MasterCPU Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 whats up? just want to know if Apple "MAC" is more stable than windows OS? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin-uk Veteran Posted June 16, 2006 Veteran Share Posted June 16, 2006 I would say so, since hardware is a lot more solid than actual software ;) Jokes aside, I would assume they are, since Macs tend to have all the same hardware so there are less driver issues etc, although im not sure, I dont own a Mac :p btw a MAC is something you get on a NIC, a Mac is a computer ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alladaskill17 Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 Yes this post does require some kidding, with that in mind, the Mac hardware is more stable then Microsoft's Windows software. :laugh: Anyways.... I believe OS X is more stable then Windows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+John Teacake MVC Posted June 16, 2006 MVC Share Posted June 16, 2006 Oh My Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blinky Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 OSX is generally more stable than Windows, due to it being built around BSD (a flavour of UNIX) :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicane-UK Veteran Posted June 16, 2006 Veteran Share Posted June 16, 2006 Prepare to suffer a fiery, flame ridden death at the hands of fanboys my friend.. but, in my experience (and being totally honest) I would definately say that OS X is far more reliable than Windows on the desktop. I've worked in IT for a good few years now (i'm not just a hobbyist) and have used so so many different operating systems and types of hardware in my time! Out of the two, OS X does seem far more reliable BUT I feel that is partly down to Apple knowing exactly what hardware they will be supporting and generally no third party drivers which can cause problems. That said Microsoft isn't entirely without blame. Inserted a PCMCIA controlled CDROM drive into a Toshiba Portege R100 yesterday, finished installing some software off it, ejected the PCMCIA card and was greeted with a bluescreen and reset. That was a fully patched, updated and un-messed with copy of Windows XP SP2 - ho hum! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spielo Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 As a Mac and Windows XP user, I'd say that both Operating Systems are pretty reliable, neither of them are invincible, but I don't generally have trouble with either of them. It's more down to the software you're using. If you're using good quality software on either platform, you shouldn't have any problems... It's far more likely that a 3rd party piece of software will crash on either platform than the Operating Systems themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
georgevella Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 well dunno, which would be more "stable"? an Apple or a Stacker? ;-) on a side note. i have never tried a MAC but the last time I have seen a blue screen on my current configuration (WinXp with SP2) was a looong time ago, so maybe Windows is not as reliable as OS X in terms of security, but it is quite close to OSX in terms of stability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John S. Veteran Posted June 16, 2006 Veteran Share Posted June 16, 2006 Personally, I think so yes. It's seriously a breath of fresh air using OS X for 14 months or so on a daily basis after 11 years of Windows. My 2 cents. If this turns into a flamewar it will be closed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stereopixels Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 Here I find I have about as many (or as few) problems with Windows as I do with OSX, I use both for similar tasks and can't say i'd choose one over the other for a particular reason. I have to hand it to Microsoft though who unlike Apple have an absolute tonne of different hardware which it's possible their OS could reside on and hence have to work with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shetland Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 Right, first off its called a 'Mac' (for Macintosh) not a 'MAC' as so many put it. In terms of stability I'd say this: For a power user its about the same as a well kept Windows XP SP2 installation, occasional hitch but never a crash For an average joe user its quite a bit more stable, there is no spyware and such to worry about For a complete computer newbie its far more stable as its pretty hard to make a mistake - it can be set to prompt you at every click:P In terms of security its pretty similar: For a power user its probably about the same except you don't have to really think about security on your mac whereas on windows you do tend to check for updates For the average joe its far more secure. And back on stability I think that the vast number of 'badly coded apps' account for the bad stability on Windows, if you like me and keep to large software companies and steer clear of shareware programs (for the most part) you will be fine on windows - becuase of this the average joe is far safer on OSX. I personally believe OSX should take over the home market and art (broad term) market and leave windows to buisness and other markets. I don't believe Linux really has a place in the home, but i've used it to survive problems with windows so I guess its just a backup for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cashman Veteran Posted June 16, 2006 Veteran Share Posted June 16, 2006 Macs always die on me, but thats because I was using it to transfer HUGE uncompressed video files around the desktop, something I don't even dream of doing on a PC. It has crashed a few times when using programmes like Final Cut Pro, but can't really comment on it being stable against Windows, my PC hasnt ever crashed, not the the point where I cant turn it off like I had to do on the mac. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julius Caro Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 Back in the day when windows 2000 was released now that was a stable OS. Now it's really hard to tell which is more stable. I havent used a mac, and as for windows xp, I have crashed it a few times I think, but most have been because of hardware problems. But one thing is true, is that windows requires you to reboot de computer a lot. Something that linux doesnt... take the X server for example, if it crashes you close it and open it again. But linux definitely is a victim of hardware hangs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xxdesmus Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 I would say in theory, yes, it's more stable. In reality, no... Windows, OSX, and Linux are all equally as stable. I've had just as many kernel panics on my Mactel mini as I've had blue screens on my Win XP box. I honestly can't even tell you the last time I got a blue screen in Windows. Sure, the system hangs sometimes and occassionally programs leak memory, but it definitely doesn't crash like OSX does where you have to physically unplug the box sometimes. Just my $0.02 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chadwick Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 I think it is, every system is going to act up, and there are occasional glitches. But when i reboot my mac which is only for software updates i dont find myself closing 15 apps that I never installed. Games dont crash, software doesn't crash as often as i had experienced on windows, and when it does you are able to force quit it without fail. I've never had a kernel panic, from what I've seen kernel panic is usually the result of buggy software, I've never had happen with "good" software. With windows it was always hit or miss, completely random. Im not bashing windows, i just find it to be less consistent than OSX, even when something does crash in osx I find it repeatable, which makes it easy to report, and easy to avoid. I have a WMV pluggin for quicktime that fails to open wmv files on a specific website in safari, if i use firefox there isn't a problem, but even when it does cause safari to hang safari will come out of it eventually and if i dont feel like waiting i can force quit. When IE would freeze it meant a reboot for me.