[rugby10]

Hey All,
Disclaimer: I've used nothing but, Micro$oft and Unix.
My girlfriend has been touting the power of Apple for a while now, as she uses them with her architecture firm. I'm so sick of windows that I'm ready to try anything. The problem is no one, including my girlfriend(non-tech), has been able to elaborate on the differeces between PC's and Mac notebooks. I've tried to look for the info myself, but I can't distinguish between a powerbook and ibook, G4 vs. G3, or emac and OS X??? Hell, I can't find anything that is useful. What I'm looking for is a primer of some sort, an indoctrination, if you will, to the world of Apple. Please help... must get rid of PC...

[SueG]

I'm trying to decide if you want technical specifications of various models or more practical - hands on - users' information. Are you trying to decide if you need a PowerBook or if an iBook will do what you want? Tell us what you need to do.
We often advise people to buy the most computer they can afford; I think we all want the best and feel good about seeing someone get it. But if you tell us that money is tight, we'll let you know if the iBook will do what you want.
Apple's site is a wealth of information. The Switchers pages are useful, once you get past the ads. Find your model at the Apple Store and look around, there will be a link to the technical specifications. If it's the BSD Unix core that interests you there are resources there, too.

[rugby10]

Hello SueG,
Technical and practical information would help tremendously. I've looked at the Apple store, but as a prior window user the tech specs seem pretty weak. I've heard from word of mouth that an 800 MHz MAC can beat, say, a 2.4 GHZ PC, but I want to read about it. So, information I need would be, for example, the difference between a 2.4 GHZ PC and an 800 MHZ MAC. Or, why OSX is better than Linux, and what is the difference between the ibook, powerbook, and emacs. I want a machine for web surfing, paper writing, photoshopping, and horizon expanding all wrapped up with Wi-Fi capability.
Money is kind of tight, but I'm getting a check from Uncle Sam soon /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif It seems kind of weird spending $1500 on a machine with a 1 GHz processor? I think that I'm missing something, but I cant find it. Im supremely lost in the Apple world.
What do you think about Refurbished?
Thanks
BTW - I'm at Offutt AFB in Omaha.

[my58vw]

A few notes on processor speed mac MHz = 1 to 1.5 x Pentium MHz. Your 1 GHz is like a 2 GHz pentium and the 1.25 is like a P4 2.53 approx. Emac - 1000 dollar all in one with a low cache processor, slow without major ram upgrades and still slow. Good value for the money, little upgrading compatability.
Ibook, cheep portible, now in the G4 processor but low cache (256k) like the emac and slow compared to other mac models. The ibook has low max ram (640 MB) also so you may want to look at higher models other than the ibook. They are good for web surfing and others also but they are limited in upgradability like the emac. Also get the bluetooth as an option because it easier to get in when the computer is new.
Powerbook, the real laptop from apple but is expensive above the 12 inch model. They have 512 cache and all really quick but still not as quick as a 3 GHz p4 computer. Max ram is high (2 GB) and many of the options are onboad unlike the ibook. Expect to pay 2599 for a nice 15 inch powerbook but it is the only way to go for mobile performance.

iMac - Think emac with an LCD but with 512 k, 1 GB max, no upgradability easily.

Powermac - G5 processor, expensive, 1799 no monitor. The worlds faster computer according to apple. 8 GB current max, up to 4 TB possible in the future, 800 + MHz FSB (1 GHz on the dual 2.0 GHz model) SATA drives, dvd-rw, the works. With a studio display say 3000 typical cost, expensive but worth the money.
I used to be a pc user and came to mac some time ago. Welcome to the world of mac.

[mystery_stain]

First let's get a couple things out of the way. If you want the laptop with the most screen resolution, or the longest battery life, don't look for a Mac, unfortunately.
A popular analogy for the GHz issue is RPM. Is a Yugo running at 3000RPM faster than a Ferrari running at 2500RPM? You'd say it's an incomplete question because RPM is an incomplete measure of performance. It's the same idea with GHz. Here's a link with an example although it may be biased because it is a Mac web site.

I do not believe a 1GHz Mac can outrun all 3 GHz PC laptops. However, where the Mac makes up for it is in reliability and
better built-in network security. You do not have to reboot your Mac every day, because the Mac has a superior sleep mode (it isn't unreliable and doesn't drain battery like Windows Standby or Hibernate). Mac OS X can literally go weeks without rebooting for any reason. Most software installs do not require a reboot! (Because user and system are kept strictly apart.) For some of us, real performance equals the machine always being there when you turn to it, not crashing, rebooting, or getting taken down with viruses and spyware.
OS X vs Linux: Both are Unix-based. OS X is based on FreeBSD open source Unix with Apple GUI and APIs on top. The difference is OS X is highly consistent and standardized enough to be friendly to regular people. Many say Mac OS X is what Linux has been trying to be for so many years: The security/reliability of Unix, ability to run Unix apps, but plus the ability to run Photoshop, MS Office, plug in off-the-shelf digital peripherals with no hassles. You cannot do all that with Linux or Windows. Yet, if you must have command line access, Mac OS X Terminal lets you operate your Mac directly with Unix commands.
PowerBook and PowerMac = the "pro" line. Full capabilities and expandability.
iBook and eMac = cheaper "consumer" line, frankly these are machines Apple deliberately cripples to keep them from competing with the main line. They are harder to upgrade. iMac and eMac are mostly the same but with the iMac you pay extra for flat screen compact coolness factor.

