The Instigator
THEBOMB
Pro (for)
Winning
9 Points
The Contender
blackhawk1331
Con (against)
Losing
2 Points

Resolved: PCs 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 3 votes the winner is...
THEBOMB
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/18/2012 Category: Technology
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 5,486 times Debate No: 22133
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (7)
Votes (3)

 

THEBOMB

Pro

The age old argument, PC or Mac. Well it shall be discussed here.

I will be arguing PCs are better than Macs.

My opponent will argue Macs are better than PCs.

BOP, thus, is shared.

This debate is limited to the computers/laptops no handheld devices such as Ipods.

Please no semantics, we're debating over the respective computers....not whatever else PC and Mac could stand for...

If my opponent wishes they can begin this round, but, if they do so they must give up their last round.
blackhawk1331

Con

I accept your challenge and await your arguments. Just to add, this is for MiG's tournament.
Debate Round No. 1
THEBOMB

Pro

I thank Blackhawk for accepting this debate and will begin.

In today's day and age, you tell a Mac user a PC is better (or vis versa) you're bound to start a verbal argument. In this debate, my opponent and I shall once and for all put to rest what is better, the Mac or the PC.

C1. Affordability of a PC over a Mac

When it comes down to it, the upfront cost of a PC is much cheaper than that of a Mac. According to a Popular Mechanics article in 2011, a PC laptop starts at 250 dollars while its counterpart in the Mac starts at 1000 dollars. A PC desktop starts at 200 dollars its counterpart in the Mac, 600 dollars (1). As you can see the affordability of a PC beats the affordability of a Mac by a mile. This means more people can have access to a computer to do whatever it is they need to do. In this day and age, PC allows almost everybody to have access to a computer. The price of an Apple computer only allows a small group to use their products. I mean windows controls 91.9% of the market for a reason while Mac OS controls a little over 5%. (8) The affordability of a PC, with windows, combined with the below items allowed windows to dominate the competition. If Mac is better than a PC why is it that they do not control more of the market? Simply because, most people either 1) think windows is better, 2) they cannot afford a Mac, or 3) a combination of 1) and 2). Either way, windows rules.

C2. Selection

a)Name brand built

Once again this is a no brainer; there are thousands of different varieties of PCs a person can buy. As one author puts it "the best thing by far about Windows PCs is the sheer unending variety of choices. They come in every size from teeny-tiny to extra-large. There are boxes with touchscreens, Blu-Ray players for high-definition movies, and TV tuners that let you watch and record cable and satellite TV. You can buy a PC that's pink, or transparent, or designed to be as close to indestructible as possible." (3) Apple, on the other hand, only produces 9 different models. There is more of a selection of PCs. More selection means you can pick and choose exactly what you want to use the computer for. This ties back to price, if all I am going to use the computer for is email, browsing the web, and typing up documents, I do not need a thousand dollar Mac. I can just as easily do the exact same thing on the 500 dollar PC. Why spend the extra money? I mean why would an 8 year old who needs to write a book-report need a 1000 dollar computer when a 400 dollar one can do the exact same thing?

b)Building your own computer

You can build your own PC. You cannot build your own Mac. The ability to build your own computer allows you to customize it to suit your own needs. Every single component you need to run a computer can be bought. This gives you options.

C2. Hardware

Popular Mechanics decided to see which was better, Mac or PC. They took two laptops with almost identical specs (a Macbook Pro and a HP Pavilion DM4). Here is what they concluded: "While our Mac felt faster by a hair, our PC was cheaper by a mile. Our PC came with a bundle of free software, but our Mac was impervious to viruses. The point is, as tools, these machines are both hugely—and equally—capable." (2) The reality is, when you take the two computers with comparable specs, one Mac and one PC, they are basically equal when it comes to hardware. That "huge" advantage Mac user's claim they have is just not there. When it comes to hardware a Mac and a PC are basically equal.

C3. Hardware upgrades, in other words Apple is Fascist

In the technological world, Moore's Law states "the number of transistors that can be placed inexpensively on an integrated circuit doubles approximately every two years." (4) Every 2 years, the processing speed of computers can potentially double. A PC it is quite easy to upgrade to the best hardware. It works something like this, open the lid of the computer, take the piece of hardware you don't want any more out, and put the new piece of hardware into the computer. To someone with any technological knowhow, this is quite simple. To put it another way "with a trip to Fry's Electronics and a little lunch money in the PC world you can basically soup up your own Windows roadster." (5) In the technological world, computers become obsolete in a few short years, with a PC you can continue modifying and modifying it. With a Mac you cannot, it is simply impossible to do so without violating the warranty. And guess what? PCs are cheaper.

C4. Software

There are thousands of games available for PC. You just have to find them. Look at one of the world's most popular games, Counter-Strike. It has one main requirement in today's world, that you have windows. (6) Mac does not have the same selection of software when compared to windows. From file sharing with the millions of PC users around the world to playing Counter-Strike, the PC can do it all. A Mac…not so much.

