To PC ... or not to PC?

[Dave2002]

Anyone who's read any of my posts over the last 5 or more years will know that I don't like PCs and Windows very much. However, sometimes they are useful, and perhaps the OS has improved somewhat - maybe Windows 10?

I have wondered about setting one of my Macs up to run Windows using Bootcamp, or using a virtual system tool such as Parallels, but the costs of doing so would be somewhat greater than zero, as I'd have to buy (probably) an OEM version of Windows and install it, and maybe another disc drive for machines without enough backing store to run multiple OSs. So that's something between £100-£200 maybe.

A further complication is that I wouldn't necessarily only want to run "regular" software - Word, Excel type stuff, but probably some more real time stuff - such as Total Recorder, maybe some video software etc. That might now work so well using a VE such as Parallels, though I think it should be fine running Bootcamp - hopefully the system would find all the ports needed.

A few months ago I saw some cheap Windows laptops in a few shops. By cheap I mean £500 or less. Some of the really cheap ones are based on hopelessly underpowered chips, such as the Intel Atom - I already have an Asus netbook which I bought years ago - and it very quickly outlived its usefulness. I don't want to repeat that. However I think that some of the laptops in the range £300-500 say might be an option. Buying hardware does have the advantage that the Windows license is thrown in! Most of the machines i now use (either my own, or in the family) run a minimum of an Intel i5, with a couple of i7s, and an earlier Core Duo.

One might ask - "why not a desktop?" - but my concerns there relate to space. Unless I really wanted to set up a much bigger Windows system with a large screen, my guess is that a laptop would do. Presumably larger screens could be attached later anyway - though I got bitten with attaching different monitors to one of my now ancient PCs as that promptly invalidated the verson of Window on it - not what I wanted at all.

I'm not particularly keen on switching everything I do back to Windows, but it could be useful to have a portable and reasonably powerful system for the odd occasion when it would actually be helpful - even though those times may not be frequent.

I could just save the money and use it for something completely different - and discard any old software which may not be so useful now anyway.

Comments.

[Nick Armstrong]

I constantly use both - Windows PCs at work, Mac at home. The office PC has just been updated - and all it's done is make the whole Windows experience even more irritating, counter-intuitive, needlessly arcane. (And I learnt computing on Windows - it was 5 or 6 years before I changed to Macs at home, and haven't looked back).

In short, for personal use, I wouldn't touch Microsoft and all its works with an outsize bargepole.

(I recognise it does depend on what you use it for - I've just had my 17" MacBook Pro given a new lease of life by the pre-emptive replacement of the hard drive with a Solid State Drive - what a rejuvenation!! - and the chap that did it, although expert on Macs, said that for private use he vastly prefers Windows - it's what he started on, and using games and other programs a lot, finds Windows much more compatible - plus he's built his own computer.)

So there's an element of horses and courses.

But for me, the sooner I never have to touch anything Microsoft-based, the better!

.

[umslopogaas]

I wonder if, to some extent at least, this is an argument - Mac versus Microsoft - whose time has passed? Thirty years ago I was much involved with international agricultural research, notably FAO and the CGIAR group. Both were heavily into Mac products, FAO because the guy I worked with promoted them with messianic zeal and the CGIAR group because they could buy them tax free, which made them competitive with the cheaper MS products. My organisation was firmly in the MS camp. My argument with the Mac messiahs was simply, I dont care how much better they are than MS, only ten percent of the world uses them and they cant speak to the other ninety percent. I cannot be so restricted, I need to be able to talk to anyone (including the Mac ten percent - but they usually has an MS system hidden somewhere when there was no choice).

The chief advantages of Mac were, firstly robustness, the machines could be moved around much more easily than MS systems, and secondly ease of use. Downside was, as mentioned, price, and also a more limited range of software. There was a general opinion at the time that Macs were better for "creative" stuff, but for everyday work and scientific stuff, MS had more comprehensive software and was cheaper.

