Mac's Firmware and PC's Bios. And more... *POLL*

[CSFM]

I was having a heated debate last night about why you WOULDN'T buy a MAC. I think the OS is a very good reason to buy one but upgradeability is a problem. Also the price gap between a MAC compared to a PC seems to be widening.
I argued that a MAC owner is someone who doesn't really know enough about a PC's or computing in general to set something up themself that will work just as good if not twice as good. I think the main reasons why people by MAC's is because they either use one at work or they have been told by someone to buy one. There are other reasons of course, like if you want to run the design program Quark (although it is available for Windows), or you have to get one for work reasons (such as myself) but these are rare.

The argument against me was that a MAC is far more stable (hence, I say if this is the case then you don't know enough about PC's to build a good one) and ready to go out of the box.

Without flaming in this thread. Please state your reasons why you would prefer a MAC or a PC.
I have said my piece, have your say!

 

[Nothinman]

I think the OS is a very good reason to buy one but upgradeability is a problem.

The new G4s have several PCI slots, an AGP slot, USB, firewire, serial, etc ports and use IDE drives so buying new hardware isn't really a problem. OS X's driver support is lacking, but if you run something like Linux on it that's not an issue because Linux's hardware support is much wider =)

Also the price gap between a MAC compared to a PC seems to be widening.

That's the only reason I don't own a TiBook right now, the price.

The argument against me was that a MAC is far more stable (hence, I say if this is the case then you don't know enough about PC's to build a good one) and ready to go out of the box.

It's not the hardware that's unstable in PCs, it's the OS and drivers. OS X is rock solid and yes it is ready to go with virtually no knowledge, you can setup a Mac with just booting off the CD, Windows take considerably more work.

I still own all PCs (well, a majority PCs, I have an Alpha (soon to be 2) and an UltraSparc too) so I can't really say I'm a Mac Fanboy, but OS X really does kick ass.

 

[ojai00]

Personally, I like PCs because I'm so used to it. When I sit down in front of the MAC, I have no idea what I'm doing. Sometimes I even try to use PC keyboard shortcuts on MAC keyboards (go figure!). I mean I've used MACs before, but I think PCs are much better to learn. Don't get me wrong, the MAC can be a powerful computer for graphics and stuff, but it's not really all that great other than that. I also really hate MACs because of the IMAC mouse...it absolutely sucks! Just my two pennies.

 

[Abzstrak]

I've worked a great deal with many platforms and I personally love the hardware and general engineering of a mac. I personally didn't like them until recently cause I hated the OS, but with OS X, thats all changed. My only reason at this point for selecting a PC is the price. Cant wait for that G5

 

[n0cmonkey]

Are we talking about computers or just network cards? If network cards, whats the PC on my nic?

Now that I got the mandatory/petty flaming out of the way. . .



<< I argued that a MAC owner is someone who doesn't really know enough about a PC's or computing in general to set something up themself that will work just as good if not twice as good. >>



From my posts here do you really think I know that little? I love my Mac. I use it basically every day. For 0min spent setting the thing up (iBook) to the 20min it takes to customize everything to my liking I get up and running quicker than I would with an x86 notebook. Why? I would have to install an OS, and then take the time (quite a bit longer) to get everything running the way I like it. So I like it for the speed.

Convenience. OS X came with the most important applications installed for me. OpenSSH, a great cli, and a browser. IE unfortunately. I download Mozilla, ssh into my home machine and Im doing basically what I would be doing at home, just from a Mac. With Windows I would have to download OpenSSH, download Mozilla, and download cygwin and still have to put up with an interface I do not find the least bit appealing. (notice my flagrant use of words that convey this as my opinion )

Hardware: PCs still have the BIOS.

 

[ProviaFan]

I've not used a Mac too much myself, mainly because of the cost, and, until recently, the crappy OS (however, all seem to be agreed that OS X is great, and I have no reason to not believe them). I don't think that one is especially easier to use than the other. For example, I talked to a person who had used Linux for many years, and she was just now having to learn Windows to run a specific application, and was having a terrible time of it. Thus I conclude that one OS or platform doesn't make a computer necessarily "easier" to use than another.

 

[CSFM]

From my posts here do you really think I know that little?

LOL... No I think your a very knowlagable person. I was wrong to generalise in such a way. I am saying that the MAC is just a bit of a status symbol to a lot of people.

