h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/A614530

I am submitting this for Peer Review because I've searched for this topic on the Guide, and the best it's come up with is "I personally think PCs out-do macs any day it saddens me Douglas Adams uses a mac". Also, there's a lot of prejudice, bigotry and mis-information around on this (big) topic, and I think a nice balanced article by someone familiar with the use of both is just what the Guide needs.

I have a couple of suggestions that could improve this.

cut out the bit on transport and give it it's own review. It doesn't really add anything to this one, and could form the basis for quite a good review.

lose the "aren't mac's wonderfull" tone. it seriously detracts from something that could be quite good.

You seem to be ignoring the fact that today, an awful lot of hardware and software are common to both platforms.

USB keyboards, mice, scanners, harddrives, printers, cd writers, dvd drives, are all common components. also a lot of the chips used for graphics and sound are also common.

When you take the latest mac operating system (os x), and compare it with a pc running linux, even the core operating systems are similar, as they are both unix.

what you have got is fairly good, but as I say, it comes from the "macs are good, ms windows sucks" camp, which is a fairly restricted viewpoint.

I will be following this review with interest.

keep up the good work.

As someone who keeps one of each at home, let me second xyroth's comments. The more well-balanced you are, the more people will take you seriously.


Mikey

I have an iMAc, a PC and a Toshiba laptop which runs Office 2000 very slowly. Each of them has plus points. When I move, it takes me 2 mins to get the iMac up and running, instead of 20 mins with the PC.

My school use PC's as does most of the education world, and this is a shame as the wireless airporting could solve a lot of problems for head teachers who are just getting into computer suites.

This is a good, balanced article, but the transport section is unnecessary, although it is very well written.

See 'right mouse click', below the actual article.

Grime

Editorial Note: This conversation has been moved from 'Peer Review' to 'Mac or PC- which is better?'.

This thread has been moved out of the Peer Review Forum because your entry has now been recommended for the Edited Guide.

You can find out what will happen to your entry here: http://www.h2g2.com/SubEditors-Process

Congratulations!

let me put in a personal vote for the person who recomended this to be stripped of his scouthood.

If they had bothered to read this thread, they would have seen that the general tone is that it needs lots more work, although the author has not obviously changed anything in 4 weeks. To me this would make it more suitable for the update center, or the sin bin than for the edited guide.

recommending obviously unfinished entries seriously de-values all of the other entries that have been recommended. Please mr scout read this and buck your ideas up.

Pleae mr editor bounce this straight back to peer review. it isn't ready yet by a long shot.

Hi all,

I've just picked up this entry to edit.

In response to xyroth, I do think that this entry can be made suitible for the Edited Guide, and anyhow the italics have approved it so it's got the official thumbs up.

I was a bit disappointed for there not to be a lot of discussion in the Peer Review thread on a topic which I imagined would have caused a lot of people to post opinions and contributions. So I will leave this entry for a couple of weeks to let people add ideas which can be incorporated.

So if you are just joining this thread, please post any contributions!

Frankie

There are a lot of things needed to make this entry ready for the guide, despite it being recommended and OK'd by the powers that be.

this includes a lot of inacuracies that need correcting, which and bad attitudes that need removing, so I had better comment in detail about the entry, and hope the author doesn't take it too hard. The scout should have done this prior to recommending it!!!

first, it starts with awhole bunch of stuff about transport, which can be totally removed (possibly to another entry) without effecting the rest of the entry at all, so it should be.

........


This article begins with a metaphorical little pseudo-parable. In order to skip this and proceed to the main, meaningful, and rather tedious bulk of the article, please scroll down to "Mac or PC- Which Is Better?"

"WHERE DO YOU WANT TO GO TODAY?"

Consider transport in the affluent Western world (notably Britain). Most people make do with two main methods of everyday transport- the privately owned motor car, and one form or another of public transport. Consider also the main advantages and disadvantages of each.

