Mac's
rmc1981
Posts: 114
Whats the difference between a mac, and something like a dell. I'm thinking about getting a laptop, and wondering if I should go with a mac or something like a dell?
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
More recently the Apple hardware has become compatible with PC hardware. Probably because PC standards are better. But Apple still does things slightly different to give them proprietorship. The operating system on Apple computers is a forked version of FreeBSD an open source operating system available for free. FreeBSD is a forked version of Unix another free open source OS that Linux, another free open source OS, is based on.
FreeBSD, Linux, Unix and most other operating systems will also work on PCs like Dell. Windows Vista is now compatible with Mac PCs. Microsoft and Apple computers are partners and competitors. Apple is essentially a software company, as per co-founder Steve Jobs. What they've done is taken existing technology and made it proprietory and sold it back to the public. Microsoft has a Mac division devoted to assisting Apple in the development of Mac OS. Similarly Apple has a division that shares operating code with Microsoft for use in the XBox 360. The XBox 360 uses a motorola processor, the same processor Mac has historically used.
The hype over Apple computers has been around video editting. However, Adobe, the software manufacturer of leading video editting software like Premier and After Effects, bench-marked After Effects on the Apple-Motorola configuration and an Intel Xeon based PC, they found the PC to perform better. Since then Apple has switched to Intel Xeon processors, drawing the gap between Apple and standardized PCs closer.
Because Mac OSX, like other alternatives to Windows, has a small market share, viruses are uncommon. However several viruses have been written for Mac OSX and more will be written as popularity grows.
The differences between Apple computers and other standardized PCs is dwindling. Yet, Apple still tries to remain apart from the rest of the industry, primarily in marketting, by pushing the Mac VS PC dichotomy. Even though they have been forced to conform to several of the PC industry standards. The switch to Intel comes as no suprise, since Motorola excels in writing processors for electronic devices with limited functionality. I can't recall the industry name for such processors, but they are great at running cell phones and not so great at multi-tasking PC platforms. Intel and AMD have excelled at PC processors, others have come and gone and AMD is relatively new. Such is the nature of the competitive PC industry. Apple computers on the other hand have historically provided no alternatives, users were restricted to the hardware the unit was shipped with. However, as I mentioned, the current Apple form factor supports standard PC pin grid arrays and Intel processors. Begging the question; What really is the difference? It's 90% the operating system, which as I mentioned is a revised version of a free operating system and is also available on PCs. There really is no Mac vs PC. It's Mac vs Microsoft, and on that same token, they help each other out. It's in both of their bennefit to have the public believe in a false dichotomy, that there are only two options while others like Linux have been around and is responsible for running the majority of internet services.
I use both and Mac is 10 times easier to operate than the PC. Installing peripherals is usually as simple as plugging them in. You can change out your harddrive, video card, memory ect just like a PC. Mac will also duel boot to Windows or Linux.
If you want the real facts, just compare customer satisfaction ratings between Apple and any other PC manufacturer.
Make your life a mission - not an intermission. - Arnold Gasglow
Notes:
*Apple Processors were built by: Apple, Motorola *and* IBM.
*Apple Performance data on Adobe video products is obsolete due to Apple's
Final Cut Pro surpassing Adobe some time ago (as of this year Adobe is
now competing again with their "Master Suite.")
* Mac OS X is indeed Unix based (and now certified), however it is the GUI
that overlays it and allows efficient interactivity that sets it apart from
any other OS. Apple gambled in 2001 with a radical OS overhaul and
won their long-term bet.
* The "Proprietary" of a lot of apple's hardware is a good thing for most
users as it is specifically what keeps Macs (not MACS) so resilient.
Granted the market share is smaller, but when you build an OS to run
on native hardware that was 100% designed to run it you get a measure
of performance, stability and resilience you cannot otherwise get by
leaving your OS "open" to a massive variety of hardware bits and pieces.
These "open bits" are often the very avenues that are used to hack and
breach PC's. This also logically means apple hardware is better by the
very nature of its deployment.
