tlarkin
VIP Member
So, since everyone likes to toss in their opinions on the matter I would like to create a thread that only provides information. So, if you are going to make fan boy statements don't do it on this thread. This is solely for technical comparisons of the Macintosh platform to all others, be it: Windows, Linux, Unix, Solaris, PPC, x86, etc.
A good place to start is to start at the beginning, and how OS X and a Mac is designed. Apple has a wide range of employees. They have customer service reps, sales reps, service and support staff, engineers, software developers, hardware developers, etc. They design every aspect of their systems from the ground up. They design the hardware, the specs, the chip sets (with some exceptions of what Intel designs), the OS, the APIs, etc. Apple has also taken Unix and made it into their own version of an OS. Even though it is Unix, it is definitely it's own version. All apple applications have their own command line binary as well, which I will get into later on. So, when trying to compare what a Mac is to anything else you must take all of this into consideration. Like trying to compare an iMac to say a HP desktop is not really comparing the same thing. An iMac is an all in one system, and spec for spec it is priced actually OK, more so than most people realize. Which I will touch on later.
Why? Why would anyone want to use a Mac? I think it comes ultimately down to personal preference, but I also think that it comes down to features and benefits as well. When you buy a Mac, you are getting a complete package out of the box. When Apple says, out of the box you can do all of this, they are not kidding. With many PCs you can't accomplish that, and yes there have been tons of articles out there about how to get a PC close to a Mac with free software comparable to iLife and the like, but it still doesn't compare when we talk about features and benefits. If ultimately you dislike OS X, then a Mac is probably not for you, that being said however, does not make it an inferior or over priced product. Most people never take the time to learn the differences, and that is on both sides. Mac elitists never take the time to learn Windows or Linux and vice versa.
Pricing and comparing to other platforms. Like I said earlier, you can't really compare an iMac to a PC desktop because you can't build an All-In-One machine and when you compare it to other All-In-One machines, the iMac is far superior. For grins, let us compare shall you say, an entry level iMac to a custom built PC. Just to give everyone an idea of what it would take to build a machine comparable to an iMac. I won't take the time to dig through newegg or pricewatch and build the cheapest PC out there, but I will instead list of what an iMac is made of to give you an idea of the quality of the machine you are getting for the price. Here is the spec sheet:
http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APP...ome/shop_mac/family/imac&sf=wHF2F2PHCCCX72KDY
The first thing I notice is the built in 20" high resolution LED LCD that comes with the entry level iMac for $1200. I am sure that is at least a $350ish retail purchase right there, with out buying any other hardware. It also comes standard with built in WiFi (802.11ABGN), bluetooth, web camera, optical audio out, giga ethernet, media remote, IR sensor, and of course is really thin and takes up little space. So you must take all of that into consideration when comparing it. Apple also uses high quality components in their hardware, which is what they have always done. This also does not include the software, which goes back to what I was saying earlier, features and benefits. We have only touched on the hardware portion of it, and not even included the software portions of it. That we can get into later on.
Security. A lot of people will say that a Mac is more secure, and they are correct to make that assumption by design. However, the Mac is not immune to social engineering attacks and there are some out there that do hijack your Mac. However, given how the POSIX, and Unix permissions work (wikipedia search it for more info), technically from a design aspect Unix and Linux and all OSes of the like are more secure than windows. For one, Windows allows kernel hook access from drivers and applications, which is a big security no no, but at the same time I guess it does offer some robustness. Given how the world works, I personally would rather have security.
Software. This is always a huge debate. Macs don't have enough or the right software. This is just wrong. I have never ever not seen either a Mac version of a program or a Mac alternative. The only exception is gaming, and if that is a huge issue for you, you can just load windows on your Mac, and then there is zero application barrier. If you want to get into enterprise level networks and say that they don't work with AD environments, and exchange support, blah blah blah, sure that is true, but there are work around and there are ways to manage them in mixed environments, that is also a whole other subject, which I have a thread on that on another forum. If you want to read about Macs on the enterprise level you can do so here:
http://forums.macosxhints.com/showthread.php?t=61788
So, there really is no such thing as a Mac not being compatible, because it can do everything that any other platform can.