C5. Security

Every day we hear a lot of stuff saying "ohh, Mac is more secure than Windows". But, the truth is, this is entirely false. Robert G. Ferrell, information systems security specialist at the U.S. Dept. of Defense states "I just don't think this question (Mac or PC) has any real meaning today. Far more relevant to me are the browser and e-mail clients a consumer is using, irrespective of the operating system or hardware platform. Even more critical from a safety standpoint is the level of security awareness exhibited by that consumer. If you haphazardly visit every link and download every file sent to you in e-mail or posted to your social-networking pages, sooner or later you're going to get nailed. Period. Platforms are passe." (7). It does not matter what OS you are using, it matters how safely you utilize the OS.

Carole Fennelly, director of content and documentation at Tenable Network Security states "I will give you a frustrating answer: the most secure system is the one that you know how to secure Meaning if you're pretty knowledgeable in Windows, or even just disciplined enough to keep up with Windows updates and keep your antivirus up to date, there's no reason you can't run a Windows box relatively securely." (7) You see it's not about the number of people attempting to hack windows, its about the person using the computer, if they decide to get lazy and click on random links they will get "hacked" the same goes for Mac. The operator of the computer matters more than the OS.

R. Adrian Lamo, threat analyst states ""I'm not sure this question is really as relevant as it would have been just a few years ago. The security posture of the average Internet user depends less on their computing platform and more on their browser choice and configuration. […]There's no one-size-fits-all answer to this question. A PC, common sense, and NoScript http://noscript.net... [Firefox plug-in] will help a user reduce their exposure profile more than a Mac and no common sense + clicking on anything that flashes. But the former isn't because it's a PC, and the latter isn't because it's a Mac." (7) Once again, I reiterate, it's not about the OS rather the user of the computer which makes something more vulnerable.

A PC is no easier to "break into" than a Mac.

Source:
1.http://www.popularmechanics.com...
2.http://www.popularmechanics.com...
3.http://technologizer.com...
4.http://en.wikipedia.org...'s_law
5.http://www.esquire.com...
6.http://en.wikipedia.org...
7.http://news.cnet.com...
8.http://marketshare.hitslink.com...
blackhawk1331

Con


I wish good luck to my opponent.. I don't really think we'll put the issue to rest. Look how fast the world of technology changes. Irrelevant, though. I'll start with rebuttals.


Rebuttals:


C1. Affordability


I will concede that macs are more expensive than the cheapest of PCs before anything else is taken into consideration. Here is an account all can read of a person who has used both mac and PC. He complains about the viruses that PCs get.[1] I have also used to use both and find the same problem. I used to use my grandparents' PC before they got multiple macs. I'd go over for a weekend every so often and by the time I was seven or eight I wouldn't even bother asking to use the computer for a simple LEGO game because I knew it'd crash. At the same time, I was learning how to play StarCraft on a 2-3 year old mac desktop. I've never seen a mac crash and I've used some really old macs. Back to the article, it would cost this guy $345 every year to fix his PC if he had to pay for it. That's $1,035 in three years, the average time between replacing macs in my experience. Add that to the original cost of the PC and it loses to the mac. Then take into consideration you can run macs that are 10 years old (I've done it with no problems), and you theoretically have even more money saved. I know it's unrealistic to say someone can use a computer for 10 years. While it can be done (seen it happen. It's now about 16 and I believe they're still using it), technology is just moving too fast to expect someone who uses their computer a lot to stay with one for 10 years. So we'll stick with three. While the price for the computer itself is less with a PC, it's not less once you factor in viruses.


C2. a) Just because you have a large variety doesn't mean any of them are quality. I've only seen one mac ever have issues and I've been using it since it's repair. That problem was being kicked off my father's lap. Apple doesn't need 80,000 different models. Plus, they're one company. There's a reason everyone knows their name whereas dell, toshiba, and hp are basically the only known PC brands. All three of which are terrible. Physical appearance has nothing to do with the quality of the computer, so the fact that a computer’s pink has nothing to do with whether or not it will do what you want. Personally, I'd think you'd want the mac for a higher quality computer. If the internet crashes every time you try and open it, then it doesn't much mater that you saved money on the computer. What 8 year old writes book reports, honestly? They're in 1st or 2nd grade. Even if they are writing a book report, they can use paper and pencil at that age. They need to learn some sort of penmanship.


b) You can toy with a mac and change it. Plus, building your own PC doesn't mean it's customized. That's like saying you built a swing set from a box means it's customized. I'd also like to point out that macs were originally built by the buyer. It's just that anymore it's pretty hard to do all the high precision work needed to make sure a mac is up and running to the standards of Apple.


