Apple needs to design the motherboard and the internals of their laptops so that other people's parts fit in there. Apple has even boasted about the internal design of their laptops. And the same goes for Mac Pro, which has stunning interiors compared to the hodgepodge of most PCs. Designing a sleek aluminium case and throwing standard components in is not enough as they would not fit in.

As for price difference between Macs and PCs - yes, you can buy a 15" PC laptop for a fraction of the price of a MacBook Pro. If screen size and, say, hard drive are the only things important to you, you're better of with a cheap PC. But if you want a PC with the exact same components of a Mac laptop, there will be no price advantage. In fact, comparable PC laptops can be more expensive! The most common misconception is to compare entry level PCs with Macs and conclude that PCs give you a better run for the money. In reality, you should be comparing the quality of the components, processor speed, amount of memory and hard drive space, etc.

But I also can't deny that a good design wouldn't be a factor... I would never buy a computer that comes with a zillion stickers glued on the case. :p

I love these adverts

Mac v PC Virus
Compilation of Ads

Another vote for Mac.

Now that you can run both operating systems and even at the same time using VMware or Parallels not to mention Sun's free virtual box, there is no reason to go for PC.

The OS is more stable and responsive and UI experience definitely better.

The only reason I ever boot up Windows is if I need to use a VB macro or run Visio or Project. Otherwise I prefer all the Mac apps. In fact if Apple implement a proper VB interpreter, their iWork suite is pretty good and much better than Office 2008 in terms of day to day ease of use.

Well, between the wife and I we have a macbook, an Air, 5 PC laptops (counting our work laptops), a mac mini, and a PC desktop. I use the macbook as my primary personal computer.

But, you know what? Once you have them set up, I just don't feel there is that much difference in useability between the two operating systems. However, while it may not be true that the mac offers less configuration flexibility, I do think it is probably the case that the PC requires more configuration. In other words, I think that a mac straight out of the box is more useable than a brand new PC.

One place where I think the mac stands out is in the hardware, which is well-designed and solidly-built. It definitely feels more finished than my laptops from HP, Toshiba, and Lenovo. That being said, I also have a Vaio P, which I think is the equal of the macbook in terms of design and build.

And, FWIW, I don't think the macbook Air is as bad of a machine as many would make it out to be. The wife loves hers. It has a nice screen, a good keyboard, battery life is decent, and the weight is right for travel. Another USB port would be nice, perhaps, but it hasn't been anything approaching a major issue so far. It has its limitations, but as long as you are okay with them (and the price), then I don't see any reason to shy away from it.

I'm sorry, but while it might look that way on the surface, believe me it is very much not the case!

Totally agree. Lots to play with under the hood which can keep BSD and Limux fans very happy. Apple have just made thier OS so good that for day to day work there is no need to touch anything.

Remember that OS X is actually a BSD based distribution. Many Linux and BSD tools will happily work on Mac.

unless you're unlucky like me, where both the laptops and the backing up equipment (Time Capsule) have been nicked!!!!! :mad: Now, I back up the Time Machine itself onto a hard drive and store it off site.

Luckily, this whole solution takes a fraction of time on Mac equipment, compared to the time consuming backup solution that are available for Windows.

It's definitely true that Macs last longer, and also last longer between reinstallations.

After a year or so, PCs tend to become horrendously overloaded, grinding and groaning on startup as 50 applications all start automatically loading and trying to download updates, bombarding the user with cascading dialog boxes, popups, security warnings, etc.

Macs are a lot more restrictive about what programmes are allowed to do - for most applications, to install them you stick them in your application folder, to uninstall them, you delete them. Easy. PC programmes have a nasty habit of leaving all sorts of traces in your system and not properly uninstalling, part of the reason why a Windows installation becomes unusable more quickly than a Mac one does.

A bit of digging will reveal this discussion carried out time and again in the Travel Technology section.

Again - depends on your application, what you're going to use and where you're going to use it.

(and yes - I manage a PC network and run a Mac Network at home - as I tend to play photographer I find the toolset more appropriate to that platform - like I said, different strokes for different folks.)

For those feeling unloved and technical, have a Mac and want to play with BSD, open up a terminal box and run some system level commands with sudo. That'll change your views.

It's program.

BAH

I'll be the voice of dissent then :eek:

I had a Mac for a couple of years and have gone back to Windows laptop. Yes, the Mac "just worked" out of the box. Very impressed with how easy the setup was. However when things started to go wrong after about a year, I couldn't get them sorted out. Repeatedly had to reinstall programs. Files that I'd worked on would corrupt.

I can fix those things on a Windows PC, but had no joy in OS X. I'm sure there's an element of user-education needed, but for me the pros of Mac (shiny, easy to set up initially) were outweighed by the problems.

I wrote the burglar a thank-you note for taking it away. However I don't know the address to send it to!

Don't go to the SK lounge in ARN T5 then, that's how they've got it set up.

I'm with heckenhocker and the silent majority here: PC user. PC would get my vote, but for what you're going to do, I don't think it matters too much. Assuming that you don't mean heavy multimedia production/editing when you say "photo, design and video stuff" that is. If that is what you do, then a Mac would probably be more appropriate, otherwise either one will work just fine.

I live in a Mac and PC household, right now it's the Macs (iMac G4 and iBook G4) that have been passed on to the children and an Aldi PC (£350) and a Dell Laptop (£220) that are used by the adults for "work".

I do like Macs - just can't justify the prices at the moment.

Vista is now what OS X was five years ago and it gives me little trouble. My PC does all I need quickly enough for now - I don't bother with Video, so it's just web, office, photos and iTunes.

My wife's low end laptop came with XP as an option and works just fine for email and Open Office.

That is unlucky :( My 1TB Time Machine sits in a double-bottomed 16th century built-in cupboard with a secret compartment made my my carpenter for that very reason! It's pure Harry Potter, and I'm amazed the wifi signal is at 90% in the rooms around it given the thickness of the wood!

Meanwhile a couple of GBs of capacity on my my .mac account handles the off-site backups of documents in a few specific folders in case of a fire :eek:

We are so computer-dependent these days that I wouldn't risk anything else.

Thanks, a distinction I wasn't aware of (having always assumed program = American / programme = British, which is right, with the apparently sole exception of computer programs).