Windows/Mac switch?

[jontucker]

Can we get to 100 votes before we get shut down??

 

[joescrivens]

Just 2 more votes! looks like the clear winner is that most people have seen the light from their windows mistake and chose macs as I predicted very few people have done it the other way around

 

[Amp34]

i'm leaving it open as long as possible.. i have faith in you all

It's been over a week so it's pretty impressive anyway.

Can you not just lock the posts but leave the poll open?

I still think that MacDonalds shouldn't have stopped putting salt on their fries

I had salt on my fries today.

(first time i've had some this year.)

Just 2 more votes! looks like the clear winner is that most people have seen the light from their windows mistake and chose macs as I predicted very few people have done it the other way around

The poll doesn't really show anything tbh, as there will always be more people moving from a major party to a minor party than the other way round.

As I said to guage it properly you need an option to see how many people have tried OSX and stayed with Windows, because few people actually buy something like this before trying it out, and they wouldn't buy if they liked what they had more.

 

[joescrivens]

To me it shows more people have switched to mac from windows than stayed on windows. Since there is a higher number of switchers than stickers. Pretty simple

 

[Amp34]

True, however even on this forum I can't see the ration of Mac users to Windows users being that large. But then i'd suggest a lot more mac users would come into this thread than windows users, especially considering the title.

 

[pragmatist]

I switched from Windows Vista to the Mac only a few days ago but it doesn't necceserily mean Windows is crap, I just wanted a change. I absolutely love the imac but have a friend who uses Windows 7 and he loves it. As long as our chosen medium keeps us happy then we are all winners.

 

[blue max]

What does the poll prove or intend to prove?

I don't think you can draw any conclusions at all from the answers. Many people will ignore this because they couldn't care less or expect it to end in a ruck.

I have voted honestly, but it's my personal experience, in my situation, over my timeframe. It may well not be the right choice for many, so you really need to be much more specific to draw any conclusions at all.

And I may be wrong of course

Graham

 

[jontucker]

As I said to guage it properly you need an option to see how many people have tried OSX and stayed with Windows, because few people actually buy something like this before trying it out, and they wouldn't buy if they liked what they had more.

True, however even on this forum I can't see the ration of Mac users to Windows users being that large. But then i'd suggest a lot more mac users would come into this thread than windows users, especially considering the title.

If you assume all the people in option 1 have tried OS X and chosen to stick with Windows it still looks like OS X comes out on top. However, I suspect your last sentence is the reason the poll has turned out like it has.

Gary can you close this now please as I think might be about to descend it to the usual rows and I'm going to start another one to see what difference a different question would make.

 

[cowasaki]

True, however even on this forum I can't see the ration of Mac users to Windows users being that large. But then i'd suggest a lot more mac users would come into this thread than windows users, especially considering the title.

I would say that the proportion of Mac users on a forum like this will be higher than the proportion in the normal world due to the Mac being more popular with arty type people and photographers falling into that category somewhat. I would suggest that it is likely to be maybe 2 to 1 for windows users on here and more like 6-8 to 1 in the real world or even possibly higher.

Marcel would be able to give you the actual figures from the web site stats......



MY REASONED ARGUMENT FOR BOTH SIDES.

If someone asks my opinion I will give it and in my opinion MacOS is a better OS for most tasks that most people do (my opinion). Most of the things that people say in relation to macOS like "it just works" are a bit daft but there is some truth in some of them none the less.

All three major OSes have their advantages and Windows 7 (from what I have seen so far) is really rather good. I really could not stand Vista and ran XP on my main Windows box most of the time (other than testing script writer) but I have bought Windows 7 pro version or whatever it is called (it was £29.95 for students ).

I have seen numerous threads extolling the virtues of Windows over MacOS and vice versa with the odd bit of spam from the Linux camp but Windows users rarely point out the things that I like about Windows....

WINDOWS WINS....

Cheap upgrades - It is £286 for a 4870 graphics card for my mac pro when the equivalent (totally equivalent because I can actually turn the PC version into a Mac version ) version is about £150-175.

Quicker upgrades - If we were talking about someone's monster Windows rig rather than my monster Mac one we would not even be thinking of 4870s!! You can stick a 2Gb 5970 into a Windows machine !!

