The Student Room Group

Why do people buy Macs?

Scroll to see replies

I have a mac because I got one as a present for my 21st Birthday. Since then I never had to deal with my laptop freezing (used to drive me nuts when i had a pc), breaking, refusing to uninstall software, asking to pay for a new antivirus. I find macs extremely user-friendly, which is perfect for a computer-illiterate person like me.

Also, the thing I probably use most on it is the amazing search function. It doesn't just work, it works fast and effortlessly finds articles I need by name or by contents. It baffles me why windows haven't figured out how to make an efficient search function.
Why do people buy anything?
Reply 82
I don't know a lot about computers. And I don't know why people from other backgrounds use macs. But for the work I have to do (I study architecture, so I use lots of Photoshop, Illustrator, 3D modelling and rendering) Macs are much more superior and even easier to use than windows or linux based PCs. I've had a mac for 3 years now and still runs those programs faster and more reliably than most brand new PCs.
Reply 83
Original post by _K3N
Spec is not everything. When people look at spec they ignore the quality of build, choice of materials, actual usage battery life or the resolution of the screen.

It is expensive. But you get more when you pay more. :smile:


Wow, could you be more wrong? So everything that is more expensive, is better? What a crazy statement :eek:
My parents wanted to get me one for my 17th birthday, so I was like yeah...

What I've noticed from my mac (3 years running now) is that the speed hasn't deteriorated yet and it hardly ever crashes. My older brothers sony laptop of 4 years (a couple of years ago) was ungodly slow. I remember using it and it took timeeeee to turn on and it kept crashing like there was no tomorrow and not to mention the delay after double clicking 'my computer'.
I gotta say I'm pretty please with my laptop and I have a good feeling there's still 5-10 years before I may/may not notice the deteriorated speed.
(edited 11 years ago)
Reply 85
Original post by wales321
I haven't read the whole thread, but the main anti mac argument i see is why pay more for their products when you can get a much higher spec windows product for the same price. Personally i use both, i have one of the higher spec iMac's and a medium spec windows desktop. Why did i get a mac? because i wanted one . . .simple. I could have got another windows machine but tbh i am bored of windows, it just seems bloated and slow in comparison. The mac, when teamed with the trackpad is so easy to use, multi gesture features just make for complete ease of use and a nicer user experience. In comparison my mac beats my other PC for processing power in every way. I really don't see peoples problems when people suggest buying a mac. If you can afford it and your happy to pay for a mac then you won't be disappointed. I couldn't care less what the haters think, i am very happy with my mac purchase and still use windows machines for work and uni. I much prefer using the mac, but i don't hate windows, a rare thing it seems.


If people just used this reason, then that's fair enough. If someone likes the look, feel, software etc... then that's there personal choice. But when people start saying that macs are BETTER than pc's, then that's where the arguments start.

Take the macbook pro 13 and the Dell XPS14z. Specs are more less identical, but I had a guy the other week try to argue that the mac was far superior in every way. Faster processor etc.. Even though they both had the same identical Core i7.

I have a 14z myself and bought it as a returned, unused item for £620. Where the macbook with the same specs (core i7, 8GB ram, 750gb etc) would cost in excess of £1300. I'm sorry but on this occasion, I'll keep my pants on!:biggrin:
Original post by partoftheweekend
I cant be arsed reading the rest of the thread, but I just got to this then noticed you used "hate on" to finish 2 posts and it really bothered me. Just wanted to let you know that it either sounds like a very faggy signing off catchphrase or a really **** superhero powering up. FLAME ON.


lol its from a show with a really cocky b---- on it and she always says "hate on b----es, im the best in this b----, i'm destined for greatness, you boring!":smile:
Original post by Jimbo1234
" 'Cause its shiny and expensive thus that means it is better right?"
:facepalm2:

Well, most people using Macs are conned into thinking that expensive = better, but for some people eg. those using specific industry software, audio packages, terminal, or making use of the Unix architecture, a Mac is required - but these people are about 1 in 100 of actual Mac owners.





1 - Who cares about the outside :confused: With electronics what matters is the inside, not the outside :rofl: So cheesy, but in thise case it is true.

2 - Dell also offer upgrades, and the horrific time it takes for Apple to renew their products makes the hardware inside a downside as they become very dated, very quickly.

3 - All laptops have them (bar firewire as nothing uses it).

4 - Battery life is a problem on most laptops, but new batteries are lasting at a comparable rate to Macs. Also some batteries don't last as long as the hardware is far more powerful.

5 - the software being so optimised is also limiting as it prevents many programs running smoothly on the Mac compared to a PC.

7 - That is sadly a myth and very wrong. The life span of Macs is the same as any other laptop, and you have no support if you do not continue to pay through your nose for Apple care. The fact is any compact electronics (laptops, smartphones etc) will break within 18 months + due to heat damage, thus you want to find the laptop with the longest warranty possible.


