Editors' note : This shootout is based on tests done by our sister site CNET.com. As such, please note that there may be slight differences in the testing procedure and ratings system. For more information on the actual tests conducted on the software, please inquire directly at the site where the article was originally published.

Mac or PC? Leopard or Vista? If you're in the market for a new computer, the choices may seem endless and limiting all at once.

New Macs generally cost several hundred dollars more than Windows machines that have similar specs, but Mac fans swear the difference is worth the cost for security and ease of use. Plus BootCamp, included with Leopard, can also run Windows. However, diehard Windows devotees insist that their less-expensive systems can run more applications and are more customizable.

Apple Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard touts more than 300 new features. Microsoft didn't advertise as many changes to Windows Vista, which also introduced new eye candy and under-the-hood changes. Here's a rundown of the features offered by each.

 

Recanter

 View profile
 Send mail

Recanter says...
Get the Leopard... why?

For me its 2 simple things.

1. Stability.
If I got a 1 dollar for every time I had to restart my Vista since I bought it and multiplied it by the amount of time I wasted waiting for the restart... I could buy Leopard for free... But wait, there is more... If I factor in the amount of lost information due to crashes during work sessions or downloading important data... I think I could buy at least half a Mac system.

2. The force is with Leopard... with more "useful" softwares coming.

Without getting all technical, the general feeling I get is that the Windows operating system is on the back foot, because it peaked somewhere in the 90s with WIndows 95 then Xp. For those who remember, back then may kool applications and GAMES, could not be played on Mac. So Windows had the momentum and really "ownd" the desktop.

After the Ipod revolution, more and more people got a taste for the Apple interface and customer focus and they liked it... Now more and more "useful" programs and applications are migrating to Mac. All the games from Electronic Arts, Id software and many other software companies are now available on Mac. So this was a great bonus to me.

I own both systems and I can tell you now, that I only use the Vista when I have to and thank god, those moments are getting less and less!

Hope this helps :)

Nov 02, 2007 23:13

Devlin

 View profile
 Send mail

Devlin says...
That statement about Macs being more expensive than PCs is simply not as applicable today as it was back in the 90's especially if it's going to be used as a workstation. Macworld has an article that compared a Dell workstation to a similarly configured Mac Pro and the Mac was almost $900 US cheaper and still had slightly better specs! There's also no getting around the fact that there is only one version of Leopard that's superior to most of Vista's versions.

Nov 04, 2007 06:41

shashanktri...

 View profile
 Send mail

shashanktripathi says...
That is not true. Don't know about the "Macworld" comparisons (how's that for an unbiased article) but I can get the top of the line Sony Vaio with 4GB of RAM and the latest Intel multi-core chip and a top of the line 17 inch screen with 240 GB of hard disk, for about US$ 4000. In the Mac Pro world, try configuring the same system on the apple.com website (choose all the top of the line products) and you'll be close to US$ 7,000.

So yes, Macs are very much more expensive. And I haven't even started counting the cost of all software. A number of functions on the Windows machine are available through free downloadable software. Not so in the Mac world. Also, the next time an update to Windows happens, it will be included as a service pack. Why should I cough up a "special upgrade price" for new features without a majar overhaul?

Bottomline: the total cost of ownership of a Macbook Pro is immensely higher than a comparable Windows laptop.

Nov 15, 2007 14:16

jemgx

 View profile
 Send mail

jemgx says...
being the most problematic operating system in the world, we still have to face the fact that windows operating system is everywhere, from automation to controler. more then 90% industries uses windows as operating system. even your iPod calibration work or chipset, might be using a machine working on windows operating system.
apple have already given up on their processor and gone for intel processor. My dream is to have MAC operating system on intel chipset, this way i can have a custom PC with both windows and MAC OS. who knows... anything can happen

Nov 05, 2007 14:52

shashanktri...

 View profile
 Send mail

shashanktripathi says...
Not sure what makes Windows the "most problematic". Among which ones? Have you tried Ubuntu/Kubuntu, SuSE, FreeBSD, and such? Great to tinker with, hard to get all kinds of things done. OSX is pretty but it's expensive. And a number of kinks still need working out in Leopard (ARS Technica has a fantastic and detailed overview), just as they do in Vista.

