, but there's the other rub: Whether you like it or not, you're very often very limited to hardware options, because Apple simply won't allow others in on their game! People talk about MS being a monopoly. Give me a break! Proprietary hardware, software and pricing. Just don't set right with me. And, all of that Mac-specific stuff also leads right into inherently larger costs and profits for Apple.

I think one of the things which really turned me sour to Macs is, when taken in large numbers, they may be stable while they can still operate, but hardware failures are extremely common! Until just recently, I worked at a major university campus repair department. The last stats we got, showed that Apple had about 12 or 13% of the campus computer market (both dept. and students), WinTel about 85% and the remainder to misc., primarily Sun. Now, while in the "regular" market (not counting the oddballs), Mac had substantially fewer boxes out there, the MAJORITY of repairs coming into the shop at any given time were always Macs! As I see it, not a real good track record!

Sure, there are many which seem to live on forever. Most Mac aficionado's are much like the Beemer or Harley crowd: No matter how much ever goes wrong with them, in their mind, the Mac still rules. Go figure. Macs are indeed revered by graphics folks and with the latest G5's available with dual processors and such, they're a kick-butt machine! .......When they work. Just MHO. Part of your decision should also be to get something you're used to and familiar with. If it's Mac, then go for it. Otherwise, stick to something more familiar.

[Mike Cutler]

John. I feel compelled to address some of the issues that you brought up.
You brought up some valid points, that require a little more discussion.
The hardware compatibility issues are largely a thing of the past. More third party vendors are beginning to manufacture peripheral devices for the Mac's, The downside to this issue is that they are not supporting OS-10.2 and below widespread, and there are a lot of Mac classic legacy programs out there that are not compatible any longer. Apple also recently lost a class action lawsuit against the initial distribution of OSX, for not being as entirely backward compatible as they advertised, I recieved a Check for $129.00, the cost of the OSX operating system when I upgraded from 9.1.
I agree entirely with you that there are Mac users, and PC users who are not paying attention to security and virus vulnerability issues. There are two types of computer users, those that back up, and those that will learn to back up.
As far as infant mortality or insidious, hardware faults, this is a wash. I've fixed more PC's than Mac's, and in defense of both systems it was generally attributed to a third party hardware device installed incorrectly by the owner. PC's used to have a horrendous track record with the OEM supplied power suppiles, and BIOS batteries. I always thought the OEM's were remiss when the USB standard switched to 2.0. With the PC you had two options; reflash the BIOS or install a controller card, and they were three years behind Apple with the inclusion of USB 2.0 and Firewire 400 as OEM supplied standards. A I pointed out in my initial post tho' the limited availability of video card suppliers and compatable RAM is certainley an issue to consider. Although I wonder how much of this is driven by Apple and how much is because of ATI, Nvdia, and Kensington.
The software stability, was for a long time in Mac's favor. With the release of Windows 2000 and especially with the release of XP this is now a non factor in my opinion. XP is an extremely powerful operating system.
I don't really put the Mac's in the "beemer" or "harley" category. I agree that at one time, and not long ago, you had to want a Mac, 'cause it wasn't going to be easy. This is largely gone now with the relase of Panther and Jaquar.
Are Mac's perfect, absolutely not. If you were to go to the "Discussion" forums on the Apple website you will find hundreds of threads of Mac users that are unhappy with Apple and Their Mac. I promise that PC user's are nowhere near as critical of Mac's, and Apple, as Mac users are. But there is also Annoyance's.Org to scare you away from buying a PC related system.
I've always kinda of been of the opinion that PC's are for "Computer" users and Mac's are for "users that want a computer". Some people just don't care, or want to know how their computer works. They just want it to work.
John's post implies that he is not happy with the performance, or reliability of his system, and is looking for an alternative. Hopefully this thread will give him some thought's to consider. The only concrete advice I can give him is to quit using a software firewall and get a hardware firewall no matter what he decides, and to invest in an anti spyware program.
John I know that youre a 'puter whiz of, and I'm not trying to be contrary. Just trying to present a different point of view. Mahalo 'bro