1. Subjective response is subjective.

2. Tell me how a laptop with a dual core Ivy-Bridge chip running @ 2.5 GHz is "out-dated".

3. No ultra book has a DVD drive. Also, AFAIK, no other laptops have a thunderbolt port although I'm not sure how important it is, right now. The MacBook Pro can be compared to ultra-books because of its great battery life, which normal laptops don't have. And please don't start comparing top of the line "gaming" laptops with the 13" MBP. That would be like comparing apples with oranges. (Pun intended. :tongue:) As an example, an 11.6" Clevo, with really powerful hardware, that I was originally considering, lasts only 4 hours despite the smaller screen size.

4. Not many laptops with comparable hardware have comparable battery life. You'll need to back your argument with specific examples.

5. WHAT?

7. I don't have enough personal experience to say anything but it seems pretty solid to me and the general vibe I get from people's opinions on the Internet is pretty positive.


Basically, show me a laptop with similar hardware, battery life, build quality and looks that costs less.
Reply 88
Original post by CHY872
2) Fact is that I'm not particularly interested in the open source alternatives. I'm a big fan of open source software, I use open source software when I can and generally develop using the GPL v2 - but when it comes down to it, I like to use either the best solution for the problem or one I already know. In general this is closed source software. With regard to Wine, it's always seemed a little ropey for me. Lots of stuff works, but often the more esoteric features crash the app or whatever. It's a good stopgap, but is often more trouble than it's worth. It may (or may not) please you to know that I use Wine on OSX just fine.

3) Yes, and OSX comes free with any Mac, which is better for me as detailed in my previous posts.

Seriously, you need to realise that arguing with me like this will not in any way influence my use of operating systems - partly because I have a Windows desktop, a Mac laptop and a Raspberry Pi linux thing (I'm not uneducated) - but also that it's just bad discussion tactics. Attempting to convince me with a 'you're wrong about this' attitude will only help set me in my ways - it's been shown in studies many times. I was simply posting here to answer the OP's question - if you want to argue with me about it that's fine, but my opinion will not be changing, so you will I assume achieve nothing.



True, and the differences are there and obvious (different UI for one) but by and large, they do the same things almost as well as each other.


2) Fair, that's your opinion. But see my general point.

3) OSX doesn't come free with any Mac. The cost of the OS is subsidised by the hardware but it's far from free. The hardware for a PC is cheaper, therefore the OS is most likely cheaper.

My general point is that Macs are better than PCs in non-subjective areas but twice as good for twice the price? Not a chance. Consider that absolute advantage isn't as useful as relative advantage.

It's not about trying to convert you. The OS you use doesn't affect me at all. I simply disagree with some of your opinions.
Original post by {Unregistered}

7. I don't have enough personal experience to say anything but it seems pretty solid to me and the general vibe I get from people's opinions on the Internet is pretty positive.


Good god I thought you just admitted that even you knew that reliability surveys had Apple in the middle of the pack?
Reply 90
It's over four years since I got my macbook pro and it's still as solid, sturdy and running as well as it was the moment I got it. Plus if anything goes wrong then Apple are great customer service. I admit that during this time I haven't had a windows laptop so can't directly compare but so far it's proving good value for money.
Original post by {Unregistered}
1. Subjective response is subjective.


Well if you thinking buying shiny things is fine then I can't stop you...:giggle:

2. Tell me how a laptop with a dual core Ivy-Bridge chip running @ 2.5 GHz is "out-dated".


You don't understand how macbooks only get updated ~36 months do you? :curious: At the moment, they are good, but overpriced. IN 2 years time, they will be crap.


3. No ultra book has a DVD drive. Also, AFAIK, no other laptops have a thunderbolt port although I'm not sure how important it is, right now. The MacBook Pro can be compared to ultra-books because of its great battery life, which normal laptops don't have. And please don't start comparing top of the line "gaming" laptops with the 13" MBP. That would be like comparing apples with oranges. (Pun intended. :tongue:) As an example, an 11.6" Clevo, with really powerful hardware, that I was originally considering, lasts only 4 hours despite the smaller screen size.


And what uses thunderbolt? :redface: Maybe they should have gone with USB 3.0...


4. Not many laptops with comparable hardware have comparable battery life. You'll need to back your argument with specific examples.


Go look at any laptop that starts at £999. They all have comparable battery life.

5. WHAT?


Yes. Go look at what drivers are and why Apples are crap.

7. I don't have enough personal experience to say anything but it seems pretty solid to me and the general vibe I get from people's opinions on the Internet is pretty positive.


They are not. The interior is just the same as any other high end laptop and they all suffer from thermal degradation.

Basically, show me a laptop with similar hardware, battery life, build quality and looks that costs less.

Ok.
Here is another.
And with the money saved, up that warranty to as high as you can and you'll be far better off then if you had bought a Mac (excluding specific needs for a Mac).
Reply 92
Original post by Jimbo1234
You don't understand how macbooks only get updated ~36 months do you? :curious: At the moment, they are good, but overpriced. IN 2 years time, they will be crap.

Basically, show me a laptop with similar hardware, battery life, build quality and looks that costs less.


