The question of operating system supremacy is one that many people confront when it comes time to buying a computer, especially here at Dartmouth. Many people might think that it would be a disadvantage to have a PC on a campus that is predominantly Mac-oriented. However, we both own PCs and together have only had three occasions where we had to use software that was available only for the Macintosh. In those cases, we could either use a friend's computer for a while or go to one of the computer labs. Aside from those instances, we have never had a problem with running our PCs. And the popularity of PCs on campus and the available support is increasing every year, meaning that it will become increasingly unlikely that PC users will be at any sort of disadvantage.
Apple cheerleaders typically have a couple of standard arguments as to why Macs are far better computers than PCs. Since this is a relatively short and simple list, we can address those claims straight away. The first claim is that the MacOS is far more user-friendly than Windows. User-friendliness is a highly subjective attribute, and we have always found PCs easier to use than Macs. The worst inconveniences we have seen with Macs are: the lack of a two button mouse, frequent crashes (Constantly!!!) and unhelpful error messages -- and without a doubt the most aggravating: the flashing question mark that lets you know when your computer is officially and completely brain-dead.
The other main argument for Macs is that they are aesthetically more pleasing. We'll actually agree with the Mac fans on this one. Apple changed the way that PCs look, and there has been a positive response to it. PC makers are taking the cue and are putting more effort into style, but they still lag behind Apple. Realistically, though, it's what's under the hood that counts, and that's where PCs leave Macs in the dust.
While there are few advantages to owning a Mac, there are numerous reasons to prefer PCs. There are three clear advantages: higher performance, lower cost, and more flexibility. Plain and simple, PCs are faster than Macs. The fastest processor available for the PC is made by AMD and runs at 1.1 Ghz (or 1,100 Mhz). Intel, who also makes processors for PCs, is scheduled to ship a processor running at 1.4 Ghz around the end of October. The fastest processor that Apple has available runs at only 500 Mhz, or about a third the speed of Intel's upcoming chip. Admittedly, the processors that Macs use are better at certain tasks, such as running Adobe Photoshop and other graphics programs. But, Apple has also tried to mask the fact that they can't clock their processor any faster than 500 Mhz by introducing some dual-processor systems, claiming that they offer "up to twice the firepower" of previous models. Sorry, but due to the nature of dual-processor computers, only certain applications (once again, like Photoshop) can take advantage of extra processors, and even then the speed increase will be significantly less than double (more like 40 percent, according to industry benchmarks). Even then, Macs will still fall far short of the computing power available for even inexpensive PC's, with the fastest models currently available achieving a speed of approximately 700 Mhz.
Also, due to the large popularity of PCs, there is far more variety and flexibility. Most people equate PCs with Windows 98 -- however, there are a number of operating systems that can be used on PCs, including Windows 2000 (formerly Windows NT), Linux and BeOS. There is more software available, and the latest and greatest technical innovations tend to be available first for the PC.
Finally, we come down to what for many is the most important factor in deciding what type of computer to buy: price. Since the PC is a much more open platform than the Mac there are many companies that must compete for business. This, along with the economies of scale that PC makers enjoy, leads to lower prices. For example, a Mac G4 with dual 500 Mhz processors (again, about equivalent to 700 Mhz), 128 MB of memory and a 30 GB hard drive will set you back about $2800 (according to Apple's web site) -- and that's without a monitor. And, if you're buying a Mac for its beauty, you might consider the G4 cube, which prices at a shocking $2,800 with a single 500 Mhz chip. A comparable PC, however, costs far less. According to www.dell.com, a system with an Intel Pentium III processor running at 800 Mhz (we'll be generous) and equivalent hardware will cost you about $1300, also without a monitor. After all this, is the Mac really worth 215 percent more?
