Foo - The Mac conundrum

I wonder if anyone else has this dilemma.

I like Macs, especially after OS X, and definitely due to the fact that I can dual-boot a Windows OS for games, and MacOS.

MacOS has so little latency (assuming you are not running a ton of apps in the background) that you can do decent audio/video work on even a slow machine.

Although NeXTStep (which is what MacOS evolved from) isn't as secure as a true BSD (Open/Free/Net), its nowhere as near a big, fat, juicy target as a Windows machine. So, with basic security measures (HARDWARE firewall between machines and the Internet, running as a user rather than root, etc.) one can keep a secure box with very little effort. Its also a lot harder to hide from the ps command than it is to hide from the Task Manager.

Now the hangups:

Macs are underpowered when it comes to graphics unless one shells out the premium dollars (2-6k) for a Mac Pro. For example, even the highest end iMac only comes with a nVidia 7600 chipset (which is about a $80 to $150 dollar PCI-E card.)

I just can't justify paying $3k for a machine that will end up being a server or given to a relative in 2-3 years, when I can build a generic PC for a lot less. Especially right now, being a college student.

Maybe the answer is another Power Computing -- Apple licensing MacOS to a third party to make 100% legit Mac clones.

Get a mac, I heard they just released "minesweeper" for it last week.

BTW..you don't have to run Windoze on a PC.

Maybe the answer is another Power Computing -- Apple licensing MacOS to a third party to make 100% legit Mac clones.Doubtful. Damn near killed 'em the first time they tried that.

Are you a graphic design or video type student? If so you should get the best computer for your profession, which is a Mac from what I've heard from friends and family in those fields.

If your just a tinkerer, and your really trying to not bust the bank, then you might want to just look at building your own PC and *finding* the best versions of video/graphics programs for a PC on the internets at lets say a less than reputable site for pennies (or even less) of the normal cost of such programs.

I do some sidework at a graphics company during election season (this company does 75% of NYS election materials) and I get to sit their and usually spend my time working on a large order for a baseball hat catalog - coloring the hats, sinking logos, etc (there really should be a law about making a ladies line of pink and blue hats - with recoloring the NFL, etc logos pinks and blues to match the hats!) - and they are all running MacPros with no problem.

Yeah, you aren't paying as much for a Windows machine... But it does have Windows.

I spent the extra cash and am supremely happy with my Mac. No crashes, no bugs, no - well... anything. It works, and works well.

A conundrum for you, a riddle if you will..

Mallard with a cold, FTW!

Ive been running my custom build PC with XP for almost a year now, mostly use it for Illustrator and Photoshop, and a few Windows specific software, as well as the internets and other small stuff, and haven't had a single problem yet. Wait, yeah I did have a problem, the fan on the video card started to hit its little shroud, must be Windows' fault.

The higher end mac's are nice, and macs do have some capabilities I'd wish I could have in windows, but overall, for my price (~$1150), theres no way I could get a mac to do what I would need it to do. If you got it, flaunt it, but if you don't have the cash and aren't a complete idiot, build your own.

Yeah, you aren't paying as much for a Windows machine... But it does have Windows.

I spent the extra cash and am supremely happy with my Mac. No crashes, no bugs, no - well... anything. It works, and works well.
wot kind of Mac you got? I'm in the market...and I'm just a tinkerer, no insane apps or graphics demands. I just like their usability (my god, the usability!) and many of the aspects that others have listed.

Macs are underpowered when it comes to graphics unless one shells out the premium dollars (2-6k) for a Mac Pro. For example, even the highest end iMac only comes with a nVidia 7600 chipset (which is about a $80 to $150 dollar PCI-E card.)

I just can't justify paying $3k for a machine that will end up being a server or given to a relative in 2-3 years, when I can build a generic PC for a lot less. Especially right now, being a college student.



You are right about the graphics. The new releases of the Mac Pro feature better video cards but cost require mucho $$.

Apple thinks MAC clones are a slippery slope.

wot kind of Mac you got? I'm in the market...and I'm just a tinkerer, no insane apps or graphics demands. I just like their usability (my god, the usability!) and many of the aspects that others have listed.


I've got the 15" 2.33 MacBook Pro. I would recommend the MBP to anyone with the $$$

You are right about the graphics. The new releases of the Mac Pro feature better video cards but cost require mucho $$.