OS X, is the operating system of Apple and the Mac platform. It is a multi user environment that uses Unix memory management, and runs just like most OSes and a lot like BSD Unix, which it is based off of. There is the whole Kernel > shell > GUI environment. Apple's GUI is called Aqua, and it is an OpenGL driven GUI environment which allows for smooth eye candy effects while in operating mode. The multi tasking abilities built in are very streamlined. I honestly can't work anymore with out expose and spaces. I love out I can have 25 windows open at once and never have to minimize any of them with expose and spaces. The hierarchy of the system is just like the Unix/Linux tree, with some exceptions. That won't matter to most users, so I will keep it simple at first. OS X also has what you call self contained applicaitons and user level preferences. This is very advantageous over windows for several reasons. For one, you do not have a clunky, system wide registry. Every resource an Application needs is in the folder of that Application. The pros of this are as follows. I can move an application anywhere in my file system by simply drag and drop. There are no absolute paths or registry entries that are stopping me from doing this. This is great for rearranging and customizing how you want your filing system to work for you. Since it is a *Nix multi user environment all data is stored under your home directory. That also means all your preferences (.plist files) are also stored in your home directory (under ~/Library/Preferences). This is great for several reasons. In other platforms like windows when a preference for an application goes corrupted you can get things like registry errors that affect all users system wide. Since all preferences are kept at the user level in OS X, when this happens it only affects the user account in question. You can then go out and just delete that .plist file all together and the next time that application launches it will realize that there is no plist file at all, and create a new one. The easiest way to troubleshoot this type of problem is to create a new user account and if the problem does not duplicate then you know it is tied to your user account. Now, there are always exceptions to every rule and there are some Apps out there that are not 100% self contained but for the most part what I said holds true. Resource management is pretty much top notch, and it works a lot like most modern OSes, and Vista uses a lot of the similar things.
I can touch on advanced uses later on, but want to keep it simple, now for the criticisms.
Criticisms of OS X and the Mac platform:
There is no prosumer Mac out there. I think that this is sort of hurting Apple in a way. I mean the jump on their desktop models is iMac to Mac Pro, and a Mac Pro is overkill for 95% of computer users. They need to implement some sort of mid tower non All-In-One desktop system with a core 2 duo or a core 2 quad processor. Then allow users to add whatever HD and video card they want to it. This I think would get that pro-sumer market talking about how they aren't all over priced since most people don't take all features and benefits into consideration. Lack of third party support, but this goes both ways. Apple products have more quality control because it is a closed platform and the down side to that is you get less choices, this hurts consumers in some ways, but in others it is good because generally you get better reliability out of it. There are some basic features and technologies that OS X lacks that other platforms have. There is no system roll back at all, however there is time machine, and while time machine can do some of that stuff, to me it is, well not quite like a system roll back. I have had (on very rare occasion) a system update botch something and make it not work, and there was no way to roll back that system update. Lack of backwards compatibility, and this is another one that goes both ways. When developers have to keep lots of legacy code in their OS it does create a bloat, however, not everyone likes to upgrade all their software every OS release. Apple is a bit notorious for this, and it has happened to me in the past. However, with the release of 10.5 Apple finally started following and creating their own standards, so hopefully that will go away with future releases. Some developers of plug ins and open source software can't always update their product, so sometimes it never gets ported over to the next version. Windows does a pretty good job of backwards compatibility, but it also holds them back a bit as well. There is some lack of customization in the OS natively that can be done with third party apps, but a lot of users would like to see that built in. Their wireless has some issues and is not as controllable in other platforms. There is no way to hardware profile something out in the OS like you can in device manager.
If there are any specific questions to comparing the platform to anything or technical questions about networking, advanced usage, application support, etc, then ask them here.
