Which is more hassle to set up - Mac or PC?

Which is more hassle to set up - Mac or PC?

Summary: Is it more hassle to set up a Mac or a PC?

SHARE:
TOPICS: Apple, Hardware
114

Is it more hassle to set up a Mac or a PC?

Dwight Silverman offers both sides of the argument:

Dwight’s put a lot of effort into these two posts and I think that he captures well the kind of setup that the systems need.  Dwight’s conclusions are that both require about the same level of setting up.

Thoughts?

Topics: Apple, Hardware

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

114 comments
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • This is blasphemy I tell you!

    Vista being as easy to setup as OS X? How can this be?
    ye
    • re: Vista being as easy to setup as OS X?

      not likely. read both links. just do an install to have the basics running on os x is quicker than msft's vista. even customizing either os, os x is quicker. why? most of the drivers and software I need are already installed.

      gnu/linux...giving choice to the neX(11)t generation.
      Arm A. Geddon
      • Vista is easy. Why are so many "knowledgable" people...

        ...having problems with it?
        ye
        • re: knowledgable people

          probably because most of us have been around msft windows for a long time and back then we could do a lot more customising of our operating system then we can today. msft took away a lot of that freedom with each new release.

          it wasn't too long after win98 was released I started getting into linux, beos, etc. as I felt that freedom disappearing. also, the fact the dirty tricks msft was pulling off.

          anyway, back to the subject at hand. some of those problems are from having software not even a year old not being able to run. even some hardware problems are still around. mostly vista's media center doesn't like my tv tuner card.

          gnu/linux...giving choice to the neX(11)t generation.
          Arm A. Geddon
          • re: software and hardware

            oh yeah, I'll answer that myself, it's not vista's problem. ;-)

            gnu/linux...giving choice to the neX(11)t generation.
            Arm A. Geddon
          • Is your TV Tuner Card Vista certified?

            .
            ye
          • re: Is your TV Tuner Card Vista certified?

            nope. when I built the computer last year in order to beta test vista none of the hardware was. by the time vista was RTM most of the hardware worked. vista's media center couldn't find the driver during setup and yet the drivers were installed and worked great with the software that came with it. btw, a few weeks ago I went back to winxp pro w/sp2. :-) here's the link to the card mentioned...

            http://www.asus.com/products4.aspx?l1=18&l2=83&l3=0&model=592&modelmenu=1

            gnu/linux...giving choice to the neX(11)(t generation.
            Arm A. Geddon
          • Then why are you blaming Vista?

            I'm having trouble understanding why people blame Vista for hardware that's not certified to work with Vista fails to work. It just doesn't make sense. Perhaps you can explain it to me?
            ye
          • in reponse to ye: blaming vista

            hmm, let me see, is it because all the hardware is not even a year old, and that most of those "knowledgeable" people seem to say that if you're running anything from 1 to 1 1/2 years old, things should work? remember too, those "knowledgeable" people(ed bott, george ou, etc) also had/have vista issues.

            gnu/linux...giving choice to the neX(11)t generation.
            Arm A. Geddon
          • So?

            "is it because all the hardware is not even a year old"

            One can purchase many brand new (as in today) peripherals for a Macintosh and
            they'll fail to work. Should I blame OS X?
            ye
          • re: So?

            say I bought the recently released imac which includes tiger. then later on I buy leopard. if I had hardware issues, the answer is yes. that's the point I was trying to make. recently released OSes I would think, sould work with hardware manufactured within the last year.

            gnu/linux...giving choice to the neX(11)t generation.
            Arm A. Geddon
          • It's reasonable to assume they might be supported.

            But once you determine they are not you need to stop blaming the OS. The same holds true for any computer. If it wasn't designed for or the manufacturer is not offering support for something then it's unreasonable to blame the OS because you think it should work. The end result is it was never intended for the OS in question. No matter how new said item may be.
            ye
          • Tuner card? Mac people have to buy a computer to use osx, lol

            Ridiculous.
            Protector
    • re: blasphemy

      >Vista being as easy to setup as OS X?

      Except they weren't really talking about ease of setting them up in the original techblog posts, were they? It was specifically the number of steps for each that was covered. The posts didn't dive into the details of each step at all. This is nothing against MS at all, but there is simply no way anyone can honestly say a typical software update on a fresh Windows machine (or fresh Windows install) is not more of a hassle than the same on OS X. Same thing goes for junkware removal. I am sure there are situations where it is or can be, but it's not the norm.
      JakAttak
  • let's not forget...

    there's msft's software I'd like to remove but unfortunately you can only turn it off. damn waste of space, I say.

    gnu/linux...giving choice to the nex(11)t generation.
    Arm A. Geddon
  • Oh Please! You runining your credibility!

    "the best part is that after all this, even though it's a new computer with a cure 2 duo processor and 2 gigs of ram, it's still sluggish."

    Do you actually expect anyone but ABMers to believe this? At least try to make your story somewhat believable.
    ye
    • Vista sluggish?

      I am running Vista on a single core 1.6 AMD mobile processor, and it is not sluggish. Are you sure your hardware is working?
      BroGnorik
      • I've never had a complaint with Vista's performance.

        But then my system is a dual core Athlon 64 x2 4600+ (2.4GHz) processor with 2GB
        of RAM.

        Though I have run it on lower spec hardware (single core 1.7GHz Celeron w/512MB
        RAM). Performance was fine once Norton was removed and Free AVG put in its place.

        I think your post was intended for the OP and not me :-)
        ye
        • Well......does that change things for others?

          I mean I'm certain there are several very happy Packard Bell computer users out there
          but Packard Bell was JUNK. I'm sure there are a few happy Yugo users out there but
          on the whole that was a bomb. I'm certain that statistically even the worse software
          and or hardware ever made had it's champlions because they had not problems and
          it worked for them. Just the law of averages right?

          Pagan jim
          Laff
          • When you can demonstrate a problem with this model...

            ...then you may have a point. Until then you have none.
            ye