problem i'm having with Macs

[Rocket Boy]

I've heard Macs are more stable/powerfull/better ect ect. The problem I have is that... theres no way to do PCI recording with them unless you're going to put out $2000+ as opposed to with a PC based system in which you could use pretty much any computer and have PCI slots. Am I missing something?

 

[ssscientist]

Am I missing something?

Yes. In my humble opinion, PC's can be just as stable, just as powerful and just as better as Macs.

For the price of Mac you could buy two PC's and there's a hell of a lot more software available for the PC. If you want a really stable machine, buy one just for music use - no internet, no word processing, no spousal use.

 

[rigsby]

macs have their distinct advantages. i haven't had any anti-virus software for about 7 years, and have not had any problems. there are currently no mac viruses, osx is very secure. i very rarely have crashes, and i am currently on the net on my music machine with logic in the background. macs do what they are meant to, no bullshit.

there are problems, such as the slow ibm processor powerbooks, but hopefully that will be sorted next year when intel start making chips for apple.

all my friends who have pc's have to wipe their machines every so often because of spyware, viruses etc. i have a carefree computer experience, the way it is meant to be. getting two computers to do the job of one is severe overkill, and a really bad excuse for ms security failures.

if you want an easier life, save the extra and get a mac. if you want to use a terrible operating system, with security holes galore, get a shit looking pc with flashing lights.

 

[Codmate]

I don't run any anti-virus software on my PC and have never had a problem.

I have a hardware firewall in my router and don't touch Internet Explorer or OutLook Express (I use Firefox and Thunderbird - http://www.mozilla.org/).

PCs can be safe and secure if managed properly.

There are plenty of viruses around for MACs, the reason there aren't as many is simply due to the fact that MACs are in the minority.

Both platforms will get the job done for a variety of tasks (unless you plan to play games - in which case you have to use Windows really).

Ultimatly whatever you're used to using is the best platform.

The only concrete advantage with buying a MAC is that your wallet is distinctly lighter to carry around...

 

[rigsby]

There are plenty of viruses around for MACs, the reason there aren't as many is simply due to the fact that MACs are in the minority.

there are no viruses for osx. there were some for system 8.6 and earlier, and a few word macros, but that is it. nobody runs 8.6 now unless they have a 6 year + old mac. it might be possible to trick somebody into running a fake application or script, but that is not a virus.

 

[jonnyc]

So I have both macs and pc's and IMO macs are by far more stable than any pc. On my pc I use mozilla, and only surf 4 website(no bullshit) this one, recording.org(for laughs) tweakheadz.com and musiciansfriend. After about a year I started having all kinds of problems and it seemed to affect every program, Cubase at times was unusable do to pop ups and various trojans and viruses, I ran adaware and it came up with 956 critical objects I have the screenshot saved if anyone wants to see it. Its just hard for me to believe pc's hold up to macs stability wise when I have mozilla on both my mac and pc, I've had the two almost the same amount of time and use them on the internet just about the same amount and the pc is a god awful mess that I just wiped clean yesterday and the mac is running like a champ. Two computers used in nearly the exact same enviroment and two totally different results, makes you wonder.

 

[Codmate]

there are no viruses for osx. there were some for system 8.6 and earlier, and a few word macros, but that is it. nobody runs 8.6 now unless they have a 6 year + old mac. it might be possible to trick somebody into running a fake application or script, but that is not a virus.

http://securityresponse.symantec.com/avcenter/venc/data/macos.mw2004.trojan.html

MacOS.MW2004.Trojan is a Trojan horse that targets the Macintosh OS X. It masquerades as an installer of Microsoft Word 2004, named "Microsoft Word 2004 OSX Web Install."

When launched under OS X, it attempts to delete the user's home directory (/Users/<current user name>) and all of its contents. The actual number of deleted files depends on the user and file permissions (see the "Technical Details" for more information).

 

[rigsby]

that was one of the fake apps that i was talking about. it was actually a disk image with an app masquerading as word 2004. it probably used applescript to delete the users home directory. it is not a virus as it does not replicate itself. i could make an applescript now that could do evil things to a mac, that hardly qualifies as a virus.

symantec are completely discredited with their mac sofware. that post was an attempt to justify them selling antivirus software when none is needed for osx. symantec norton utilities is more dangerous to a mac than the word 2004 "trojan horse". norton almost ate my mac on several occasions before i stopped using it. they no longer sell it

anybody that tries to download word 2004 for free deserves what they get.

 

[BostonPops]

http://securityresponse.symantec.com/avcenter/venc/data/macos.mw2004.trojan.html

A *program* that someone would have to download (probably from P2P trying to get pirated software) and execute on their own computer, but that wouldn't actually spread itself to other users automatically is a virus how? And this one *program* proves there are *plenty* of Mac viruses how? Dude, it's obvious you have some sort of personal problem with Macs, but you're really reaching.

 

[BostonPops]

I don't run any anti-virus software on my PC and have never had a problem.