The guy I was having this heated discusion with is a sound engineer. He has a large studio set up with a few MAC's running the whole operation. He was saying that a PC coulnd't do what his MAC's do. I was saying they (PC's) are capable of all that and a whole lot more.
My PC has 6 PCI slots, one CNR slot one AGP slot, I have a three port Firewire card, USB 1 & USB 2 on the MoBo, I have a Soundblaster Live! PLatinim Sound card an ATI Radeon 7500 Video Card, an NIC, Cable internet, Running Windows 2000. NEVER!!!! had a crash in the 4 months I have been running Win2K. I set this up correctly, therefore I have no problems. Programs may crash, but the OS is solid. I have a tweeking program for Win2K running and although I am a little dissapointed with the NTFS file system because I have to defragment once a week I am happy with the over all preformance of this machine I have 640 MB of RAM and an Athlon XP 1800+ in there so is no problem with the Defrag. In fact it only takes about 15-20 mins. to do about 15 Gig on a 60Gig HDD. So as you can see that if you take all the money you spend on a MAC and put it into a PC you will end up with something twice as good.

 

[dartblazer]

why is it twice as good? Because it's stable. Mac's are stable, even OS 9.2.2, it's the apps that bring the OS down(bad OS design, but stable). So what does your PC have that a Mac doesn't. USB 2.0?

And you had to set this all up yourself, research the parts, find drivers, setup the mobo and BIOS.

And what makes the Mac better? Not much. Besides 4 open pci slots. Gigabit ethernet, and easier setup and maintenance, if any.

The only reason why I wouldn't buy a Mac is because i can't upgrade the processor or motherboard easily.

The only reason why I wouldn't buy a PC is because, it requires maintenance and more knowledge.

I have both a PC and a Mac(G3 B&W ). I have run/am running OS/2, Linux, BeOS, AIX, Windows(Dos), Windows(NT), MacOS(9), MacOS(X). My personal favorite is BeOS.

Everybody will need to do different things, some OS' are better than others for that task, but might not be as good at other tasks. Can I do all of my personal stuff in MacOS? yup. Can i do all of my personal stuff on Windows? yup. It just comes down to preference and whether or not the application you need is available on that platform.

At work(prepress shop) i have the Mac file server running OSX, the workstations on OS9, the prepress PC on Windows2000, the accounting/estimating PC's on OS/2, a RIP running on Linux, a RIP running on AIX. Different machines for different jobs. Could i run everything on Windows2k, yeah. Could i run everything on MacOS9, yeah. It'd be a major pain in the ass(either case) though.

So the answer to your question is: there is no answer.

But I like Macs

 

[FOBSIDE]

im kinda known as the champion for Macs here in these forums and i like to speak up whenever theres a Mac or Apple thread in the forums. i personally dont think Apple is better hands down over x86 systems, nor do i think the opposite is true. i think each has their strengths. youll see me stick up for Apple in these forums just because no one else will. i dont like to see the OS or hardware unfairly torn apart in the same way i wouldnt want to see windows torn apart my Mac zealots. i would never give up one for the other. if you guys have the money, get both. thats the only way to really see how great both sides are. using the "other one" in a lab or when youre at a friends place doesnt count. just shell out some cash and go for it.

 

[kovert]

Macs have been a staple in the recording industry though. Until recently, latency on PC sound cards was considered unacceptable. As you said, things have changed and the software for recording on the PC is on par with or at least incredibly close to that which is available on the MAC. In fact, but don't quote me, I think most software has been ported to both platforms.

I wish linux would catch up on the recording software now. I would love to see Cubase and FruityLoops on linux...

-kovert

 

[Sunner]

I'd love to get a Mac, but the main thing keeping me from it is price.

The new iMac's arent horribly expensive considdering they come with a 15" LCD, but OTOH I dont want a "15 LCD, thats way too small.
And the iMac's have little room for upgrades, which I dont like either.

The G4 towers OTOH are nice, those cases are REALLY nice, and the upgradeability is there.
But, they cost a damn fortune.
A G4 costs like 2.200$ and up, not including display, thats twice the price of an x86 with supperior hardware.

Apple really needs to do something about their prices, thats their biggest problem by far IMO, now that they've thrown MacOS <X away.

 

[FOBSIDE]

<< I'd love to get a Mac, but the main thing keeping me from it is price.

The new iMac's arent horribly expensive considdering they come with a 15" LCD, but OTOH I dont want a "15 LCD, thats way too small.
And the iMac's have little room for upgrades, which I dont like either.

The G4 towers OTOH are nice, those cases are REALLY nice, and the upgradeability is there.
But, they cost a damn fortune.
A G4 costs like 2.200$ and up, not including display, thats twice the price of an x86 with supperior hardware.

Apple really needs to do something about their prices, thats their biggest problem by far IMO, now that they've thrown MacOS <X away. >>



i agree that the towers end up being a little bit pricey but the iMac is definitely worth the price. 15" LCD with a powerful processor. the thing with Apple, is that they dont flaunt their software enough. iMovie, iTunes, and iPhoto are included free with every OS. the OS itself is also a lot cheaper. if you considered the prices of the software the price gap would be significantly less. i agree though, at first glance, it looks expensive.

 

[Sunner]

I agree that some really nifty software is included, but Im not interested in that.

I think I've taken like 10 photo's in my entire life, all of them more than 5 years ago, and editing movies isn't my thing.

