my reasons for moving away from apple

Status
Not open for further replies.
I use both machines everyday. Up until Lion, Macs just worked. Lion is horrible and I agree.

I'm on Snow Leopard on my Mac Book Pro and Windows 7 Ultimate x64 on my desktop PC. I switch back and forth all the time, and even edit on the same projects in Premiere. I like both for different elements (i.e. file handling under Windows 7 is a bit better (search is better than Finder at the moment because Finder won't find files that haven't been indexed yet, being able to move mixed items (isolated files along with folders at the same time) and getting a detailed breakdown of two files whenever you're going to copy one over top of another, but SL has much better disk image utilities for instance). Premiere CS5.5 runs a bit better under Windows (though I've heard CS6 goes a long way towards identical performance on both platforms), and I've been experimenting with RAIDed system drives and the like so I install Windows a lot of my desktop.
 
Many business (and personal) decisions do not account for the total, all-in cost of "individual" transactions. The term is Total Cost of Ownership, which I'm sure is familiar to you.

Let's say that an Apple computer cost 2x as much as a comparable Microsoft computer. Let's say the Apple product cost $3000 and the Microsoft product cost $1500. That's sticker price.

Now add up the time-cost of setting up the two different computers. As you say, any fool can plug-in a Mac and it just works. How much incremental time is required to setup a Windows machine? What about installing networks, printers and other peripherals? What about the easier ongoing maintenance of Mac OS, as you say? How much time does that cost?

So you say that fools are better of with Macs, but have to pay the price for being not able to maintain their everyday tools?

:evil: just teasing.

I can see where you come from, but Macs are not maintenance free, just look at any Mac user forum.
So you pay much more, to get a little better maintenance and loose a lot of freedom for tailoring your most important tool (at least for an editor) to your needs.
Also you should factor in the HP per buck.
Apple makes much more profit on a computer than anyone else (can´t blame them for trying) - you get what you pay for doesn´t apply to Macs.
 
Well, in some ways OSX used to be worth a premium, and the idea of a "console"-like PC isn't necessarily a bad one. It just seem QC has started to lax since Apple got really big, and the move to Intel made them no different than Windows boxes internally.
 
Now add up the time-cost of setting up the two different computers. As you say, any fool can plug-in a Mac and it just works. How much incremental time is required to setup a Windows machine? What about installing networks, printers and other peripherals?

You're going on pretty out-of-date info. Hasn't been an issue since the time of the "Switch" ads, which is pretty much the last time it was claimed.

Windows 7 is pretty much all plug-and-play.
 
I've built my own computers since around early 2000 and can attest that the latest one I built didn't require any driver installs. Windows update pretty much installed everything you need including nvidia drivers.
Doesnt stop a tech nerd like me from downloading all the official drivers though but for most people, windows is as easy to use as osx.
As far as security, having a malware free computer just takes a bit of commonsense. Don't click dodgy links or install dodgy programs, let windows automatically install security updates, install a free antivirus like avast and that pretty much guarantees a safe computer. Also keep teenagers off your working PC as they will pretty much install or click anything with a half-dressed model on it.
 
You're going on pretty out-of-date info. Hasn't been an issue since the time of the "Switch" ads, which is pretty much the last time it was claimed.

Windows 7 is pretty much all plug-and-play.

Some say the Mac OS is easier to maintain. And I say that´s actually true to some degree.
Any fool can buy a Mac, push the start button and start working, without the need of any fine tuning.

It takes much more work and knowledge to set up a smooth running Windows system

I was more or less taking off from Frank's statement above. He said it takes more work to setup a Windows system, not me. I don't setup systems so I don't actually know.

My simple argument (and readily admit that it's a simple and incomplete argument) is that sticker price is such a small factor when considering TCO. It takes perhaps 10 hours or less to burn the price difference between machines. That's 1 hour every 3.6 months if you turnover/depreciate machines 1x every three years. So if a Mac works at a 1-hour-per-3.6-month advantage over a PC (please note my comment about Lion above) then it's well worth it. If a PC works just as well then that's fine as well.

Personally, I'm glad that Microsoft has woken up. I think Apple was probably the best thing to happen to Microsoft. In the space I'm in (corporate), it's exciting to see some of the tools MS is rolling out and I'm not talking about Windows or Office. Lync is simple but replaces several tools at once. Dynamics is challenging the giants in CRM. The vision for Kinect in the business world -- think Minority Report -- makes touchscreens look like lite brights. In terms of stock, MSFT looks like a great buy to me. But none of that changes the prevalent dogma on either side of the argument. Dogma such as "[Apple] only cares about making money," "Apple doesn't care about the pro market," and "FCPX isn't a pro app."

I'll leave you with this: "Roads? Where we're going, we don't need roads!"

Perhaps if Dr. Emmit Brown were alive today, he might say, "Desktops? Where we're going, we don't need desktops!"
 
