30 Responses

1. derek

   January 17th, 2007 at 12:26 pm

   1

   i think that as a developer, windows boxes are just much easier and more cost effective to use.

   plus, you know damn well that nothing about mac is cheap. the OS may be cheaper, but vista will come with PCs that still sell for super cheap.

   macs will continue to be expensive because they are pretty. and when you buy a mac, you usually purchase all of your accessories separately – all of which are also pretty so they are expensive.

   and even worse, you will become a mac head and end up buying every accessory they offer. shit you may even buy the same mp3 player 6 times.

2. Harper

   January 17th, 2007 at 12:29 pm

   2

   hahah. yea. stupid ipod. But i think that for work its different. I mean. i use a pc laptop to work and it sits next to my mac mini – which is what i use to sync my phone, do my calendar and all that.

   But what kills me is that they seem to be attempting to get into the home market. however – their tactics don’t make sense.

   i want a wii

3. Josh

   January 17th, 2007 at 1:32 pm

   3

   The problem a lot of people have with OS X is that they come out with a new version every year or so and that’s another $200 bucks out of your pocket. Vista is going to be the standard for PCs for at least 5 years and then all of their upgrades to Vista are free (i hope).

4. chriskalalalani

   January 17th, 2007 at 6:16 pm

   4

   Don’t worry, I just went over to William Gate’s house and punched him in the weenie… he said he will lower the price now.

5. Jeff

   January 17th, 2007 at 8:16 pm

   5

   Tiger is also $129, not $149, and $79 for the student edition (which is the same operating system just with the discount for the poor students).

6. Francesco

   January 17th, 2007 at 8:31 pm

   6

   The OS X you pay is pratically an upgrade, because when you buy a new mac you already pay OS X in its price. So those 149$ and 199$ you pay are simply upgrades, because you install them on computers that already came with MacOS/OS X.

   Also there are OEM and upgrade version, and since most PCs come with windows people would simply buy an upgrade.

   By the way, vista home premium upgrade costs 149$, just like OS X.

   Really, if you want to make vista look bad you’ll have to invent something else…

7. Yacze

   January 17th, 2007 at 8:43 pm

   7

   I haven’t got the time (or intrest really – I’m a mac user) to review the Vista specks too hard, so I just go with my knowledge of XP versus OS X.

   Mac – Comes with the OS lightyears ahead, with software bundled along. Pretty expensive, but man, it works and you got the software you need all out of the box.

   PC (with a Windows OS) – Comes with an OS that’s pretty god damn lame (no seriously, think about it, you have to tweak it every two seconds and it crashes all the time) AND you still have to buy all the software you need separately.

   So, I’ve been using a mac for about 3 years now, and the total cost of it was 1200 euros. I also bought a new PC at the same time, the specks was pretty much the same with the mac and it cost me 900 euros (windows xp incl.). But here’s the deal:

   With the mac I had all the software I needed, and the OS updates was painless – it automagically downloaded the patches, so I didn’t have to worry about that. With the Windows PC I went thru Hell downloading all teh hotfixes & shit. And it STILL crashes every other second, got full of viruses etc, I had to spend extra 400 euros to get some serious firewall & antivirus software. With mac I had not these problems.

   I mainly have used the PC for gaming, cause that’s all it’s good for. Well, I bought a Nintendo Wii and sold the PC. I will never ever go back to windows again. Mac is truly worth it’s reputation.

   But don’t take my word for it, try it out for yourselves. The more people switch to mac the more game and software developers notices the trend and starts to develope more and more stuff for macs.

   Windows is out cold.

   I pitty the fool who spends his/hers money on that crap.

8. Jacob

   January 17th, 2007 at 9:48 pm

   8

   Amazon says Jan 30th

9. Harper

   January 18th, 2007 at 11:25 am

   9

   Francesco: If you are going to be comparing OSX and VISTA you should probably be comparing the most similarly capable products. So Vista Ultimate at 299 (i will subtract 100 to make it an upgrade) versus OSX at 149. So the price difference isn’t 50 bucks.. its more like 150.

   so i guess my point still stands.