The Motor Car

The Motor Car will, of course, offer to take you wherever you want to go today. It is, therefore, in theory more convenient. However, when everyone else also wants to go where you want to go today, you are more likely to find yourself tearing your hair out in frustration. Equally, although you are free to go wherever you like, you will find you almost invariably have to get there yourself. We all know that the motor car is bad for us, but while everyone else uses it, and it's more convenient, it's a fair comment that you may simply be making life difficult for yourself if you abstain.
If your motor car breaks down, you can pretty much always find parts- unless of course it's too old a model, in which case you're screwed. However, you'll have to find the right kind of parts, and there's always a chance that they'll be dodgy. The workings of a motor car are, of course, your business, and so if you like, you can always make a few modifications to the workings to improve performance.
As many of us will say, we know that the privately owned motor car is bad for us, and we'd gladly give it up and make the world a better place– if only everyone else would as well. But as that's clearly not going to happen (thanks to the capitalists,)- I think I'll keep the car.

Public Transport

Public Transport is wonderful in theory, but of course there's always a practical problem or three. First of all, if you want to use Public Transport, more likely than not you'll have to travel quite a distance until you can actually get started. Once you have found someone or somewhere that can help you, in theory, the system is elegant and simple- however, things never work out like that in real life, do they? The main complaint could be that no matter how elegant and simple the system may be, if the company in charge is incompetent, you'll end up pretty much stuffed. Equally, there's always the chance that the company in charge will charge you over the odds, firstly because not enough people use Public Transport to make it easily profitable, and secondly, because they know that if you don't like it, you've got no-where else to go. Except possibly to a private motorcar... which is, perhaps, where they're going wrong.
If you break down on public transport, although the problem may be quite simple to solve, you may well find that it's a long time before someone turns up who can actually help you. The ease of use of Public Transport is all very well, but it makes it much harder to go hands on and "tinker" in order to get better performance.
Finally, Public Transport would be fine for everyone, if only life wasn't made so hard by all the inconsiderate people using their privately owned motor cars.

Which Is Better?

The answer is, of course, neither. Both have their advantages, and for either to be significantly BETTER, significant changes will have to take place. For now, the only answer is- whichever is better for YOU.

IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER- Coincidences are strange and dangerous things, but it is VERY important not to attatch too much significance to them.

In next week's episode- travelling by Linuxycle.


............

having got this far, you get on to the meat of the entry, which actually has some tolerable stuff in it.

............

Mac OR PC- WHICH IS BETTER? From a User's Viewpoint

If you ask some passing computer geek, there is a 95% chance that you will get a firm answer. There is also a 94% chance that that answer will be wrong. This is partially because you could be talking about hardware, software, software availability, marketing, technical support, or see-through cases, and those you ask will tend to interpret your question to mean whichever they personally consider the most important. The issue is one of great pride to many in the computing community, and those who hold the strongest beliefs are often the least well-informed. Contrary to popular belief, only a very few Mac users both have beards and smell of wee.

Most people have preconceptions, many of which are based in fact, and most of which are exaggerated. It is also true that most people know more about PCs than Apple Macs.

.............

having got this far, it then veers into wild inacuracy, bias and out of date information, dealing only with the situation on microsoft operating systems, and then only applying to win3.1 and win95.
Even then it gives microsoft too much credit. saying things like "programs usually work" (they don't), "will get you roughly the results you want" (but only if you think like the author of the program), "are incompatable with each other" (deliberate policy by microsoft, keep the small players out of the market), "is easy to learn" (despite professionals needing lots of training to be able to do anything advanced with word-processors, etc).
The thing in this section that are right ignore the reasons for it, like "a small number of big companies produce the main software" (because the smaller ones can't keep up with microsofts next generation of deliberate incompatabilities with last years file format).

.............

