The Instigator
Pro (for)
4 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
13 Points

Mac is Better than Windows

Do you like this debate?NoYes+8
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision - Required
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/2/2011 Category: Technology
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 5,777 times Debate No: 17745
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (14)
Votes (4)




Mac is better than windows because they boot using EFI strings instead of hardware, meaning faster booting/running speeds, and they utilize RAM more efficiently and don't crash often, due to the fact that they run on Unix. Although the upfront costs for purchasing Macs may be more expensive than Windows, updating the operating system and keeping the computer secure are both large concerns with Windows, and cost a lot. Macs are $30 per upgrade. With Mac, there is an app store and you know what you are getting. If there is a malfunction, you only need to deal with three companies: Apple, Intel, and AMD, whereas with windows, you must deal with multiple companies. Macs can last forever and use an old software and windows cannot. Apple only uses the best processors from Intel: Core 2 Duo, i5, dual core i5, dual core i7, and Intel Xeon "Westermere". They o not use i3 because although the gigahertz may be better than that of core 2 duo, the material of core 2 duo is better for processing. Macs require no security softwar and despite this they dont get any viruses. The same is not true for Windows. Mac is a company that revolutionizes technology with every update. Windows is a sad laggard.


I thank my opponent for his argument and gladly accept this debate.

Rebuttal to His Argument
First, I will address his statement about the pricing of the OS. Lion is the only Apple OS so far to be only thirty dollars. The upgrades before that were upwards of a hundred dollars. Apple OS upgrades are no more than service packs. The updates in them are insignificant compared to Windows. From 2001 (When Mac OS was launched) to 2006, five OS upgrades came out, all 200 dollars, all doing a little more than the last one. The upgrade from XP to Windows 7 was drastic. Windows Aero introduced a whole new way of experiencing Windows, at only 120 dollars for the home premium version, users could finally experience their desktop in HD graphics. Animations allowed windows to open and close in a smooth and stylish manner, preview allowed users to view a LIVE thumbnail of what was running on their minimized icons, peak allowed users to see transparent glass forms of their windows so they would know what was running and where they put it, gadgets allowed users to see things such as their stocks, weather, etc. live on their desktop.

Multiple Companies
Now I argue with the point about having to deal with multiple companies. With computer problems with Windows, here are the companies that you may have to deal with.
  1. Microsoft
  2. Your Manufacturer (i.e. Toshiba, HP)
  3. Intel or AMD
Here's the thing, my opponent's argument about this point is invalid. Here is why: How often when you are having computer problems does the problem stem from your processor, your OS designer, AND your manufacturer at the same time. In fact, I have never heard of anyone needing to call Intel because their processor wasn't working.

Just because Apple uses the best processors doesn't make it better. Sure, Apple computers use all dual core processors, but the reason Windows uses all kinds of processors is because not everyone needs a powerful processor. Do you need 2.7 Ghz of speed when you only use word and firefox? The answer is absolutely no. This point by my opponent is therefore moot because you can't judge a company by what kind of processors it uses. Also, the Core 2 Duo processor is NOT better than an i3 at processing. the i Series of processors is a significant jump from the Core 2 Duo processor. Even though they both have 2 PHYSICAL processors, which allows them to do two different things at the same time, the i3 has a feature called hyperthreading which allows it to run 2 processing threads on each core. This gives it two virtual cores in addition to the physical ones, making the i3 somewhat resemble a quad core whereas the core 2 duo is left behind with its 2 physical cores and no virtual cores.

The reason that Macs do not get viruses is because they control less than 10% of the computer market. Hackers don't make viruses for Macs because they wouldn't have many people to give the virus to. If hackers started making viruses for Macs right now, Mac users would be almost defenseless due to the weakness of its antivirus.


Debate Round No. 1



I would first like to address the unreliability of my opponent's source in his saying that Lion is the only Apple OS to be released for $30. In fact, Snow Leopard was released for $30. Also the OS upgrades were not 200 dollars, but rather $110, which is comparably priced, if not cheaper than today's Windows 7 OS!! If we want to talk about shortcomings in releases, then windows is the target here, not Mac. Mac has both added AND improved the UI, apps, and how things work under the hood with every update. Cheetah was the start of the modern Mac OS. Puma reworked Finder and added support for DVD, camera, 3D, printers and other hardware. In Jaguar, they revamped finder again, this time adding Mail, Address book, and a plethora of other apps used today. In Panther, there was a new UI, development tools, and Safari. Tiger updated many apps and added Dashboard. Leopard reworked the UI once again, and the UI of lion started to take shape. Snow Leopard COMPLETELY reworked the usage of RAM and rewrote Finder. The updates in Lion completely changed the way the computer works, moving computing into the tablet era. Windows on the other hand, did nothing except fool with the UI and add hardware support until Vista and Aero, but Mac had smooth 3D animations from the start, and Dashboard was introduced WAAAY earlier in tiger Also, we are not here to argue about who WAS better, but rather who IS better, so therefore I feel any comments on past Mac ways that are no longer applicable can be rendered irrelevant. Mac comes with useful out of the box software that can do things of which Windows could never dream using out of the box software. Windows m must be bought or ordered. Mac OS Lion can be downloaded DIRECTLY to the computer. Mac has its own app store, a place where users can go to find free and paid apps that will do most anything while staying secure.