I must make clear I am no computer buff, and am long retired. I use an MS based lap top every day for emails, news, visiting websites, running Excel as a cataloguing tool and writing letters. I dont know anything about complicated software, or about how they work. I suspect that these days the old Mac v. MS arguments are largely historic, because my understanding - correct me if I'm wrong - is that both systems are now fairly compatible with each other. Which one you buy would depend on price and available software.

Or are Mac users and MS users still at war? If so, side with MS users, there are a lot more of them.

[aeolium]

I moved to Mac quite a few years ago as I was fed up with the bloated nature of MS software, its hopeless lack of security, and its constant desire to interfere and tell me what I should be doing. Now Mac software in its more recent incarnations, e.g. OS Mavericks, seems to be replicating some of the things that so irritated me in MS. I'm still using an old Mac (on OS Snow Leopard) but my next computer when this packs up or compels me to upgrade will undoubtedly be Linux-based, using Ubuntu or Mint.

[MrGongGong]

I wonder if, to some extent at least, this is an argument - Mac versus Microsoft - whose time has passed?.

I think you have a good point.

The argument that the Mac is somehow unable to "talk" to other machines is gone (i'm not even sure how real it was?)
many folks run Windows, Linux and OSX on the same machine without any problem at all

I think it does come down to robustness and build quality
I can drop a macbook and it will still work

iTunes and iMovie are the work of Satan but there are many alternatives

[richardfinegold]

I moved to Mac quite a few years ago as I was fed up with the bloated nature of MS software, its hopeless lack of security, and its constant desire to interfere and tell me what I should be doing. Now Mac software in its more recent incarnations, e.g. OS Mavericks, seems to be replicating some of the things that so irritated me in MS. I'm still using an old Mac (on OS Snow Leopard) but my next computer when this packs up or compels me to upgrade will undoubtedly be Linux-based, using Ubuntu or Mint.

Exactly. Apple IMO has lost track of what made them so preferable to MS. It was ease of use, and not interfering with the execution of tasks.

[P. G. Tipps]

For me. a PC is essential for really heavy-duty work like video production/conversion and more complicated graphical work in general. Those who recently predicted the demise of the PC are likely to be proved wrong in the same way as those who claimed the days of radio and newspapers were numbered.

There is a place for all sorts of computing devices. I have a PC running Fedora 22 (I also reluctantly keep a copy of Windows Vista running in case of possible app incompatibilities in the future) and also an Android Nexus 7.Both devices serve different purposes. I have never considered any Apple products due to hefty price-tags and lack of availability of non-Apple programs. However, most users will probably just want something that works ' straight out of the box' and are not particularly interested in anything else, and that's where Apple scores, undoubtedly.However, Linux Mint and Ubuntu are now virtually 'out of the box' and Fedora, with a little extra work, is the most satisfactory and rewarding to operate, imv, especially with a MATE desktop environment on top.... and, remember, these are all free to consumers!

The use of home networks/wi-fi means that more bulky PC components (eg, printers, scanners) can be moved to different parts of the room or even house so space planning need not be quite as concentrated on one area as was the case in the past.

And a PC never needs re-charging ...

[MrGongGong]

and lack of availability of non-Apple programs.

Such as?
Lots of folks say this but can you give me an example?

(I mostly use Macs but don't really use Apple software)

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

For me. a PC is essential:

I thought you were anti-PC?

[umslopogaas]

#5 Mr GG, the inability of Mac and MS systems to talk to each other was once real enough. In the late eighties/early nineties I had a part time project manager to look after the financial side of the project. He arrived on work days carrying an ancient Mac, on which he did a very good job of financial management - my boss used to describe Bill's Mac as his moneybox - , but nothing he did on that computer could be transferred to our MS systems, or vice versa.

These days, as mentioned, the incompatibility is at least partly resolved.

[MrGongGong]

#5 Mr GG, the inability of Mac and MS systems to talk to each other was once real enough..