So basically the software is no value added to me, since I get Linux and Windows for free.

Of course this is just me, but he did say "your preferences" in the topic

 

[n0cmonkey]

Computers are like strippers. You can look at one type the entire time, or you can have variety. Personally x86 is nice but boring. Like the girl next door. A brunette maybe. Macs are more like the Blonde haired blue eyed woman that everyone thinks is hot, but the dances cost just a little bit more.

 

[Sunner]

When you start comparing computers to girls, you really need a vacation

 

[FOBSIDE]

<< When you start comparing computers to girls, you really need a vacation >>



i agree. you cant compare women to computers. women are more like network cables.

 

[CSFM]

Computers are like strippers. You can look at one type the entire time, or you can have variety. Personally x86 is nice but boring. Like the girl next door. A brunette maybe. Macs are more like the Blonde haired blue eyed woman that everyone thinks is hot, but the dances cost just a little bit more.

That's the greatest analogy I have ever read in these forums. I got to work this morning and read all your posts from last night and I couldn't stop laughing.

Thanks all for your great input and views on this subject.

Oh... and for the record, yes I did build my own PC, I build at least 4-5 a week for my own personal clients after work. I am a network consultant by day here in Australia. Basically people call me to find out how to do stuff... too much to go into here, coz I was running a bit late this morning and I have loads of work to do...

Keep the responses coming though...

-CSFM-

 

[littlezipp]

Both are great, but I only had money for one, so I had to go with the PC. Why?... Well it is more compatible with EVERYTHING.

 

[n0cmonkey]

<< When you start comparing computers to girls, you really need a vacation >>



Ill be off all weekend. Going to be visitting some friends and the strip club activity was on my mind...

 

[benjamit]

'The new G4s have several PCI slots, an AGP slot, USB, firewire, serial, etc ports and use IDE drives so buying new hardware isn't really a problem'


not the imac which many people still consider as a mac


'Hardware: PCs still have the BIOS. '


don't macs have something called pram?

that uses a battery like bios?



i like the mac towers but i would like to be able to add more drives than they permit

our imac g3 500 bd is ok but for surfing and watching movies our PCs are better at the task

 

[Nothinman]

not the imac which many people still consider as a mac

If you buy a PC the size of a monitor you should know the only thing you really have a hope of upgrading is the hard drive and the memory.

don't macs have something called pram?

that uses a battery like bios?


The point was the BIOS is a hold over from the 286 or ealier days, PCs still startup in real mode with only 640K of memory available, we shouldn't be limited by a design flaw older than I am. Real machines have firmware that start up in protected mode (or whatever that arch calls it) that allows access to all hardware, hell Alpha SRM even has drivers in it.

 

[n0cmonkey]

<< not the imac which many people still consider as a mac

If you buy a PC the size of a monitor you should know the only thing you really have a hope of upgrading is the hard drive and the memory. >>



EDIT: Thats the point of those machines. The fact that there is so little you can do to them they shouldnt be screwed up as often. They are basically for newbies or people that prefer style over substance. They could be great for a lobby type area where you want to impress sales/marketing/phbs.



<< don't macs have something called pram?

that uses a battery like bios?


The point was the BIOS is a hold over from the 286 or ealier days, PCs still startup in real mode with only 640K of memory available, we shouldn't be limited by a design flaw older than I am. Real machines have firmware that start up in protected mode (or whatever that arch calls it) that allows access to all hardware, hell Alpha SRM even has drivers in it. >>



For Macs its the OpenFirmware which I believe is fairly new (PPC instead of m68k).

EDIT: Forgot to say that Nothinman explained my hatred for the BIOS pretty well.

 

[jhu]

what're the specs for openfirmware/openboot? is the only difference between that and the pc bios just in the user interface? or there a fundamental difference in how the hardware is probed and setup?

 

[n0cmonkey]

<< what're the specs for openfirmware/openboot? is the only difference between that and the pc bios just in the user interface? or there a fundamental difference in how the hardware is probed and setup? >>



NetBSD FAQ that may have a little information on it (found it linked on a Debian page )

EDIT: Other links in the linked part: OpenFirmware's Working group.
Apple's OpenFirmware information

Quoted section from FAQ:
Briefly, it is a command environment using the FORTH language which the NetBSD kernel uses to gether information about your system, and to control some of your devices. It is part of the boot ROMs in most PowerPC-based Macintosh systems, and we use it to load the kernel from disk or network.
Open Firmware, as specified by "IEEE Std 1275-1994: IEEE Standard for Boot Firmware (Initialization Configuration) Firmware: Core Requirements and Practices" and its supplements, is a platform-independent boot firmware. It is based on Sun's OpenBoot firmware, and uses ANS Forth as a processor-independent interface language.

 

[CSFM]

So why are we still using BIOS????? Why do PC motherboard manafacturers still use it?????

I have often wondered this, but never thought of asking anyone about it.

-CSFM-