Have you ever programmed for android, or iphone for that matter? Android is basically java with apis. Its much more flexible then anything you can do with the iphone, which includes background services. Android is much more user friendly for developers and users. Review of the iphone+android sdks: http://www.infoworld.com/d/developer-wo … iphone-074

I do develop on the iPhone, and I find it much more user-friendly than Android. Java is not a core system language, and even though it is good to take less digital space than an application like C++, it still would not run as fast, and C++ is a more international computing language. The only use I've seen for Java is for integration in a web browser or other current running application. Using VM technology is much slower... It's like comparing Linux to Windows Server... The question is, have you ever programmed for both the android and iPhone? I am guessing you haven't since you don't like anything from Apple.

Ohh yes... Windows 95, 98, and ME were really different from each other... Same with Vista and Windows 7... Windows 7 should have been a service pack too. Nay, it should have been Vista...

I would like to point out that Apple releases constant software updates that are like service packs. Though since they come out quickly, bugs are killed before many people notice them.

Like I've said before, many people need a higher tech machine. It's just like dial-up vs. cable/fiber optics. Some people can get by on using those computers, and others need a more powerful machine.

The point is getting a machine that is integrated with the software. Unlike Dell, HP, Gateway, and other PC manufacturers, Apple doesn't need to adapt their machines to fit their software. And if they do, then they can adapt it quickly and efficiently.

So you are saying that Macbooks look too... Girly? I think you may need to come up with a better argument than that. And also about the clutter, OSX comes with 2 great things called Spaces and Exposé.

Now when did I say 'all' executables? I believe I said 'many'.

It's true, you can port any cross-platform language to Windows.

That was back when it was 10.6 vs Vista, and many sources proved it was true.

I've never seen any source code that couldn't be ported to Windows from a Mac. The core APIs aren't all that different, you just need to change some functions and variables. And everything that I make on a Mac, I can port to Windows.

I would appreciate it if you did not attempt to insult me personally. There are many things that you stated that were complete fabrications about OSX, so try and keep the conversations mature.

I believe it is my turn to attack, so I would like change to customer service and environment.

I have only once needed to take my MacBook Pro to the Apple store (one of my keyboard buttons fell out and I needed to get it back in) and I was in and out of there in half the time they told me. They said they would be done in 15 minutes, but they alerted me in a little over 5 minutes that they were done.

Infact, Apple customer service is so excellent, that Microsoft is copying Apple and trying to bribe the employees to help at their new 'MS Stores'. Currently, the majority of MS's costumer care currently reside in India.

Now on to the subject of environment...

Apple is the most environmentally friendly computer manufacturer in the world. Ahead of all the other big leaguers. All toxins and dangerous materials have been removed, and they currently are the most energy efficient computers.

They even left the Chamber of Commerce for what they believed in... That took guts to stand up against those millions of companies and call them out like that.

I like the environment, and I like technology that works. That is why I choose Apple.

I also like polar bears... That has nothing to do with the debate but I just wanted to point that out. Save the polar bears!

That would mean that the last word would take the cake. I do not see that happening.

I would also like to point out that 68% of all people who try a Mac, point out they liked it better then Windows. And 11% of the others say they won't switch because they can't afford it.

Where are you getting your statistics from?

Have you ever programmed for android, or iphone for that matter? Android is basically java with apis. Its much more flexible then anything you can do with the iphone, which includes background services. Android is much more user friendly for developers and users. Review of the iphone+android sdks: http://www.infoworld.com/d/developer-wo … iphone-074

Windows 7 is expensive, so is every other windows version when it was launched because of how different the the oses are. A new osx version seems more like a service pack. Students can get win7 for $30 if they wanted.

Many people in my family use cheap $500 notebooks for office work and the such, they use them because they work. Not because they need to spend more than a grand on a laptop that can do the same thing that they need done.

The argument is always, "oh hey I can run windows apps on my mac", well guess what? I can run windows apps on my windows laptop. I don't see the advantage to buying an apple laptop if I can do everything with what I have.

Apple macbooks look too effeminate to me, and I don't like the dock type thing. Looks like too much clutter.

Lets take a look at so called better informed Neotyguy:

-Makes claims that all executables can be decompiled back into source code.

LOL @ ^ different apis ftw LOL

Ive always hated the way the apple laptops looked, and I hate the os, so I don't understand how anyone expects me to buy one. What am I going to do, buy one then buy another copy of windows 7 so I can run windows on it? Thats smart, isn't it, pay a lot for hardware then pay even more to get the OS you want when you can just buy a product from MSI/dell/gateway/etc etc etc and get the OS preinstalled.

Exactly why I use CrossOver, Windows is too expensive.

That may be 'near' it, but still not better in forms of specs. The screen is smaller by almost half a foot, it has slower RAM, and sound is lower quality. That, plus it is $1,252 without the temporary discount.

While I admit most people buy lower priced computers more often, those of us who actually want a good quality computer that actually has power in it spend more then $1000. I am using an iMac from 4 years ago that has the same power as the average $600 dell desktop.

Android is NOT where 'it's at'. I can speak from experience that Android takes much longer to develop for, and there is not nearly as many APIs that give flexibility.

Well just to let you know, iLife comes free with every new Mac, and the only way you would need to pay for it is if you built your own Hackintosh and want iLife. In which case, you would also need the Box Set, which comes with OSX, iLife, and iWork for less then Windows.

Choice

I would also like to point out that 68% of all people who try a Mac, point out they liked it better then Windows. And 11% of the others say they won't switch because they can't afford it.

o_O

I've never met anyone who said they don't like how the Mac looks... Even MS fanboys that I've debated with before...

As for Macs vs. PCs, I'll have to agree with Swaffy, PCs ftw.

Am I one of the emo kids Swaffy? I hope not

Personally, I would prefer the Windows XP 7. Vista is a bit geared towards
looks and "fun" add-ons, and XP 7 is more toward what a computer was
meant to be. Also, games and game editing programs are more compatible
with XP 7.

In the "Mac vs. PC" arguement, I go with PCs. Here's one reason: Much
more applications and programs can be run on PCs. Many programs have
to be specially redesigned to be compatible with the Mac. So in getting a
PC, you are able to do much more on it than you would on a Mac.