As for Windows XP, I have never used a more stable OS. My laptop, a piddly Sony Vaio with 2 gig of RAM and dual Intel Core Duo (long before they were available in the Mac camp), has been up since about 42 days running now.

I do all sorts of design (Photoshop, Dreamweaver) and programming on it (Eclipse, Postgresql, Apache, MySQL, PHP) so it's not exactly your average Windows machine either. Many of the programs I use are free, from full function FTP or SSH to the sophisticated design and animation software.

And btw, my Windows actually looks like a Mac with FlyakiteOSX, so I have the advantage of a decent looking interface too. I'm very active online but have never had a virus or a worm or spyware (free but powerful tools for all of those). Even my firewall is free.

Windows XP is the best system in the world, and for all its snags at the moment I am confident that Vista will be quite a solid system in a couple of years too.

Nov 15, 2007 14:26

Jerry

 View profile
 Send mail

Jerry says...
You can have both!
The new Macs can run Win and OS-X.
I had PC twice and that was a horror time. Never again.
My two sons wanted PCs but after they tried my G-5, now they also have their own Macs. By the way, my G-5 runs for over 4 years, 24/7 and the only thing tat I had to replace was the hard drive.

Dec 10, 2007 03:05

shashanktri...

 View profile
 Send mail

shashanktripathi says...
The table comparing the two has some insufficient information from the Windows side. The whole ecosystem of Windows is structured around allowing 3rd party software. This has some minuses as Microsoft loses a Mac-like "control", but these negatives are hugely outweighed by the positives:

(1) For Virtual Desktop, there are several freely available software that will make multiple desktops a cinch. Microsoft Powertoys itself has one such system, and then there's "Virtual Dimension" freely available on Sourceforge: virt-dimension.sourceforge.net

(2) The Windows firewall is basic. Try Zone Alarm, or even better Commando firewall, both of which are free.

(3) AVG is unbeatable as an anti-virus software. It seamlessly updates itself every day, does well in tests for identifying virii, and does it all without being a memory hog.

(4) Spyware Search & Destroy is the best anti-spyware software out there. Especially with its ability to 'immune' the most commonly known software against compromise. And it updates automatically too.

(5) Media player: just get the free VLC player. It plays almost every format out there so you don't have to bother with codec downloads. It even plays music CDs, VCDs, and DVDs.

(6) Burning a DVD, or ripping and copying a DVD (your own) is a cinch on Windows.

(7) Drive encryption is fantastic on Windows machines. This is quite a solid feature of Unix and MacOSX inherits those strengths, but TrueCrypt for Windows is just as good if not better because of user-friendly features for control.

In a nutshell, I just don't see any major benefits of these things. As for the timing/archiving function, Windows XP has had "System Restore" for many, many years now. It was about time Macs caught up.

Nov 15, 2007 14:35

lquan@cyber...

 View profile
 Send mail

lquan@cyberway.com.sg says...
Not sure what has gotten into shashanktripathi to be so emotional and not really objective. Give the diligent editors here at Cnet some recognition. This is a good comparison.

shashanktripathi first talk about Mac pro and quotes its price of $7000 and he concludes that Macbook pro is way more expensive than Sony vaio. Mac Pro is a industrial level workstation. Macbook Pro (at about $1800) is the laptop for the consumers. Get the facts right, compare apples with apples please. Furthermore $7000 is a reasonable price for what Mac Pro is used for. Most of your Hollywood graphics are made on the Mac Pro. For what most people use their desktop computers for, there's the iMac that comes in at about $1000.

Secondly this is a comparison about Leopard and Vista. So why ramble about your Windows XP and give a huge list of third party programs you have to install to get it to look like a Mac (quotes "flyakiteOS") and do what a Mac does? I do agree though that Windows XP is the best from Microsoft so far but Vista really hits the snag. And seriously I don't have hours or days to download 10 different programs, put them on my previous generation OS aka Windows XP before it starts to look like a decent OS. I was an early adopter of Vista when it came out. 6 months and I've formatted my computer 3 times. Huge waste of time and life. Can't sit in front of my computer and try to fix it for days and night. I do have a life remember?