However, I would like to have a desktop Mac, and if Apple either releases a new Mac Pro (doubtful) or an Ivy Bridge Mini with a good GPU (7000M or 600M with 1GB of RAM), then I'll probably go for that. I like having options.

New Mac Pros are coming out in the next 2 weeks. Retailers are out of stock of current Mac Pros; Apple ordered them to be recalled. New stock numbers were uncovered; similar pricing to current models:


MD770LL/A – K5BPLUS,BETTER, BTR-USA
MD771LL/A – K5BPLUS,BEST,BTR-USA
MD772LL/A – K5BPLUS,ULTIMATE,BTR-USA



 
Great if true, but I do recall a lot of blatantly false iPad rumors swirling around before that was released.
 
The new replacement for the mac pros may be coming, but it remains to be seen if Apple relies on thunderbolt instead of pci slots in the new form factor.
 
Last edited:
It amazes me that people are still ignorant of the fact that while, yes, Thunderbolt is an external PCIe interface, it's still the slowest form of PCIe (4x) when your graphics cards plug into 16x slots.
 
I think Apple was probably the best thing to happen to Microsoft.

I think you have this backwards, less we forget that Microsoft bailed-out Apple in 1997.... without that, there probably wouldn't be an Apple today.
Can't we all just get along? :)


A least take a listen to Steve @ 7:05 .... he was a very wise man. :beer:
 
It amazes me that people are still ignorant of the fact that while, yes, Thunderbolt is an external PCIe interface, it's still the slowest form of PCIe (4x) when your graphics cards plug into 16x slots.

Thunderbolt is way overrated. IMHO it´s just a crook for laptops.
Doesn´t make much sense on a workstation, especially if it has USB3.
But now with Windows PCs and Tablets coming with TB - the hype is high.

Frank
 
It takes perhaps 10 hours or less to burn the price difference between machines.

Not sure how you arrive at that.

That's 1 hour every 3.6 months if you turnover/depreciate machines 1x every three years. So if a Mac works at a 1-hour-per-3.6-month advantage over a PC (please note my comment about Lion above) then it's well worth it. If a PC works just as well then that's fine as well.

I never go three years. It's about $900 every 1.5-2 years.
 
I use a Mac for all of my freelance and personal stuff and PC workstations in the office at work. Both have issues, and both work very well.

If only I could take the best from both...
 
It's not about getting along, it's about showing how "hip" you are.

Exactly! Which is why I use my free-to-me Blackberry instead of an iPhone even though the touchscreen on my Torch keeps locking up. It's why I drive a 10 year old Toyota Camry and my wife drives an 8 year old Toyota Sienna even though we should get a new car every 3-4 years like everyone else (exaggeration). It's why I rent my home by choice instead of "owning" it...you know, 'cause when we tell people that we rent, they just look at us with awe.

It's definitely all about being cool! Or hip. Or rad. Or whatever the current word is. ;)

:) :) :) *

* I have liberally applied the Kohli method of denoting sarcasm.

BTW, I'm not in the least bit offended by this discussion. I'm hoping that others aren't offended by my posts either. I'm not trying to attack anyone so please let me know if that's how my posts are coming across.
 
Not sure how you arrive at that.



I never go three years. It's about $900 every 1.5-2 years.


I arrived at that # this way:
* I assumed that a Mac cost 2x as much as a comparable PC. A Mac cost $3,000 and a comparable PC cost $1500.
* I assumed, whether Mac or PC, that it will be used for 3 years.

1. Calculate the actual difference in sticker price = $1500 ($3000 - $1500)
2. Calculate the hourly time-value of the sticker price difference = 10 ($1500 / $150 per hour)
3. Extend the hourly equivalent over life of the computer = 1 hour every 3.6 months (36 months / 10 hours)

So...to break-even, a Mac needs to save about 1 hour every 3.6 months to justify the cost difference.

Check my math because it might be wrong.

The #s will be different based on your individual situation. But, to a degree, the exact#s don't matter so much as the principle. If a Mac costs 3x a comparable PC then just change the #s. If you account for a new box every 1.5 - 2 years then change that #. If your daily rate is different, change it. My point isn't so much about the exact dollar figures as much as the general principle about TCO.

I'm afraid I've hijacked the OPs thread so I'm going to do my best to be quiet now.
 
Last edited:
im not an apple fan boy, never have and never will be, the reason why I buy apple desktop in a profesional envirorment is for one simple reason, the operating system, maybe i had a lot of bad moments with windows computers but here is what has made me stick around with apple desktops, in a 4 year period, using our mac pros almost daily, putting them to test everyday running after effects, heavy photoshop etc etc. in 4 years we had one crash, i pay double for that stability, i would even pay triple, its not because its apple, i am really buying stability that what our agency cares about. i have no doubt that windows computers can be just as good right now, but we are havily invested in apple products right now and just could not make the change.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top