C3. Hardware


The site you built this argument off of is highly untrustworthy. Many things that people are saying is good with the PC and bad with mac or vice versa is just untrue in my experience. Mac finishing is certainty not gritty. It has no problems opening the servers mentioned, and the gestures are not hard to learn on a mac. It took me five minutes when I had never used them before. This is my personal experience, though, so whatever. It would have been a more accurate test with more subjects. Plus, they should have taken kids who haven't yet used computers and therefore aren't biased one way or another. I saw some definite bias in there. “no removable batteries” This was said in reference to macs. I'm removing the battery of the mac laptop I'm using right now. And now I'm typing with it out. I’m sorry, but without a reliable source backing this argument up, I'm not addressing it any further.


C4. Software


First of all, a mac can run windows and the OS out from Apple at the time. Second of all, you can't decide what computer to buy based off of one game. Finally, I am not aware of this file sharing issue. I share files for school with PC users all the time.


C5. Safety


It is known fact there are more viruses for PCs out there. Perhaps that is why I never worry about opening anything. There are going to be 1 million viruses for PCs at the end of 2008. [2] What do you think that speaks to now? The issue of operator being more important than operating system is false. As previously stated, I don't worry about clicking on links. I haven't for years now. I also rarely update things. The computer is less likely to get a virus even if for the sole reason that there are less viruses out there for macs. On that last point, once again, I've never seen a cautious mac user and never seen a mac get a virus. I'm probably one of the least cautious people out there when it comes to computers, and look, no viruses.


Arguments:


Macs are favorable to developers


People in software development prefer macs. There is one big reason for this. The software development equipment available on a PC was too hard to work. The person (this is from the first comment) switched to LINUX because it was easier and better. When everything was incompatible with LINUX, the programmer switched to a mac because they “wanted something that just worked”. Every developer this person knows uses macs because they don't have all the annoying little bugs of PCs. “My off-the-cuff reaction is that most people will deploy applications to unix-type servers, and Mac OS X is closer to any flavor of unix than Windows is. Therefore a lot of your configurations are going to be the same or similar, and subsequently you don't need to go through the hassle of making things work on two entirely disparate systems” Just another reason why they're better from another programmer. Since most people don't use MSFT stack, but rather OSS/Linux, Macs are a much better dev environment for that. “In addition, you have the Stanford effect - with a lot of startups coming out of Stanford, where Macs "rule" and all high-level CS classes are on Sun/Linux (or at least used to be the case), you have a lot of affinity to Macs as a development platform. And add your usual Unix is better for development than Windows list of reasons: case-sensitive paths, better handling of spaces in filenames, better system logging/debugging, Unix-based tools like grep/awk/sed for text munging, etc...”[3]


Macs are favorable to professionals


It's mostly because it just runs without the viruses, spam, crashes and constant need for support, reboots, upgrades, defrags and maintenance without which Windows simply stops working after a few weeks. I only have to reboot my desktop Mac when I return from a trip during which I turned it off! It runs smoothly for months at a time.”[4] Macs just work. They don't have all the hassle that PCs have. They don't need constant support, have less risk of a virus, and many other things. “Your office and big business use Windows because many IT departments who choose the computers protect their jobs by selecting Windows precisely because Windows requires so much upkeep. This keeps them employed.””When I'd ask our tech support people why they wasted our time with Windows systems, they'd freely admit that most of them would no longer have jobs if they upgraded to Mac.” So windows isn't used because it's better. It's used because it's worse. Macs would allow for many people to get laid off, so those people at risk won't switch.[4]


[1] http://open.salon.com...


[2] http://www.pcworld.com...


[3] http://www.quora.com...


[4] http://www.kenrockwell.com...


Debate Round No. 2
THEBOMB

Pro

I thank my opponent for his response and agree with him, in part, we really will not put the issue to complete rest simply because we are going to get to the point where handheld devices take over computers. Technology constantly changes but, nevertheless, I shall begin with my defense.

Defense:

C1. Affordability

My opponent has conceded almost my entire analysis of this point. Most people will not be able to buy a MAC meaning they will buy a PC, the rest of my opponents rebuttal deals with how a PC costs more to repair. Then he provides a personal story, which we cannot regard as true as we have no way to verify the facts and a blog. Despite the fact it is a blog and we have no idea who was writing it there are several problems with the blog itself the blog in question is poorly written and has not sourced at all. So unless my opponent can provide a source which is verifiable and written by a professional (not a student) this entire argument is unsourced and unverified. Nevertheless, I shall refute your arguments. What exactly is this person using the PC for? If he is going on sites like "thepiratebay.org" and downloading every piece of software, of course he'll get viruses. If he's looking at a lot of pornography, of course he'll get viruses. If he's clicking on every single flashing banner, of course he'll get viruses. Does he even have anti-viral software? (All this common sense applies to the MAC as well.) Please find another source. Cross apply my security experts testimony here.