DO NOT post fan boy comments from either side, I will move to have a mod delete any of those. This thread is to dispel any myths and misinformation about the whole, "Mac Vs every other platform debate."
I will give more examples later on.
A good place to start is to start at the beginning, and how OS X and a Mac is designed. Apple has a wide range of employees. They have customer service reps, sales reps, service and support staff, engineers, software developers, hardware developers, etc. They design every aspect of their systems from the ground up. They design the hardware, the specs, the chip sets (with some exceptions of what Intel designs), the OS, the APIs, etc. Apple has also taken Unix and made it into their own version of an OS. Even though it is Unix, it is definitely it's own version. All apple applications have their own command line binary as well, which I will get into later on. So, when trying to compare what a Mac is to anything else you must take all of this into consideration. Like trying to compare an iMac to say a HP desktop is not really comparing the same thing. An iMac is an all in one system, and spec for spec it is priced actually OK, more so than most people realize. Which I will touch on later.
Why? Why would anyone want to use a Mac? I think it comes ultimately down to personal preference, but I also think that it comes down to features and benefits as well. When you buy a Mac, you are getting a complete package out of the box. When Apple says, out of the box you can do all of this, they are not kidding. With many PCs you can't accomplish that, and yes there have been tons of articles out there about how to get a PC close to a Mac with free software comparable to iLife and the like, but it still doesn't compare when we talk about features and benefits. If ultimately you dislike OS X, then a Mac is probably not for you, that being said however, does not make it an inferior or over priced product. Most people never take the time to learn the differences, and that is on both sides. Mac elitists never take the time to learn Windows or Linux and vice versa.
Pricing and comparing to other platforms. Like I said earlier, you can't really compare an iMac to a PC desktop because you can't build an All-In-One machine and when you compare it to other All-In-One machines, the iMac is far superior. For grins, let us compare shall you say, an entry level iMac to a custom built PC. Just to give everyone an idea of what it would take to build a machine comparable to an iMac. I won't take the time to dig through newegg or pricewatch and build the cheapest PC out there, but I will instead list of what an iMac is made of to give you an idea of the quality of the machine you are getting for the price. Here is the spec sheet:
http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APP...ome/shop_mac/family/imac&sf=wHF2F2PHCCCX72KDY
The first thing I notice is the built in 20" high resolution LED LCD that comes with the entry level iMac for $1200. I am sure that is at least a $350ish retail purchase right there, with out buying any other hardware. It also comes standard with built in WiFi (802.11ABGN), bluetooth, web camera, optical audio out, giga ethernet, media remote, IR sensor, and of course is really thin and takes up little space. So you must take all of that into consideration when comparing it. Apple also uses high quality components in their hardware, which is what they have always done. This also does not include the software, which goes back to what I was saying earlier, features and benefits. We have only touched on the hardware portion of it, and not even included the software portions of it. That we can get into later on.
Security. A lot of people will say that a Mac is more secure, and they are correct to make that assumption by design. However, the Mac is not immune to social engineering attacks and there are some out there that do hijack your Mac. However, given how the POSIX, and Unix permissions work (wikipedia search it for more info), technically from a design aspect Unix and Linux and all OSes of the like are more secure than windows. For one, Windows allows kernel hook access from drivers and applications, which is a big security no no, but at the same time I guess it does offer some robustness. Given how the world works, I personally would rather have security.
Software. This is always a huge debate. Macs don't have enough or the right software. This is just wrong. I have never ever not seen either a Mac version of a program or a Mac alternative. The only exception is gaming, and if that is a huge issue for you, you can just load windows on your Mac, and then there is zero application barrier. If you want to get into enterprise level networks and say that they don't work with AD environments, and exchange support, blah blah blah, sure that is true, but there are work around and there are ways to manage them in mixed environments, that is also a whole other subject, which I have a thread on that on another forum. If you want to read about Macs on the enterprise level you can do so here:
http://forums.macosxhints.com/showthread.php?t=61788
So, there really is no such thing as a Mac not being compatible, because it can do everything that any other platform can.
