The Instigator
tajshar2k
Pro (for)
Winning
17 Points
The Contender
TheJuniorVarsityNovice
Con (against)
Losing
3 Points

PC's are better than Macs

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 4 votes the winner is...
tajshar2k
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/20/2015 Category: Technology
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 838 times Debate No: 72058
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (9)
Votes (4)

 

tajshar2k

Pro

Hi, I will be arguing that Pc's are better than Macs.
I look forward to this debate.
1st round is acceptance only.
Debate Round No. 1
tajshar2k

Pro

I thank my oppenent for this debate,


I would like to compare 2 examples of a Mac and a P.C


The New 2015 Apple Macbook Air 13 inch







        • 1.6GHz dual-core Intel Core i5 processor







        • Turbo Boost up to 2.7GHz







        • Intel HD Graphics 6000







        • 4GB memory







        • 128GB PCIe-based flash storage







        • 12 hour battery llife







        • 1440x900 screen resolution








Price: $1,119.00 (U.S)

Dell XPS 13 inch 2015






      • 5th Generation Intel® Dual Core™ i5-5200U Processor ( 2.20 GHz)





      • 8GB Dual Channel DDR3L-RS 1600Mhz (On Board





      • Intel (R) HD Graphics 5500





      • 128 GB PCIe-based flash storage





      • 12 hour battery life





      • 1920x1080 screen resolution






Price: 1,119.00 (U.S)



Processor

Both devices run a dual core Intel i5 processor. The difference however, is the actual processor itself. On Apple's website, it says their product runs a 1.6GHz dual-core Intel Core i5 processor. The XPS 13 however, has a higher clockspeed.

Verdict: Because the XPS 13 has a higher clockspeed, the XPS 13 beats the Macbook Air in this aspect.



RAM(Memory)

Apple again dissapoints. It only provides 4gb of ram for the 13 inch MacBook Air, whereas, the XPS 13 has double the RAM with 8gb. A downside with both machines is that the RAM is soldered(meaning it can't be removed and replaced). But 8gb is already very adequate for most users anyways.


Verdict: XPS 13 gives 8gb of ram, whereas the MacBook Air 13 inch gives only 4gb. XPS wins again.



Graphics

Apple used the Intel HD 6000 graphics. While the XPS 13 uses the Intel HD 5300 graphics. Technically speaking, Apple does use the better graphics, but there is a very small perfomance difference between the 2.


Verdict: Because it has a slightly more powerful graphics chip, the MacBook Air 13 inch wins.



Storage

Both devices use a 128gb SSD.

Verdict: Draw


Battery Life

Both devices can run for 12 hours.

Verdict: Draw


Screen Resolution

The MacBook Air 13 inch uses a mediocre 1440x900 resolution. The reason why they refuse to increase it, is because it would impact the battery life. The XPS 13 uses a Full HD 1980x1080 resolution. This is impressive, because it still maintains the 12 hour battery life.

Verdict: XPS 13's screen is far superior.



Operating System

This one is certainly depends on the preference of the user, but In my opinion, Windows OS is far superior.

Windows OS
-More Programs
-shared source(meaning others can manipulate the code to create software)
-Ease of Troubleshooting


OS X
-far less programs
-closed source(very restricted)
-If you break it, you have to go to Apple to fix it.



Conclusion

As you can see, the XPS 13 has far greater specs that the MacBook Air 13 inch. So why buy a Mac, when you can get a device with better specs at the same price?


Sources: http://store.apple.com...
http://www.dell.com...







TheJuniorVarsityNovice

Con

Thank you for your round. Let's begin.

Last round my opponent showed that a specific type of PC was a little bit better than a specific type of Mac however Overall Macs are better than PC's all around, here are just a few reasons why:

  1. Macs are cheaper in the long run

Sure, you can buy a Windows PC for fewer up-front dollars. But the true cost of ownership should be calculated over a years-long span. And with that calculation, Macs win easily. For instance, today, we would give $700 in trade for an original 15" MacBook Pro, made about three years ago. Now, we stopped offering PC trade-ins after a brief experiment resulted only in angst on the part of customers who discovered their three-year old PC was worth nothing, but in attempting to do a trade with another company that still offers PC trades and plugging in a similarly-configured PC as that 15" MacBook, the automated response was: "No Trade-In Value." We think that not only is a good indication that Macs hold their value very well, but that PC's are made far less well, meaning that a PC is pretty much disposable after only about 2-3 years.

  1. Macs are much easier to buy

We tried shopping for a PC just to compare, and after about 15 minutes our eyes glazed over. When you have so many choices, not only of manufacturers, but bells and whistles and speeds and sizes, it's almost impossible to know whether you're getting the right, or best, deal. With the Mac, it's much easier to narrow down your search quickly, PLUS, be assured you're getting a well-made and well-respected product, included being loaded with a whole bunch of great software you'd have to buy extra on a PC.

