what is the difference between windows and mac???
By alcazar
@alcazar (761)
India
4 responses
@jesbellaine (4139)
• Philippines
10 Apr 08
When you are using WINDOWS based platform, you can use almost all software in working with graphics. You can install an application like pinnacle, corel, photoshop and visual studio for editing some movie clips since they are designed for windows.
As for MAC computers, the software or application that you can use are very limited. It is somewhat hard to find a software that would work in MAC computers, beter yet, call MAC if they do have a software that you can use for your graphic design works.
@chaunce54 (55)
• United States
10 Apr 08
Macs use a different type of processor and different chipsets in their design. The operating system of Macs is base on the Unix operating system as well, making them less prone to virus's. PC's and Macs are becoming more and more alike in the hardware sense, and some Mac's can even run a windows operating system on them.
@santuccie (3384)
• United States
10 Apr 08
Actually, Macs don't use RISC processors anymore; they use Intel. Macs and Linux boxes are less prone to viruses for two reasons: 1) Low privileges by default 2) Obscurity
Vista changes all of this. It also comes with reduced privileges, as well as other measures such as UAC (some users will turn this off, but they shouldn't). In addition, there is plenty of third-party software now that can block drive-by downloads, and NTFS itself has always enabled locking of the kernel (already done in Vista).
As long as the user knows what their options are, malware is not an issue anymore: http://invincible-windows.blogspot.com/
@chaunce54 (55)
• United States
10 Apr 08
Yes, that's true. Macs are now running on intel processors. Vista is definately more secure, but that security is what is causing alot of the compatibility issues and lag in the system. It's a tradeoff between security and a smoother operating system.
1 person likes this
@santuccie (3384)
• United States
10 Apr 08
True that. No argument with you there. Fortunately a lot of software has been updated, in order to work with a locked core. Macs are the same way, but no one realizes this because there is no transition in this case; it's always been that way. The transition problem Macs are experiencing right now is the transition from PowerPC to Intel Mac. That's why a lot of apps run on Rosetta, which produces lag of its own.
@santuccie (3384)
• United States
10 Apr 08
Actually, it was my understanding that Intel-based PCs were starting to outperform PowerPCs even before Apple switched to Intel. Now that they have switched over, both Windows and OS-X are using essentially the same hardware. Vista is slower than OS-X if you leave it the way it comes, but XP is faster right out of the box. Any way you slice it, most modern machines are quite fast enough to handle graphics.
Both platforms have software for graphics manipulation, as well as still pictures, video, audio, MIDI, etc. One big difference between Macs and PCs is that Apple will not ship anything with bottom-of-the-line graphics processors or other hardware, but PCs are easier to upgrade. And even when you do so, or purchace a Premium-ready laptop PC with a good graphics chip, you'll still wind up paying less than you do for a Mac with comparable features (unless of course you buy Alienware or some other high-end gaming rig).
All these new Apple commercials are talking about how the Mac can do anything Windows can do. Unfortunately, what they don't mention is that it takes more resources to run emulators like Rosetta, or dual operating systems side-by-side, as with Parallels (which I hear is also quite buggy). Unless Windows has a serious problem, I see little sense in having to run extra software just to make standard applications work; I'd just as soon stick to the standard.