Ok.
Here is another.
And with the money saved, up that warranty to as high as you can and you'll be far better off then if you had bought a Mac (excluding specific needs for a Mac).
You don't understand how you are talking *******s? :curious:

Maxbook Pro release dates:
Late 2008, Early 2009, Mid 2009, Mid 2010, Early 2011, Late 2011, Mid 2012.

Macbook Air release dates:
Early 2008, Late 2008, Mid 2009, Late 2010, Mid 2011, Mid 1012

If you don't think that Macbooks are right for you, that is fine. I don't think Macbooks are right for me, and I own a PC. However don't talk blatant crap. Maybe true for the last release of the (discontinued) plastic Macbook, but not on the current line up.
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by Teenage Pirate
To add to that, the consequences of using an SSD (as the poster probably did not know) are 1) much higher price and 2) currently much lower storage capability


They're coming down all the time though and I doubt SSDs will be used for high storage capability for a long long time.
Original post by peliqueiro
But for the work I have to do (I study architecture, so I use lots of Photoshop, Illustrator, 3D modelling and rendering) Macs are much more superior and even easier to use than windows or linux based PCs.


All of that software is virtually identical on Windows and most mainstream 3D modelling software is native to Windows first and then ported to Mac, because Windows PC's can be configured with a wider range of graphics card and processors and therefore offer better performance as workstations for that sort of use.
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by Jimbo1234
Well if you thinking buying shiny things is fine then I can't stop you...:giggle:



You don't understand how macbooks only get updated ~36 months do you? :curious: At the moment, they are good, but overpriced. IN 2 years time, they will be crap.




And what uses thunderbolt? :redface: Maybe they should have gone with USB 3.0...




Go look at any laptop that starts at £999. They all have comparable battery life.



Yes. Go look at what drivers are and why Apples are crap.



They are not. The interior is just the same as any other high end laptop and they all suffer from thermal degradation.

Basically, show me a laptop with similar hardware, battery life, build quality and looks that costs less.


Ok.
Here is another.
And with the money saved, up that warranty to as high as you can and you'll be far better off then if you had bought a Mac (excluding specific needs for a Mac).

I thought they got updated 3 times every year...Will have to check this one.

Nothing on supporting the Thunderbolt interface is mainstream yet, but for a number of possible uses of this technology in the near future, you might want to look here: http://www.maclife.com/article/howtos/12_possible_uses_thunderbolt_port
Also, the 13" MBP (the latest model, mid-2012, that I have) has, in fact, 2 USB ports, both of which are USB 3.0.

The Vaio you linked me to does seem rather nice but it's about £200 more than the 13" MBP with similar hardware (except for the SSD). You simply cannot compare laptops across different price ranges.

No, I meant to ask what you wanted to say since I couldn't understand you.

True.

The link to the Sony website doesn't work for me.
The Dell you linked me to is 17", so not really portable. It's more than 1.5 times the weight of the 13" MBP, and has poor battery life (3: 37 instead of 6+ hours [7 hours as advertised by Apple]). Also, it seems really old as it's not available online anymore. I can't view the detailed tech specs either.

You have to try harder. :tongue:
Original post by CoolRunner


People buying macs =/= People who are technologically unknowlegable/ Have a **** load of money to spend on ****/ trendy/ People who actually buy the thing for "multimedia".

Linux is the best OS. Period.


I bet you haven't used any Linux distro besides Ubuntu and Mint. :rolleyes:
Reply 97
If you treat Windows well, maintain your machine and don't clutter, it will run fine for ages.

If I may be so rash as to likening the debate to that of the one of circumcision vs non-circumcision, with those being circumcised (Mac) opting for the less maintenance and 'more aesthetically pleasing' route, for a little extra cost in the beginning. One could also go into the route of wanting it to perform in other areas, but this isn't really the area for that. :tongue:
Original post by {Unregistered}
I bet you haven't used any Linux distro besides Ubuntu and Mint. :rolleyes:


Well fyi i have :] such as gentoo, backtrack & archlinux.on my other systems. Im currently using gentoo on my system right now. So what is your argument?
(edited 11 years ago)
Reply 99
Original post by CoolRunner
People buying macs =/= People who are technologically unknowlegable/ Have a **** load of money to spend on ****/ trendy or hipster.

Linux is the best OS. Period.

Why is that, might I ask? Does it provide better compatibility than my OS? No. Does it provide better real-world performance than my OS? No. Does it even provide more stability than my OS? No.

Stability is often touted by people who have installed Ubuntu on a partition and now consider themselves an uber hacker. The barebones Linux box is very stable, which is why it forms the basis of most of the worlds servers.
Most popular distributions, bundled in with all their packages and windowing environments, have many, many bugs and causes of instability, however.
But without a windowing environment, a web browser, and all the other bells and whistles it is entirely useless as a check-your-emails-and-facebook computer.

Heck, I always find even the most basic tasks (like the shut down menu) on GNOME can be iffy. That's why I only use Linux if I have a specific reason to, and usually without a windowing environment.

Quick Reply

Latest