100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Need User Opinions: Difference Between a Mac and a PC | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
I know that by definition PC means Personal Computer and that a Mac is also considered as one. But Mac has been thoroughly branded and segregated that it's treated like a separate entity. Now, my questions are these: What is the difference between a Mac and a PC? Why is a Mac relatively more expensive? Which is more practical to buy? I would like opinions from people who have actually used both. Thank you in advance! What do you want to use your computer for? Mac is better for a small niche of functions. For most purposes, a PC will be better for a number of reason: It's cheaper, easier to get software and support and you have a wider range of choices. Macs come on PC hardware now, they just charge more for it. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Which came first the Apple or the Macintosh? I never put the two together.
This article is about Apple personal computers. For other uses, see McIntosh. A beige, boxy computer with a small black and white screen showing a window and desktop with icons. The original Macintosh, the first commercially successful personal computer to use a graphical user interface, rather than a command line. A wide, thin, and sleek computer made of aluminum with a large screen. An iMac computer from August 2009, a modern all-in-one Macintosh. The Macintosh (pronounced /ˈmækɨntɒʃ/ MAK-in-tosh),[1] or Mac, is a series of several lines of personal computers designed, developed, and marketed by Apple Inc. The first Macintosh was introduced on January 24, 1984; it was the first commercially successful personal computer to feature a mouse and a graphical user interface rather than a command-line interface.[2] The company continued to have success through the second half of the 1980s, only to see it dissipate in the 1990s as the personal computer market shifted toward the "Wintel" platform: IBM PC compatible machines running MS-DOS and Microsoft Windows.[3] Years later, Apple consolidated its multiple consumer-level desktop models into the 1998 iMac all-in-one. This proved to be a sales success and saw the Macintosh brand revitalized, albeit not to the market share level it once had. Current Mac systems are mainly targeted at the home, education, and creative professional markets. They are: the descendants of the original iMac and the entry-level Mac mini desktop models, the Mac Pro tower graphics workstation, the MacBook, MacBook Air and MacBook Pro laptops. The Xserve server will be discontinued in early 2011.[4] Production of the Mac is based on a vertical integration model in that Apple facilitates all aspects of its hardware and creates its own operating system that is pre-installed on all Mac computers. This is in contrast to most IBM PC compatibles, where multiple sellers create and integrate hardware intended to run another company's operating software. Apple exclusively produces Mac hardware, choosing internal systems, designs, and prices. Apple does use third party components, however, such as graphics subsystems from nVidia and ATi. Current Mac CPUs use Intel's x86 architecture; the earliest models (1984–1994) used Motorola's 68k and models from 1994–2006 used the AIM alliance's PowerPC. Apple also develops the operating system for the Mac, currently Mac OS X version 10.6 "Snow Leopard". The modern Mac, like other personal computers, is capable of running alternative operating systems such as Linux, FreeBSD, and, in the case of Intel-based Macs, Microsoft Windows. However, Apple does not license Mac OS X for use on non-Apple computers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macintosh LOL! Which indeed. 
Thanks for the history, Rainbow! :) You are welcome. I didn't realise the little play on name or words there, either. There is a McIntosh apple which grows on a tree. Have you ever heard the song, "I am not Lisa." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tVs-d4eBq9k Why didn't he name the computer, Julie?
