UNIVERSITATEA POLITEHNICA TIMIOARA

MACs VS PCs

Iovan Andrei Filip AC-CTI, anul I Grupa 2.2

MACs VS PCs

Technology has led the world into the 21st century. Competition between two main computer systems, creates controversy over which system is superior. IBM compatables have captured the largest market share, but Apple Macintoshes hold a special place in capabilities. Computer buyers need to keep in mind different capabilities and their own unique requirements when deciding which way to go. Although both provide state of the art computer systems, IBM compatibles and Apple Macintoshes attract their own distinct clients because of their unique operating systems and stand alone buying powers.

Short History
The IBM and Macintosh computers have been in competition with each other for years, and each of them have their strong points. They both had their own ideas about where they should go in the personal computer market. They also had many developments, which propelled themselves over the other. It all started when Thomas John Watson became president of Computing Tabulating Recording in 1914, and in 1924 he renamed it to International Business Machines Corporation. He eventually widened the company lines to include electronic computers, which was extremely new in those days.In 1975 IBM introduced their first personal computer (PC) which was called the Model 5100. It carried a price tag of about $9,000 which caused it to be out of the main stream of personal computers, even though their first computer did not get off to as big as a start they had hoped it did not stop them from continuing on. Later on IBM teamed up with Microsoft to create an operating system to run their new computers, because their software division was not able to meet a deadline. They also teamed up with Intel to supply its chips for the first IBM personal computer. When the personal computer hit the market it was a major hit and IBM became a strong power in electronic computers. Phoenix Technologies went through published documentation to figure out the internal operating system (BIOS) in the
2

IBM. In turn, they designed a BIOS of their own which could be used with IBM computers. It stood up in courts and now with a non IBM BIOS, the clone was created. Many manufacturers jumped in and started making their own IBM Compatible computers, and IBM eventually lost a big share in the desktop computersWhile IBM was just getting started in the personal computer market, Apple was also just getting on its feet. It was founded by Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak in 1976. While IBM was just getting started in the personal computer market, Apple was also just getting on its feet. It was founded by Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak in 1976. They were both college drop outs, Steve Jobs out of Reed College in Oregon and Steve Wozniak from the University of Colorado. They ended up in Silicon Valley, which is located in northern California near San Francisco. Wozniak was the person with the brains and Jobs was the one who put it all together. For about $700 someone could buy a computer that they put together, which was called the Apple I. In 1977 the Apple II was introduced which set the standard for many of the microcomputers to follow, including the IBM PC. Macintosh and IBM computer have been in competition ever since they put out their first personal computers. In 1980, the personal computer world was dominated by two types of computer systems. While IBMs appeal to the general public with lower prices, Apple Macintosh has proven to be a better overall product. Unlike IBM marketing claims, which have mislead potential buyers about the superiority of their product by emphasizing their few strengths despite the value; modern Macs can easily outperform commercial IBM computers. Like IBMs the memory on a Mac often exceeds the user requirements. Todays top of the line Mac features a 10 gigabit hard drive. The only Mac property clearly recognized by IBM users as better, is their high resolution graphics; all qualified computer artists use Macs to produce more lifelike images. Additionally, in contrast to the IBMs that produce speed exclusively by megahertz, Macintosh has integrated megahertz with another kind of speed to result in the world's fastest commercial computer. Though IBMs copied Macintoshs point and click system with the introduction of Windows XP, Mac OS remains superior. With a Mac one does not need to worry about fighting through information, because there is none. Also, all
3

programs run off the Mac operating system, and point and click universally applies. Whereas there are infinite viruses for IBMs, there are only four that affect Mac OS and they are controlled by any anti-virus software. Lastly, the limited purchasing ability of the Macintosh, has resulted in a loss of market share and is its major drawback. The price of Macs is almost twice that of low cost IBMs. Also, there are far fewer programs available for Macs than IBMs. On the other hand Macs are capable of translating IBM programs to their own format, but programs to do so are also expensive and reduce speed. Ultimately, Macintosh and IBM compatible computers offer distinct capabilities and appeal that have split computer users into two faithful camps. Although IBM compatables and Apple Macintoshes offer many technologically advanced set-ups, computer buyers must chose which most suits their individual preferences. They must consider what is wanted in their overall computer setup. The demands of the consumer will define computers of the future. Apple Macintosh Mouse With the both companies in heated competition, the pressure was on for them to come out with things that the other did not have. Apple came through very strongly in this area. They created many devices that are used in many computers today. In 1984 Apple created the first GUI (Graphical User Interface) this also brought about folders or directories, long file names, drag and drop, and the trash can. All these devices are used in the more popular operating system for the IBM-Compatible computer called Windows 95. Apple also created the mouse, which is as common as the keyboard. One thing that helps the IBMCompatible in the hardware area, is all the third party developers. With the Apple computer, only Apple had the rights to develop hardware for their computers. With IBM-Compatibles anyone can develop hardware for it, thus we have many innovative accessories and hardware for the IBM-compatibles. One of the more interesting devices for the IBM-compatible computers, that was featured at the 1997 Comdex show in Vegas was a speaker system. It looks like a giant plastic dome that is placed above your head pointing down towards you, and allows stereo sound to be heard only by the person directly underneath it. One company that was showing it in action was Creative Labs, which is a maker of Sound Cards and usually sets the standard for them. They had many computers networked together and were running a popular game of 1996 called Quake, which is a first person action game. They had put the dome shaped speakers above each computer station and it allowed each player to
4

hear what was going on around them, but it would not make any outside noise or interfere with the person playing right next to them.

A lot has happened during the past 18 years. The Cold War ended, mobile phones appeared, Different Strokes went off the air and. Yet during this time the battle over which are better, PCs or Macs, continued to rage.

This hasn't been a mere argument, either. People from both camps became evangelical, created countless newsgroups and websites advocating their views and when Steve Jobs announced Microsoft would invest in Apple at 1997's MacWorld Expo, the crowd booed, hissed and some even turned their back on him. For some people, computers aren't a tool - they're a religion. Well, Icon has had enough from both sides. To critique both platforms I have used the following criteria: ease-of-use, software, performance, stability, style and design, and last, cost.

Because I have compared the platforms from a home user's perspective, I looked at the OS X (10.2) operating system for Apples and Windows XP Home Edition for PCs.

Ease-of-use
Macs have always been known for their ease of use but they've certainly lost their lead. They say that "Today the two interfaces are so close it's a toss-up what's easiest". The PC has made huge progress from a crummy, substandard design that only a nerd could love to a decent user interface. In contrast, the Mac has made very little progress from a decent and restrained user interface to a decent and flashy user interface. We'd have to agree. OS X initially seems easier to use, especially with its large "Dock" at the bottom of the screen that clearly shows some of the major
5

applications available, but OS X can also be frustrating. For example, there's no specific place where you can always, without fail, find a specific application to load. It could be in the Dock, or in the Applications folder, or on the Desktop, whereas all Windows applications can be found from the Start menu, in addition to being found elsewhere. Windows XP has another advantage, provided you have a flat-panel display: its ClearType technology that displays text more crisply. It takes advantage of the fact that each 'pixel' on a flat panel is actually three smaller pixels for red, green and blue, and ClearType manages each of these sub-pixels separately. The effect is stunning and almost approximates the clarity of printed text. Users can read text about 10 per cent faster after turning ClearType on. Since the two platforms are so similar. However, ClearType has to be activated manually (it's buried deep within Control Panel/Appearance and Themes/Display/Appearance/Effects) and most PC users aren't aware it even exists - and without it we found the Mac easier to read. Also, many Mac applications such as iPhoto are easier to use than their PC equivalents. As such, we have to call it a draw at this criteria.

Software
PCs certainly have more software than the Mac but what's important is whether the particular titles you want are available - and the Mac has most application areas well covered. With office software, for example, the Mac not only has a version of Microsoft Office called MacOffice but also AppleWorks, an office-like suite that comes free on iMacs. Internet applications such as web browsers, instant messaging and email are plentiful, as are utilities such as anti-virus packages. An area in which Macs once excelled is graphics and video editing but PCs have largely caught up. In fact, Adobe decided to release their version of its Premiere video-editing software only on the PC.

However, games are a different matter. The Mac has a number of titles but it's nowhere near as well catered for as the PC. More niche areas, such as voice recognition, are limited on the Mac. The voice-recognition package Dragon NaturallySpeaking, for example, is available only on the PC. As such, the PC wins when it comes to software availability.