   I don’t really give a shit if vista looks good. i know i will be using it at work and probably at home. My point is that Microsoft is out of touch with consumers and apple isn’t.

10. bryan

    January 18th, 2007 at 12:33 pm

    10

    derek: What accessories are you talking about? what does an iMac not have? I will admit the pro desktops don’t come with a monitor, but other than that, what accessories do you need to buy that come in a standard PC bundle?

    josh: apple does come out with a new version every year or 1.5 years. Which is incurred cost I agree…Each apple release has included new features, etc. Wether you feel it justifies the price tag is your prerogative… but the fact that MS failed to release an upgrade to its main product for 5 years is NOT a feature. I am amazed that people think that is a good thing..

    I mean, that is like pointing at the guy that has a new car that has more features than your car and saying ‘ha ha- you bought a new car! My 5 year old car still runs! I just have to wrench on it a lot’…

    And seriously, have you installed XP lately? AFTER you install SP2, you still have like 60+ updates to install. Really? 60? It is nuts. And that is AFTER you installed all the stuff to get through SP2.

    I am not saying Vista sucks (although their ad campaign does) since I haven’t used it. But for 5+ years of development, it had better be good. Or at least… something cool.

    I am not sure MS is out of touch with consumers. I mean, I know they are, but… I think consumers are out of touch with reality. I can’t think of another product people use as often as a computer that has such a long product cycle. The automotive sector operates on a shorter product cycle than XP has, and that is a MUCH MORE expensive item then XP to the consumer. The average young person changes jobs more often than 5+ years. The average young person MOVES more often than once every 5 years.

    And yet, MS has been rocking out in relative mediocrity for over 5 years. Awesome.

11. derek

    January 18th, 2007 at 5:34 pm

    11

    sorry, i meant a mac mini.

    i went with my wife’s dad to buy one a while back. he got the mac mini.

    the keyboard was extra, the mouse was extra, the monitor was extra, and speakers were extra.

    so here’s his new mac mini hooked up to all my ghetto spare accessories, freshly dug out of the closet: http://derek.broox.com/photos/matthews-50th-birthday/3023/

12. derek

    January 18th, 2007 at 5:37 pm

    12

    actually, wtf, i never said imac in my first comment, haha…

    way to pick out the imac – one of the only macs that truly does come with everything.

13. Brian

    January 18th, 2007 at 6:26 pm

    13

    I’ve decided to buy a Mac laptop for my next primary computer. This is a big deal as I’ve used windows since version 3. The reasons vary from fatigue with windows to its new insane price structure with umpteen versions.

    When it took 5 minutes just to shut down my winXP dual core, 2gb nearly brand new work laptop today, I realized that Microsoft is just wasting my time. I don’t expect the Mac to be a “holy” experience, I just hope its not as irritating. Windows just slowly pecks you to death with small annoyances. I think Microsoft is quickly wearing out its welcome with many users.

14. bryan

    January 19th, 2007 at 10:20 am

    14

    I did forget about the mini… it doesn’t have anything. But, that being said, it is the ONLY mac that doesn’t.

    The iMac comes with everything. The laptops come with everything. The desktops come with everything aside from a monitor.

    So I picked the mac that comes with everything and you picked that mac that comes without the keyboard and mouse and monitor.

15. Mike

    January 24th, 2007 at 3:39 pm

    15

    Well, the Mac Mini’s purpose was to be a “switcher” computer — one for someone who may have a PC already. All of the computers Apple is trying to market to the mainstream consumer are either iMacs or laptops.

    Francesco’s right on the upgrade pricing — each Mac has the base software cost built in, and anything else is an upgrade. Realistically, most Vista users will want Home Premium or Business, which are $159 and $199 at upgrade price, respectively.

    If Microsoft is attempting to be “cool,” it’s by distancing themselves from their main brand, if anything. The Xbox division is being given projects that attempt to hide their Microsoft logos (Zune), Expression is supposed to be Microsoft’s new creative suite to compete with Adobe and there’s already evidence of them tampering with the market. Why?

    I admittedly do the majority of my development work on Windows (at work) since I’m usually too burned out to keep messing with programming when I get home, but I’d love if I could use Mac OS in both places.