  1. In general, when Apple makes assumptions with its software, it gets it right, Microsoft often gets it wrong

Surely this is subjective, but when you run Microsoft's software, even on a Mac, it loves to run interference, making assumptions as to what you're doing and trying to stay a step ahead. Most often, however, it just gets annoying. For instance, by default, if you type a "1)" in Entourage or Word, suddenly the next paragraph automatically starts with a "2)." Most people spend more time undoing the presumptions than benefitting by them... Microsoft is just horrible at getting in the way.

  1. Viruses

While this is changing as Apple gains ground on Microsoft, Mac users are still living in comparative bliss with far fewer viruses, spyware and malware than Windows users.

Debate Round No. 2
tajshar2k

Pro

I shall now counter my opponents.

"Macs are cheaper in the long run"


Con claims that the orginal 15" Macbook Pro has a $700 value in 2015, but provides no evidence. In my experience, I have come across MacBooks that ranged from $100 to $2000 dollars.

http://www.ebay.ca...;


Con also fails to mention a key point. PC's are upgrade friendly compared to Macs. If you feel your 2gb Ram is insufficent, you can always buy the parts, and replace it. With a mac, upgradability is very limited.

Just because a device is valued at a higher price, does not mean it is actually usable. Apple even states that the orignal MacBook Pro is obselete.


https://support.apple.com...


"In general, when Apple makes assumptions with its software, it gets it right, Microsoft often gets it wrong"


Con mentions some hassles he has with Microsoft Office for "Mac". Because it isn't their main target audience, Microsoft simply doesn't have to spend time in fixing issues for Mac. This maybe market strategy to get people to buy PC's over Macs. I can tell you with Office 2013, this problem is non-existent.

Con states, "Microsoft often gets it wrong". But only provided one example, which was the Mac version of Word and Entourage.

Apple too has exprienced software failures. iMovie 08 was critisised by many for removing features from the previous version.
http://en.wikipedia.org...

If you look at reviews of the new iWork suite, most users gave it 2.5 stars out of 5.
https://itunes.apple.com...







"Viruses"

This infact is the Mac's main selling point. There are two main reasons why Mac's do not get viruses.

Closed Source Operating System

Because Apple places many restrictions on how others can manipulate its code, many virus creators have a hard time making viruses in the first place. This might seem as a postive, but you comprimise many aspects such as creating effective software.


Less people use it

Con himself admitted "While this is changing as Apple gains ground on Microsoft". Well, if everyone starts using mac, virus makers, will start targetting mac users. This will render the mac's main selling point useless. Because it is not used to dealing with virus issues, Apple will certainly be slow into providing updates and patches to fix malware.

The main reason why users get viruses is because they are not careful about their surfing. If users are careful about what content they view, and avoid clicking popups on pages, you wouldn't even need an anti-virus.



TheJuniorVarsityNovice

Con


Being that My opponent has made this a constructive round, I can assume I can make a few more points and make arguments about his critic of my side.

I'll start with the rest of my case:



  1. Time Machine

Not nearly enough people back up their hard drives (because it should be everyone), but Apple's Time Machine makes it so elegant and simple that all you really need to do is hook up a drive and turn Time Machine on. And it's not just a back-up, but you can go back in time to find a document you deleted.

  1. When something goes wrong...

Microsoft makes the software. Dell, or Sony, or HP, or seemingly a million other manufacturers, make the Windows PC. Then you have third-party drivers and whatever else for all the peripherals. When you have a problem, everyone points a finger at everyone else. With the Mac, the issue is Apple's, and they'll get it figured out.

  1. Apple makes it simple, Microsoft makes it complicated.

While learning any new system can be a challenge, it's very clear that Apple focuses a lot of attention on simplicity. Perhaps the best example is the Apple remote: just one big button in the middle, and yet it does pretty much everything you need it do.

  1. Microsoft is for geeks, Apple is for people who just want to get things done

What's pretty much true is that the back-end, server-infrastructure kinds of things is well-handled by Microsoft, because it's in the "land of the geeks," who love to dig into the machinery and tinker with all the settings and understand all the acronyms. Those kind of people like Windows on the user end as well because they understand all the crazy intricacies and complications of the computer system. Apple isn't nearly as big in the IT world, and that's okay, because it's front end user interface for "the rest of us" doesn't require us to be computer geeks to get things done.

  1. Let's face it, Apple understands style

While there are a zillion different styles of PC out there, pretty much everyone agrees that the style, elegance, and just plain "hipness" of the Mac has yet to be beat. They just look cool, and they're well-made as well. That's why you almost always see a Mac in the movies... they just look a lot better.

