I decided to check Apple.com, something I really should have done before making this thread, adverts tend to give me an idea of what companies are targeting and I guess it makes sense why I have never been interested in their products. Eitherway thanks for all the replies

As others have said, I imagine this is a hangover from the days with classic Macs back in the 80s and early 90s, when the hardware and software was very different, and it did have better support for 2D graphics.

3D graphics were more the speciality of the Amiga platform. Amigas had all the same advantages of Macs over Windows then (and more - don't ask a Mac to multitask back then!) But that shows you how silly the argument is really - just because the Amiga was more suited in the 80s, doesn't mean I should be using one now Software like Lightwave is long available on Windows.

"Macs" today aren't even the same computers, either in terms of hardware or software, so it's just the company and trademark in common. The hardware is now the same as any other PC (so even the early 2000s claims that Photoshop was supposedly better optimised for PPCs is irrelevant). That just leaves the software, and all the high end graphical software is available for Windows too anyway. As Bregma says, it's more probably that the artists who grew up using Macs years ago now continue sticking with the brandname, even though there's nothing in common with the original machines from a technical point of view.

A super-high resolution might be useful for artists. Though bad for most users - you have problems of not having the GPU power to drive such a large resolution, and things like HD video still have to be upscaled. The reason why most hardware has settled on 1920x1080 is that it matches HD video perfectly, and it's fine for most people. "Retina" is really just a marketing buzzword - you can tell that by the way that they advertise it to mainstream users rather than graphics artists, and don't explain what it is, to pretend that it simply means "better" display somehow.

I also find it interesting that Macs all seem to be glossy displays, when matte is recommended for graphical work (no reflections, and IIRC matte gives better colour reproduction, or something like that). Of course, glossy looks "shinier", which is what seems more important these days, sadly.

But you quote the one single stat of resolution, when there are far more important factors.
I'm not sure if Apple offer something with the spec and customisation choices I got with my Clevo... or maybe they do?

As for the other points:

2 - can't see why. On Windows, I get far more market share, and means most people I know can try out something I write. Even if you consider competition (i.e., that smaller platforms might do better, due to less competition), OS X is well supported enough by software that there isn't that much less competition. And it doesn't have Linux's advantage where users might be more interested to try out less-mainstream games. (On my cross-platform game, the Mac version gets the least downloads, after Symbian, Windows, Linux and Android.) For development itself, that's personal opinion - some people like one platform better, others like other platforms.

3 - no evidence of that. The specs that Macs come with make the idea that Windows is bloated rather laughable - again likely a throwback to decades ago when the Mac platform did have lower requirements than Windows.

4 - Probably safer, but more due to being a smaller platform. I see no evidence of greater security compared with Windows Vista or later. And not really an important issue - MS Security Essentials runs in the background, never bothers me, and I've never had virus problems.
Use whatever platform you like. It's a matter of personal preference. I get annoyed by fanatics who constantly try to ram their choice down my throat, or claim that their choice is so much better, or did everything first, without using any evidence or logic in their arguments. And I'm not saying which, but these days one company gets more of those fanatics than any other company or platform...

[quote name='Olof Hedman']in contrast to most PC laptops that either feel very plastic, or very clunky or both, even when they are physically small.

Remember that the same can be said of many PC companies with high end hardware. When we're talking about hardware, we shouldn't polarise it as "Mac vs PC", as Macs are just another make of PC. I could say how in my opinion, Clevo offers wonderful quality, better than most PCs, or so does Samsung (e.g., my Samsung netbook has a much better keyboard that the poor quality ones I've seen on any of the Apple ultraportables, and other makes).

Indeed, this is the fallacy I hear most often with Apple PC users. If someone bought a good expensive PC from any other company, they'd just say it's a good PC. But if it's Apple, then it then gets compared against the worst excesses of the poorest other PCs, and then this gets generalised into "Macs are better than PCs!" Saying that one make of PC is better than average isn't really that strong a claim when you think about it - and a very different claim to saying that Apple are a better PC manufacturer that *all other* PC manufacturers.

(I'm not saying that you're doing this - but it's something I often see done.)

I think a big problem is that the majority of PC hardware is for the average PC user. Almost all mac hardware is at an enthusiast level, though average users still buy it. Don't think because all macs have great screens and only some windows pcs have great screens that there are not great screens for windows PCs. The good hardware is still an option for PCs, it's just rarely the default option.

I think a big problem is that the majority of PC hardware is for the average PC user. Almost all mac hardware is at an enthusiast level, though average users still buy it. Don't think because all macs have great screens and only some windows pcs have great screens that there are not great screens for windows PCs. The good hardware is still an option for PCs, it's just rarely the default option.

Is there a not-Mac laptop that has a screen resolution comparable to 2880x1800? I'm not aware of one but I'm curious if there is.

For me I prefer the Mac environment over windows. I Use windows at work but when I get home I feel more comfortable and find it easier to code and get around the system on my Mac.

As others have mentioned before it's all preference. Both have their pros and cons, it's really just a matter of what you like.