    For what it’s worth, I jumped ship to Mac OS X from Linux as my “main” operating system in late college when I picked up a laptop. All of the programming, network tweaking, unix crap, and scripts that I had set up jumped with me pretty damn easily. The “coolness” factor of Apple was still pretty low since that was around the time the iPod came out and OS X still wasn’t that widely adopted.

    There’s something to be said about the quality of tools and the joy of using them. I mean, I’ve used a Lawn Boy to mow the yard, and I’ve used a nicer one that was probably not as economical when it comes to just cutting the damn grass, but I know which one I’d choose most of the time.

16. macbones

    January 28th, 2007 at 1:25 am

    16

    Get a mac. Feature for feature the mac hardware costs about the same. Sometimes less. Apple simply does not sell a $379- loss leader that you realize is a piece of sh!t 43 minutes after plugging it in. Sure, they come out with an expensive upgrade every year or 2. But the mac os from 3 years ago is comparable to this vista garbage being foisted on you today. Don’t be a sheep. After 7 years, my desktop runs Tiger & all its features- well. Try that with vista.

    “If I did not work for microsoft I’d buy a Mac” – Jim Allchin, MS executive 2004 leaked email correspondance

17. Ben

    January 29th, 2007 at 11:05 am

    17

    I switched to Mac because I was tired of having the same operating system for five years. Also, every review says that Aero still isn’t as smooth as OS X Tiger. Vista is going to slow down gaming, which makes an awesome gaming platform in my book. And for Microsoft with all of their concern for backwards compatability won’t run current versions of iTunes or Nero well. In any other industry, new would hopefully mean more efficient, but just to run the operating system as it was intended will require an upgrade for just about everyone who isn’t an extreme gamer, and the extreme gamers only gain from the addition of DirectX 10, which so far no games are built for. I like my XBox 360, but I’m never going back to Windows for a personal machine, and I will only upgrade the business computers I am responsible for when XP support goes away in two years.
    Also, for anyone who bitches about Mac prices, price a Dell vs. an iMac with all the same features (processor speeds, RAM, hard drive, video card, and don’t forget the included flat panel monitor). Macs are comparable if not cheaper. Of course, Gateway is cheaper than both, but who wants to own a Gateway. Macs are more expensive because currently they are better (hell, they even run Windows XP). Cool factor and better hardware make the switch worth it

18. Spike

    January 30th, 2007 at 11:30 pm

    18

    MACINTOSH = Machine Always Crashes If Not Then Operating System Hangs.

    :)

19. Spencer

    January 31st, 2007 at 1:00 pm

    19

    I used to be an avid PC user and still am at work unfortunately… I bought a G4 Powerbook about 1 1/2 years ago and I won’t be looking back… True, I could have gotten a Dell or HP laptop for less, but I wanted a computer that would work, and not one that I had to keep messing with all the time. My G4 just works and works all the time. Not one crash, not one problem, ever. It doesn’t freeze up, I don’t have to reboot it when some program decides to screw up and it’s just simply a pleasure to use. So, for me, the fact that Apple has a superior OS over Windows is worth the extra price.

    I love listening to the MIS guy I work with telling me how much better Windows is as he’s fixing yet another PC in our office that’s crashed.

    It’s interesting that whenever I hear someone complaining and bitching about their computers, they’re always always always talking about a PC with Windows. I’ve never heard one Mac user talk about how his Apple is a piece of shit… but I sure hear that a lot when it comes to PC’s…

    Simple as this… If you like Windows, then stick with them… I have no problem with that… but please stop trying to convince the Mac users out there that Windows is so much better than Apple… Apple users know better…

20. bp

    February 2nd, 2007 at 7:40 pm

    20

    Don’t forget that Mac OS releases tend to enhance performance of legacy machines as well. They improve the performance for older models. Tiger runs faster on my Yikes! G4 than anything previous and is why I can still use it.

21. seano

    February 3rd, 2007 at 7:59 am

    21

    Macs are good for editing movies, but only because there a simple fast system.

    As someone who plays games, I like the windows program and the vista is a good gaming os.

