Thank you, Scott, for the most intelligent comments on what has become a
shooting match between biased points of view that are more emotional
than thoughtful, in my humble opinion.
You've brought to mind the phrase about "level minds". After all, we
all have our own favorite tools in the garage that work for what we
need, but there are an awful lot of choices at the hardware store that
will do the same jobs.
Family Theater Productions
Scott Phillips wrote:
>It is interesting to me, reading the various replies in the Mac vs. PC
>area. Like the this gentleman, we use both systems. It used to be
>difficult to get seamless networking between them, but this hasn't been
>a problem with more recent additions of both the MAC and PC OS's. Unlike
>him, we haven't had any problems with stability or support... But then,
>we aren't an institution, but a business. IT people, when we use them,
>are as well versed at sound cards and interfaces as they are high res
>video for applications. This applies to good sound cards / interfaces
>for Mac's as well. As a business, we control who touches the equipment,
>and don't hire anyone not qualified. An audio specialist would be
>consulted as well for advise on interfaces, if needed. This is a real
>problem for many institutions, hard as it is to fire poor support
>people. Besides, where is the focus of a support group that is too busy
>dealing with Marge the secretary's fonts to look at special needs?
>I've seen this attitude in both the MAC arena and the PC arena. I can't
>say, at least in our environment, that we have more problems with PC's
>than Mac's. It is about the same, with an equal number of each type. A
>dead hard drive is still a dead hard drive. All computers do about the
>same things, after all, it is just how they go about it.
>I would say there is truth to the fact that a cheap no-name PC may have
>all sorts of BIOS / compatibility problems you won't see on a MAC. Fair
>enough, you pay a lot more for that on the MAC than on the lousy, cheap
>PC. If you buy reasonable quality PC's, this difference vanishes, and
>they still are cheaper. The 'really cheap' PC ends up casting a shadow
>on the better ones. Yes there are 'really cheap' Dells or Gateways, but
>they simply don't cut the mustard. Can't happen as much on the MAC's,
>since they can't be had cheap anyway except on eBay. Buy one there,
>you'll find all sorts of 'problems'. You get what you pay for, in both
>cases. I have to hand it to Apple, they have managed a monopoly well
>enough to enforce pretty good sexy industrial design, at the cost of a
>tiny market share. PC's just haven't quite managed the 'cool' factor yet
>like Apple, that's for certain. Better function... Not really. Just
>If I'm honest with myself, I like the MAC interface 'a little' better
>for casual work. Because of the huge number of applications for PC's,
>they tend to do more of the heavy lifting for us. More software on a
>single box always means more 'possibilities' for conflicts, PC or Mac.
>It all comes down to the basics: (no particular order)
>1.) Pick the software you want / need to run FIRST, before committing to
>2.) Which (or both?) platform will run everything you need to run ON AN
>INDIVIDUAL WORKSTATION ?
>3.) Is it smarter (usually !) to run your email, word processing, heavy
>duty spreadsheets, internet on a second separate system ? ANY Pro
>editing / recording software package is going to strongly recommend you
>use your machine for as little else as possible, regardless of the
>4.) In house support.. And what is the quality of the available support.
>5.) Is your data to be exchanged directly with others either inside or
>outside your organization. (Be honest with yourself, forget what you
>'like'.) What software (and thus hardware) makes this easiest?
>6.) Will the workstation be used for casual web surfing or the like..?
>If so, you'd best be not using it for serious work unless YOU are the IT
>guy. It is a nasty world out there, and it is true that 'Mr. Gates' is a
>disproportional target. Mac's are hardly immune to this either, but
>being a small target in the market place, it just isn't QUITE as much
>fun for hackers...yet. There is great antivirus software out there for
>both systems, but they don't catch everything. Get used to it...it is
>here to stay for a while.
>Everyone's situation is different. Best to look at this as a technical
>exercise of the requirements in particular circumstances. There isn't
>(IMO, anyway) a right or wrong, one side fits all answer. There are
>horror stories from both ends of the aisle.. So it is perhaps best to
>just try to be as clinical about it as possible.