Resolved: PCs are better than Macs

C1. Affordability My opponent concedes my argument that PCs are more affordable than Macs. They then go on to state "mac is actually cheaper than the other pcs able to compete with it. " This is false. First, of all, while my opponent may question the credibility of Popular Mechanics based on one, small, insignificant error (which I never even brought up), on the part of the author. No matter what you do there is going to be human error in something constructed by humans. I will leave it up to the voters to decide whether one tiny error should be enough to cast the credibility of a magazine, which has existed since the early 1900s and is a technological magazine, in doubt. In the study conducted by Popular Mechanics, they found that a PC laptop could stand up in quality to a MacBook and the PC was much cheaper than the MacBook. Furthermore, windows dominates the market because it is affordable. Windows controls 91.9% of the market, compared to Apples 5%, because it is so much more affordable. More people can buy it therefore, more market control (from second round). This last fact has been entirely dropped by my opponent. C2a. "We're dealing with computers. A fair amount of the sources will be personal. You can't dismiss them for that reason. Why wouldn't they be true? " The personal story I was attacking was your own. We cannot verify whether you are telling the truth. Your story would not be true because you most likely want to win this debate. You can find objective sources to show Macs are better than PCs you do not need to rely on personal subjective stories. Furthermore, my opponent has dropped my analysis that having thousands of different models means you can choose exactly what you want your computer to have and how with a Mac you do not have these options. C2b. My opponent has conceded they believe you should be allowed to modify your computer without losing your warranty. Basically, they have conceded a PC is better than a Mac, on this point, because you can modify a PC. Writing a program is much different than modifying the hardware. As the hardware is the physical computer, software (programs) run on the hardware. You need both. The fact is, kit or not kit, you can build your own PC, you cannot build your own Mac. This gives you options as you, personally, can decide what you want in your computer. My opponent asks whether I have the knowhow to build my own computer, actually, yes, the computer just across the hall, I built myself. If you want a picture I'll be glad to provide one. C3. "I don't care what the magazine is. They can do a survey poorly or be wrong about something. I know that things they said are false. " The fact is, you cannot simply say all aspects of the article are wrong simply by citing something which is easily explained by human error. My opponent has provided no reason for us to believe their numbers and data are wrong. They have provided no counter-studies, nothing. I mean if we are just going to throw out reputable magazines based on one tiny insignificant detail what is the point of citing sources? As for the survey in which "they say it's cheap feeling yet slick on a pc yet mac is gritty with sharp edges. " The finish refers to the graphics display on the computer. Edges refer to the edges on the physical computer itself. Blogs are untrustworthy because we have no idea who is writing them. Could be anyone. I believe I went over this last round. My opponent considers my source invalid based upon an insignificant, trivial, detail. Now if we are going to continue the criticism of sources based on details, my opponents counter source must be wrong (not even to mention the fact it is a FORUM and he should have been able to find objective data somewhere else…) seeing as internet speed depends on the service provider, if they "give" you faster internet, your internet will run, faster. As for your second article, it was written in 2007, computer technology has advanced so much in 5 years. Nevertheless, the objective facts are clear, the MacBook Pro has ALMOST the exact same hardware as the HP Pavilion 5 DM4, with exceptions in the hard drive, ports, and, of course, OS, even there, there is not that noticeable of a difference. So, in reality, according to my opponents logic, their source must be completely inaccurate. C4. Concession by my opponent. The OS is a fundamental part of the computer. You need the software in order to run the computer. You cannot argue the computer is better without arguing the quality of the OS. Much more software exists for the PC than the Mac. C5. Concession. They are equal. And guess what "there are more PCs" because more people can afford them thus making them, better. More people having a computer is better than less people having a computer. Opponents Arguments C1. Despite the obvious fact my opponent knows not too much about computer programming seeing as Linux is UNIX based (UNIX does not stand as an OS on its own). My opponent drops my analysis of how he uses an extremely narrow profession to justify his view. C2. I was merely stating that a photography website cannot know enough about computers to make such an assertion. This is a fallacious appeal to authority because it is not a legitimate authority on the matter at hand. (It would be akin to asking a physicist to explain Constitutional Law). I was not attacking it because it was too professional, I was attacking it because it is not a legitimate authority on the matter. My opponent then provides another source in the form of a poll (the poll is quite outdated as its from 2007). It was also comparing OS's which my opponent thinks is irrelevant but, nevertheless, according to a more recent poll of 23,000 people, in 2010, 63.99% preferred PC over Mac. (1) The reality is, more people prefer PCs over Macs. This is further backed up by the objective fact that Windows controls 91.9% of the world wide OS market (from second round). C3. Dell, Toshiba, HP Despite the obvious fallacy of providing 3 companies and certain individuals stories and cross applying it to say all PCs are bad, even those from companies such as Acer, Asus, and Gateway, there are also those people who ohh hate Macs because of their problems. Mac users by now are probably gasping but, Macs are perfect (I'm exaggerating here). Furthermore, my opponent is supposed to be arguing Macs are better than PCs, but, instead they are arguing 1) certain companies customer support can be bad in certain cases and 2) Two person's personal stories with a computer obviously means all PCs suck. The first argument is entirely subjective and depends on the customer service rep. Throughout your life, you may need to call Apple every once in a while, does this mean that every single person at Apple is always going to be all kind and helpful, probably not. And the second argument is completely fallacious. Just because 2 computers are bad does not necessarily mean all computers are bad. I mean if you really just want to go on certain subjective viewpoints here's a facebook page called "macs suck! " (. http://www.facebook.com...). Of course it must be correct, I mean 595 people like the page. Around 595 people complain about how much their Mac stinks. 595 is greater than 4 therefore, Mac is worse than PC. To conclude, my opponent spends much of their time trying to avoid objective facts instead they rely upon personal stories which cannot be confirmed in anyway. To the voters, I implore you to look at the objective facts, should we trust an unconfirmed personal story, or facts and numbers which throughout this debate have not really been contested. The choice is simple, vote objective fact, vote Pro. Source: 1. . http://mashable.com...