SOFTWARE

The IBM compatible PC

There is literally a whole world of software, and you can get what you want. There is a surfeit of games, which are available anywhere, and can be obtained fairly cheaply. Other software will usually come from main brands- Microsoft, Adobe, Macromedia etc. for 'work-related' software, and smaller groups for more specialist software, for example graphics or animation. These programs almost invariably work, and will almost invariably be incompatible with each other. Microsoft produces much of the software used in the world, and as PCs are not produced and sold by a single company, they are the closest the IBM PC platform comes to standardisation. Standardisation of course carries advantages and disadvantages. Microsoft software tends to be utilitarian- it usually works, will get you roughly the results you want, is compatible with most of the rest of the world, and is reasonably easy to learn the basics of, but it's not much fun to use. Microsoft's concession to the user appears to take the form of a small animated paperclipMicrosoft has seen the error of its ways and recently removed this. that won't go away and let you get on with your work.

..............

I can't comment much on the details of thmac related section below, except to say that again, it is mostly out of date. The situation changed radically about six months ago when apple announced the unix-based "OS X".

...............

The Mac
Even those fairly computer-literate in PC terms sometimes fail to understand the basics of the Mac– it is a different operating system, you cannot put in a PC program and expect it to run just the same- it won't. However, the Mac DOES use almost all the same information formats as the PC, as otherwise the internet, for example, would be unworkable.
It is "common knowledge" that there is no software available for the Mac platform, and like most common knowledge, it is wrong. There is certainly less software available for the Mac than IBM PC, but for everything other than games there is plenty. The major software producers, Macromedia, Netscape and even Microsoft produce Mac versions of their software, the only downside to which is that support for it is harder to find than for the PC versions. Games producers however tend to leave the Mac behind, as it is a far smaller market. There are enough games for anyone on the Mac, but the one you actually WANT will often be unavailable. Many large name PC games such as Deus Ex, Driver and Alpha Centauri do come out on the Mac, but they are often late, rather overpriced, and in some cases are poor ports in which case they run worse than on the PC. The best way to find out is to read magazine and internet reveiws for the Mac platforms. The Mac games industry took a severe blow recently when Bungie, the Mac's leading games designers, and one of the world's best on any platform, was bought out by Microsoft, and set to make their project "Halo," work on the XBox instead of Mac.

..............

This next section, while true about 2 years ago, is now much less true. apple now use standard pc components for some of their hardware, and pc's are using a lot of USB related expansions, meaning that a lot of the hardware is now common. Also this entire section is written from the viewpoint that "continuously improving hardware" is basically a bad thing.

..............

HARDWARE

The IBM compatible PC
Most PCs bought for family use come complete with peripherals, installed operating system and software, and are ready to be assembled and turned on once out of the box. As a rule, PCs are not designed, but have evolved from older models, which in turn evolved from the previous models, and so forth. It is for this reason that placed next to any Apple Mac, it is clear which is better designed. They are also traditionally ugly, although attempts have been made to make them more attractive by colouring them black or adding curvy bits to the front. IBM PCs use fans to cool their internal parts, which makes them noisy.
The culture of design in the IBM PC market is that power always comes first- you will always find adverts ranging from "BLAZING FAST NEW 1GHz Processors!" to "But Why Do I Need A 30MHz Processor?" depending on the age of the advert. IBM PCs can be upgraded with varying degrees of ease or difficulty, depending on what you want to upgrade, and the age of the machine, but there is always somewhere you can get upgrades, as long as you're prepared to look. IBM PCs are functional and utilitarian, and there are plenty of possibilities for "tinkering."

................

This entire next section is written from the viewpoint that producing hardware that is frozen from release date to release date is a good thing, and aren't macs wonderfull. it almost completely ignores the fact that with the unchanging price structure, you are progressively getting less for your money every week you delay buying the machine, and by about six months after the initial release, the hardware is essentially obsolete anyway.

................