Wider choice - 3d 120Hz displays, blu-ray (with OS support), USB microscope, the USB kit I use for the time lapse kit, USB3 as soon as it is out etc

Still some software only available for Windows - Delphi which I like for most of my programming is only Windows for example

You can build your own machine to your own spec and save money. - YES

WINDOWS ARGUEMENTS THAT ARE A BIT FLAKEY.

But the arguments Windows supporters often come out with are flawed. Cost of kit being one of them - Let us consider "cost of ownership". My mbp cost £1800 2 years ago. It is still worth £1300 so cost £500 over 2 years. Lets find a Windows laptop that cost £1800 and is still worth £1300 now..... No you can't OR I can buy a laptop for £400 with the same spec so why pay £700.... Well because the £700 one is better, will be worth more and will run MacOS

Apples are more expensive - HARD TO SAY - Compare a decent same spec DELL XPS with a MACBOOK and there is not that much in it really so long as you compare their decent brand not their cheapo consumer one items like XPS compare well. (but see above re cost of ownership)


APPLE WINS....

It just works - If it did I would not be so busy answering lots of questions by PM and Email and my 365 tips thread would have been dead and buried. It works better might be closer.

Viruses - Well there have been NO wild viruses for MacOS although they are POSSIBLE. The way that UNIX (which is the basis of MacOS and Linux) works it is less able to spread and less able to do much about it. Malware is possible and the only MAJOR problem recently was when 50000 people got a trojan in a dodgy torrent of iWorks!!


APPLES ARGUEMENTS THAT ARE A BIT FLAKEY.

Apples are more reliable.... NOPE - They are actually about the SAME reliability as certain other tier 1 manufacturers such as DELL but BOTH are FAR FAR more reliable than the rubbish £300-400 laptops you can find.



BUT


I still use MacOS


WHY


Because I now spend 99% of my time actually using my machine rather than:

upgrading it every month just because something comes out that is better even if I don't actually need it, mending the OS, re-installing the OS, messing with virus software etc etc - This is not Windows fault and is actually only possible BECAUSE of the wide range of new stuff coming out and more to do with my inability to avoid buying the latest toys!

I like the OS, I like the way all the apps integrate with each other and other people without lots of extra messing about.



SO


It is a balancing act.


NONE of them is BEST, NONE of them is WORST - You pick the BEST one for YOU and YOUR task......

 

[neil_g]

is gary on holiday?

 

[Amp34]

I would say that the proportion of Mac users on a forum like this will be higher than the proportion in the normal world due to the Mac being more popular with arty type people and photographers falling into that category somewhat. I would suggest that it is likely to be maybe 2 to 1 for windows users on here and more like 6-8 to 1 in the real world or even possibly higher.

Marcel would be able to give you the actual figures from the web site stats......

I totally agree with that, and is pretty much what I meant.

However the stats definately don't represent that.

 

[Amp34]

But the arguments Windows supporters often come out with are flawed. Cost of kit being one of them - Let us consider "cost of ownership". My mbp cost £1800 2 years ago. It is still worth £1300 so cost £500 over 2 years. Lets find a Windows laptop that cost £1800 and is still worth £1300 now..... No you can't OR I can buy a laptop for £400 with the same spec so why pay £700.... Well because the £700 one is better, will be worth more and will run MacOS

Apples are more expensive - HARD TO SAY - Compare a decent same spec DELL XPS with a MACBOOK and there is not that much in it really so long as you compare their decent brand not their cheapo consumer one items like XPS compare well. (but see above re cost of ownership)!

Although I don't necessarily agree with the reselling price (expensive brands such as Sony will generally hold a reasonably similar value) I agree with the rest of it.

EDIT: Just looking on the bay, lesser specced refurbished machines are going for around £450, so essentially I would lose only £200 if I sold mine now. Not bad for a 3 year old laptop! However it's not a real representation of the fact as I got mine discounted anyway.

Just check out the price of the 24" Sony all in one compared to the 27" imac, the iMac may have a bigger screen but the Sony is a touch screen, both are around £1500.

Macbooks, I got flamed the other day on another forum (by both mac users and windows users) when I had the gall to say if buying now my next laptop would be a 13" macbook pro, possibly installing windows on it and not using OSX, why? Because at the moment the price for spec pretty much beats anything else in the 13" markets, unless you go for either a Vostro (which are butt ugly and only a tiny bit cheaper) or a ULV "netbook" most alternatives are the same if not more expensive. However when I bought my last laptop (a Dell XPS 13") the macbook specs were terrible in comparison, unfortunately there is no direct replacement for the M1330. In the end I paid less for the XPS than a base model macbook, only because I managed to get it from their factory outlet.