For the MOS 6502 assembler for Apple II computers, see Lisa assembler. Apple Lisa Apple Lisa.jpg Apple Lisa, with an Apple ProFile external hard disk sitting atop it. Note the dual 5.25-inch "Twiggy" floppy drives. Developer Apple Computer, Inc. Type Personal computer Release date January 19, 1983 Introductory price US$ 9,995 (1983) Discontinued August 1986 CPU Motorola 68000 @ 5 MHz The Apple Lisa was a personal computer designed by Apple Computer, Inc. (now Apple, Inc.) during the early 1980s. The Lisa project was started at Apple in 1978[1] and evolved into a project to design a powerful personal computer with a graphical user interface (GUI) that would be targeted toward business customers. In 1982, Steve Jobs was forced out of the Lisa project,[2] so he joined the Macintosh project instead. The Macintosh is not a direct descendant of Lisa, although there are obvious similarities between the systems and the final revision, the Lisa 2/10, was modified and sold as the Macintosh XL. The Lisa was a more-advanced system than the Macintosh of that time in many respects, such as its inclusion of protected memory, cooperative multitasking, a generally more sophisticated hard disk based operating system, a built-in screensaver, an advanced calculator with a paper tape and RPN, support for up to 2 megabytes (MB) of RAM, expansion slots, a numeric keypad, data corruption protection schemes such as block sparing, non-physical file names (with the ability to have multiple documents with the same name), and a larger higher-resolution display. It would be many years before many of those features were implemented on the Macintosh platform. Protected memory, for instance, did not arrive until the Mac OS X operating system was released in 2001. The Macintosh featured a faster 68000 processor (7.89 MHz) and sound. The complexity of the Lisa operating system and its programs taxed the 5 MHz Motorola 68000 microprocessor so that consumers said it felt sluggish, particularly when scrolling in documents. We will always love you, Lisa.  
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
While the documentation shipped with the original Lisa only ever referred to it as The Lisa, officially, Apple stated that the name was an acronym for Local Integrated Software Architecture or "LISA". Since Steve Jobs' first daughter (born in 1978) was named Lisa Jobs, it is normally inferred that the name also had a personal association, and perhaps that the acronym was invented later to fit the name. Hertzfeld[3] states that the acronym was reverse engineered from the name "Lisa" in autumn 1982 by the Apple marketing team, after they had hired a marketing consultancy firm to come up with names to replace "Lisa" and "Macintosh" (at the time considered by Rod Holt, V.P. of Engineering[4] to be merely internal project codenames) and then rejected all of the suggestions. Privately, Hertzfeld and the other software developers used "Lisa: Invented Stupid Acronym", a recursive backronym, while computer industry pundits coined the term "Let's Invent Some Acronym" to fit the Lisa's name.
Oh. How, sweet. He named it after his daughter. But I guess apples can be sweet, too. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The end of the Lisa
In 1987, Sun Remarketing purchased about 5,000 Macintosh XLs and upgraded them. Some leftover Lisa computers and spare parts are still available today. In 1989, Apple disposed of approximately 2,700 unsold Lisas in a guarded landfill in Logan, Utah, in order to receive a tax write-off on the unsold inventory.[14] Like other early GUI computers, working Lisas are now fairly valuable collectors items, for which people will pay hundreds or even thousands of dollars. The original model is the most sought after, although working ProFile and Widget hard disks, which are necessary for running the Lisa OS, are also particularly valued. Alas, poor Lisa, I knew her well. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Buy this one- 
Oooh, my brother would love that!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I know that by definition PC means Personal Computer and that a Mac is also considered as one. But Mac has been thoroughly branded and segregated that it's treated like a separate entity. Now, my questions are these: What is the difference between a Mac and a PC? Why is a Mac relatively more expensive? Which is more practical to buy? I would like opinions from people who have actually used both. Thank you in advance! What do you want to use your computer for? Mac is better for a small niche of functions. For most purposes, a PC will be better for a number of reason: It's cheaper, easier to get software and support and you have a wider range of choices. Macs come on PC hardware now, they just charge more for it.
Oooooh, this one I didn't know about too. So they're using PC hardwares now? Eh, if that is so then there really is no significant difference. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
While the documentation shipped with the original Lisa only ever referred to it as The Lisa, officially, Apple stated that the name was an acronym for Local Integrated Software Architecture or "LISA". Since Steve Jobs' first daughter (born in 1978) was named Lisa Jobs, it is normally inferred that the name also had a personal association, and perhaps that the acronym was invented later to fit the name. Hertzfeld[3] states that the acronym was reverse engineered from the name "Lisa" in autumn 1982 by the Apple marketing team, after they had hired a marketing consultancy firm to come up with names to replace "Lisa" and "Macintosh" (at the time considered by Rod Holt, V.P. of Engineering[4] to be merely internal project codenames) and then rejected all of the suggestions. Privately, Hertzfeld and the other software developers used "Lisa: Invented Stupid Acronym", a recursive backronym, while computer industry pundits coined the term "Let's Invent Some Acronym" to fit the Lisa's name. Oh. How, sweet. He named it after his daughter. But I guess apples can be sweet, too.