The Mac
Mac users and Apple take great pride in the designs of their machines, and with good reason. All IBM PCs are fundamentally the same- a desktop tower with drives on the front, fan and ports at the back, and screws where you can take off the case and strip the machine down. Apple computers, on the other hand, vary greatly, and this reflects excellent design. The iMac is single computer which contains screen, speakers, computer, drives, microphone and ports into one fan-less self-ventilating container. The Firewire and USB ports where the keyboard, mouse and other input/output devices go are at the side for easy access. The design is simple, graceful and attractive, but has its faults, for example, there are no non-software volume controls for the speakers, and upgrading an iMac is very difficult. Mac users should keep a straightened out paper-clip near the computer at all times, as some Macs are too trendy to have eject buttons on the drives, so if your computer crashes, the only way to get the disks out is pressing the emergency release with- you guessed it- a paperclip.The iMac also lacks an internal 3.5" floppy drive to save space, and as floppy drives are now considered virtually obsolete. The G3 and G4 towers are your basic desktop computers, which most closely resemble the IBM PC. One crucial difference is that the entire side of the tower opens out, making maintenance and upgrade extremely easy. The new "Cube" contains an entire computer (bar screen and peripherals,) including toaster-like CD/DVD ROM or CDR drives in the top into an 8-inch cube.
Mac computers come with slower processors than IBM PCs of the same date, but their general system architecture makes up for some of the difference, meaning a 500MHz Mac works significantly faster than a 500MHz PC. Macs are sold as they are, so you are unable to "pick and mix" as you could with PCs. To compensate for this, Apple always releases a range of computers, from entry level to special edition. The best advice is probably always to go for the best you can afford- as it will soon be out of date.
Because Macs are actually built by the one company, the "main" software is more standardised than on PCs, as Apple makes their own software for the machines, eg. iTunes, which replaces Microsoft Media Player. Macs are very much geared towards media, for example, DV iMacs come fully set up with ports and software to transfer, watch and edit digital video. Macs are also very powerful graphically, and are usually favoured by those in publishing or design industries.

.............

This next section basically says that windows pc's are easy to use because everyone uses them at school or work, and spends the rest of the time pointing out that the windows operating system is slow, buggy, counter-intuitive, badly thought out, and generally a real pain to use if you try and do anything that the original designer didn't want to do. all valid, but could be said a lot better than this.

.............

EASE OF USE

The IBM compatible PC
Many find the IBM PC easier to use, for the simple reason that they use them at school, or at work, and know much of how the OS already works. However, the flaws in Microsoft software quickly show to a complete newcomer- when asked "How do you turn it off?" the answer is "Press START." The OS itself is rather 'pedestrian,' lacking several of the nice touches that make the Mac more pleasant to use, however, it gains by the use of a second mouse button- a feature the Mac has never embraced.
PCs tend to exhibit features which work well until pushed too far- for example, the taskbar is fine when you're running 4 or 5 programs, but once you start more, the bar becomes a cumbersome mess.
When things go wrong, PCs are seriously out of date, and tend to confront you with screens of horrific error messages such as "Fatal Exception at $0040:AAAA." If it SERIOUSLY breaks down, there is little you can do but call in an expert.
Essentially, the PC is an unfriendlier location to get used to using a computer, but amateurs and experts may prefer the "hands on" freedom to "tinker" that you don't get with the Mac OS.

...............

This next bit basically say that you work the mac way, or you don't work, and that this is an advantage. It also says that by the time programs actually get ported to the mac, they have proper help files, but why buy software that hasn't got those files anyway?

...............

The Mac
Macs are user-friendly. In fact, to a seasoned PC user, they can at times be more like "User-patronising-" in other words, making such an effort to be user-friendly, they refuse to let you do anything they think you shouldn't know how to or want to do. It tries to make setting up the Internet easier than is actually feasible. However, the Mac does come with an excellent central Help program which covers many aspects of both software and hardware, and to which certain Apple software adds their own help files when you install them.

..............

next, it says that the mac supports hardware properly, but due to the restricted nature of this hardware, that is not difficult.

..............