* Apple users have been able to customize and change a significant
percentage of their own hardware and buy "off shelf" for about a decade
now (at least). This list includes, video cards, hard drives, RAM,
expansion cards etc, etc, etc.
* Mac's have indeed conformed to standards, they have also introduced
them. (Firewire for example).
* One of Microsoft's first attempted projects was to sell the Mac. MS made
a killing selling their first version of MS Office for the Mac and have
developed Office for a Mac OS since. In fact, the mac version of a new
Office suite is typically released before the windows version.
* Apple has thrown their lot in with the massive Open Source community.
This means that ironically they use web and internet technology that has
a far greater market share than anything Microsoft deploys. (Apache,
Mysql, tomcat etc). And 9 times out of ten those technologies are free.
Tidbits:
- If someone refers to a Mac OS based machine as a "MAC" instead of a "Mac" you know they come from a windows os background. This is generally because of the references to a "MAC address" which is generally capitalized.
- HALO was originally written for and demo'd on the Mac. Microsoft then bought out Bungie, halted release and prepped it for the XBox. In fact, Halo was demo'd by steve jobs at a keynote pre 2000.
If your an undecided, go sit down in front of new Mac and a new PC. Test drive Vista, test drive OS X and if your really adventurous have a go at Ubuntu (Linux). I believe Dell has it on some of their systems.
A computer is a tool, buy the one you like and want to use
2007: Copenhagen, Werchter
2009: Rotterdam, London
2010: MSG, Arras, Werchter
2012: Amsterdam, Prague, Berlin
2014: Amsterdam, Stockholm
I don't believe anyone has said "MAC" and I'm not sure what that has to do with the difference between Mac and PC.
As far as I know Microsoft's first involvement with Apple was to copy the GUI Apple acquired from Xerox because it made MS-DOS obsolete. Following that their was a lot of distrust between the two parties.
There are most definitely viruses for Apple computers. Most attempts at security result in reduced performance or functionality. I don't believe Unix fixes this problem. Market share does have something to do with it. As a novice programmer I'm much more familiar with Windows APIs. For zombie viruses the turnover is much greater on the platform that has the greatest market share.
Don't get me wrong, I dislike Microsoft as much as I dislike Apple. I just think any operating system as common as Windows is going to be attacked. If there ever is an operating system that can't be hacked, it'll be a sad day. That will mean that I won't have the same level of control as before. I like manually editing the registry and system files. If done properly there are no problems. I am running XP on a 500 Mhz P3 and haven't rebooted in months. It runs good considering it's so old. A fan died on my P4, otherwise it's had the same OS installed on it for the last 3 years. My work got hit with an exe nuking worm and my workstation was 100% virus free and has been for the last 2 years. But I'm A+ and CCNA certified and spent my entire life with PCs starting with the old Commodore 64. All the reasons for switching are absolved by a healthy knowledge of PC maintenance and security.
I've worked tech support for HP/Compaq and Nextel. Similarly with each, 90% of errors are user errors and there is no shortage of them.
Come on ! you know there's no viruses on Mac. There is some of course, but this is so rare... I've now used macs for 3 years and I have never had any viruse, worm and so on. I don't even have an antivirus on my computer. And I'm connected to internet all the time.
it's 1000 times safer than windows, you can't say it sn't true.
I must use a PC at work, running on windows, and each day I think "god, it sucks so much in comparison to mac OS". This fucj-king computer needs 3 minutes to get started, launch antivirus, firewall , etc.
With my mac lapotop, I open the screen, I count to 5 or 10 and then miracle, I'm connected to internet...
2007: Copenhagen, Werchter
2009: Rotterdam, London
2010: MSG, Arras, Werchter
2012: Amsterdam, Prague, Berlin
2014: Amsterdam, Stockholm
Yea, I'm running XP with no firewall, virus or adware/spyware protection. No problems.