OS X, is the operating system of Apple and the Mac platform. It is a multi user environment that uses Unix memory management, and runs just like most OSes and a lot like BSD Unix, which it is based off of. There is the whole Kernel > shell > GUI environment. Apple's GUI is called Aqua, and it is an OpenGL driven GUI environment which allows for smooth eye candy effects while in operating mode. The multi tasking abilities built in are very streamlined. I honestly can't work anymore with out expose and spaces. I love out I can have 25 windows open at once and never have to minimize any of them with expose and spaces. The hierarchy of the system is just like the Unix/Linux tree, with some exceptions. That won't matter to most users, so I will keep it simple at first. OS X also has what you call self contained applicaitons and user level preferences. This is very advantageous over windows for several reasons. For one, you do not have a clunky, system wide registry. Every resource an Application needs is in the folder of that Application. The pros of this are as follows. I can move an application anywhere in my file system by simply drag and drop. There are no absolute paths or registry entries that are stopping me from doing this. This is great for rearranging and customizing how you want your filing system to work for you. Since it is a *Nix multi user environment all data is stored under your home directory. That also means all your preferences (.plist files) are also stored in your home directory (under ~/Library/Preferences). This is great for several reasons. In other platforms like windows when a preference for an application goes corrupted you can get things like registry errors that affect all users system wide. Since all preferences are kept at the user level in OS X, when this happens it only affects the user account in question. You can then go out and just delete that .plist file all together and the next time that application launches it will realize that there is no plist file at all, and create a new one. The easiest way to troubleshoot this type of problem is to create a new user account and if the problem does not duplicate then you know it is tied to your user account. Now, there are always exceptions to every rule and there are some Apps out there that are not 100% self contained but for the most part what I said holds true. Resource management is pretty much top notch, and it works a lot like most modern OSes, and Vista uses a lot of the similar things.
I can touch on advanced uses later on, but want to keep it simple, now for the criticisms.
Criticisms of OS X and the Mac platform:
There is no prosumer Mac out there. I think that this is sort of hurting Apple in a way. I mean the jump on their desktop models is iMac to Mac Pro, and a Mac Pro is overkill for 95% of computer users. They need to implement some sort of mid tower non All-In-One desktop system with a core 2 duo or a core 2 quad processor. Then allow users to add whatever HD and video card they want to it. This I think would get that pro-sumer market talking about how they aren't all over priced since most people don't take all features and benefits into consideration. Lack of third party support, but this goes both ways. Apple products have more quality control because it is a closed platform and the down side to that is you get less choices, this hurts consumers in some ways, but in others it is good because generally you get better reliability out of it. There are some basic features and technologies that OS X lacks that other platforms have. There is no system roll back at all, however there is time machine, and while time machine can do some of that stuff, to me it is, well not quite like a system roll back. I have had (on very rare occasion) a system update botch something and make it not work, and there was no way to roll back that system update. Lack of backwards compatibility, and this is another one that goes both ways. When developers have to keep lots of legacy code in their OS it does create a bloat, however, not everyone likes to upgrade all their software every OS release. Apple is a bit notorious for this, and it has happened to me in the past. However, with the release of 10.5 Apple finally started following and creating their own standards, so hopefully that will go away with future releases. Some developers of plug ins and open source software can't always update their product, so sometimes it never gets ported over to the next version. Windows does a pretty good job of backwards compatibility, but it also holds them back a bit as well. There is some lack of customization in the OS natively that can be done with third party apps, but a lot of users would like to see that built in. Their wireless has some issues and is not as controllable in other platforms. There is no way to hardware profile something out in the OS like you can in device manager.
If there are any specific questions to comparing the platform to anything or technical questions about networking, advanced usage, application support, etc, then ask them here.
DO NOT post fan boy comments from either side, I will move to have a mod delete any of those. This thread is to dispel any myths and misinformation about the whole, "Mac Vs every other platform debate."
I will give more examples later on.
. Very good read this.