The Mac OS sports such features as "Apple System Profiler" which can, within seconds, give you a list informing you of the existence and status of every piece of hardware and software connected to or stored on the machine.

.............

the next bit says that it supports configuration properly, but again, this is mostly due to the limitednature of the hardware.

.............

At all times in the Mac OS, there is a little unobtrusive tag down the bottom of the screen. This unfolds to a control strip where you can, in seconds, and at any time, change the colour, resolution, printing, sound, quicktime, connection, speech-recognition, power saving and file-sharing settings, or not if you prefer. The taskbar is replaced by the "Finder Menu"- a menu permanently in the top-right corner of the screen which you can at any time unfold and open, close or hide/make visible any programs currently running or open. Instead of the start menu, program links (aliases) are stored under "applications." Programs are standardised- so use the slightly more intuitive option-Q instead of alt-F4.

..............

The next bit says that it comes with what is basically a rescue cd. fine, but you can make one for the pc easily, and all it basically does is restore the software and hardware to it's initial configuration, probably loosing any customisation in the process.
And it claims this is a good thing.

..............

One excellent feature is that a new Mac comes with a "system restore" and "software restore" CD. Should your computer pack up, you can simply start up the computer with the CD in the drive, and it will run from that. You can then, if you wish, restore your computer to how you got it, or simply replace all the software, without losing any of your files. This is a simple process, and is very reassuring.

..............

Now we geta section saying "I am not going to talk about operating systems, as it has already been covered in earlier sections. If so, then why have a seperate section for it?
Anyway, due to the total failure to cover linux, open bsd, and OS X, BeOS, etc, most of which will have some effect on both markets in the next few years, with linux and open bsd + OS X having ongoing and radical effects on both markets, the os issue has not been covered

..............

Operating System

Much of the operating system issue has been covered above, and virtually everyone who reads this will be familiar with Windows. Crucially, most of the world uses Microsoft Windows, so changing to Mac OS can take a few days/weeks/months to get used to, despite the fact that they are very similar systems.

................

pc's still run MS DOS, true, but only under linux. microsoft have been making dos harder to use ever since long file names in win95, and win XP doesn't allow dos at all.

................

IBM PCs all still run on MSDOS, although nowadays all software runs through MS Windows, and you can do whatever you like without ever having to use DOS. Although this tiered system is unwieldy, it does give the expert easy flexibility than the Mac OS lacks. (See User-Patronising, above)

Sadly, the lastest versions of Windows (Windows ME) have removed the ability to simply 'drop' into DOS from the start menu, infuriatingly locking you into their GUIGraphical User Interface,, and meaning you now have to create your own boot disks simply to get back into DOS. This achieves littleany corrections welcome except reducing the flexibility of the system which sometimes gives it an edge over the Mac.

..............

next he says "there is a lot to be said about differences in operating systems", but refuses to say it, with a brief aside that the mac is again superior about a piccy detail.

..............

There is quite a lot to be said about the differences in the OSs, but frankly, these are tedious fiddly little things. However, the iMac DOES come with voice synthesis and voice recognition as standard, and the Mac OS system for special characters such as accentsé for example, or the euro symbol '€' which has replaced it on Windows PCs is superior.

.............

the next section just says that macs aren't compatable with pc's, but stick with other mac users and you are ok. Despite being titled about compatability, it only deals with mac to pc compatability, ignoring mac to linux, win9x to linux, linux to mac and win9x to mac.

.............

Compatibility

Compatibility is always a problem with any computer. However, it is also one of the main reasons that more people don't use Macs- most of the world uses PCs, and producing professional-looking Appleworks documents is all very well, if you can't E-mail them to your colleagues or edit them on a PC. There are other, less severe difficulties, for example, the Mac version of Internet Explorer gives a slightly different look to the PC version, so websites designed to look correct on a PC can look shoddy or badly made. These problems are considerably rarer. Macs are just as "compatible" within their own sphere of software and peripherals, but don't interface with PCs.