Ok

I probably over stated it

BUT there really isn't any real incompatibility these days unless one is working with very esoteric software.

[richardfinegold]

#5 Mr GG, the inability of Mac and MS systems to talk to each other was once real enough. In the late eighties/early nineties I had a part time project manager to look after the financial side of the project. He arrived on work days carrying an ancient Mac, on which he did a very good job of financial management - my boss used to describe Bill's Mac as his moneybox - , but nothing he did on that computer could be transferred to our MS systems, or vice versa.

These days, as mentioned, the incompatibility is at least partly resolved.

In 2002, changes in the industry made us get a new accounting a billing program. Although the owners of the software used Macs privately, it was a Windows program only. They said the costs of implementing a Mac version were prohibitive .
They were still saying that 11 years later when I sold my Practice

[MrGongGong]

In 2002, changes in the industry made us get a new accounting a billing program. Although the owners of the software used Macs privately, it was a Windows program only. They said the costs of implementing a Mac version were prohibitive .
They were still saying that 11 years later when I sold my Practice

In 2013 they could quite happily run Windows on a Mac thus eliminating the problem.

[Dave2002]

In 2013 they could quite happily run Windows on a Mac thus eliminating the problem.

Indeed, at least two ways.

1. Use Bootcamp to run Windows - disadvantage is that the machine takes a bit longer to start up, and runs in its own space. The machine may need to have more memory and more disc/SSD storage to support two or more operating systems. More systems administration too.

2. Use a Virtual Machine environment, such as Parallels or VMWare. Most software should work, and files can be read from both the Windows and Mac OS spaces. There might (but I don't know for sure) be some issues with some software which relies on specific hardware features. Games playing might not work too well, either - but no big deal for an accounting system. I don't know whether VMs work with most audio or video software. I have run some video inside Virtual Box, but it used a smaller screen size. It may not be possible to get an acceptably similar experience to using PC software when trying to run it in a VM system. There is also some sys admin work to install, set up and use a VM system - some features may be tricky to become familiar with.

I'm 99% with Caliban on PCs and Windows being, to paraphrase mr gg's words, and expressing my own sentiments "the work of the devil". However, just occasionally a satanic pitch fork (i.e. program) is useful.

THe argument about everyone else using PCs and MS software is silly. A very large number of people speak and understand Chinese. I can only manage a few words. This does not worry me at all at the present time. Counter example!

Linux may sound like an atractive alternative to either Apple's or MS's systems, but I'd advise anyone thinking of this to try to install it and run it for a while first. I've been there a few times, and mostly I do find Apple's system easier. Unix (not Linux) now seems very old fashioned. There are some arcane features in Linux, and it's useful for formatting drives in EXT3 format, for example, which is useful for some PVRs.

[MrGongGong]

Indeed, at least two ways.

1. Use Bootcamp to run Windows - disadvantage is that the machine takes a bit longer to start up, and runs in its own space. The machine may need to have more memory and more disc/SSD storage to support two or more operating systems. More systems administration too.

2. Use a Virtual Machine environment, such as Parallels or VMWare. Most software should work, and files can be read from both the Windows and Mac OS spaces. There might (but I don't know for sure) be some issues with some software which relies on specific hardware features. Games playing might not work too well, either - but no big deal for an accounting system. I don't know whether VMs work with most audio or video software. I have run some video inside Virtual Box, but it used a smaller screen size. It may not be possible to get an acceptably similar experience to using PC software when trying to run it in a VM system. There is also some sys admin work to install, set up and use a VM system - some features may be tricky to become familiar with.
.

I stopped using Bootcamp and Parallels for audio because they didn't work well with external (Firewire) sound cards BUT if you are spending a few hundred quid on a sound card buying the Mac version of the edit software is hardly a problem and the Sony XP machine I had previously frequently "fell over" putting clicks all over my pristine recordings.