I applaud you for keeping your windows up running for 42 days. The fact that you actually keep track of it proves it's fallibility. Mac never fails, always work. I can't remember the last time I rebooted it just like I can't remember when's the last time I restart my refrigerator or microwave.

The bottom line is Mac just works. It is definitely not the cheapest like what Dell tries to be. But if you can afford a few more hundred bucks, get a Mac. You'll appreciate it's simplicity, quality and detailed elegance. I switch over 3 months ago and I'm not looking back. The age where computers are complicated and only for the geeks are over. If you're a geek stick with windows, everyone else get a Mac. Hmm...actually I'll take that back. If you're a geek, stick with Unix. Everyone else get a Mac.

Yours truly,
the PC guy

Nov 15, 2007 16:38

kaisei1

 View profile
 Send mail

kaisei1 says...
Windows or MAC ..... It really boils down to "PREFERRENCE"...nuff said

Nov 15, 2007 21:24

modsupremo

 View profile
 Send mail

modsupremo says...
Cutting the long story short, Macs are better both software and hardware wise...

Nov 15, 2007 21:44

midnito

 View profile
 Send mail

midnito says...
okay i admit that i have never used Mac before. However my windows vista does NOT hang and on the contrary, it is faster than Xp. When I went to the Apple shop to take a look , I was impressed by the "design" of the desktop(i mean the icons are placed on a toolbar on something like that).However the reason I did not want to even consider buying it is some/many of my software are NOT compatible with Mac at all.Maybe they should improve on that to make me decide to take Mac as my OS.

Nov 15, 2007 22:37

voltusbazoka

 View profile

voltusbazoka says...
I use both OS, Windows and Mac.
For me, I use Windows for work because it's compatibility with other user. And for anything else, which more important than work, I use Mac.

Nov 22, 2007 15:02

modsupremo

 View profile
 Send mail

modsupremo says...
Interesting comment voltusbazoka! I use both platforms too...but it's the other way around for me, Mac for work, PeeCee for other network stuff...
Programs are a lot for the Mac compared to how it used to be 20 years or more ago so for me the software issue isn't really an issue...

Nov 22, 2007 19:49

itconsultant

 View profile
 Send mail

itconsultant says...
Hey,

There's no such thing as 'Best' OS - for that matter 'Best' anything. Unless one has tried ALL, I mean, ALL the OS's in the world, who is to say what's best?

It all boils down to personal preference and whether the OS suits our needs or not. If I just want to surf the web and check email, even the Asus EEE PC can be the 'best' to me.

I own both a Mac and a PC. Both serve my needs for different occasions and functions. Trying to convince people why my choice is the best choice only goes to show that I'm not sure about my choice after all and therefore I'm looking for supporters to justify my decision.

The same sun that turns the ice (hard) into water (soft) also turns mud (soft) into clay (hard). Get it? :)

Why not just let Apple be Apple and Windows be Windows and we all live happily ever after! :)

Jan 11, 2008 00:08

aadim2006

 View profile
 Send mail

aadim2006 says...
its clean as this leopard is better.

Jan 17, 2008 14:34

composer

 View profile

composer says...
To think that Vista is good does not make sense.

I have built PC's for years, AMD, OCZ Ram, Intel, Over-clocked some gaming rigs with fast front side bus, and so on. Then Intel came out with Duo Core. That just about killed off AMD (although hopefully we'll see something soon). With the DUO CORE, one need not have to over-clock as it was a great chip, especially the duo core 2 at .45.

This being said, I work in Film/TV. I thought MAC and EXPERIENCE was a bunch of hot air until I built a MAC OSX (thanks to INTEL) and while I used them in the studio, I never played with iLife, or some of the other software offered.

Needless to say, I bought a mac, two in fact, two Macbook Pro's and have never EVER looked back. Wait. That is not true. I installed Vista for about 2 hours - also the same time it took to install. Now, perhaps going to Vista from XP and never seeing a MAC, I might have been "WOWed" but I was not, it was a horrible work flow. Not only that, many key commands that Apple has just makes sense.
Plus, add to this that most of the software for the MAC is far, far far superior to that offered by windows. You don't need SpyBot S&D, you don't need Zone Alarm, or McCaffe, and many other 3PP.