...........

now a complaint that you and your friends can't pirate each others software, combined with a simple statement that if you are using multiple types of machine, your software has to support this.

...........


Far more of an issue is that software being shared around, or even illegally copied, that works on a PC would stand no chance of working on a Mac. If you want to have the same software as your friends or colleagues, and they all use PCs, it is possible, but you would have to research whether it is available on both platforms.

FINALLY-

............

this next bit basically contradicts his assertions all through the article that mac's are better.

............

Suitability-

In the end, neither system is better, although most people would disagree with this. It is of course an academic question for everyone other than those about to commit themselves to a platform. For those people, the following information may prove useful:

............

says "gamers choose pc's". as the fastest evolving platform, you would expect that.

............

People buying home family PCs for games and work usually go for PCs, as they are well supported and versatile.

............

says "anyone doing generic office stuff should choose mac's". this stuff is equally well supported on mac's, win9x and linux, but mac's loose out for portability (as he says earlier), and most linux stuff is deliberately cross-platform anyway. (an advantage over win9x, which is basically pro-microsoft).

............

People buying family / work PCs for whom games are not an overruling factor would be well advised to consider an iMac or other Apple Mac, as they are easy to use and set up, well designed, and have plenty of good software. Be warned- salesmen in PC retail outlets have been known to be incredibly poorly informed when it comes to Apple Macs.

............

says "graphics and design should use mac's". although mac's were superior to pc hardware and software two years ago, for most graphics work, the hardware is now either the same, or inferior. A lot of the software is being proted from mac to unix, preparatory for exploiting OS X, and this makes it linux friendly as well. also linux has loads of programmers actively working on improving the graphics systems, to the extent that the movie industry is now starting to use generic linux boxes with generic linux programs for things like SHRECK and other animated features.
the mac is now no longer the default choice for graphics.

............

Professionals in the publishing, 3D / 2D graphics and design industries often favour powerful Macs such as the G4 tower, as there is a great deal of excellent software, the machines themselves are powerful, and work well with peripherals such as USB graphics tablets.

.............

"businesses and schools tend to use pc networks". they sure do, but the servers all tend to be linux. (even for mac networks). This means that both mac's and win9x/nt have already lost the server wars, with linux spreading to other areas from this stable market.

.............

Businesses and many places of learning tend to use PC networks, as most people can use Windows and Microsoft software, and there is a great deal of expertise and support which is lacking in the Apple market.

.............

This next bit basically says that mac's look better. true, but mostly irrelevant to the question of which is the better system.

.............

iMacs are used a great deal in the TV and advertising industry where computers have to be attractive as well as functional.

Internet Cafes and places of learning also favour the attractive design of Macs and their easy operating system. Macs also come with an easy to use built in "display mode" system, where access can be banned to all but a few features, ideal for displays, or for children who like to see what they can delete...

.............

Finally, an apocraphal story, which has been doing the round of all the operating systems for years. I personally have heard that the machines uncovered were mac's. also that microsoft was coming and they were pc's running Beos, linux, qnx, and a number of other operating systems. It doesn't really add anything t the debate anyway, only saying that are an bunch of uptight twits.

.............

And finally, Harvard university in the USA is sponsored by Intel, the makers of IBM PC processors. However, they use a lot of Macs on their campus, so were told by Intel to cover them up on an open day. However, visitors to the university uncovered the machines, and got stuck in...Much of the guide is apocryphal, or at least wildly inaccurate.

..............

I can't really dispute the links, but as they are mostly hate sites, plus "I love apple", rather than general information sites, again they don't really help the article in any way but to raw futher criticism.

..............

Links

For further biased, partisan and entirely partial advice, you are advised to visit

[URLs removed by moderator]


...........

well, I don't like doing that to an author, but if the towers really think that that level of stuff is ready for the guide, they should consider what will happen if they don't set minimum standards for the edited guide.

First let me say that yes, I will be removing the transport stuff. Secondly, I don't think it's very constructive to post the whole entry with comments, it's difficult to read for one thing.