Viruses - Well there have been NO wild viruses for MacOS although they are POSSIBLE. The way that UNIX (which is the basis of MacOS and Linux) works it is less able to spread and less able to do much about it. Malware is possible and the only MAJOR problem recently was when 50000 people got a trojan in a dodgy torrent of iWorks!!!

The main reason for the lack of malware is because people can't be arsed to code for macs, because they can spend the same time coding for an OS that has a much larger market share (same reason there are very few viruses/malware for Linux). They are also very difficult to get hold of for would be mac hackers, unlike windows virii.

upgrading it every month just because something comes out that is better even if I don't actually need it, mending the OS, re-installing the OS, messing with virus software etc etc - This is not Windows fault and is actually only possible BECAUSE of the wide range of new stuff coming out and more to do with my inability to avoid buying the latest toys!

That's not really a fault of windows as you said, that's an itchy credit card.

 

[cowasaki]

That's not really a fault of windows as you said, that's an itchy credit card.

I know. But it happened and it doesn't now

 

[Amp34]

Hmmm, that last sentence was supposed to have a at the end... Don't know where that went.

(I.e. it was meant very tongue in cheek)

 

[cowasaki]

Hmmm, that last sentence was supposed to have a at the end... Don't know where that went.

(I.e. it was meant very tongue in cheek)

I realise that

 

[Craikeybaby]

The main reason for the lack of malware is because people can't be arsed to code for macs, because they can spend the same time coding for an OS that has a much larger market share (same reason there are very few viruses/malware for Linux). They are also very difficult to get hold of for would be mac hackers, unlike windows virii.

But with all the Apple fanboy website anyone who writes the first in the wild virus for OS X would be notorious, plus the fact many Macs run without AV it would be easy pickings...

 

[cowasaki]

The main reason for the lack of malware is because people can't be arsed to code for macs, because they can spend the same time coding for an OS that has a much larger market share (same reason there are very few viruses/malware for Linux). They are also very difficult to get hold of for would be mac hackers, unlike windows virii..

This is another of those ridiculous comments!!

People write copies of one banks web site to catch 1 in 200 or 300 people so writing something to catch 1 in maybe 10 would be more realistic. Writing malware which is the only one for a platform covering 10% would be a bigger return than writing some malware which is 1/2000000th of 90%

If it was as easy or at all easy then SOMEONE would have done it. The only real malware was a trojan hidden in a torrent of iWork09. It didn't do much because it quickly got round that it was dodgy and it could not self propagate.

 

[Amp34]

Notice I didn't say virus/worm, I said malware. There are most certainly malware/keyloggers available for macs, just far, far less than available for windows machines. I also didn't mention anything about propogation, again purposely. Malware is just a piece of software executed without you knowing (it doesn't even need to be that really), which can be bound to another program, just like the dodgey version of iworks you mentioned, because someone did do it.

Thing is most people that spread viruses aren't actually the ones that write them, to write a mac virus you need to know mac code, which again is far less well known than code that runs on a windows machine, which means there are less people to write them, this in turn means people buying these pieces of malware are going to have to pay more.

To say you can't spread malware on a mac is stupid, there can be little difference between a legitimate program and a piece of malware...

 

[cowasaki]

It's a big planet and nobody has written anything that causes any real problem for mac users. Pc av/malware software is a multi billion dollar industry with virtually every windows pc having to run something. There is no need to run the equivalent on a mac. Whether this is as you say because nobody wants to or because it is more difficult is of little relevance and we can have a pantomime arguement about it but the simple fact remains mac users do not need anti av/malware software.

 

[theonemule]

Which OS do you use and have you switched?

I'm talking about your primary computer, at home mostly (unless you choose which system you want at work!).

No posting please, just vote on the poll (I don't want the trigger happy thread closer exercising his itchy finger again! )

What about Linux????

 

[neil_g]

It's a big planet and nobody has written anything that causes any real problem for mac users. Pc av/malware software is a multi billion dollar industry with virtually every windows pc having to run something. There is no need to run the equivalent on a mac. Whether this is as you say because nobody wants to or because it is more difficult is of little relevance and we can have a pantomime arguement about it but the simple fact remains mac users do not need anti av/malware software.

yet in this months "mac user" mag there are more and more adverts for mac AV software

its inevitable (mr anderson)