When people ask me why I use Windows instead of insert-their-OS, I just reply, "get back to work."

I use Mac at work, and Windows at home. In terms of overall usefulness and productivity, I'd still give Windows (at least Windows 7) a higher rating vs. Mac.

Mac/Windows
Pros/Cons (respectively):

• UNIX terminal. Good for programming. grep, vim, less, and all that useful commands are available from the console. Windows console is just pure trash, although there's Cygwin which helps out a bit.
  
• Easy to install/uninstall apps. Compared to Windows, Mac wins. Drag and drop to your Application folder to install, and delete to uninstall. No need to mess around with Registry or Add/Remove Programs (which takes forever to load if your PC has had tons of updates and apps).
  
  
  Cons/Pros:
  
  
  • Unintuitive shortcuts. Copy is ?+C and Paste is ?+V. You have to awkwardly curl your thumb to press the command key. Home and End doesn't actually take you to the beginning/end of a sentence, rather it does nothing. Try it on Safari. click on the URL, and press Home. Nothing. You have to press two keys: ?+Left or ?+Up, but to move one word left and right, you use Alt+Left or Alt+Right.
    
  • Finder isn't as good as Windows Explorer. Finder has four views: Icons, Details, List-Columns, and that iTunesy Cover Flow (which is totally useless for document files, btw). The only slightly usable one is Icons. Details is useless as it has this collapsible tabs that confuses you. If you highlight one folder a couple levels deep, and Paste a file, it actually pasted it to the parent view, rather than that folder you selected.
    Not to mention that to delete a file, it's ?+Delete!! Just delete doesn't work. And to open a file it's ?+Down, not Enter. Horrible.
    
  • Fan view in the Documents and Downloads folder in the Dock is just totally useless. That's the first I do to any new Mac installation, remove Downloads and Documents folder from the Dock. I'd rather access them from Finder.
    
  • You can't maximize your Finder window to fill the screen. Pressing the green + icon only changes the dimensions. Not sure what the logic is behind this strange behavior.
    
    
    Overall, Mac seems to be optimized for mouse users, and people who don't mind the fancy animations of their UI popping in and out of screen -- easy to wow the general population with. Programmers tend to like something that's more snappy and keyboard-friendly.
    
    Linux would've been that nice middle ground: UNIX console + Windows shortcuts + snappy + customizable like PC, except that it doesn't have Office, Photoshop, and Lightroom.

Is there a not-Mac laptop that has a screen resolution comparable to 2880x1800? I'm not aware of one but I'm curious if there is.

The retina screen is an impressive looking screen but in reality bigger numbers don't mean better. My 1920x1080 laptop screen looks great at a normal viewing distance. Plus, a 2880x1800 pixel size on the retina screen is actually 1440x900 points, meaning I get more screen space to work with on my 1920x1080 than I would on a 2880x1800 retina screen.

[quote name='cowsarenotevil' timestamp='1345566880' post='4971883']
Is there a not-Mac laptop that has a screen resolution comparable to 2880x1800? I'm not aware of one but I'm curious if there is.

The retina screen is an impressive looking screen but in reality bigger numbers don't mean better. My 1920x1080 laptop screen looks great at a normal viewing distance. Plus, a 2880x1800 pixel size on the retina screen is actually 1440x900 points, meaning I get more screen space to work with on my 1920x1080 than I would on a 2880x1800 retina screen.
[/quote]

There was a several-page discussion on this subject just a few weeks ago and I've recently bought one of these Macbooks and have been using it for a few weeks. The default setting in OSX does indeed scale up the UI elements and for a lot of programs this means that they run at a lower resolution, but if you download a third-party program you can treat it just as a normal display.

To be honest I'm not the biggest fan of OSX (for reasons alnite has mostly covered) and I'm much more used to Windows so I've been using that almost exclusively, and Windows also treats it just as a normal 2880x1800 display (although the Bootcamp software also defautls to the largest DPI setting and larger UI elements where possible this is very easy to change).

I was concerned that text, etc. would be too difficult to read on a 15-inch screen at this resolution but so far it's been great.

I don't think I would have gotten a Mac if not for the screen, though. Like I mentioned OS X isn't really a selling point for me (I do use Adobe products on Windows and don't see why they'd be any better on Mac, although the disks I got through school can be activated twice and work on both Windows and Mac), but the hardware was all completely in the range I was looking for and a comparable computer from other companies, while cheaper, wasn't substantially so and I couldn't find anyone offering a screen above 1920x1200 which is a pain if you want to edit video that is 1920x1080.

I was also pleasantly surprised by the sound; the audio quality is markedly better than all the laptops I've had before.

Windows console is just pure trash, although there's Cygwin which helps out a bit.

PowerShell 2.0 is one of Windows 7's best kept secrets and makes up for a lot in my experience. Still not as great as bash and its variances for linux/unix, but leaps and bounds better than the basic cmd line. If you know what you are doing, you can script UIs via the .NET framework as well as access system features, processes, etc. through WMI. its awesome. Highly recommend it to windows power users. If you got good enough at it, i suspect you could code a game in it.