If you call Microsoft or HP, you are transferred to India, whereas with Mac, you speak with an American who you can understand the first time they say something!

As my opponent has stated, windows processors are not always as strong as Mac's. Although the extra power may not be NECESSARY it is BETTER. it is like having a car with top speed of 65 mph vs. a car with top speed of 250 mph. You will never go 250 on a road, but its still better than 65. And bottom line processors these days are i5 and i7 which are both better than i3. And they only us hyper threaded dual core and quad core.

I don't care WHY Macs don't get viruses, the point is they don't!!!!!!!! Not to Say they are 100% virus free, but there's a MAJOR virus for Windows every year and I always know someone who gets it. Never met someone with an infected Mac.


First off I would like to thank my opponent for his rebuttal.


My opponent says that Microsoft will transfer you to India. I will now request a source of proof that this happens. If he cannot provide a source for this statement, his point is moot.


My opponent's processing argument basically defeats itself. If you are only going to go 65 mph with your car, why would you spend 500,000 to above 1 million, (yes, that is how much a car that fast costs,) when you could by, let's say, a Toyota Camry for 23,000 which will do everything you need it to do. If Mac only uses i5, i7, and the Xeon processor, why would someone like me or my opponent need that? If I were a Mac fan there wouldn't even be a reason for me to buy a Mac. Why would I need an i5 processor computer that costs over a thousand dollars when I could get my current laptop, a Toshiba Satellite with an i3 processor for only 450 dollars. Programs open instantly, my computer goes from turn on to the login screen in less than 30 seconds, my opponent has yet to explain why someone would need a Mac.


Macs are much less likely to get viruses, but it is more appealing to get viruses once in a while than to pay too much for a computer that isn't even as good as a PC, here is an example. The Sony Vaio vs the MacBook Air. This MacBook is $3100 whereas the Sony Vaio TZ is $2200. The Sony has higher resolution, more USB ports (the ones on the MacBook aren't even expandable,) the Sony has 4 to 7 hours of life on their REMOVABLE battery, he Macbook battery is non removable, the Macbook has a camera but no microphone, the Sony has a fingerprint scanner, a card reader, and even has stereo speaks unlike this Macbook. One thousand dollars cheaper for the Sony, many more features, but I guess for some people a cheaper operating system and less chance of viruses is worth it.

Debate Round No. 2


My opponent's rebuttal is appreciated and I thank him for raising these points.

First of all, Microsoft does, in fact, have call centers in India, as this web page proves. It should also be noted that this customer had a bad experience. He could tell it was in India because of the accents of both service representatives.

This link describes a fake Microsoft scam based in India.


I don't I have to say much here. My opponent states that my argument defeats itself, but he must remember that we are not arguing about what processing strength would be suitable for him. Instead we are arguing over what processor is BETTER, and if Macs use better processors, then they are better in the processing category.


My opponent has just admitted that Windows computers are more susceptible to viruses, malware, and spyware than Macs!

The top MacBook Air is NOT $3100! These are the configuration options for the top-line MacBook air and with the improved processor, it is only $1700, making it cheaper than the Sony VAIO TZ my opponent mentioned earlier. The MacBook battery CAN be removed and replaced., as it is in this video:

The MacBook Pro (,which is cheaper than some configurations of the Air,) has a camera AND a microphone! Look at the tech specs for the MINIMUM configuration!

I also question the legitimacy of my opponent's source. If it is legitimate, then it is outdated.

So the MacBook air (maximum configuration) is, in fact, cheaper than the Sony VAIO TZ.

And who doesn't want an OS with extreme user-friendliness, customization options, its own app store, and negligible security risks for $30?


Thank you Pro for your rebuttal.


Here are the flaws in this argument
1. At the end of the blog, the author states that the Indian accent wasn't a problem, just the service, so Pro should have picked a better argument
2. This link: shows a disgruntled Apple customer, for every angry PC consumer there's an angry Apple consumer.
3. It is a blog, there is no proof that any of this happened at all, in fact, the link in point number two in this rebuttal could have been a lie for all I know, that is why I am not using it as solid evidence of anything.
4. Pro's point about the scam could really happen anywhere. There are scams all over the place, just because it happened in India doesn't mean it is a problem that there are call centers in India.


Pro, you should have dropped this topic because now you are defeating yourself even more. If my Toshiba has an i3 and your Mac has an i5, that doesn't mean Mac has better processors, it means I couldn't afford a computer with an i5 processor. In fact, it would seem that Mac tends to use the lower end of each processor in the Macbook Pro. For example, for $1200, the 13 inch Macbook Pro has a dual core i5 operating at 2.3 GHz [1]. The dual core i3 in my Toshiba laptop operates at the speed of 2.53 GHz and yet my computer was a mere $450. So the only valid processor argument is about who uses the better version of the type of processor, not who has the better types of processors. Pro used the latter which is a moot point, and I used the first which would seem to be a much more valid argument.