    I also will say I like the feel of windows more because The format seems just better. Also having a mac is like telling people I’m computer eliterate.

22. Derek#2

    February 3rd, 2007 at 1:51 pm

    22

    I’m surprised to see that barely anyone touched on backwards compatibility of existing software. Esp since other developers were making comments here. Essentially what we are saying is that Windows XP while different than Windows 95, generally has to maintain the quirks of the operating system down to MSDOS. M$ maintains a developer group, whose sole job, is to create mimicked bugs of the operating system, through the compatibility layer. Sure this can be a royal pain the ass sometimes, but rarely has compatibility been broken with Windows as it has been with MacOS in general.

23. Tina

    February 8th, 2007 at 2:33 pm

    23

    I’m also surprised that the lack of support for prior hardware hasn’t been addressed. We have an old iMac and a fairly old pc running windows XP. I’m looking for a new computer and am dying to know if my peripherals I have now on my pc will be compatible with VISTA if I upgrade. When we looked at upgrading to a new iMac, we discovered that we needed to purchase a new scanner and printer because our old ones are not OS X compatible. Well, now I’ve recently purchased a printer/scanner for the pc. Will it be compatible with VISTA should we decide to go that route? I’m not looking to spend the money on upgrading an entire new system – I just want something that is faster, has a lot more memory and will make my life easier, not more stressed!

24. Chris

    March 4th, 2007 at 12:22 pm

    24

    You cannot compare Vista Ultimate and OS X, they are two different beings, one thing being is that Ultimate has alot of stuff that OS X doesnt even bundle, like MCE, ready boost,bit locker etc.

    The only version of Vista that is comparable to OSX is Premium and even that has MCE which OS X doesnt have an equivelent too.

    And please we all know that ever since OS X has come out every year or so you have to pay for an upgrade to it. So if over a 5 year span you spend 500 dollars on an OS for the MAC, what exact cost savings is there over Vista Ultimate which has free update over its entire lifespan?

    MAC’s, for people who can’t get over themselves.

25. Jason

    March 5th, 2007 at 2:02 pm

    25

    I have been working on and fixing pc’s for over 15 years now and no matter how often I have to fix one, I’d still use a pc over a mac. “Why?” you might ask, because a mac will never hold a candle to a pc when it comes to gaming. Macs have only saturated 10% of the computer market. Which, logically, would mean that they would have 10% of software titles available to them. I remember when Halo came out for PC, able to run on a 733MHz system and 128mb memory. Two years later it came out for Mac, requiring a CPU speed of at least 1GHz and 256mb memory. Not only that, but the 1 button mouse made playing with the standard mouse / keyboard config virtually impossible.
    I was on the beta team for Vista and I must say, they DO need a LOT of work. Running on a 3.2GHz 2GB 4200 DDR, 250GB sata drive with a 512mb 256bit gfx card, it lagged. Much like when XP first came out, we waited a good year or two before upgrading from 2000. Most IT techs will probably do the same and wait until Gates decides to correct the majority of the issues.

    “And as requested its filled with bugs that will force users to upgrade for years” – Tomorrow Never Dies

26. Davor Prcovich

    March 11th, 2007 at 1:54 pm

    26

    Hi, first I have to say that your blog is really nice and informative. As for the Vista, I think it will just drag the users away from it. First due to a high price tag and second would be that Vista is quiet demanding for what it offers ( which is nothing). Many people would consider switch to mac because OS X is a very stable and Intel macs can rub both Mac OS X and Windows XP. Keep up the good work man…

27. Windows Vista vs Mac OS X

    March 20th, 2007 at 10:15 am

    27

    I’m installing Vista presently onto my P4 2.6GHz machine alongside XP. I can’t wait to see what Redmond has been up to, it sure had taken a while. In the meantime, it looks as if Apple will be poised to release 10.5 before this actually sees daylight (in any mass-adoption sense). The next iteration of OS X looks to have some amazing things built in. Microsoft just keeps trying to catch up, in my opinion.