I have a hardware firewall in my router and don't touch Internet Explorer or OutLook Express (I use Firefox and Thunderbird - http://www.mozilla.org/).

PCs can be safe and secure if managed properly.

There are plenty of viruses around for MACs, the reason there aren't as many is simply due to the fact that MACs are in the minority.

Both platforms will get the job done for a variety of tasks (unless you plan to play games - in which case you have to use Windows really).

Ultimatly whatever you're used to using is the best platform.

The only concrete advantage with buying a MAC is that your wallet is distinctly lighter to carry around...

Actually, the concrete advantage is that you don't have to upgrade a Mac every 6 months. I spend less money on computing than any of my PC using friends. I also trade in or sell my old Mac for a substantial percentage of its original purchase price. Try selling a 3 year old PC for more than $50. It's not going to happen.

 

[giraffe]

a pinto is a car, whare do you get off saying it's not as good as a porche?

and really i mean, the pinto costs less too.


face facts, a GOOD pc is about the same price as a mac.
i can show you 2000$ pc's, and guess what....... thier better than the 500$ ones.

cheep computer, any platform= cheep computer

!!suprise!!

 

[dwillis45]

I'm a long-time Mac user. I've had a Performa, a G2 (225mHz), a G4 (400mhz), a flat-panel i-mac (800mHz), and three or more i-books. I currently use a 2gHz i-mac G5 to record and a 1.8 gHz i-mac G5 for graphics and desktop video editing. Trust me, bad things can and do happen to Macs. They are, after all, computers. Bad things include crashes, failed or defective logic boards, batteries that have to be recalled, monitors that develop funny horizontal lines, and other little goodies. Now--knock on polycarbonate--I've never had a virus under OS 9 or 10. And I believe I have no spyware--largely becasue I can't seem to find any anti-spyware software made for mac! I can't compare Mac vs PC on any performance question because I've never used a PC--well not since the mid 80s when they stuck me in an office and pointed a C: prompt at me! I can tell you that Macs look cool and that they do lack one thing: choice. If you get a mac there are just a handful to choose from with the G5 being the best recording workhorse. You can configure each machine with differing amounts of RAM, different processor speeds, and storage space, but basically it comes down to only a few models. Now, that actually may be a good thing because it makes your choice fairly simple. It's not like trying to buy toothpaste!

 

[Codmate]

Actually, the concrete advantage is that you don't have to upgrade a Mac every 6 months. I spend less money on computing than any of my PC using friends. I also trade in or sell my old Mac for a substantial percentage of its original purchase price. Try selling a 3 year old PC for more than $50. It's not going to happen.

I haven't upgraded my PC for two years!

I haven't re-installed windows for the same length of time.

I tend to sell individual components on. I sold my AthlonXP1800+ when I upgraded to a 2400+.

Try doing that with a MAC when you upgrade it's CPU (joke obvuiously ).

 

[Codmate]

that was one of the fake apps that i was talking about. it was actually a disk image with an app masquerading as word 2004. it probably used applescript to delete the users home directory. it is not a virus as it does not replicate itself. i could make an applescript now that could do evil things to a mac, that hardly qualifies as a virus.

symantec are completely discredited with their mac sofware. that post was an attempt to justify them selling antivirus software when none is needed for osx. symantec norton utilities is more dangerous to a mac than the word 2004 "trojan horse". norton almost ate my mac on several occasions before i stopped using it. they no longer sell it

anybody that tries to download word 2004 for free deserves what they get.

So viruses for Windows masquerading as screensavers aren't viruses - they are 'fake applications' now? Oh cool - I must stop calling them viruses!

 

[Codmate]

a pinto is a car, whare do you get off saying it's not as good as a porche?

and really i mean, the pinto costs less too.


face facts, a GOOD pc is about the same price as a mac.
i can show you 2000$ pc's, and guess what....... thier better than the 500$ ones.

cheep computer, any platform= cheep computer

!!suprise!!

Utter rubbish!

I just built a multimedia encoding/broadcast machine in work for much less than I could buy an equivalent MAC.

It has an AMD643000+, 300GB of hard drive space, 1GHz, FSB, 1GB of RAM, ATI AIW 9800Pro. Plus the entire thing was built to be near-silent (much more quiet than a G5).
To get near the equivalent power I would have to spend £1,349.01 on a G5. Even then I would have to upgrade the MACs RAM and graphics card to match the spec of the machine I built in work.

The machine in work cost just under £800.
That's £1,349.01 (plus the extra for the specialist graphics card and extra RAM) bringing the MAC cost to well over £1400.

That's nearly twice what it cost me to build the PC.

Case closed frankly.

Don't get me wrong - I don't have anything against the MAC architecture or OS. I work with them every day in my job as a web-developer. But for home use I know where the bang-for-buck lies - and right now it lies with building my own system.

I'm not here to get into a MAC v PC debate - because I know MACs *are* PCs. They just have a different OS installed and a slightly different architecture (depending on the model).