This was a comparison of the fully upgraded models on release date. If Pro wishes to challenge my sources then why does he not use sources to fight my sources? Pro is trying to make the reader think my sources are unreliable but he never refuted them with real evidence and I know that my sources are legitimate so there is no reason to not accept them.
I did not say the Macbook PRO didn't have a microphone, pay attention to my argument please, Pro. Also, the Macbook Air is not cheaper than the Sony Vaio TZ, the Macbook Air's current price is $1700 while the Sony Vaio TZ is $1000[2].
Pro's last statement seems to be unfounded. When did Pro offer evidence for user-friendliness and customization? Windows also has an App Store called the Windows Live Gallery for Windows 7 and Vista.

Debate Round No. 3
14 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Debate786 5 years ago
Pro is forgetting the fact that PC users are capable of handling High End Gaming. Mac cannot play these because Apple does not want gaming in the Macs, PC users actually get way more benefits than a Mac would if you compared what you can get for the price. I have used my laptop/PC for 7+ years, never have I ever got a virus. I recently bought a Lenovo i5 Laptop, best investment ever form my Steam games. I have antivirus and Malwarebytes Pro, makes it more secure to operate while using PC's. My brother just bought a Macbook Pro, I used it to see how it was, it is indeed awesome for it's looks, but looks aren't everything. I installed Windows 7 on his Mac, yes I did dual booting on it. It runs just fine, Heats up like crazy though. I installed steam, and did in fact try to install a game, I didn't play it because it felt like an oven from underneath the MacBook Pro. The Mac was an i7 Quad. My only conclusion is that, Apple is not really using the Macs to their full capability. They limit their consumers with choices you need to make on your own. If you pay money like that, you would want to expect you get what you pay for type of thing. If you want to compare the powers between PC and Mac, I believe they are both are the same in computing computing power and gaming if, I repeat, IF Apple brings gaming to their market. Remember, Intel is Intel, anything you see in a PC is in a Mac, you just have limited access to what you can do really.
Posted by donburi3000 6 years ago
Pro said "Windows m must be bought or ordered. Mac OS Lion can be downloaded DIRECTLY to the computer."

I bought my copy of Windows 7 (upgrade version) from Microsoft website, using my credit card. I was able to downloadeit & install it. I did NOT have to buy Windows 7 from my local retail store & NOT have to snail mail order it.

Microsoft DOES allow you to purchase & download their OS just like Mac does.
Posted by Thefirewielder 7 years ago
I find it funny that alex never stated the fact that windows can use up to a 6 core processor where as mac typically only uses dual core meaning that windows DEFINITELY has WAY more potential for processors. Think about it. If a mac is using a I5 Dual Core Processor and a manufacturer of Windows decides to put in a I5 Quad Core with Hyperthreading then it will beat the processor in the mac by 2 physical processors and if you count the virtual then it would beat it by 6 processors. Also anyone with the right knowledge can build their own Windows comp and put whatever they want in it like mine has a 6 core processor and a 4g AMD Video Card. Whereas with MAC, last time I checked they reserved the right to build and design their own computers thereby limiting the amount of capability that one can put into it. Reason being that you can only buy what is already made in stores which most of the time is obsolete compared to what you can make yourself.
Posted by CD-Host 7 years ago
As an aside 10.1 was also free.
Posted by crackrocks 7 years ago
I have a Dell and I have the option to dual boot either Ubuntu or Windows 7 (for Netflix). The reason I will always be a windows user is strictly for torrents which are designed for Windows 90% of the time.
Posted by tiger4291 7 years ago
@crackrocks - I have a mac with a Ubuntu partition. But they both run Unix
Posted by crackrocks 7 years ago
I use Ubuntu..... so.....
Posted by alex0828 7 years ago
Webos, my opponent's processors argument was invalid.
Posted by randolph7 7 years ago
I find it odd that neither of you noticed the resolution is "Mac is Better than Windows". Mac could refer to the hardware or the software but the same is not true of Windows. Windows is software only, the hardware is a PC.
Posted by webos1337 7 years ago
"You will never go 250 on a road, but its still better than 65." Editing video is pushing all your hardware to the max! Doing actual work rather than web browsing and blogging is where these system resources come in. This is where the NATIVE 64bit OS of OS 10 prevails, it is able to utilize all available resources since the hardware was written in tandem with the software. Where as there need to be many different builds and drives for windows to fully utilize its full hardware potential.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by X_mitchell 5 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: This was a very close debate and both opponents showed differences between the OS but I would have to agree with con on this one
Vote Placed by eltigrey 6 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: I strongly agree with pro, but con debated much better. Pro had so many missed opportunitys
Vote Placed by randolph7 7 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: While con refuted most of pro's case mac's near virus argument remained.
Vote Placed by SuperRobotWars 7 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Con did use better sources and clearly refuted Pro's arguments.