[Bewolf]

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

Well I regularly work with Photoshop and Illustrator and have a colleague who works with AutoCAD. We have a division of sound engineer who works with Macs as well and in our professional and corporate experience, we can say that Macs performs better, and I'm not talking merely about top end Mac Pros, even the standard iMacs work a treat compared to the pcs you can assemble for the same money; in addition to that you have a stable OS and a long guarantee.

I have worked in companies using both Macs and Windows PCs, and it really depends on the components build into a PC, also in regards to stability. More so, there are lots of applications that were never ported over to a Mac, unluckily. Broad statements here in regards to the superiourity of one system to another are a bit like agueing Merits of a Porsche Cayenne vs. a Humvee, completly senseless.

No, that's a myth that PC geeks love to think is true, but it's not because hackers don't find Macs appealing, it's cos viruses don't work on Macs, because OS X doesn't work like Windows. You can get certain trojans and ad-wares, but it's really hard because of the way permissions are structured within OS X.

I am argueing here from a middle ground, and I argue against Apple geeks like you the same way I onced argued against Windows geeks. It's just that Windows is out by now and Apple affictionaed have the same high time now here blowing their praise (some of if justified) totally out of proportion.

In regards to the security issues and legends:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/08...pard_security/
http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/...-snow-leopard/

It's down to personal choice, but the whole misconception is that a machine with a greater chance to be tweaked shouldn't be put in the hands of people that don't know how to handle it. Take the virus examples again: viruses do spread because of a combination of poor security in terms of OS and bad policies or IT habits of average users. Apple took these factors into account and developed a fenced system that is not susceptible to these issues.
As a consequence, you have a stable machine, which reliable performance and that doesn't let you down.
The main difference is that Micro$oft develops a generic OS to be thrown to the lions, whereas Apple develops a complete package, which now is even capable to run the Windows OS (and performing better with those too).

Viruses are one problem. They are not the end of the line. I never had a Virus problem with a Mac, very true. But then again I only had a Virus problem once in 15 years of using Windows. Not using pron sites too much really helps, btw.

You probably never looked into a Mac Pro. That is hardware porn at its finest

True, I didn't as of yet

things have changed, and keep on changing: Apple is now ditching the concept of the mouse in favour of the Magic Trackpad , which together with a pen tablet is all I use for work. The simple genius of multi-touching is incredibly useful.

I have my Wacom sitting right next to me and it's a great device, no doubt. I am not a fan of touchpads in their current form, however, so I am not convived about this one.

you probably never worked with Apps. They generated an incredible amount of work and income for a lot of new companies, and many apps are for free. A developers' package is not very expensive and you can really make a lot of profit. The fact that apps are monitored by Apple is a further example of how they care about quality standards.

not worked with apps yet? you do want to be taken serious, yes? maybe you should extend the favor to others? apps are neat little tings, but they are just programs like all others put into a userfriendly GUI. That's all there is to it. Monitoring, btw, is a many ways street. Figure it out yourself.

Apple is a giant, they have more liquidity than the US of A in their bank. They're also winning causes for patent infringements done by other companies, because they worked hard on having their patenting done properly. They invested a lot in it, and it's paying back. As for design, it's questionable, designers continuously take inspiration from the past, so nothing wrong with that.

Call me a cyncic, but in the US of A, in court this really is all that counts. I am not saying there is something wrong in the apporach of Apple, but it's nothing breathtaking either, as the argument goes.

there's quite a difference: Apple delivers a complete, functioning package, Windows sells a ($hitty) OS, some applications and crappy peripherals. Their only advantage is that they arrived on the market before, and were cunning enough to steal key ideas and establish themselves into the market to become what they are today: an over-inflated, over-paid, overrated fart.

LoL, be careful to not let that argument come back at you in a couple of years, the roots for that are already laid. Btw, this is exactly why I think you lack objectivity in this debate. Apple has been around now for a very long time. Despite that they never really managed to be a serious contender. Why do you think is that? Fanboyism never is a good sparring partner in an arguement.

You're completely missing on the actual business value here: time.
We ran a survey at work over a month's time, checking workflows of people that worked on same roles but with different platforms (say PC vs Mac).
It turned out that people working on Mac had a higher efficiency rate of circa 35%, this due simply to the time saved by a faster and less buggy machine, less need for costly IT support and generic compatibility issues with peripherals.

This is the first argument here to be actually taken serious, but Macs and PCs are not only precision mashines geared for only once purpose in any given company. In fact, many companies "need" Windows because they have to utilize their machines for in parts very different tasks. Esepcially new companies do a lot better with Windows simply because it is a more flexible machine. I am not declarting your argument wrong here, but it is a very narrow view for very specialised taks. And let's not forget the private users, which probably require even more flexebility.


All that said, I am not going to argue against a man on a mission, so you will have to go it alone from here. I can just advise to get a bit more distance towards the topic.