C2. a) Once again my opponent cites unverifiable personal stories. How do we know any of them are true? My opponent then goes on to say "Apple doesn't need 80,000 different models." But, having "80,000 models" allows the buyer to choose exactly what they want to use the computer for. Gaming? High quality processor and graphics card. Email, word, and excel? Probably do not need something as expensive as you will not need the best processor and the best graphics card. My opponent then goes on saying, "dell, toshiba, and hp are basically the only known PC brands. All three of which are terrible." Well even despite the fact there are well known companies such as Acer out there, my opponent has not stated why Dell, Toshiba, and HP are terrible. It is an unsubstantiated claim. "I'd think you'd want the mac for a higher quality computer. If the internet crashes every time you try and open it, then it doesn't much mater that you saved money on the computer." If you cannot afford the MAC this is irrelevant. Furthermore, you have provided no source stating the internet crashes this much on PCs. Then my opponent attacks my 8 year old with the book report while missing the entire point of the analogy. The point is, if you are writing a book report why do you need a MAC?

b) My opponent begins by stating, "You can toy with a mac and change it." First, you lose the warranty on your computer if anything happens to it your down $1000 dollars. Second, how can you exactly? Let's take the MacBook Air, do you honestly think anyone would have the technical knowhow to modify this without breaking the computer? And do you think you will have the technological knowhow to build it? My opponent states, "building your own PC doesn't mean it's customized." But, it can be. That's the point. You can build your own PC and customize it to do whatever you need it to do. My opponent also concedes "it's pretty hard to do all the high precision work needed to make sure a mac is up and running." In most cases, it is impossible to do so (ie the Mac Book Air). That is what closed system means.

C3. Hardware

My opponent drops my analysis of this point because apparently Popular Mechanics is untrustworthy. I am going to put it to rest, Popular Mechanics is a magazine written by professionals. I cannot believe my opponent would just dismiss it outright because he does not agree with what they are saying. I am going to treat this as a conceded argument because Popular Mechanics is a technology magazine and is perfectly reliable. I must also remind my opponent, I was citing their conclusions based upon many of the tests they had run. On a side note to my opponent, please do not say my perfectly reliable sources, in an American technological magazine run since the early 1900s, are unreliable when you yourself use blogs in your arguments.

C4. Software

The two problems with citing how a Mac can run windows is first, if you run windows off of Mac you will slow down the computer quite a bit. This ties back to hardware. Second, it goes against what your arguing. Your trying to argue Mac is better than PC. A Mac includes its OS. If you change to windows OS your computer is nothing more than a PC which looks like a Mac. You will then encounter any alleged problems PCs have as well as the ones Mac's have. I am not arguing PC's are perfect just better. Just as my opponent cannot argue Macs are perfect, just better. I am not saying decide what computer to buy off of one game, I am merely stating there is much more software existing for PCs than Macs. As for your ignorance on file sharing, just because you do not know something does not mean its untrue.

C5. Safety

First of all, my opponent completely ignores the IT experts I cite to show how personal use of the OS matters the most. My opponent provides no counter source simply stating there are over one million viruses for PCs. You get less viruses if you use the computer well. Once again my opponent uses an unverifiable personal story to make his point. In order to verify his story he must allow me remote access to his computer in order to verify he does not have a virus.

I would also like to point out, most computer hackers say Mac's have less inherent security than windows. Take Marc Maiffret he states "Now when you look at Microsoft today they do more to secure their software than anyone. They're the model for how to do it. They're not perfect; there's room for improvement. But they are definitely doing more than anybody else in the industry, I would say […] It's even a little scarier with them because they try to market themselves as more secure than the PC, that you don't have to worry about viruses, etc. Anytime there's been a hacking contest, within a few hours someone's found a new Apple vulnerability. If they were taking it seriously, they wouldn't claim to be more secure than Microsoft because they are very much not. And the Apple community is pretty ignorant to the risks that are out there as it relates to Apple. (1)" As we can see computer hackers believe Mac's are less secure than windows.

Opponents Arguments:

C1. Developers

My opponent chooses one extremely narrow profession to justify why Mac's are better. Most people are not computer software developers therefore; this point would not apply to the vast majority of people. Even so, my opponent is dead wrong, most programmers prefer the UNIX based Linux OS over windows and Mac simply because Linux is open source, very simple, and an extremely compatible OS (2). Linux, not Mac, is the best for developing.

C2. Businesses

My opponent uses a fallacious appeal to authority in this section of his argument. Kenrockwell.com is a website to tell how to take better photographs. It's a photography website. I seriously doubt whomever is running the site has the expertise necessary to make claims about a computer. This article was not written by an IT professional nor does it cite any IT professionals. Thus, we must hold this entire part in doubt until another source is provided. Even if we take it as true, the fact of the matter is, you are citing one company, one company does not represent the majority of companies.

Sources

1.http://www.neowin.net...
2.http://en.wikipedia.org...
blackhawk1331

Con


I'm just going to put links to sources right when I use them. It's easier this way. I apologize in advance for not writing as much of what the article says, but I ran out of space last time and want to make sure I say all I want to this time.



C1. http://www.geeksquad.com... Here's a link to a professional repair company. $130 per repair. You're just going to have to take personal experience when it comes to the number of times a computer needs to go to the repair shop. Here are plenty of complaints about a particular computer's failing and needing repairs. I'll find more if you want. http://www.my3cents.com... I'll concede that on the very bottom end, the mac is more expensive than the cheapest of pcs. If you start climbing the ladder in quality, however, you'll find that mac is actually cheaper than the other pcs able to compete with it. http://www.computerworld.com...



C2a. We're dealing with computers. A fair amount of the sources will be personal. You can't dismiss them for that reason. Why wouldn't they be true? Do you have any sources that directly contradict what those people have said? Unless you do, then they are perfectly acceptable. The models you sighted were being see-through verses pink verses whatever else. That has no affect on the capability of the comuter. The amount of crashes was an exageration. Personal experience, which apperntly doesn't matter, is where I'm pulling that from. http://www.techrepublic.com... Another source. http://www.sevenforums.com... http://www.techspot.com...


I wasn't attacking your 8 year old. I asked a question. And I didn't miss the analogy. I sincerely want to know why an 8 year old kid needs a computer to write a book report. Let him do them without one for awhile to develop his hadwriting.



C2b. You lose the warranty on anything if you do something you weren't supposed to. That doesn't stop people. Yes, I do think someone would be able to modify it themselves without breaking it. Especially since you can write a new program to do something new and the computer is modified. Would I have the technical know how to build a mac book air? No. Would someone else, say the person who designed it? Yes. Do I have the technical know how to build any computer, though? No. Do you? Here's a site to get a kit. The minimum price is $750. http://www.build-my-home-computer.com... Why not just get the mac at this point? I didn't realize we were arguing about the precision of the computer. I also don't see how the fact that Apple has more precise manufacturing helps your case.



C3. I don't care what the magazine is. They can do a survey poorly or be wrong about something. I know that things they said are false. One of the people cited in their survey said you can't take the battery out of the computer. That is false. Regardless of the quality of the magazine, a bad survey is a bad survey. http://www.popularmechanics.com... Read the survey part. There are four people cited. That is not a good survey. Read the last one. They say it's cheap feeling yet slick on a pc yet mac is gritty with sharp edges. Would gritty and sharp not be a contradiction? I hate to tell you, but those surveys are from the same kinds of people that comment on and write blogs. And you've provided no reason why the blogs are untrustworthy. Because the person isn't a proffessional? Most people who use computers don't know everything about the computer. I will, however, try to refrain from criticizing any of your other sources. Also, this is not a dropped argument. I already explained why I considered it invalid. I'll find different reasons to counter it, though, than testimony against the computer with contradictions. Macs have more RAM, a faster CPU and faster internet. http://forums.steampowered.com... Once you start climbing the ladder of quality, the mac has more to it at a lower level model than pc. http://www.computerworld.com...



C4. I am arguing that the physical computer is better. This debate isn't over the quality of the operating system. I believe the mac operating system is better, but that's not what we're arguing. I'm sorry, what ignorance with file sharing? You said macs can't. I said I do all the time. I wouldn't be able to get projects done if I couldn't.



C5. PCs are viewed as less secure. However, at this point, through what you've shown and my own research, I'll concede that the two computers are equal in their security without additional measures. Another reason I'm concedeing they're equal without any anti-virus software is that being equal (obviously) doesn't mean that one computer is better than the other. Being equal means that arguing this point is a waste of both our time. However, you are less likely to get a virus on a mac. The reason is that there are more PCs, so those programming the viruses stand to gain more in that field.



My Arguments



C1. If we were arguing Linux verses UNIX, I'd have forfeited. We aren't however. I said why Mac was preffered to PC. I never stateed mac was better, just preffered to pc.



C2. Last I checked, the kenrocwell article was why businesses should use mac. I'd like to point out that my opponent first attacks the blogs because they are not proffessional enough and is now attacking this article because, far as I can tell, it's too professional. Very well, I'll provide another source. More than 60% of people would choose a mac for a business. http://www.themaclawyer.com... Also, IT people are cited in here unless you want quotation marks. I was a senior manager at a multi-billion dollar corporation for many years and had to deal with Windows. When I'd ask our tech support people why they wasted our time with Windows systems, they'd freely admit that most of them would no longer have jobs if they upgraded to Mac.”



Dell, Toshiba, and HP are bad computers


I ran out of space last time, so here's the argument. People constantly complain about their computers. About crashing from the beginning and needing constant repair. I'll provide a few sources. From the time I bought Dell inspiron m5010 it needed restores, now after five months and still going into safe mode it needs to have factory settings. it is just garbage this laptop, a defective piece of crap.


hp I think is a much better computer and of course apple.


i got stuck.” Based on the next site, HP is obviously no better. http://www.my3cents.com... "My Hp Dimension is basically a worthless piece of crap..


It has been problems since the day I purchased it.


Save you money DO NOT buy a HP.. “http://www.my3cents.com... "My laptop within 60 days of purchase began to reboot itself. No power issues. Hours on the phone with tech support. $25 to send it back. 4 weeks later I get the laptop back with out either cord. I called they send one cord, called again they sent the other cord. 3hours of phone time to accomplish the 2 cords. Within weeks the laptop begins to reboot itself again (they replaced the harddrive.


More Hours on the phone, sent the laptop back and then was told that the memory was not supported. THE MEMORY THAT CAME IN THE LAPTOP IS NOT SUPPORTED?! Of course they offered to replace the 4g of memory for $176. When I questioned them they accused CompUSA of replacing the memory. So $525 and a week of my life on the phone with scripted indians”http://www.customerservicescoreboard.com...


Debate Round No. 3
THEBOMB

Pro

As we enter this final round, I thank my opponent for the opportunity to debate this topic with him.

C1. Affordability

My opponent concedes my argument that PCs are more affordable than Macs. They then go on to state "mac is actually cheaper than the other pcs able to compete with it." This is false. First, of all, while my opponent may question the credibility of Popular Mechanics based on one, small, insignificant error (which I never even brought up), on the part of the author. No matter what you do there is going to be human error in something constructed by humans. I will leave it up to the voters to decide whether one tiny error should be enough to cast the credibility of a magazine, which has existed since the early 1900s and is a technological magazine, in doubt. In the study conducted by Popular Mechanics, they found that a PC laptop could stand up in quality to a MacBook and the PC was much cheaper than the MacBook. Furthermore, windows dominates the market because it is affordable. Windows controls 91.9% of the market, compared to Apples 5%, because it is so much more affordable. More people can buy it therefore, more market control (from second round). This last fact has been entirely dropped by my opponent.

C2a. "We're dealing with computers. A fair amount of the sources will be personal. You can't dismiss them for that reason. Why wouldn't they be true?" The personal story I was attacking was your own. We cannot verify whether you are telling the truth. Your story would not be true because you most likely want to win this debate. You can find objective sources to show Macs are better than PCs you do not need to rely on personal subjective stories. Furthermore, my opponent has dropped my analysis that having thousands of different models means you can choose exactly what you want your computer to have and how with a Mac you do not have these options.

C2b. My opponent has conceded they believe you should be allowed to modify your computer without losing your warranty. Basically, they have conceded a PC is better than a Mac, on this point, because you can modify a PC. Writing a program is much different than modifying the hardware. As the hardware is the physical computer, software (programs) run on the hardware. You need both.

The fact is, kit or not kit, you can build your own PC, you cannot build your own Mac. This gives you options as you, personally, can decide what you want in your computer. My opponent asks whether I have the knowhow to build my own computer, actually, yes, the computer just across the hall, I built myself. If you want a picture I'll be glad to provide one.

C3. "I don't care what the magazine is. They can do a survey poorly or be wrong about something. I know that things they said are false." The fact is, you cannot simply say all aspects of the article are wrong simply by citing something which is easily explained by human error. My opponent has provided no reason for us to believe their numbers and data are wrong. They have provided no counter-studies, nothing. I mean if we are just going to throw out reputable magazines based on one tiny insignificant detail what is the point of citing sources? As for the survey in which "they say it's cheap feeling yet slick on a pc yet mac is gritty with sharp edges." The finish refers to the graphics display on the computer. Edges refer to the edges on the physical computer itself. Blogs are untrustworthy because we have no idea who is writing them. Could be anyone. I believe I went over this last round. My opponent considers my source invalid based upon an insignificant, trivial, detail. Now if we are going to continue the criticism of sources based on details, my opponents counter source must be wrong (not even to mention the fact it is a FORUM and he should have been able to find objective data somewhere else…) seeing as internet speed depends on the service provider, if they "give" you faster internet, your internet will run, faster. As for your second article, it was written in 2007, computer technology has advanced so much in 5 years. Nevertheless, the objective facts are clear, the MacBook Pro has ALMOST the exact same hardware as the HP Pavilion 5 DM4, with exceptions in the hard drive, ports, and, of course, OS, even there, there is not that noticeable of a difference. So, in reality, according to my opponents logic, their source must be completely inaccurate.

C4. Concession by my opponent. The OS is a fundamental part of the computer. You need the software in order to run the computer. You cannot argue the computer is better without arguing the quality of the OS. Much more software exists for the PC than the Mac.

C5. Concession. They are equal. And guess what "there are more PCs" because more people can afford them thus making them, better. More people having a computer is better than less people having a computer.

Opponents Arguments

C1. Despite the obvious fact my opponent knows not too much about computer programming seeing as Linux is UNIX based (UNIX does not stand as an OS on its own). My opponent drops my analysis of how he uses an extremely narrow profession to justify his view.

C2. I was merely stating that a photography website cannot know enough about computers to make such an assertion. This is a fallacious appeal to authority because it is not a legitimate authority on the matter at hand. (It would be akin to asking a physicist to explain Constitutional Law). I was not attacking it because it was too professional, I was attacking it because it is not a legitimate authority on the matter. My opponent then provides another source in the form of a poll (the poll is quite outdated as its from 2007). It was also comparing OS's which my opponent thinks is irrelevant but, nevertheless, according to a more recent poll of 23,000 people, in 2010, 63.99% preferred PC over Mac. (1) The reality is, more people prefer PCs over Macs. This is further backed up by the objective fact that Windows controls 91.9% of the world wide OS market (from second round).

C3. Dell, Toshiba, HP

Despite the obvious fallacy of providing 3 companies and certain individuals stories and cross applying it to say all PCs are bad, even those from companies such as Acer, Asus, and Gateway, there are also those people who ohh hate Macs because of their problems. Mac users by now are probably gasping but, Macs are perfect (I'm exaggerating here). Furthermore, my opponent is supposed to be arguing Macs are better than PCs, but, instead they are arguing 1) certain companies customer support can be bad in certain cases and 2) Two person's personal stories with a computer obviously means all PCs suck. The first argument is entirely subjective and depends on the customer service rep. Throughout your life, you may need to call Apple every once in a while, does this mean that every single person at Apple is always going to be all kind and helpful, probably not. And the second argument is completely fallacious. Just because 2 computers are bad does not necessarily mean all computers are bad. I mean if you really just want to go on certain subjective viewpoints here's a facebook page called "macs suck!" (http://www.facebook.com...). Of course it must be correct, I mean 595 people like the page. Around 595 people complain about how much their Mac stinks. 595 is greater than 4 therefore, Mac is worse than PC.

To conclude, my opponent spends much of their time trying to avoid objective facts instead they rely upon personal stories which cannot be confirmed in anyway. To the voters, I implore you to look at the objective facts, should we trust an unconfirmed personal story, or facts and numbers which throughout this debate have not really been contested. The choice is simple, vote objective fact, vote Pro.

Source:
1. http://mashable.com...
blackhawk1331

Con


This was a fun debate. I just realized this was the final round. Before entering my final arguments, I'd just like to express that I look forward to the possibility of debating with THEBOMB again someday.



C1. The most basic mac is more affordable than the most basic PC. That I concede. As you climb up the ladder, however, macs are cheaper. Also, whe you factor in the tec support mentioned numerous times on those review sites provided, the pc is roughly the same price with more aggravation. That error was not tiny. It was a poorly run survey with only four people as far as can be seen. There are too few people polled to be able to determine which computer is worse. It becomes even worse when you observe that two of those people showed evident bias towards PC from passed experience. I never called the credibility of the magazine as a whole into doubt. I called the credebility of that survey for that comparison into doubt. The magaine is liable to mess up at some point. Since it was clearly in that survey, that sury can't be used as proof and so any results drawn from it can't be used. The quality of a computer cannot be judged on price alone. If that were the case, then the cheapy kids computers you buy for a three year old to press buttons on would be the ultimate computer because it's the cheapest. While more people can afford the various PC brands, that doesn't make them a higher quality computer. I spent no time on this argument because anyone can see that there are more PCs out there than macs. That's because they're cheaper, not better.



C2a. I provided more personal accounts than just my own. Even if you disregard my account, the sites I've provided have easily 100 accounts of people having problems with their PCs and complaining about them. My opponent has provided no such site for macs. My opponent claims that I've dropped the different models argument. This is false. If you'll look back one round, it'll be noticed that I pointed out why his models example was useless. The models you sighted were being see-through verses pink verses whatever else. That has no affect on the capability of the comuter.”



C2b. I never conceded that someone should be allowed to modify their computer without losing their warranty. I said that any company will take the warranty if you mess with the computer, but that doesn't stop anyone. They take the risk anyway. You can modify a mac as well as a PC. There are risks I both, and the warranty is voided in both cases. It was never specified that modifying was limited to hardware. The argument was you can't modify a mac. You can. Even if that modification is as simple as writing a new program.



You can't build your own mac because the pieces are very precise and very high quality. That doesn't make the computer worse. I would love a picture.



C3. Two of the people surveyed were clearly biased towards PC based on past experience. They're entire testimony contradicted itself. That alone makes those results untrustworthy because half the survey was biased. Since the ultimate conclusion cited relied on the results of that survey, the argument is invalid based upon the sole source provided. I have provided no counter studies because that “insignificant detail” is very significant. When half of the people surveyed are biased, that survey is invalid. This argument was my opponent's thus he had to fix it. Based on my opponent's argument's, all I had to do to invalidate this argument was point out that a significant portion of the study cited was invalid and poorly done. Read the testimony. The gamer is clearly refering to the graphics for both parts. The testimonies in the study could have been written by anyone. There is no name or anything. It just says “teacher” or “gamer”. If blogs are untrustworthy even though someone asking for help with, or criticizing, their computer and has no reason to lie, then that is a further reason why my opponent's study is invalid. Once again, when judging computer quality, one must use personal accounts. There is no reason to ignore them. My opponent's study doesn't even have a date to show when it was written. In five years, the site is still considered a valid source. If it were ten years old, that'd be a different story. Older sources must be used, however, because there wouldn't be enough sources from 2012 alone. The internet argument is not true at all. That's like saying if your provider provides 4G, then you get it even though your phone can't even run 3G. The computer can only run the internet so well and so fast. I miss how my source is completely innacurate according to my logic.