  1. You can run Windows on a Mac anyway, so why not get the best of both worlds?



I have high confidence in my side of the argument, I cont believe pro has shown substantial evidence to refute my claims. Apple is the clear winner in my book, and I don't even own one. Thank you
Debate Round No. 3
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by bluesteel 1 year ago
bluesteel
=====================================================================
>Reported vote: ClashnBoom // Moderator action: Removed<

3 points to Con (arguments). {RFD = Reasons for voting decision: Con proved that some of pro's arguments were invalid.}

[*Reason for removal*] This RFD is insufficiently specific. It could be copy-pasted to any debate. It doesn't explain how Con proved that some of Pro's arguments were invalid, and why losing those arguments cost Pro the entire debate.
=====================================================================
Posted by bluesteel 1 year ago
bluesteel
=====================================================================
>Reported vote: ClashnBoom // Moderator action: Removed<

3 points to Con (arguments). {RFD = Reasons for voting decision: Con proved that some of pro's arguments were invalid.}

[*Reason for removal*] This RFD is insufficiently specific. It could be copy-pasted to any debate. It doesn't explain how Con proved that some of Pro's arguments were invalid, and why losing those arguments cost Pro the entire debate.
=====================================================================
Posted by dcarroll9999 1 year ago
dcarroll9999
TheJuniorVarsityNovice stated that PCs are for geeks, and Macs are for people. This is huge profiling to PCs!!!!
Posted by TheJuniorVarsityNovice 1 year ago
TheJuniorVarsityNovice
@Midnight1131 How in the hell is it disrespectful to say

'I have high confidence in my side of the argument, I dont believe pro has shown substantial evidence to refute my claims.'??
Posted by bluesteel 1 year ago
bluesteel
====================================================================
>Reported vote: Midnight1131 // Moderator action: removed<

6 points to Pro (arguments, conduct, sources). {RFD = Reasons for voting decision: Con argued that overall macs were better than Windows PC's. But Pro stated in the beginning, that he was comparing two examples of pc's and macs. Since pro is the instigator, in the opening round, he stated what the debate was about, and that's what con should've stuck with.}

[*Reasons for removal*] (1) The argument vote is nonsensical. The resolution is whether macs in general are better than PCs. Just because Pro only compared one mac (the 2015 Air 13 inch) to one PC (Dell XPS 13 inch) does not mean that Con was obligated to only look to those two examples. If anything, Pro was failing to uphold the resolution in general. It would be stupid to suggest that just because Pro picked the fastest Mac (e.g. a top of the line Macbook Pro) and the slowest PC (e.g. a budget laptop with a Celeron processor) that Pro proved the resolution true. The argument point vote here is thus nonsensical. (2) This RFD completely fails to even mention why it voted on conduct and sources.
=====================================================================
Posted by Midnight1131 1 year ago
Midnight1131
FlaouaPaoua

You do realize the difference between hardware and software right? The reason people think that macs are in general faster and more stable is because they compare $1500+ to $600 PC's. If you actually compare two of them with the same cost, it's a lot closer.
Posted by tajshar2k 1 year ago
tajshar2k
A lot of people don't know this, but technically you can also run mac on P.C.
Posted by TheJuniorVarsityNovice 1 year ago
TheJuniorVarsityNovice
sweet, That's exactly what I said too, you should give her a vote
Posted by FlaouaPaoua 1 year ago
FlaouaPaoua
2 things.
1: A MAC IS A PC. PC=PERSONAL COMPUTER. MAC IS A PRODUCER OF PERSONAL COMPUTERS; JUST LIKE ACER, ALIENWARE AND OTHERS.

2. The mac's software is much smoother and better than Windows.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by jsgolfer 1 year ago
jsgolfer
tajshar2kTheJuniorVarsityNoviceTied
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:50 
Reasons for voting decision: PC's are better. Regardless, tajshar2k provided some very important points about consumers and usefulness of product (features/per unit price). Macs being cheaper in the long run is a stretch. My 2009 PC runs just fine. The reason Macs hold their value so well is because they are practically luxury items. In the end, Pro wins.
Vote Placed by Midnight1131 1 year ago
Midnight1131
tajshar2kTheJuniorVarsityNoviceTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro provided sources, con did not. Also, con was disrespectful in the manner he ended the debate, when he basically ended the debate with "I believe I won."
Vote Placed by AlwaysRight12345 1 year ago
AlwaysRight12345
tajshar2kTheJuniorVarsityNoviceTied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:33 
Reasons for voting decision: I don't know where Con got the idea that the last round was constructive. All that Pro did in that round was refute his arguments. Very minor S&G mistakes on both sides, so that's tied. I'm not blaming Pro, but Con just made too many arguments and didn't provide adequate space for refutations, so I gave arguments to Pro. As for sources, Con used none, so that was an easy Pro vote.
Vote Placed by Mister_Man 1 year ago
Mister_Man
tajshar2kTheJuniorVarsityNoviceTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct to Pro because I don't find it very "respectful" to basically say "I believe I won the debate," lol. Sources to Pro because he was the only one to provide sources. And a slight edge to Pro in regards to Arguments - He disputed pretty much all of Con's arguments, while Con did do his fair share of refuting what Pro said, Con added that little extra afterwards to make his points more concrete. Pro showed how PC's are upgrade friendly and the reason theer aren't as many viruses on Macs is simply because less people use them - if more people used Macs, hackers/whatever would create viruses for Macs more often. Con seemed to rely more on his personal opinion of how he figures out PCs and stuff more than facts or the general consensus of things.