I had to laugh at the MAC zealots' response when Apple decided to switch to use Intel processors. Intel are associated with the 'evil' PC world in some way so the MAC zealots were up in arms!

In reality of course it will make no discernable difference to their MAC experience.

The fanatisicm surrounding MACs is all just about marketing and people feeling as though they are part of some exclusive club. Some people prefer the OS - and that's fine. Use whatever you have been trained on or like; but do know that if you're going to choose a MAC for home it's gonna cost you and extra at least 1/3rd of your budget to get the same performance as you'd get building your own PC from components.

Know what you're buying.

For the record I currently run four different operating systems on my PC at home, so I'm certainly no Windows fanatic...

 

[Codmate]

A *program* that someone would have to download (probably from P2P trying to get pirated software) and execute on their own computer, but that wouldn't actually spread itself to other users automatically is a virus how? And this one *program* proves there are *plenty* of Mac viruses how? Dude, it's obvious you have some sort of personal problem with Macs, but you're really reaching.

I have no personal problem with MACs. I use them every single day.

Do you know what a rootkit is?

 

[rigsby]

There are plenty of viruses around for MACs, the reason there aren't as many is simply due to the fact that MACs are in the minority.

so symantec's post on the word 2004 trojan horse justifies them selling antivirus software? if that is the only thing you can come back with after a day of looking, i think we are pretty safe on osx. and yes, it is not a virus, it does not replicate itself or spread to other users. so where are all the rest of the viruses you mentioned? on dusty old macs that you can't make music with.

So viruses for Windows masquerading as screensavers aren't viruses - they are 'fake applications' now? Oh cool - I must stop calling them viruses!

when did i mention anything about windows screensavers? i mentioned the one instance that you could dredge up from a company that would do anything to sell it's software and rescue its tarnished reputation among mac users. the application mentioned was a couple of hundred megs, now that is some size of virus. it is technically a trojan horse, but if you had read what you had quoted from symantec you might have realised that.

so one trojan horse since osx came out. no viruses.

no doubt you will be frantically searching for something else.

 

[Codmate]

so symantec's post on the word 2004 trojan horse justifies them selling antivirus software? if that is the only thing you can come back with after a day of looking, i think we are pretty safe on osx. and yes, it is not a virus, it does not replicate itself or spread to other users. so where are all the rest of the viruses you mentioned? on dusty old macs that you can't make music with.



when did i mention anything about windows screensavers? i mentioned the one instance that you could dredge up from a company that would do anything to sell it's software and rescue its tarnished reputation among mac users. the application mentioned was a couple of hundred megs, now that is some size of virus. it is technically a trojan horse, but if you had read what you had quoted from symantec you might have realised that.

so one trojan horse since osx came out. no viruses.

no doubt you will be frantically searching for something else.

Listen buddy - I'm not the zealot here - I use both OSs, as well as many others.

Do you have any idea how many security patches are released for most Linux distros evey week? I do, because I run a Linux server in work.

If you can't believe that a regular PC can be as stable and secure as a MAC then you don't know much about computing.

For one I can run any OS of my choice on my PC - I'm currently running four. Gentoo (a linux distro), WinXP, DOS and BEos.

All of them are maintained to be as secure as possible. I also have a hardware router.

There are many more OSX viruses than you might think - most of them don't spread very far though and never become well known as a result. The reason for this is simply that there are far less machines running OSX in the world than there are WIN32.

If you really want to see a MAC OSX virus I could write you one

You should also read up on rootkits and the like if you think that having a *nix OS makes you automatically really secure.

You're welcome to carry on thinking that your machine is somehow magically superior because it's got a little Apple logo one it. It's just a view that isn't based in reality.

I'm certainly not saying that Apples are junk - they are well built machines and I use them every single day of my working life. However - for the money I think a home-built PC is much better value and can get the same job done, whilst being just as secure and stable.

Again - your original point was that you don't have to run anti-virus software. Well - neither do I and I bet my machine is just as stable and performs just as well witin its specification.

I've never had a virus or encountered any spyware. It's easy - you use a firewall (I have one in my router), use up-to-date non-MS software for anything net-based browsing, e-mail and IM and you don't open executable attchments unless you know where they came from.

Just because you don't know how to maintain a Windows installation and keep it secure, doesn't mean the rest of the world also doesn't.

I maintain a variety of different systems at home and at work and neither is more or less hassle than the others - you just have to know what you're doing.

 

[rigsby]

you still have not shown me any evidence of an osx virus. saying there are doesn't mean there are.

we could go round in circles here. this is my last post on the subject, i don't want to have an argument about it. i stand by everything i said.

once again, i am on the internet with my music-making machine, with no antivirus software and no firewall other than the one built into osx.

 

[Joseph Hanna]

Oh please stop....take a deep breath....go record something like, oh I dunno, the sound of drool.

At least then we'd have an endever of some merit.

I'm just a bit more savvy than you cause I use a (insert 20 minute sound bite of someone drooling)