[rugby10]

Thanks, I really appreciate the information. The responses really cleared the confusion. I have a lot to read and learn at this point. I can't believe I was so clueless for so long. The military is beginning to use Linux more and more, so I have had a little taste of that. I use a Solaris box at work for high-end graphic work: read satellite interpretation. I'm constantly forgetting commands and I find it terribly time consuming. My typing skills are better known as a three-finger attack. So a good GUI with UNIX reliability is just what the doctor ordered. The search for a powerbook begins today.

[doggdamac]

rugby,
Although your questions are vaild, in the future, if you're doing what you say you are, at the place you said you are doing it at, you might wanna be a LOT less specific about it, for a number of reasons. You never know who might be reading these fora.......
And in case you haven't guessed already, I know & so do some other folks......
Need I say more ?

[CrecenS]

In reply to:

---

I've heard from word of mouth that an 800 MHz MAC can beat, say, a 2.4 GHZ PC, but I want to read about it. So, information I need would be, for example, the difference between a 2.4 GHZ PC and an 800 MHZ MAC. Or, why OSX is better than Linux, and what is the difference between the ibook, powerbook, and emacs. I want a machine for web surfing, paper writing, photoshopping, and horizon expanding all wrapped up with Wi-Fi capability.

---

As was stated earlier, and with a car emphasis, its not about engine rpm but performance around the track that counts in racing, whether it be cars or processors. You want a chip that will make it to the finish of all your tasks, so to speak, which means you need a lot more than high rpms (processor speed). Besides, you are never going to notice an appreciable speed difference despite which processor is faster, as Apple and Wintel processors are still close in performance.
The real question is, are you fed up with your Wintel PC because of the processor speed, or because of all the shortcomings inherent in Windows operating systems?
Mac OS X is what Linux strives to be. Unix + good GUI and compatibility with apps and peripherals = Mac OS X. End of story there. Linux is great, but its like building cars for a hobby if you want to use it for PCs. You have to keep updating and modifying a system that at its base is completely open source and officially not supported or backed up by anybody.
Mac OS X is developed and kept running smoothly by the world's second largest personal software company. It already has everything you need, and if you have ever set up and used a Linux variant, you'll realize that in the end you are spending just as much time messing with getting your system to work as you were with Windows (the main difference being that you get somewhere with Linux!). With Mac OS X, you don't really need to tune up your system, which saves you much hassle and time - something most Windows users hate about Windows whether they admit it or not.

In reply to:

---

First let's get a couple things out of the way. If you want the laptop with the most screen resolution, or the longest battery life, don't look for a Mac, unfortunately

---

Mac laptops do not have the highest screen resolutions, but I find their battery life respectable at 3-4 hours between charges. For the money, you are better off getting a PB in the long run IMO as they currently have the ability to go farther into the future before becoming obsolete(ish). Plus, they offer greater interoperability with external monitors, etc.

[Iccy]

To simplify:
Macs do NOT have the fastest CPUs, longest lasting batteries, biggest pixel count, largest software library, largest number of compatible hardware, largest user base, greatest number of computer viri, greatest number of systems updates.
Those are the things you will lose when you move to the Macintosh platform.
Macs DO have the most flexible platform, most reliable user interface, most intuitive user interface. It basically does what you ask it to do. It does not interupt you while you are working.

[Praxis]

In reply to:

---

To simplify:
Macs do NOT have the fastest CPUs, longest lasting batteries, biggest pixel count, largest software library, largest number of compatible hardware, largest user base, greatest number of computer viri, greatest number of systems updates.
Those are the things you will lose when you move to the Macintosh platform.
Macs DO have the most flexible platform, most reliable user interface, most intuitive user interface. It basically does what you ask it to do. It does not interupt you while you are working.

---

I have to disagree with this.
Mac CPU's are more balanced than x86 CPU's.
For example, you want battery life on a PC laptop, you have to either fork over extra money for a slower Centrino or an uber expensive Pentium 4-M. The desktop processors take up too much battery power.
You want speed in your laptop, say bye bye battery.
On the other hand, you get a PowerBook 1 GHz, you have a computer that can give a 2 ghz P4 a run for its money, and yet still gets 5 hours of battery life, something it takes a centrino or dual battery configuration to do in the PC world.
So, PC users have to pick between Battery or Speed, Mac users get a balance.
Additionally, Macs do a lot more calculations per second than PC's. They lose by a little with games, but when it comes to things having to do with raw calculations (video editting, photoshop, music creation, etc) Macs BURN the competition into the ground. When we get to games, the G4's and 5's lose to PC's only by about 15% in way of Frames Per Second.
Macs are faster in some ways, slower than others.
Plus we get an OS that is as stable as Linux, easier to use than Windows, are just plain incredibly cool.
I'll take the Mac, thank you very much.

[Praxis]

In reply to:

---

Thanks, I really appreciate the information. The responses really cleared the confusion. I have a lot to read and learn at this point. I can't believe I was so clueless for so long. The military is beginning to use Linux more and more, so I have had a little taste of that. I use a Solaris box at work for high-end graphic work: read satellite interpretation. I'm constantly forgetting commands and I find it terribly time consuming. My typing skills are better known as a three-finger attack. So a good GUI with UNIX reliability is just what the doctor ordered. The search for a powerbook begins today.

---

You know, theres a pretty neat feature i've found with Macs and UNIX.
Have you ever gotten annoyed having to type up a long string of characters to get to a file? for example, cd /Users/iBook/Documents/MyFolder/Homework/Math/Semester2/ ?
On a Mac, you can drag the icon of a document into terminal and it'll automatically stick the path into terminal for you, without you having to press a key.