I understand that this may well be quite a controversial piece, as the nature of mac and pcs mean that you usually love one and hate the other. There's always going to be some kind of bias, which is why I opened up the discussion for people to post their own ideas and contributions.

I'd rather that people post what they think could be added to the entry rather than what should be taken away, though I'd like to know of any major technical innacuracies.

Please don't take this as a flame xyroth, I appreaciate your help and will be reading all your comments I'd just like to steer this in a more positive direction.

So what do people generally think of the Mac vs. PC debate?

Frankie

I won't take it as a flame, and please don't take it as undue criticism.

If it had stayed in normal peer review, rather than being accepted, but on hold, then I would have detailed the points as they came up.

However, once the editors popped along, and said that they thought that this was already in a form suitable for the guide, it is very hard not to point out exactly why it isn't ready.

Currently, you are in limbo, you can make any changes you like, but there is no guarentee that they will actually be taken into account, as having already been accepted, they can freeze the entry at any moment, with no advanced warning. The main point of the point by point criticism was to try and get the editors to reject it from being recommended, and put it back into peer review.

Having said that, I think that you have the basis for a good entry here. however, it does suffer from rose coloured glasses about the mac, and blinkers about recent developments. Hopefully I have covered those in the previous post so that I don't have to cover them again.

I do think that considering the somewhat controversial nature of the subject matter, you must take into account OS X for the mac, the increase in common hardware, and linux for the pc, otherwise, you are writing from a position that is already out of date.

Anyway, I look forward to seeing what you come up with after you have listened to the criticism (as you say you haven't had time yet), and hope that the editors will bounce this back into normal peer review, as it is not yet ready.

Keep working, as what you have got so far isn't bad, it just isn't ready yet, and I didn't want the editors to get away with forcing something into needing an update before it was even completed.

but wot about amiga's ?

what about amiga's?

well, as they are currently not being made, they don't come into the debate.

Erm, little misunderstanding here. I didn't write the entry, I'm editing it. And no I can't reject it.

I've got to agree that it does need re-formatting before it can by in the editted guide....but that's what us SubEds are for after all! I've been given articles in much worse conditions than this and they've all made it through eventually.

On the subject of the PC v Mac debate, it's been some six years since I used a Mac. They were the first modern computers I used and I loved them. When we bought a PC at home, I didn't really want to make the transition to Windows 95. However, I grew to like it and realise that the Mac OS I had experienced (which was basically the same as Windows 3.1) didn't have anything on Windows.
However, I haven't seen a modern Mac OS so I don't know what it's like. I will however say that Apple have managed to make their computers look very spiffing, setting the translucent casing trend that has flowed over to PCs and made them all generally more attractive.
That's my artistic view points anyway - you may think they're ugly. I do also understand that Macs are the choice of Graphic Designers, web designers and such. It's the style thing.
Anywho...that's my two cents...I look forward to reading the finished article.

the problem with this article is not the style comparison between the mac and the pc, which the mac wins hands down.

The problem is that it makes detailed technical comparisons that are basically between win3.1 pc's and very old macs. thus it is already out of date in it's current form.

hence the detailed critisism. hopefully this will provide enough info to take the basic core article, pull it to pieces until it is unrecognisable, and put it back together with acurate facts and proper comparisons.

Hi folks,

Frankie, if you can take xyroth's comments into consideration for the Entry, that would be excellent. I know it seems like a lot of work, but there are some good points in there...

I'll be looking at the entry myself in-house when Frankie returns it, so I'll be helping him to set any biases straight. I have used Macs and PCs for many, many years, and the conclusion that I will be looking for is that neither is better overall - they are each good and bad at several things, but the *most important factor* is actually what the user is used to, and how they're used to working. It's all a matter of preference, and, as Douglas said, there's no point at all in getting evangelical about it.