C4. That was not a concession. We are not arguing OS capability and quality. If we were this would be Windows vs OS X. It's not. We are arguing the physical capability of the computer itself. Not it's operating system. If my opponent wants to argue OS, though, then fine. I've already cited numerous sources saying the Apple OS is better for multimedia alone.



C5. There are more PCs than macs because of pricig, true. However, the price doesn't determine the quality of the computer. There are also more phones that can't use 3G than those that can. 3G is better, though. The phones and plans that allow it just cost more.



My Arguments



C1. This argument was based solely on programmers. Therefore, the testimonies of programmers are what will lift up or tear down this argument. The only testimonies provided lift it up.



C2. Why can't a photographer know which computer is better? If a business owner isn't the proper authority, then who is? A magazine that can't run a good survey? I don't understand how it is at all akin to asking a physisist to explain Constitutional Law. One is theories while the other is government. They are nothing alike. Business owners can make recommendations on equipment even if they aren't in the same business. They know what works. They can tell others what works based on their experience. There is no reason why a business owner is not a legitimate authority on the matter of what computer is better for business.



C3. I specifically said those three companies, so I provided sources for them. I can't possible get a source for every PC company out there in the time I've got availiable. Give Apple customer support a call sometime. They are plenty helpful. And I provided two personal accounts because providing anymore would just get repetetive. There are tons of them out there. You provided a sourcce were 595 people complain. I provided four scources and pulled one complaint from each. The first scource alone has 1045 reviews for Dell with a two star rating.



My opponent has tried to show that PCs are superior because they are cheaper. This is false. The quality of a computer has nothing to do with its price. He's also tried arguing that PCs are superior because you can get them in pink and purple and orange. His one survey showing PCs have superior hardware is a poorly conducted survey with obviously biased participants.


Debate Round No. 4
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by 1dustpelt 4 years ago
1dustpelt
I have never Windows crash. As for the slow part, it's most likely the user's fault. If they were ignorant idiots who doesn't know how to defragment their hard disk or optimize their computer, then it's the idiot's fault. As iv597 said, knowledge is power. The people who crashed their computers were probably ignorant fvcks who doesn't know what an antivirus is or went into the Registry and deleted everything.
Posted by iv597 4 years ago
iv597
The problem is not "PC" or "Mac". The problem is Windows.

If I throw Windows on either of the above, it could be argued that it is more likely to crash than an operating system using a Linux or BSD kernel (So GNU/Linux, FreeBSD, etc. Mac OS X runs a Darwin kernel which derived from FreeBSD).

On the other hand, though, the computer is only as stable and/or secure as the user allows it to be. While Linux and BSD OSes are more stable by design, a user with proper knowledge can crash the system just as easily as a Windows user could. Knowledge is power, my friends.
Posted by blackhawk1331 4 years ago
blackhawk1331
I've never seen a mac crash, and just about every pc I've used or seen used has either crashed or been slower than sh!t.
Posted by 1dustpelt 4 years ago
1dustpelt
"PC's crash" I have only seen one PC crash in my entire life and that's because the guy was so ignorant at computers and did not know how to maintain it. Besides, Macs crash too.
Posted by blackhawk1331 4 years ago
blackhawk1331
Lol@ peacefulchaos.
Posted by PeacefulChaos 4 years ago
PeacefulChaos
I agree with Pro 100%. I am certainly better than a Mac.
Posted by blackhawk1331 4 years ago
blackhawk1331
I'll have to add more of my arguments next round. I ran out of characters. Sorry.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Stephen_Hawkins 4 years ago
Stephen_Hawkins
THEBOMBblackhawk1331Tied
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:32 
Reasons for voting decision: Both arguments were relatively strong, but B-hawk used a lot of solely opinion arguments which really are dismissed quite quickly. Better sourcing, as it was very much needed for many of the claims, but ultimately THEBOMB made better cases in fewer words.
Vote Placed by 1dustpelt 4 years ago
1dustpelt
THEBOMBblackhawk1331Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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: Pro proved his point, and Con used ridiculous facts like, (Reworded) "PC's get virusses and have to get repaird every 3 years!" Yeah right! (Sarcasm)
Vote Placed by Brenavia 4 years ago
Brenavia
THEBOMBblackhawk1331Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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: Very close debate. Very close. I sided with Pro in the end because most of the facts he stated were rooted in truth, while a lot of the Con's arguments were opinionated. Bad reason, I know, but in a debate this close everything counts. Good contentions, good sources, and overall enjoyable to read about.