Stability

Now, it's time for the hot button issue, the one issue that Mac users use against PC users (and vice versa) all the time: stability. To put a few misconceptions to rest, I will resort to the timely bulleted list. I hope by this point, I've shown that I can definitely appreciate both a Mac and a PC platform, and thus, readers will view the following statements as pretty darn impartial:
  • OS X crashes
  • Windows XP crashes
  • My G5 machine crashes a bit less than any of my Windows XP machines
Now, let me qualify those three statements - I'll start at the bottom. Apple has it very easy. They have complete control over the hardware and drivers that go into every machine they build, they don't have to deal with multiple chipsets for a particular platform, and they don't even have to deal with multiple video card vendors. Apple controls every aspect of the hardware and software that goes into their computers. There are no strange driver or BIOS revisions out of Taiwan that don't play well with some configurations, and there are no worries about memory timings set too aggressively causing even the slightest bit of instability (without the appropriate timings, DDR400 will not boot in a G5). The PC world is much, much different; everything that Apple doesn't have to worry about or deal with, PC users may not worry about, but they definitely do have to deal with. How many times have you bought a cheaper piece of hardware from a no-name manufacturer because it fit your budget? It's not as common now because prices have gone down so much, but a few years ago, it was definitely very popular - I know. I did it. Sometimes you'd luck out, and other times, you'd have one component in your system that would always cause compatibility problems or stability issues. For me, it was an old Opti sound card; then, it was a no-name 430VX motherboard. And tracking down those kinds of problems can be very difficult because the symptoms don't always point to the culprit. I've always said that if you use the right hardware, a Windows box can be just as stable as any other machine out there - and my systems have supported that. I wouldn't reboot my system for months if it didn't have any problems. It was always a bad driver install, power outage or a program gone awry that forced a restart. People used to complain about Windows NT/2000 as a server platform because of stability; we've actually had more outages on our Linux servers than on our Windows servers. Not saying that Linux is a bad OS, but we know our Windows servers, and we know what hardware works best under them, and thus, once assembled and properly maintained, we had no real issues with them. >br?
OS X is built on a very solid core and it does handle individual applications crashing much better than Windows does. I've never had to reboot the entire system because one application crashed. It's also much better about restarting Finder (the equivalent of Explorer) if it crashes. It is things like these that make OS X a bit more "stable" of a platform than Windows, but also, remember that the tight quality control that Apple has over the components that go into their systems does also play a very large part in assuring stability.

The end result is that my Mac is a bit more stable than my PCs. It's not night and day, and the Mac does crash, just like my PCs do - it just crashes a little less frequently.

As far as hardware stability and failures go, I've heard horror stories about dead/dying G5s on Apple's support boards. I was honestly worried when I started reading through the threads; thankfully, I have yet to encounter any hardware issues with the G5, but I do recognize that there are users out there that have had serious issues with their systems. Unfortunately (or fortunately?) without much experience in this regard, there's not much I can say to Apple's hardware quality control, but I view Apple just like any other hardware vendor - there's no way that everything to come out of a company is going to be perfect. It's how they minimize the imperfections and deal with them when they occur that matter the most.

OS X Bottlenecks and Caching Applications under OS X
Comments Locked

215 Comments

View All Comments

  • fxparis - Wednesday, October 13, 2004 - link

    FinalFantasy also wrote in #151: " a lot a stupidities "

    it doesn't matter for him. but please FinalWhoever don't misinform people that need fair information to make their choice ! specially when it come to audio video pro

    some young people will make a living from it. and they'll make a better living if they choose Mac since the beginning to work.
    it's IMPORTANT !
  • chrisnorth - Tuesday, October 12, 2004 - link

    Regarding post #172 by Digstra, RIGHT ON! I think you have said, eloquently, what I was thinking. Of course, an open mind means that people need to recognize the good and the bad; nothing is perfect including OS X and the Mac. Having said all that, using XP may be subjecting yourself to unnessissary torture :-)
  • melgross - Tuesday, October 12, 2004 - link

    Student/Teacher Office for the Mac sells for $135-150, and you don't have to show that you are anything other than willing to pay for it.

    About security. While I completely agree with those who say that we should all get a router, firewall, virus protection, and several spy-ware prevention programs, it just doesn't work for the average person.

    When I help someone with a PC who has a seriously infected machine, I find several things of interest.

    Most have an anti-virus program, but have let their subscription lapse. When I mention this, they get angry about the idea that they should HAVE to pay for a subscription. They feel as though they shouldn't have to pay for something on a yearly basis to use something that they have already bought.


    The idea of getting two or three anti-spy-ware programs is also something that they can't understand, or like. When I explain that even having these programs doesn't mean that they won't still get infected, even though the probability is much less, they are bewildered. They don't WANT to understand that they have to be proactive about these problems.

    They just want to use their machines.

    If you rarely buy anything, go to obscure sites (and with the new fly-by trojans...), not open e-mails, etc., you won't likely get infected. I suspect that those who have all of the protections, and claim to never get infected, don't really do as much as they have us think they do. I don't see Anand web surfing frivolously, downloading questionable files from newsgroups, and subscribing to porno sites etc.

    Most people do at least some of those things.

    No matter how you look at it, OS X is far more secure, for the average person, than XP. If we all played by the rules, and Microsoft did the right thing, it might be different.

    One reason that SP 2 is having as many problems as it has been, is because even though it's got a number of services turned off by default, when you use .net, or need certain services from office etc. they have to be turned on again. OS X doesn't need most of those services to accomplish the same things. FreeBSD is also one of the most secure UNIX variants. Linux, by the way, is turning out to be not that much more secure than XP is, going by all of the successful exploits reported.
  • Digsa - Tuesday, October 12, 2004 - link

    Just wanted to say that - as a long-time Mac user - I really respected this article for its honesty of approach. I was really impressed. While of course I might quibble here and there about some things (Windows security, adware and virus issues were strangely absent;-)) I can genuinely trust the writer's attempts at balance, and I give his opinions the weight they deserve. he's done a fine job.