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TokyoKiller Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 Once Linux and Macintosh are used by the masses, they'll crash as much as Windows. Windows now adays only crashes due to the stupidity of the user who goes into websites full of spyware and says YES! to the free screensavers, etc. Also, since there is a LARGE variety of hardware for Windows, Microsoft can't control ALL the drivers and try them out themselves. I hate it when people try to compare a product used by millions and one used by thousands (Well maybe more but you ge the point) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkaic Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 This is a little unfair. But yes apple appears to be more stable. As far as design though, by design they all susceptible to crashes, issues, etc. Nothing is perfect. If it can be assembled, it can be disassembled. Reasons why? Apple makes the hardware, less driver issues, etc Smaller market, theres less difference and less possibility for problems. Apple is also more expensive. Not sure whether its because of brandname or quality. Because of smaller market share, less viruses, malware, trojans, etc. But If you know how to secure your windows box you should not have issues. As far as it goes, windows is extremely stable. But when you introduce a multitude of drivers, for multitudes of hardware combos, the internet, viruses, trojans, inadaquete software development companies, other inadaquete software, stupid users, yes the problems are much more grand scale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
semaja2.net Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 last time i checked XP was just a bloated screwed up version of 2000, i know some people that will only use 2000 or 2003 as XP to be honest was the worst OS ever in the NT range. PS. MacOSX for me so far fo 6 months of intsense work is the most reliable OS over windows Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John S. Veteran Posted June 16, 2006 Veteran Share Posted June 16, 2006 thread cleaned, let's stick to the thread-starters question please Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theyarecomingforyou Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 The main problem with XP, and Windows in general, is that it gradually becomes less and less responsive over many months. Despite what many claim it is not just about using your computer sensibily, it just becomes more bogged down the more you install, especially as applications can often leave up to several hundred registry settings after uninstalling them. Stability has been very good recently, particularly since SP2, but dodgy drivers can still take it down... that is the disadvantage to the open hardware model that Microsoft supports, though Vista looks to clamp down on a lot of the problems (the 64bit version especially). Although I use XP and mostly have a good time with doing so it has plenty of problems and there is an awful lot that could be improved, hence why Vista couldn't come sooner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phot0nic Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 It depend on the hardwarein the PC. Apple can control the hardware OSX is run on, and the drivers for that hardware. Microsoft cannot (except I heard they're trying something new for Vista so who knows..). If your PC has unreliable hardware, then yes, OSX will be far more stable. However, if you have decent quality hardware with decent quality drivers, then neither one is more stable. I've used Windows (many versions), several distros of Linux, OSX, and one flavor of Unix. I've got to say that none of these OSes I've tried are really any more stable than the other. The Macs I've worked on crash just as much (or more) than my custom built and maintained PC. However, the OEM PCs around campus (or owned by friends) I've used crash like there's no tomorrow. It all depends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1759 Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 It all depends on your hardware; I've had my current rig up for over 2 years, i.e. I haven't reformatted XP in over 2 years, in the meantime, I've applied 2 service packs and countless hotfixes. I've also installed Vista and Ubuntu in the past month, and out of the 3 OS's, the least stable has been Linux, but that was due to doggy programs and not knowing Linux as well as I do Windows. I haven't had a BSOD in XP in probably 6 months, there's just no reason for them if you keep your system clean and only update drivers when you have to. If you use crappy hardware on any system, expect problems and reboots, no matter which OS, although in Apple's case, there's less hardware you can actually use; if Apple was as open as Linux and Windows, then it would all be a wash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LTD Posted June 16, 2006 Share Posted June 16, 2006 The answer is YES, OS X is more stable than XP. Can XP be made just as stable as a standard OS X install? Absolutely. Run enough antivirus and anti-spyare/adware software and it'll run beautifully. Bu there's the kicker: Windows XP needs to be *maintained* regularly. OS X basically cleans itself, and owing to the fact that nothing can install itself onto the an OS X sytem without user notification and permission, OS X will remain more stable than XP with less work. In terms of the hardware/software relationship, one is desgined for the other, and vice-versa. It's the safest bet. Although there is plenty of software that runs on OS X, Windows own the lion's sahre of the software market. But unless you use *certain* specialized industry-specific software that runs on Windows, you can basically replace a Windows system with OS X and not miss a beat. Gaming is a different matter, but all the popular titles are more or less out for the Mac as well. Notwithstanding the software availability, in terms of design, functionality, aesthetics, and user-friendliness, OS X is a superior operating system. Its stabiity is only a small part of its virtues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leddy Posted June 17, 2006 Share Posted June 17, 2006 Mac OS X is generally more resistant to stupidity. Due to the lack of users of Mac OS X, it is also, by far, more resistant to malware. So no; Mac OS X isn't more stable than Windows. They're both equally as stable. One's just more resistant to stupidity than the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+virtorio MVC Posted June 17, 2006 MVC Share Posted June 17, 2006 I use both, and as far as I'm concerned, MacOS X is light years ahead of Windows XP in (among other things) stability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts