Justifying the cost of Mac hardware.

[Oleg Volk]

I am thinking of updating my 350MHz G4 Mac. Bare-bones single-processor G5 runs $1500+...almost twice of a PC with simiilar specs. Having just set up an XP box for a friend, I can't say it was that inferior to a Mac in user interface. I am not sure about it being as stable, but I also find it hard to get tech support for the Mac lately. So I am considering keeping the old Mac as backup and getting an XP box for doing graphics. One benefit would be more software options.

1. Am I kidding myself about comparable performance for much less money? Would I have to upgrade the PC substantially to make it work as well as a G5?

2. Am I missing some non-obvious down sides to Windows?

3. If Macs are the way to go, where could I find a used G5 for less than the price of a new one? Even used G4s seem to sell for as much as new!

Oleg

[Harold Tuttle]

www.smalldog.com is a good source for refurb mac hardware

http://www.smalldog.com/product/34552

PowerMac G5/1.8GHz 512/160/Superdrive
Condition:   used, 90 day small dog warranty
Part Number:   G/APPASIS#5{u}4915
Platform:   Mac
Price:   1149.00
Qty:   1 In Stock

Our bean counters at work attempt to kill off the mac platform on a regular basis

They seem to be swayed by the fact that getting high end art & typography actually printed on a PC is still voodoo.

another downside are all the viri, trojan horses, and evil on the Windows OS

heres an objective review
http://www.xvsxp.com/

[jefnvk]

another downside are all the viri, trojan horses, and evil on the Windows OS

I hear this all the time, yet never experience it (at least on my computer).

If you are really against Windows, why not build a comp with the specs you want and run Linux?

You are not missing anything, BTW.  The G5 can be beaten by PC's at a much cheaper price.  Take a look at something running an Athlon 64 or FX processor.  Back when G5 came out, some of the PC mags did a side by side comparison of it and a similiarly equipped PC with one of the AMD 64-bit processoors (forgot where that article was at).  The PC beat it in nearly all the tests, including things like Photoshop, and at a $1000 cheaper price tag.

[Oleg Volk]

Another questions is: how would I figure out the difference between AMD, Athlon, Pentium and Celeron processors?

[Sean Smith]

Another questions is: how would I figure out the difference between AMD, Athlon, Pentium and Celeron processors?

AMD is the company.  Their processors, in order of performance, and how they roughly compare to Intel, are:

Athlon 64 FX ~ Pentium 4 Extreme Edition
Athlon 64 ~ Pentium 4 (Prescott and Northwood)
Athlon XP ~ Pentium 4 (older variants)
Sempron ~ Celeron

Bear in mind that for most uses, the Athlon 64 and (especially) Athlon 64 FX processors are faster than their Intel counterparts at a given price point at the moment.  Intel essentially does not make a product that can compete with the Athlon 64FX-55... it is roughly equivalent to a Pentium 4 @ 4.2 GHz, if such a thing existed, which it doesn't.

AMD processors have lower clock speeds than their Intel counterparts, but often have higher overall performance, for a variety of reasons (e.g. more instructions per clock).  A 3000+ (1.8 GHz) is roughly equivalent to, or a little more powerful than, a Pentium 4 3.0 GHz.

[Oleg Volk]

Thank you. So how would I go about finding a PC with roughly

- dual processors optimized for graphics
- dual 160GB or larger drives
- video card supporting two monitors

for under $2,500 (the price of a G5)? My other option would be to go with a simpler system and upgrade sooner in the future.

[Sean Smith]

Dual processors are pretty uncommon in PCs that aren't servers, they just use more powerful single processors instead.  

You could probalby build a dual Xeon (Intel) or Opteron (AMD) system for Mac-ish money that would pulverize a Mac, but for most uses it probably wouldn't be worth it.

[Sean Smith]

Forgot to add: AMD announced they will be releasing the Athlon 64 X2 processor, which is 2 cores on 1 chip in June.  It uses standard Socket 939 motherboards.

With Windows XP Pro x64 (now available) and a dual-core Athlon 64x2, you should get brain-melting performance in just about anything on Earth.

[Zundfolge]

My 1.25ghz G4 MacMini at home runs Photoshop as fast (if not faster) as the 3.2ghz P4 HT I'm running here at work (with 512MB RAM in the Mac and 1GB ram in the PC).

Of course to keep the Windows machine running smoothly I have to make sure I reboot daily ... and sacrifice about 10% of my RAM and CPU cycles to anti-virus and anti-spyware software (the Mac has no anti anything software and my uptimes are around a month ... only reboot if I update software)

So I am considering keeping the old Mac as backup and getting an XP box for doing graphics. One benefit would be more software options.

Unless you're doing 3D modeling, how could you possibly have more graphics software options with Windows?

[Dave Markowitz]

Another thing to consider is that if you get a new Mac, you can move all your old apps over to it from the old machine.  If you get a PC, whether it's running Linux or Windows, you'll need to get new applications.

As someone who just switched to Mac OS-X as his main platform (coming from Linux, no less), I can't fathom going the other way.

[roo_ster]

The ever-present anti-virus apps and anti-spyware apps have taken my work Windows box that, 18 months ago, ran just fine and turned it into a doorstop at times.  My CPU is constantly being hit and memory being utilized by these apps.  Sometimes my hard drive gets hammered bythem, too.  It then becomes time ot walk away & drink a Coke.  This is a company machine & they set the policy WRT all those services.  Yeah, I could fiddle with their mandatory settings (AV scan @11AM, AS scan @1PM), but I got to work with them on other projects.

Administering a Windows box has gotten to be more of a pain because of the AV, AS, firewall, OS patch issues.  Expect to spend much more time administering your new Win box than your Mac.  

Another processor (& a commensurate boost in RAM) would be welcome, indeed, to carry the OS, AV & AS overhead.

IOW, to run Windows OS on white-box PC hardware, you will need more/better hardware to get performance similar to Mac OSX or any of the contemporary linux distros.

If you go for PC hardware, make sure your mobo supports PCI Express.  Most dual-proc mobos are intended for server work & lag behind the cutting edge WRT some of the details (AGP vs PCX for video, in my buddy's newest box).

Good luck with your decision & new box, whatever arch & OS it may be.

[BryanP]

Oleg, I'm a Windows/PC guy (Actually I'm a Netware guy but it's not a desktop OS ...) but I have to tell you that while I know several people who have happily transitioned from PC to Mac, I don't know anyone who has gone the other direction and was still happy.  

For gaming and general desktop applications a PC is great.  For serious multi-processor graphics and multi-monitor video work I'd stick with the Mac.  It can all be made to work on the PC, but it's a lot more work and a lot more finicky than a comparable Mac.  

As for viruses and worms, I've been online since 1991 and using Windows since 3.0.  I have never been infected.   I run my current machine behind a Linksys NAT router, run decent antivirus software (AVG is free), keep my OS patched, refuse to use Outlook or Internet Explorer, and regularly scan with programs such as Ad-Aware and Spybot S&D.  For anyone who takes the time to do it right, viruses and worms are not a legitimate reason to abandon Windows.

[Harold Tuttle]

the dealUwant
http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore.woa/71908/wo/Tq6FD9jLulyJ2enbDjv1p4MpSY0/1.0.0.11.1.0.6.7.3.5.1.1.2.1.5.1.0.5.0

Power Mac G5 1.6 GHz 256MB/ 80GB/ SuperDrive/ GigE/ 56K - Apple Certified Refurbished
Price
$1,199.00

Mac OS X v10.4 Tiger included
iLife '05 included

[Standing Wolf]

Having just set up an XP box for a friend, I can't say it was that inferior to a Mac in user interface.

Macintosh OS X is nearly as ugly and user-unfriendly as Windows. Out of the box, my top of the line G4 included a defective IBM hard drive, which my local Apple disservice center took two weeks to replace, as well as a defective Pioneer DVD drive, which Apple replaced only after I sent the defective drive in and trusted the company with a credit card number. The modem works about 50% of the time. Boeing makes intercontinental jet aircraft that are quieter than the fan in my sorry excuse for a computer.

I bought my first Macintosh in 1985. I've bought seven or eight for my personal use, well over 100 in corporate environments, perhaps as many as 200.

Apple seems to figure I've got no choice but to be loyal.

Apple's wrong.

[Oleg Volk]

Mac OS X is wonderfully stable. It is resistent to viruses and malware. It is also fugly, obtuse and actually harder to navigate in some ways than Windows. The number of utilities for digital camera files and such is smaller than for Windows. Hardware is less likely to be compatible. I am researching now, but it looks like high-end systems cost about the same. So will likely stay with Mac.

I am running a G4 350MHz 1GB RAM...and strongly suspect it will be a few months before I can afford a replacement. Fortunately, most of the recent slowdown is probably due to me simply running out of disk space. I'll get another hard drive as a stopgap measure and see it it improves matters. I am using all the RAM slots but can probably dump the smallest chip and get another 1GB in there...

160GB Firewire drives seem to run about $150-200 ( http://www.macmall.com/macmall/search/search.asp?id=141706480&search=External%20FireWire/IEEE%201394%20Hard%20Drives ) -- any recommendations as to which brands/enclosures to favor over others? After repeated failures of a LaCie mini 20GB USM drive (finally out of warranty and probably trash now), I am a bit skittish about buying before learning more.

[auschip]

Another thing to consider is that if you get a new Mac, you can move all your old apps over to it from the old machine.  If you get a PC, whether it's running Linux or Windows, you'll need to get new applications.

Couldn't you just unplug the harddrive and plug it into the new machine?

[lee n. field]

I am thinking of updating my 350MHz G4 Mac. Bare-bones single-processor G5 runs $1500+...almost twice of a PC with simiilar specs. Having just set up an XP box for a friend, I can't say it was that inferior to a Mac in user interface. I am not sure about it being as stable, but I also find it hard to get tech support for the Mac lately. So I am considering keeping the old Mac as backup and getting an XP box for doing graphics. One benefit would be more software options.

1. Am I kidding myself about comparable performance for much less money? Would I have to upgrade the PC substantially to make it work as well as a G5?

Are you prepared to manage it?

I fix PCs for a living, and support a school full of Macs.  I see the sorts of troubles naieve Windows users bring upon themselves.  The Macs are far less trouble.

2. Am I missing some non-obvious down sides to Windows?

Viruses.  Malware.  All the stuff targeted at the Windows or IE vulnerability of the week.  "Unmountable Boot Volume" errors.  Registry flaking for no good reason, requiring a system repave.  "Tech support" consisting of some guy at 2am India time working his way painfully through a troubleshooting script.  Hardware that's inexpensive because it's cheap! (ie. shoddy, not inexpensive).


"These are a few of my faaaavorite things!"

[lee n. field]

Couldn't you just unplug the harddrive and plug it into the new machine?

If he connects his Mac drive to a PC, he won't be able to mount the partition.

If he connects a PC hard disk as a second drive, he will be able to see files, but programs very likely won't run.  The installation for your typical Windows program makes changes all over the place, and none of that carries over.

Windows XP now has a program (File and Settings Transfer Wizard) that actually takes a great deal of the pain of moving data to a new computer away.  But you still need to manually install apps.