The Entry was submitted by one person, and the content is largely good (or at least saveable), which is why we accepted it. We appreciated that there would be some content and style changes, which Frankie and I can take care of. We could have had an Entry written by 50 people, but we don't - it's written by one. If anyone wants to write an update (or a deeper treatment) after it's gone through the editorial process, they're most welcome, but in the meantime we'll incorporate as much as we reasonably can.

I understand your worries xyroth, but I will hopefully be able to sort out all the problems and with Chris looking over it I'm sure it will be a fine entry! As sub-eds we always look through the Peer Review threads and take into account the comments that people have posted.

If you want to write some extra information about the PC vs. Mac debate that you think isn't already included in the entry, please post it here within this week and I will be happy to include it in the entry and give you the appropiate credit.

Frankie

Extra info? well, I will try.

This entire subject is to do with "how do I choose a computer". is the eighties, this lead to all sorts of "religios wars", over bothe the hardware, and the software, but a lot of that has now become irrelevant.

It used to be a case of win pc vs mac vs archimedes vs amiga with a few other minority machines thrown in for good measure. While the religious wars have mainly become irrelevant, there is still the valid question of "how to choose a computer" (perhaps a better title thanthe current one).

The first thing you have to do is decide what you want to do. for a lot of things, you can do them on any platform, so that makes little difference. but a few things are platform specific.

First, hardware. There is an accelerating trend to use commodity of the shelf components (COtS for short). This means that all sorts of stuff is common to all platforms. this includes all IDE drives, and all SCSI drives. it is also starting to include lots of USB components including mice, and keyboards, scanners, printers, some drives (zip and jaz in particular) and even tv cards.

then there are a whole lot of PCI cards. these are also common technology, and thus are excluded from the hardware debate (unless you are talking self-build computers, in which case lots of the discussion is invalid anyway).

The boxes are a different matter. everyone that I know of in the industry aggrees that macs look better. wherever you need something to provide standard services (web browsing, office, etc) where the hardware looks good, you go for a mac. this is why you find them as the machine of choice for the customers machine in internet cafe's.

There is a minor problem with computer main boards that contain everything onboard (graphics, sound, network, modem, etc). due to the nature of the industry, these components go from leading edge to osolete in 12-18 months. As mac's tend to use this solution, this makes them more prone to this problem, but a lot of "cheap" pc makers go the same route, so their machine is equally vulnerable to this problem.

Then you get to the software. Undoubtedly, the mac gui is currently the best one around. As it has now been moved over to "OS X", as an averlay on top of an X-windows unix (free bsd I think) system, this makes mac's with OS X the ideal choice for unix graphics workstations, as they can run older mac software, unix software, X-windows programs, and mac specific programs.

You also have MS Windows, in all of it's forms. This has the advantage that it tends to get support for the latest hardware, so if you need bleeding edge technology, this is where to go. this is why it is the machine of choice for gamers.

Also on the pc (among other machines) you have linux. This is a completely open source environment, with (at least) dozens of programming languages available, complete source code for all the software (if you get it yourself) and a generally hacker (someone who likes to get into the heart of the machine and understand how it works in detail, not cracker) mentallity. This makes it the operating system of choice for anyone who is interested in programming, as a development platform (it can now develope software for win pc's, linux, and OS X) and for people who want the possibility of detailed control over the hardware.

Also, linux is the server platform of choice, with software for databases, webservers, mail servers, multi-platform printer servers, support for a massive number of different filing systems, etc.

I think that covers most of it. any questions, post them here and I will try and answer them as best I can.

Oh, and I am certain that as soon as OS X reaches the hobbyist user, there will be massive ports of linux software being made. thus making the mac even more attractive for certain tasks.

linux also works up to mainframe level, (unlike MS windows), and down to the embedded market (where it is the operating system of choice for developing pda/mobile phone convergent technology).

this makes linux even more usefull for anyone wanting to work in internet technology based firms, and as a learning framework for unix systems in general (although OS X might also be usefull in this regard).