I'll have to keep an eye on it now though. Wedge might try to prove something
It's easy to avoid viruses on pc's. Don't install anything that you don't trust and you're usually good to go. And stay away from things like limewire and such.
No Firewall? You are playing with fire dude
How so?
I had a packet sniffer installed for a while and my traffic was clean.
Just a "fun tidbit". Nothing to do with mac and pc - more to do with mac and pc users.
All OS's are tools, select the one that gets the job done and hopefully is fun/interesting to use.
True enough.
and the guy replied on the lines of.. becuase a lot less people use them.
ANd i think theres some truth in that..
The standard Linux user tends to be a little more technically educated than the average PC buyer, this contributes greatly to how susceptible that demographic is and also contributes to its small size.
Then again, the biggest engine in the hosting of website content is Apache. A non-microsoft product... now given that a majority of websites run on non-MS software, why do they not fall victim? At the end of the day Windows is an easier OS to attack, regardless of how many people use it. MS themselves proved it when they took the leap to rewrite core architecture in Vista. Unfortunately the change has been too great in many cases so further investment in XP has been required.
Why is it easier to attack? Because it has to cater to a user base that wants to adapt it to just about any type of hardware while retaining a usable GUI. (Apache generally prefers to work under the GUI). Given that we are definitely in the age of the GUI (Even Cisco is pushing their ASDM interfaces and web-clients vs CL deployments - even requiring new CCNA certifications as of 11/07), the GUI is being scrutinized and probed on all platforms like never before. OS 10.5, Vista and Ubuntu all release frequent security updates and all are under constant fire from the press, consuming public and "fanboys."
These updates and issues are the cons for standard consumers (Sys Admins are, after all, not the demographic that main GUI's are written for) but the advances in integration and ease of use across the board now give consumers something they have never had this much of before: choice. This GUI delivered choice can give people access to the internet and computing like never before, but it also opens portals of weakness by leaps and bounds. Its an exciting and pioneering time for technology!
And remember the next time your mad at your little vaio, dell or macbook: that little unit probably has more power than the main infrastructure that first launched humans into space.
Seriously, memorizing what 0x12FE or whatever does is not fun. It could just read "Startup-Config" or "Running-Config" and It'd be a lot easier
ASDM is great if your in a hurry and the unit is running or ready to go. In depth access is a bit limited and its all a bit much if your used to the CL and playing with the Boson packages. Ive found it doesnt always alter/save your config as expected on ASA's... I doubt Cisco skills are in any way getting outdated though. There's a whole wall of their gear in China
I'm not very practiced with Cisco equipment. For the first half of my course I got to play around with the routers with basic commands like "copy start run" and so on, but we lost the equipment and I've never had an opportunity since to use Cisco equipment. Do you think for someone like me ASDM would be better? I'm a fan of functionality, so anything that gives me more control might be more to my liking.
I had a quick question. I wanna get a Mac. I only need it for music, internet, email, and pictures. Will the cheapest IMac do the trick?
By the way I was reading your replies and you guys are speaking a different language! Hhahahaha.
2007: Copenhagen, Werchter
2009: Rotterdam, London
2010: MSG, Arras, Werchter
2012: Amsterdam, Prague, Berlin
2014: Amsterdam, Stockholm
yes
its a good tool. Runs on windows only. I run it on Vista with no problems. If you run into problems you will need to go CL though as the output is often anemic. Its a great tool to get an ASA etc up and running though.
Yes. Make sure it is a new one though (shipping with Leopard pre-installed, not a drop in pack to add to a Tiger install). Any vendor will know what you are asking. Or if you buy from the apple store they can help.
I was reading (on here I think) where people were saying that they have had there Macs for over ten years and they are not thinking of upgrading becuase their computers are still fast as eff.
Now if I buy from Apple will Leopard be pre-installed?
2007: Copenhagen, Werchter
2009: Rotterdam, London
2010: MSG, Arras, Werchter
2012: Amsterdam, Prague, Berlin
2014: Amsterdam, Stockholm
Thank you. You people rule!