I'm not saying that iMac is superb-low.. I trying to say taht iMac is not a replacement for desktop machine.

"Low-end" machine which mainly refer to the graphic chips/card component. Graphic card is very important, not only for gaming but for multimedia apps as well. iMac? You can just compare to any generic laptop.. Don't fool by the "Extreme Processor" cos' the rest of the components are mobile-based. I said again. Desktop/workstation components are not same as mobile/laptop based. Mobility always does lower down the speed of all the components in order to minimum the power usage. In conclusion, iMac is just like macbook pro(High-end mobile machine).

As for macbook, you don't think it is "low-end" machine? Powered by intel GMA950. Even the older mobile machine (G4 or whatever) uses a dedicated graphic card (Both ibook and powerbook). If you compare in 3d benchmark, i doubt macbook can overpower ibook.

And now? Where's the midrange machine? Desktop machine? Where? ... Please do the math..

PS: I'm end my *though* here.. If you've read international mac forum, load forumers will say Apple don't offer "mid-range" machine(desktop machine or a better macbook)

This post has been edited by allvin: Sep 14 2007, 05:51 PM

being a mac / windows / linux user - i'd say the debate is endless. there's no clear winner.

Point taken. I do visit "International Mac Sites" and I am active on them too. Thing is Apple is very clear about its product lines. One for consumers, and one for the pro line. Hence the vast difference between the iMac and the Mac Pro. On the laptop side, its not that clear cut I guess since they use practically the same components but the MBP has a dedicated GPU. That being said however, the GMA 950 is no push over. True that it probably will be outperformed by even the Mobility Radeon 9200 that was in the previous iBooks BUT people have successfully run games on it albeit with lower resolutions. Again, the MacBook is a consumer laptop. Apple is not catering to gaming freaks, they're catering to people who want to use their computers for basic daily stuff (surfing the web, emailing, IM-ing, maybe an occasional game or two). And yes this "mid-range" computer for Apple does not exist because again like I said Apple caters to two distinct categories of customers. Consumer and Pro. They don't have any Pro-sumer (so to speak machine). Now I for one am all for a headless iMac with upgraded specs over the iMac a midsize tower so to speak but I don't see Apple doing that kind of thing. There is no "math" for me to do. Its just plain economics and clear market strategy. Apple doesn't have like 2385719836719834 different product lines. Just two or three for each product segment. Clear and simple.

And yes I also agree with goldfries. It just depends on the user themselves. Some people like the control they have on the components they have when they build their own PC's, people like me like my computer system to "Just work" with minimal hassle.

The 'great' thing of this 'close-ended' thread like this is when the old boys start to debate Things got hotter, technical jargons jump in and in the end, all the confusions which should be removed, have been increased

why can't these 2 OS exist side by side?
or 3 OS exist side by side?

are there anymore OS?

They can. Sort of, you can install Windows, Linux, Solaris almost anything you can think of on the new Macs side by side with MacOSX. I say, use whatever you're comfortable/proficient in

i am not quite sure am i posting at the right thing .
but as far as i know form my friend who runs photoshop alot .
the mac is definately running much faster than windows based computer .
such as rendering in photoshop .
my guess is , althought the grahpic and the core does play apart of the role . but basically apple's circuit board architecture maybe is designed well for graphical stuff.

Why not? I'm running WinXP on top of my MacOS .. in my Macbook Pro. I've successfully running MacOS, Ubuntu and WinXP .. all of them at the same time using VMWare Fusion.. there .. happy?

well welcome to mac family , mac definitely better than windows

Mac hardware is better than windows (PC WORLD reports MBP fastest VISTA notebook ever tested by them)

mac hardware cheaper than pc (configure a similar spec dell with macbook and you will see why)

mac os is the best in the world (think about it, you dont need to buy an antivirus for goodness sake. whats more, its beautiful!!)

there is pro n con on mac ..i just switch from pc to mac so far i m still learning to use it ...
if u ask me which is better i think mac at the moment
i never regret to buy my first mbp

4. yau Yeng.

5. Gaya
6. Mutu
7. Keunggulan

i switched from dell to apple then to IBM.

Dell was too plasticky.

Apple was too retarded (not enough supporting apps)
...my ibook has crashed a number of times btw. Ok, the crashing screen in OSX looks way better than windows with a nice transparency effect and a message in like five languages but fvck it's still a crash.


And btw, windows XP SP2 is quite stable. I've had no real problems with it for over a year now.


The only thing i really miss with OSX is Expose. The ability to flick the mouse to a corner of the screen and instantly see all open windows is really really handy for multitasking.

but i think windows OS is more user friendly..used windows for 10 years++

well, no point arguing or debating here. most of the users here have Microsoft OS, be it the latest or not. if you are capable of getting a Mac, be it Mac Mini or Mac Pro, give it a shot. you judge the overall usability yourself.

I'm all-the-while Microsoft user, but I never regret to own a Mac not long ago. now Mac has the best of both world - bootcamp~

I'm enjoying my Mac Mini very very much.

This post has been edited by breonwei: Nov 16 2007, 03:43 PM

er.. i had been window user since 10 years old... but i never like window cause i need reformat often cause of system crash, virus , spyware and so on... my family will always come to me whever the comp got problem.. however, i get to try to use mac when my sis buy a macbook... the best part of mac surely is no virus and spyware, boot time fast and nvr exp system crash! however, what i can say about mac is is good for daily usage, but if you are heavy gamer, go for window. Is not worth to own a mac just to look cool but you always run window on it...

All you guys are comparing is the looks, the components, the cost and so on. The difference most people overlook in comparisons of PCs and Macs are they way both the OS runs things.

You know why PCs tend to overheat more often than Macs? That's because of the algorithm PCs are programmed as. Like for instance, why do Macs can have hundreds of windows opened and yet it doesn't lag? And it does on a PC?

Why most PCs konk out faster than Macs? That's because programs in PCs often strain their hardware to the max. All due to the algorithm the OS is programmed. In PCs, to open a file you need to have this is order, that in order before the .exe can be executed, while most programs on Macs are stand alone where it doesn't depend on anything.

And if you do not delete a program nicely in PCs, you can have .dlls all over the place (in hidden folders, registry, etc) but not for a Mac. That's why a Mac always out lives a PC.

This post has been edited by Peanutz: Nov 18 2007, 01:54 AM

totally agree. not to mention the simplicity when someone need to uninstall an application.
i just love the idea of drag-n-drop thingy.
i ran xp and vista on top of my tiger few months back, but then i realized.
why do i need to use windows when all the best i have is right in front of me?
and there when it begins...