    At the moment I am travelling in the opposite direction to the author - I've just started using an XP machine for course work - and this article has helped me to see my experience in a more balanced light. Some of the criticisms he has - and my own criticisms when using XP - are based upon long-established working habits and prejudices. The clever trick is to see through those prejudices to look to the root of the system. What is the system trying to achieve? Does it do it better or worse? Honestly?

    OS X is a wonderful system, and I recommend those who haven't looked at it to do so. I'm enjoying the journey of discovery with XP - and trying to keep an open mind when it does something I'm unaccustomed to. However, the best lesson is perspective. If we don't give the other system a proper try, how can we make justified comments upon it. The author of this piece set out to do just that - and the results speak for themselves.

    I suppose my one crucial point is this - if we all keep open minds about the possibilities for innovation from different computer systems, and don't let the zealots on both sides take over the asylum, then we are all winners. Because the market in ideas can function without prejudice, and a good technology implementation can be seen for what it is - rather than through the prism of reality distortion fields or slick marketing.
  • chrisnorth - Tuesday, October 12, 2004 - link

    In reply to post #167 by Victor, thanks for the commentary.

    Yes, I could have been much more specific. So perhaps I should have reworded my thoughts to read "10 most popular software requests" or some such thing. Also, I was playing "Devil's Advocate" to some degree as I believe a somewhat critical eye represents the best approach when you want to improve something.

    I agree, Mellel is a first rate word processor and an excellent deal. I've been using it since its early days. I think it cost $19.95 when I purchased it. Instead of BBEdit, I use skEdit, which is reasonably capable and has great potential. As for Filemaker Pro, it is an expensive option as is Keynote, given that they represent the equivalent of only a single module each from the Office suite. Mesa 3 from P&L software is a top rate spreadsheet and at $30.00 a great value.

    Hadn't heard of Blogwave Studio. I use the freeware MacJournal, which is an excellent Journal hampered only by its limited functionality. Haven't heard of Quicksilver, and can't use it anyway since I'm waiting for Tiger before upgrading from Jaguar. As for the other suggestions, been there and not terribly impressed generally.

    Any other thoughts on great Mac software deals anyone?
  • victorpanlilio - Tuesday, October 12, 2004 - link

    FinalFantasy wrote in #169: Victor...you are a monster...wow... hehe ;D

    My 4-1/2 year old son likes to have me pretend I'm one... :-)

    I'm just a regular guy who thought he had finally overcome his addiction to discussion forums...not... well, it's better than video lottery terminals, I suppose. Anyhoo, I'll probably wind down my posts because I *really* need to get a life... :-)

    If this were a group in physical space and I'd just won at the VLT I'd invite y'all for a round of brewskis... make that a keg, on me. Oops, maybe not everyone here is of drinking age... :-D

    Hey Anand, ever tried Stella Artois?
  • FinalFantasy - Tuesday, October 12, 2004 - link

    Victor...you are a monster...wow...hehe ;D
  • victorpanlilio - Tuesday, October 12, 2004 - link

    Re: inexpensive alternative to MS Office

    If you really need ALL the functions of Office, the total cost of the apps listed above would exceed the price of Office 2004 for the Mac (C$560 Std, C$700 Pro). So, at this time there seems to be no inexpensive substitute. One avenue you might try is to enrol in a community college course and use student status to purchase Student/Teacher Edition of Office (about C$225), which would allow you to install on up to 3 machines.
  • victorpanlilio - Tuesday, October 12, 2004 - link

    Chris North wrote in #166: How about the top ten most needed apps on the Mac

    Top ten most needed from what perspective? CAD? Web design? Database development? 3D Rendering? Business intelligence? Customer relationship management? Seismic data interpretation? Medical imaging? Small business collaboration?

    Anyway, some suggestions based on your list:

    Advanced inexpensive OS X native CSS Editor
    StyleMaster, http://www.westciv.com/software/index.html

    Advanced inexpensive OS X Native XML Editor
    Hmm... they all seem to be Java-based, so no go...

    However, for text editing, instead of BBEdit, try
    TextMate, http://macromates.com/

    OS X advanced personal journal with photo and file wells
    BlogWave Studio, http://www.littlehj.com/

    OS X native advanced but inexpensive alternative to Photoshop
    Stone Design Stone Studio, http://www.stone.com/

    OS X native advanced but inexpensive alternate to MS Office
    Word: Mellel, http://www.redlers.com/
    Excel: MarinerCalc, http://www.marinersoftware.com
    PowerPoint: Keynote, http://www.apple.com/keynote
    Access: FileMaker Pro, http://www.filemaker.com

    Oh, and if you're on OS X 10.3, you should try QuickSilver:
    http://quicksilver.blacktree.com/
  • chrisnorth - Monday, October 11, 2004 - link

    Further to my last post, here's a thought for Anand: If you are looking for a followup article to do on Macs, how about the top ten most needed apps on the Mac? You could take a poll or something then describe where the biggest deficiencies lie and which apps would best fill them. Maybe, you could help convince a few companies like Jasc, or Xara to port their products.

    Here is a quick list to start with:
    Advanced inexpensive OS X native CSS Editor
    Advanced inexpensive OS X Native XML Editor
    OS X advanced personal journal with photo and file wells.
    OS X native advanced but inexpensive alternative to Photoshop
    OS X native advanced but inexpensive alternate to MS Office.

    Please no multi-platform java apps.

    Just a thought...

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now