28. Joshua

    April 9th, 2007 at 12:48 am

    28

    I would have to agree with the mac. I am presently deciding between the mac and pc for my laptop. As of now im swaing towards the mac. Easier, and can also run Vista. If you really want to spend that much money on it. Over looking both systems patterns seem to start coming out. Apple are leading the technology bringing improved software out, every 1 – 2 years. Every 5 years microsoft is starting to play catch up. Athough I have not made my final choice yet. PC may still be best for running auto-cad. However its still possible to run on the mac using xp or vista. However I found that the Mac system is actually cheaper than the pc market. Apple just make the high quility stuff at a low price. Where PC have a range from poor to high quility.
    Oh and PC much better for gaming. But what kind of nerd sits down and plays games all day. GET A JOB, PLAY REAL SPORT. Damm come on gaming is not cool. If you are really that nerdy, get a life, not another computer.

29. Mike2

    June 11th, 2007 at 7:17 pm

    29

    @ Jason

    “Not only that, but the 1 button mouse made playing with the standard mouse / keyboard config virtually impossible.”

    Dude – so spend 10 bucks on a two button USB mouse – yes – even then Macs accepted two button mice… And yes – I am posting this from a Windows machine – a beast laptop (yes laptop) with 3.4 (yes – three point four – yes in a laptop) Ghz pentium 4 processor and a 256 SDRAM nVidia gfx card and a gig of memory. It runs games like an x-box – and can run about a gazillion programs including photoshop, illustrator and flash simultaneously without even slowing down. Why am I telling you all this… – well frankly I am about to buy a mac – I have to for business reasons – as a web developer/designer I need to be able to develop applications that work on both – and to be honest, I will probably end up installing windows XP on the mac and using it if an intel core 2 duo with 128 gfx card, and two gigs of memory will handle the above programs in a similar fashion. I will not be upgrading to Vista any time in the near future because I have tested it and it just isn’t that great. There are a few neat navigational features that were improved – start menu, folder to folder navigation – but IE7 – what a joke – where did they put the refresh button…oh lets remove it by default? Good thing I am a keyboard shortcut guy. I’m ready to spend 150 bucks every couple of years (as I understand it you get two upgrades per purchase? – correct me if I’m wrong but I read that somewhere earlier today) Vista is playing catch up w/ Mac OSX and even with Linux in some areas… sad really. And all the different versions – what a crock – I develop applications myself and yea – that’s how developers can make money – build an application that you can strip/disable features on and then charge the client/customer to get those features – so yes – Vista Ultimate (aka Vista Useful) is a rip-off and Home Edition isn’t worth wasting your money on. In XP – the start menu actually has a registry item where a delay is set for how long it takes to appear after you click the start button…. You can change it to be much quicker. I wonder how many things they did in Vista that are similar in nature. In XP home, networking was painful to say the least – professional was much easier to configure – how many things like that did they do with Vista? Your average home business person won’t need things that would come w/ Media Center so let’s split them apart – but wait – now I need to buy a whole new computer (or dual boot) to have some nifty media features… – with a mac it’s all included regardless. I don’t think there is much of a comparison there folks…. just a slaughter-fest against Windows….

30. PCTech

    November 18th, 2007 at 12:35 am

    30

    nope, as a tech who frequently repairs PCs I have absolutely had it with microsoft and Vista which is a nasty OS. I currently work for a school district who in it’s wisdom decided to upgrade it’s servers to Vista from XP without checking the hardware properly. The servers crashed and we were forced to revert back to XP. The servers also were less than 1 year old.
    VISTA demanded too much of the hardware to run properly even with what it was said to be compatible with… which turned out to be false.

    Bottom line: after seeing the poor quality of Vista and the high quality of OS X 10.5 … I am making a formal recommendation to switch over to Apple. I am nothing short of impressed with their products, and for those people who argue about the initial cost of the OS .. let me put it to you this way… $149 non student edition/$99 CDN Student OS X 10.5 has FAR FAR more capability out of the box than VISTA has at current.

    We wasted money on faulty PC hardware every year when we could have gone mac and had few hardware repair costs, not to mention
    the save in AntiVirus software and a few other areas… all this money could have been used more cost effectively. :(

    Very sad indeed!