Music Banter - View Single Post

Freebase Dali · 04-29-2012, 02:39 AM

It has probably been said plenty times before, but as a person who has used both systems (predominately PC, but used a Mac and learned a lot about it in a Mac class in college), the difference and intent behind both systems is obvious.

Mac is a user-friendly system. It's practically perfect right out of the box, requiring little user configuration, and it will run the programs designed for it flawlessly. It is no surprise that there is a user-base that supports that quality. And that user-base is ok with paying a little more and not having the customization options a PC might have, because they don't find a need for them. That is exactly why Mac is viable on the market.

PC is not so user-friendly. At first, it might be, but eventually, all PCs need far more maintenance than a Mac, and have more issues that consumer-level users may not be capable of handling. It may not run all the programs designed for it flawlessly, but it will definitely provide more options for what you can run on it. More importantly, it costs less and can be upgraded to a very high degree. The Windows operating system also allows for a very high degree of control. It appeals to those who want a system they can alter and make work to their own specifications, rather than specifications that are predetermined.

So, the difference is very much need and intent. Obviously, popularity of one system over the other might lead the wrong kinds of users to the wrong kind of system, and there will inevitably be disappointment. Someone who just wants their system to work for their needs and is not concerned about tweaking that system or upgrading it should obviously go for the system that provides just their needs and nothing more.
And, alternately, someone who wants to be able to fit their system to a larger horizon of possible needs as they arise, and has the knowledge to do so, should choose the system that allows it.
Both systems might be on equal footing in the center of the sphere of needs, but it's the peripheral benefits that really separate one from the other, and separate the reason an informed party chooses one over the other as per their particular intent with that system.

04-29-2012, 02:39 AM	#385 (permalink)
Freebase Dali Partying on the inside Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 5,584	It has probably been said plenty times before, but as a person who has used both systems (predominately PC, but used a Mac and learned a lot about it in a Mac class in college), the difference and intent behind both systems is obvious. Mac is a user-friendly system. It's practically perfect right out of the box, requiring little user configuration, and it will run the programs designed for it flawlessly. It is no surprise that there is a user-base that supports that quality. And that user-base is ok with paying a little more and not having the customization options a PC might have, because they don't find a need for them. That is exactly why Mac is viable on the market. PC is not so user-friendly. At first, it might be, but eventually, all PCs need far more maintenance than a Mac, and have more issues that consumer-level users may not be capable of handling. It may not run all the programs designed for it flawlessly, but it will definitely provide more options for what you can run on it. More importantly, it costs less and can be upgraded to a very high degree. The Windows operating system also allows for a very high degree of control. It appeals to those who want a system they can alter and make work to their own specifications, rather than specifications that are predetermined. So, the difference is very much need and intent. Obviously, popularity of one system over the other might lead the wrong kinds of users to the wrong kind of system, and there will inevitably be disappointment. Someone who just wants their system to work for their needs and is not concerned about tweaking that system or upgrading it should obviously go for the system that provides just their needs and nothing more. And, alternately, someone who wants to be able to fit their system to a larger horizon of possible needs as they arise, and has the knowledge to do so, should choose the system that allows it. Both systems might be on equal footing in the center of the sphere of needs, but it's the peripheral benefits that really separate one from the other, and separate the reason an informed party chooses one over the other as per their particular intent with that system.