Performance
The question of which platform is the fastest has always been contentious. Last year, for example, Adobe claimed PCs were faster than Macs by running After Effects, Illustrator and Photoshop operations on both a single-processor Dell 2.53GHz Pentium 4 and a 1.25GHz dual-processor Power Mac G4. Apple, however, argued that the problem was with those particular applications and that some tasks could perform faster on a Mac with different software. This year Apple claimed its new Power Mac G5 (which uses a 64-bit processor codeveloped with IBM) was the world's fastest personal computer and outperformed 3GHz Dell machines using Pentium 4 and Xeon processors. Within hours, criticism surfaced that the benchmarks and testing procedure were slated against PCs. For average home users, however, these arguments are largely academic because most don't make the most of the processor speed they already have. At the end of the day, applications are not catching up as fast as the hardware. Hardware, speed and power are not as critical anymore. To play the devil's advocate, you can run a number of matching applications on both platforms, but for the most part, you can't tell the difference. That's not to say there wasn't any. It should also be noted that even some Mac users acknowledge that the G4 processors are lagging behind Intel's. The Mac-oriented site Bare Feats, for example, has benchmarked both and shows the Pentium 4 is faster.

Since it's also easier to boost a PC's speed by upgrading the graphics card or processor, we've made it the winner in this category.

Stability
Both XP and OS X crash less than previous versions but it's the latter that has the better reputation because it is based on the stable UNIX operating system. Most studies find this. The researches show us that Mac OS X crashed less for users than Windows XP (as well as other Windows versions). A survey last year by the Australian Consumers Association (ACA) had similar results. Apple stood out for reliability with 86 per cent of owners reporting no repairs in the past 12 months, but, mind you, Dell came in at 83 per cent and IBM at 82, Macs are also more secure than PCs because most viruses are created for PCs. Whereas there are tens of thousands of viruses for the PC platform, there are only hundreds of viruses for the Mac. However, virus writers may target Macs more as they increase in popularity, and that macro viruses, which work through Microsoft Office, work on both platforms. I should acknowledge that Macs aren't perfect, but Apple still wins this category.

Style and design

Beauty may be in the eye of the beholder but there's no doubt more attention was put into the iMac's design than into any desktop PC. First, the iMac is extremely compact - the main unit is encased in a small base that also supports the flat screen via a chrome arm that allows you to raise, tilt and rotate the screen more easily than any monitor we've seen. The arm is also strong enough to act as a handle.

Apple also intended the iMac to be thought of more as an appliance than a computer. Its all-in-one design makes it easier to set up and instead of looking like a box with slots and protruding buttons, the dome-shaped base has a smooth front with the optical drive merely an outline. Until you press the keyboard's eject button you almost wouldn't notice it. Last - and, admittedly, this is subjective - I believe the iMac looks more elegant than any desktop PC I've seen.

Cost
Macs have a reputation for being expensive but this isn't necessarily so. For operating systems alone they're actually cheaper - OS X 10.2 costs $229 while Windows XP Home Edition is $199. Comparing the cost of full desktop systems is harder, but if you're buying a brand-name PC you probably won't pay less. For example, the new 15-inch MacBook Pro (which was just announced at the time of writing) is $2099 while an Acer T300 with a 15-in LCD monitor and similar specs is $2120. There are, however, exceptions. For example, you can buy a Dell Dimension with roughly the same specs for several hundred dollars less (this is because Dell sells directly to consumers rather than through retail outlets). Another option is to buy a "no-name" PC from a local store, although the support and overall quality is sometimes not as good. As such, the PC won this category, albeit by a small margin. I think that Mac won the competion if i could tell so, but not by much. I consider that Macs are better because of its design and if it had kept its lead in usability, the margin would have been greater. Also, its performance suffered slightly but this is likely to be remedied by their new processors. However, I do believe PCs are better suited for games and running specific software titles.

Bibliography
1. Kaufman, Dan. Macs vs PCs, PC Magazine, October 11, 2003 2. Glancey, Jonathan. Twentieth Century Architecture. London: Carlton Books Limited,1998. Schulze, Fraz. The Seagram Building. NJ: Princeton Architectural Press. 1999. 3. Linzmayer, Owen. Apple Confidential: The real story of Apple computer, Inc,USA, 1999 4. http://www.comkey.net/daniel/seagram.htm 5. http://www.studyworld.com/newsite/ReportEssay/Science/Technical%5CMac_ vs_IBM.htm

10