Plus, when it comes to major software, you can always find it for the mac now, (ADOBE, STEINBERG) however, you cannot find Final Cut nor Logic or iLife for the PC and hands down, Final Cut and the FREE iLife suite is 2nd to NONE. I mean NONE. With iWeb, Garage Band (I was a developed for Sony (Sonic Foundry Acid), iPhoto, man, it just works and all the programs work intertwined, even 3PP software exports and works fluid with any other APP on the MAC.

What you can do on a mac (creative) can take hours to accomplish on a PC, all the while, freeze and restarts. You see, with PC's you have all these developers who have to write code to make their software work nicely with other software - some are Authenticated, others are not and this spells trouble.

With a mac, it really is EASY to become productive. For example, while I have InDesign for Newsletters, Print work, you can use iWork at a fraction of the price and its about 5 X faster too. And games? Now they are out for the MAC. If not? I boot to boot camp and play my unreal on WIN XP (after of course, adding 81 critical updates) - that's insane.

Lastly, I will say, the one program that tied me to a PC was GIGA STUDIO which by far, is the best sounding SAMPLER out there for the serious composer/artist, and is only PC. All MAC composers had a PC just for that reason. I am happy to say though, there is a MAC version coming out very soon. Hurray. And apple has gone from 3% to almost 9% market share in just a few short years.

And finally, how sad is it that I have some HIGH END Firewire Audio Pre Amps that the manufacture to this day (MARCH 2008) has still not released drivers for and many audio/video companies insist that you stay with WIN XP, (with a maximum of 4GB addressable ram) meanwhile, Apple is running 64 bit and can use 32 GIGS of RAM. I can go on and on on how VISTA IS A HUGE FAILURE and this is coming from someone that is a developer/beta tester for PC to MAC applications. Vista is a waste of time and MACS have come down so much in price that a iMAC is simply a wonderful machine for the price to performance ratio - the only caveat I have with Apple is I wish they would release a decent LAPTOP that had a DEDICATED GPU as the PRO user is not the bread and butter any more and APPLE would do well to add a GREAT GPU to the low end, then they could get more gamers as well as allow some of us to use a cheaper laptop for 3D without worrying what would happen if we lost it.

FWIW, I also tested a 10.4 (TIGER) application running in 32 bit then tested the same application on 10.5 (LEOPARD) and I was really surprised that the increase was almost 30% in performance, just by updating the Operating System. How cool is that? For example, if you are using LOGIC and add REVERB, you can add almost DOUBLE of what you could have loaded, simply by upgrading the OS.

I admire Bill Gates and we have to thank him for revolutionizing the computing industry, but without sounding like a zealot (who does know about the registry, .dll files, networking, desktop.ini), you really have to wonder with all those BILLIONS why MSFT could not come out with a ZIPPY cutting edge Operating System and why Longhorn (VISTA) was delayed almost 3 years.

I see many people switching these days and most that don't - are afraid they can't "control" (overclock) their system- but let me tell you, going to a Mac really does change the way you think, work, operate and if you have a smidgen of "creativity", you will REALLY become creative as the OS and programs really do inspire you to do so much. Apple has the DIGITAL LIFE down and they release something new for every quarter - - its great.

Watch for the new iPhone coming soon I bet.

Oh well, so much for the "final thought" huh!? (LOL). Windows is okay, it does it's job, but for me, (drivers), I literally have no choice but to stick with XP and wondering why multimillion dollar companies stick with XP has to make you wonder, from Tascam, to DELL, to Sony - many offer XP and in the business world (as well as education), they are all recommended to stay with XP. Now that right there says quite a bit about how Vista missed its mark.

Perhaps the next time?

Cheers

Mar 28, 2008 18:32

andychx

 View profile

andychx says...
There's no comparison.

Get a Mac, It Just Works... (=

Apr 15, 2008 23:09

Pratyay

 View profile

Pratyay says...
Vista needs too much of hardware support =(

Jun 12, 2008 11:32

GENE

 View profile

GENE says...
i never use mac before but face the fact that windows OS is more efficient and compatible on most softwares and applications, as what i heard from other advertising junkies, when it comes to design Mac is good on graphics, BUT its slower compare to windows, i guess its up to you what suites your taste.

Aug 05, 2008 16:54