MustangWorks.com : Ford Forums - View Single Post

Mr 5 0 · 08-26-2002, 03:32 PM

All:

Thanks for the information and for what it's worth, I enjoyed the debate.

I've debated both Chris (PKRWUD) and Kell (Unit 5302) on a few hot-button issues (drug legalization, religion) before and although it was intense, it was also intellectually stimulating because a worthy opponent forces you to think hard about your position and defend it with logic, not simply emotion-driven opinion.

In this case, I've long been curious as to what causes the chasm between Macintosh and PC fans and I've never seen a real debate over the facts before.

Admittedly, as a near-bumpkin in the world of computers I'm easily dazzled by the tech stuff but one thing is clear; just as aftermarket manufacturers for performance auto parts can play around with dyno HP numbers (by using a part on an otherwise stock engine and increasing performance or using the part on a highly modified engine and showing big gains - at 6400 RPM) so can computer manufacturers play around with the OS and other components to reach a desired number in performance and make their product appear superior. Understanding that simple fact of advertising, one must be very careful to evaluate the data and the source for it.

While I believe there may be a certain measure of equality between the two systems - depending on the application and many other factors - I would still buy another PC over the Mac. Then again, I'm reallya low-end user and all the bells and whistles are of only marginal interest to me anyway.

I agree with Chris that when the smoke clears it seems to be a personal preference and apparently once the decision is made to go with either the PC or the Macintosh there seems to be a real need to justify that choice. I understand that and I see a lot of it in the posts here. No one wants to be wrong. I empathize.

On subjective issues such as politics or religion, that's possible but with issues based on hard data such as computer performance it becomes difficult to escape conclusions - except that so much of the data is skewed by slight changes in the comparisons. As Kell said, his stock '87 5.0 may have a better 60-ft time than Sky's Mustang (due to putting down less power) but that doesn't mean it can beat Sky's Mustang in the quarter. One test doesn't determine the total usefullness and value of a computer product.

I'm not picking a winner but I've been educated here and for my next PC purchase (a few years away, at least) I may well contact some of you guys for up-to-date info and advice (along with Dan McClain, who advised me on my last PC buy).

It was fun for us bystanders and I'm leaving the thread open for any further comments but please avoid name-calling. It doesn't enhance anyone's argument and it takes down the tone of the discussion where it unfortunately does just become more about egos than information. I prefer information, especially on technecial issues. I suspect most members who care enough to read the thread feel the same way.

That said; thanks to all for the effort - and the information.

Kell; good to see you back, even if you are at variance with another prolific member. Keeps the board interesting.

'Don't be a stranger'.

08-26-2002, 03:32 PM	#65
Mr 5 0 Conservative Individualist Join Date: May 1997 Location: Wherever I need to be Posts: 7,487	Mac vs PC, Round 9,297 All: Thanks for the information and for what it's worth, I enjoyed the debate. I've debated both Chris (PKRWUD) and Kell (Unit 5302) on a few hot-button issues (drug legalization, religion) before and although it was intense, it was also intellectually stimulating because a worthy opponent forces you to think hard about your position and defend it with logic, not simply emotion-driven opinion. In this case, I've long been curious as to what causes the chasm between Macintosh and PC fans and I've never seen a real debate over the facts before. Admittedly, as a near-bumpkin in the world of computers I'm easily dazzled by the tech stuff but one thing is clear; just as aftermarket manufacturers for performance auto parts can play around with dyno HP numbers (by using a part on an otherwise stock engine and increasing performance or using the part on a highly modified engine and showing big gains - at 6400 RPM) so can computer manufacturers play around with the OS and other components to reach a desired number in performance and make their product appear superior. Understanding that simple fact of advertising, one must be very careful to evaluate the data and the source for it. While I believe there may be a certain measure of equality between the two systems - depending on the application and many other factors - I would still buy another PC over the Mac. Then again, I'm reallya low-end user and all the bells and whistles are of only marginal interest to me anyway. I agree with Chris that when the smoke clears it seems to be a personal preference and apparently once the decision is made to go with either the PC or the Macintosh there seems to be a real need to justify that choice. I understand that and I see a lot of it in the posts here. No one wants to be wrong. I empathize. On subjective issues such as politics or religion, that's possible but with issues based on hard data such as computer performance it becomes difficult to escape conclusions - except that so much of the data is skewed by slight changes in the comparisons. As Kell said, his stock '87 5.0 may have a better 60-ft time than Sky's Mustang (due to putting down less power) but that doesn't mean it can beat Sky's Mustang in the quarter. One test doesn't determine the total usefullness and value of a computer product. I'm not picking a winner but I've been educated here and for my next PC purchase (a few years away, at least) I may well contact some of you guys for up-to-date info and advice (along with Dan McClain, who advised me on my last PC buy). It was fun for us bystanders and I'm leaving the thread open for any further comments but please avoid name-calling. It doesn't enhance anyone's argument and it takes down the tone of the discussion where it unfortunately does just become more about egos than information. I prefer information, especially on technecial issues. I suspect most members who care enough to read the thread feel the same way. That said; thanks to all for the effort - and the information. Kell; good to see you back, even if you are at variance with another prolific member. Keeps the board interesting. 'Don't be a stranger'.