ptlis wrote:
The main disadvantage as I see it with PC's running windows is security; lets face it, Windows does not have a good track record as far as security is concerned.
I have to echo C_D's earlier sentiments, are we arguing hardware or software?
As far as I know there are few or no alternative OSes for Apple hardware (yellowdog linux comes to mind, can anyone tell me if that'll run on a new G5, etc). So, Mac software is Apple hardware.
A PC is not Windows. A PC is also not just Intel or AMD. A PC is choice--Think different.
Security:
So, most of the statements above have said that a PCs greatest downside is the security issues. I am not aware of any innate security issue with PC hardware. Both AMD (Athlon 64s) and Intel (Prescott) have NX (no execute) support in their modern processors. So, PCs are not more insecure. Hell, I even know of a few CONSUMER PC mobos with stateful firewalls built-in to the chipset! Let's see a Apple with that.
As for the OS side with respect to security, I can throw OpenBSD on my PC if I want. Or maybe QNX. Plenty secure. So PC OSes are not inherently more insecure.
With respect to Windows versions:
I admit it, windows does have a track record of being insecure out of the box and hooked straight to the net. There is also a trend of non-user intervention exploits being found. Weather this is due to a greater scrutiny (since most people use windows it is the biggest target) or anything else is unknown. But it does happen. On the otherhand, given a little time spent disabling unneeded services, a proper firewall, antivirus software, etc one does not have to have security problems unless one is a fucking idiot who opens everything sent to him or her. In my time I have had exactly one virus (this was back in 97 or so) and no break-ins. The computers I secured for my family and then never touched again have had a similar track record, the only problems coming from a buffer-overflow in MSN messenger a family member used. It should be noted that I used Win98 (first edition) up to the release of 2k, and from that point on Win2k, up to 2k Sp4 currrently.
Windows is not insecure when properly managed.
On the otherhand, I've seen MacOSX machines set bare naked to the net that survived, thusfar, without a scratch. That is a point in their favor, they are heavily resistant to ignorance in administration.
When compared to Windows, and administered by users who do not know what they are doing, and do not care because they don't want to (they just want the computer to read the mail, browse the net, write a paper, etc), MacOSX is more secure.
So, I suppose we have to further qualify the debate to set what kind of end-user will be using the computer? Is it an enthusiast? Or is it someone who just wants to have things work? With respect to security in the Windows vs Macintosh: The former (geek) it is a tie, the later normal user, Macs win....of course, a Win98 box is nearly as secure as an OSX box (I would put forward both achieve this by being slightly less customizable).
Price:
PCs are cheaper (in both software and hardware). Macs are expensive(in both).
Upgrades:
It's cheaper, easier, and generally just better with PCs.
Macs are expensive and limited.
Performance:
An Athlon64 or Opteron will outperform a top of the line G5 in nearly all applications. The issue with bus speed mentioned is irrelevent, hell, Intel even has a 1Ghz stock bus speed coming down the line. Instructions per cycle? Well, the risc arcitecture (sp?) does have an advantage there, but it is less with every day. And that is something to look at, because of the competition in the PC hardware market improvements are very fast. I would contend this pressure and the many diverse companies competing tends to push PC technology faster than Apple hardware.
Software:
There is more PC software. More is better because you are more likely to find niche apps you like or those that are generally just 'nice'. This point isn't really even debatable. Oh, and the PC software, or at least a great deal of it, is free.
Specialty:
There exists a great range of PC products which are for niche markets. These markets are not large enough for it to be profitable for Apple to make products for. It is for smaller sized, more agile PC based companies with commodity parts. An example, can you find an Apple computer that'll run a modern OS that will fit into a match box? You can easily buy such sized PCs.
Display:
A non-issue. Displays can be had for any type of computer for similar costs. Though I do have one area in which I am unsure, can any apple system automatically extend the usable destop space when another graphics card is installed (so that one can hook up another monitor?) This is a software issue with respect to OS, primarily Windows, which can. And on the hardware side, can you even have multiple graphics cards in a Mac?
...it's really a non-issue if you are a power user. PCs are better.