Apple thinks MAC clones are a slippery slope.


They always have. Its unfortunate.

Shill!! :p


Yeah, you aren't paying as much for a Windows machine... But it does have Windows.

I spent the extra cash and am supremely happy with my Mac. No crashes, no bugs, no - well... anything. It works, and works well.

Yeah, you aren't paying as much for a Windows machine... But it does have Windows.

I spent the extra cash and am supremely happy with my Mac. No crashes, no bugs, no - well... anything. It works, and works well.

ummm...I run a network on over 100 windows machines which have had the same os for 2.5 years. My home pc has XP as well and has been solid for 4 years or so. It had 2000 before that. I really don't see why people can't take care of their own computers, its very easy to make a stable xp box. (I won't get into Vista since I don't run it and plan to skip it)

its very easy to make a stable xp box.If you get lucky with quality hardware with good drivers, I can definitely see this. Windows 2000 was pretty stable (as far as Windows goes), and since XP is just 2000 with a bunch of extra crap tacked on, it shouldn't be too much worse.

But making XP un-annoying is a very different story.

If you get lucky with quality hardware with good drivers, I can definitely see this. Windows 2000 was pretty stable (as far as Windows goes), and since XP is just 2000 with a bunch of extra crap tacked on, it shouldn't be too much worse.

But making XP un-annoying is a very different story.

Right click desktop - classic mode
right click toolbar, properties, start menu, classic mode check

Makes it look like XP with all of the cool GPO features still intact. I know most people wouldn't care but windows xp is damn good for administrative control over the GPO. 2000 and NT were weak introductions. Behind the scenes XP is actually an a full upgrade and not just the pretty big brother (vista supposedly kicks serious ass, but I hate vista)

And ya, I guess I tend to buy quality brand name hardware. My days of experimenting with the cheap or the "newly" fast hardware are long gone, there are kids for that. I just don't cheap out anymore.

It's better to actually disable the theming service. By trimming out unnecessary services, I was once able to get XP to run acceptably in 128MB of RAM. It was still annoying, though.

I can't really quantify the annoyance with XP. I just get frustrated as hell every time I try to use the damn thing. Thankfully the only XP machine I had to regularly use (it was my parents', then my sister's) died a welcome death. I replaced it out of my own pocket with a home-built Athlon 64 running Windows 2000 so I wouldn't have to endure another store-bought pile of junk with XP. :rolleyes:

I just can't justify paying $3k for a machine that will end up being a server or given to a relative in 2-3 years, when I can build a generic PC for a lot less. Especially right now, being a college student.

Maybe the answer is another Power Computing -- Apple licensing MacOS to a third party to make 100% legit Mac clones.I don't think PowerComputing ever came out with a G3 or G4 clone before Jobs pulled the plug. OSX will only run on G3 and later machines I think...

However, you can build your own MacIntel clone and run OSX just fine. Check out: InsanelyMac - OSx86 installation (http://forum.insanelymac.com/index.php?showforum=18). You tend to pay for top-quality components on Apple products, stuff like high-end power-supplies with lower ripple than 95% of the others. Or nicely designed cases where everything is accessible without a screwdriver. However, these extra costs may not reflect any actual performance benefits. So build your own! Check the hardware compatibility list and see if 3rd-party OSX drivers are available for the components you're chosing.

Dell laptops seems to be a very popular PC to install OSX onto:
http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e346/DannoXYZ/ComputerTech/DellOSX.jpg

Although $3k for a MacPro is not outrageous for what you get. Here's a comparison with a comparably-equipped Dell:
Anandtech - Apple's Mac Pro - A True PowerMac Successor (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2816).
MacWorld - Comparing prices: Mac Pro versus PCs (http://www.macworld.com/2006/08/features/macproprice/index.php?lsrc=mwtoprss).

Also you can pick up used MacPros and upgrade the CPUs to the latest quad-core Xeons without any difficulty. That's been done even before Apple's own 8-core MacPros were announced: ZDNet - Benchmarks: the unofficial eight-core Mac Pro (http://reviews.zdnet.co.uk/hardware/desktops/0,1000000968,39284700,00.htm) (note MacPro running WindowsXP also scales performance to 8-cores nicely :) )