Oh, I liked the idea of them naming it LISA. Too bad it didn't last. I hope they come up with one with a name similar to mine. Haha.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm a Mac fan, so I'm biased. PCs won domination by using an operating system that anybody could write software for. Hence, there is tons of software out there that few people will ever want to use. It's like having hundreds of cable TV channels and there's still nothing to watch. It was a good marketing strategy, though. One minus for Macs, most new software projects come out for PCs first, and some never get around to writing a Mac version that works right. On the other hand, nobody writes viruses for Macs.
The last time I used a PC, I remember having to get real acquainted with the hard drive structure, but Macs do all of the file handling for you. Probably my biggest beef with PCs is that they crash a lot. But that isn't really a PC problem . It's a Windows problem. It makes sense if you think about it. The purpose of Windows is to make PCs work like Macs.I don't think that PCs are basically designed to work like Macs. One big plus for me is that, if you have a problem, you can make an appointment at an Apple store and a "Genius" will diagnose and fix it for you, usually for free. For me, the bottom line is that I just don't care about any of that cornucopia of specialty software that you can get for a PC. I like a computer that is reliable and user-friendly. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Probably my biggest beef with PCs is that they crash a lot. But that isn't really a PC problem . It's a Windows problem. It makes sense if you think about it. Oh, that's a lot of hog wash. If there is a software or hardware issue, the computer will crash...regardless of if it's a Mac or a PC. A well maintained PC will run perfectly fine for years. Yes, you need to use anti-virus and other defensive programs, but everything you need is free and easily downloaded and installed. The purpose of Windows is to make PCs work like Macs.I don't think that PCs are basically designed to work like Macs. No, Windows is a GUI. Just like Xerox had a GUI before Apple STOLE their idea. Windows 95 was a crappy GUIs sitting ontop of console OS. 98 was a huge improvement and now that we are up to Windows 7, it's never been easier. XP is still a great OS. The idea that windows computers are buggy or crash a lot is about 11 years past true. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm a Mac fan, so I'm biased. PCs won domination by using an operating system that anybody could write software for. Hence, there is tons of software out there that few people will ever want to use. It's like having hundreds of cable TV channels and there's still nothing to watch. It was a good marketing strategy, though. One minus for Macs, most new software projects come out for PCs first, and some never get around to writing a Mac version that works right. On the other hand, nobody writes viruses for Macs. The last time I used a PC, I remember having to get real acquainted with the hard drive structure, but Macs do all of the file handling for you. Probably my biggest beef with PCs is that they crash a lot. But that isn't really a PC problem . It's a Windows problem. It makes sense if you think about it. The purpose of Windows is to make PCs work like Macs.I don't think that PCs are basically designed to work like Macs. One big plus for me is that, if you have a problem, you can make an appointment at an Apple store and a "Genius" will diagnose and fix it for you, usually for free. For me, the bottom line is that I just don't care about any of that cornucopia of specialty software that you can get for a PC. I like a computer that is reliable and user-friendly.  Windows is highly proprietary - it is a closed source code one of industry's most closely guarded secrets. It does have more software written for it than probably any other OS, and very sophisticated applications in large numbers making it widespread but there is a difference between anyone being able to write it - which is not the case - and anyone being able to develop compatible applications - that is true - the reliability of the hardware has more to do with the hardware vendor than the operating system
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
sweetestgirl11
on
Mon 01/31/11 10:28 PM
|
|
I'll set a comment here - I have a very, completely reliable Vista system that I love with an HD (2) so big that IDC about it's size (Vista's size)- see no reason to change unless I decide I want touch screen capabilities
but one kinda interesting thing is that I got my Vista to be the prize that it is by sitting to load on top of linux - linux actually loads it for me been perfect ever since I'm ducking out B4 the anti vista tirade begins - bye |
|
|
|
|
