Forum menu
I've been a Windows user since 3.1 and supported it since 98/NT. I like macs. Currently typing on a mid-2012 MBP. It's no different to people's choice in cars or bikes. Some are prepared to spend more for the look, the feel, etc. Note I haven't updated though since 2012. Since SSD they've got a bit silly price wise for any decent amount of storage and I still find a use for some of the old school ports and built in DVD drive. If Apple would bring themselves to accept the current "normal" pricing of SSD I could be prepared to go for M1.
As for the interface I've never had a problem switching between MS and Mac. Each has it's pros and cons and as someone mentioned earlier the mac trackpad is unsurpassed.
Don’t do it!
I tried and bought a MacBook Air a few years back, I was seduced by sexy aluminium, I was weak.
Tried to love the OS but having been raised on gem, os2 and windows I just couldn’t make the switch. Gave up after a year and sold the Air to my son in law who loves it. I brought a Thinkpad and it’s been faultless and since work runs windows I don’t have to switch between work and home life.
Well that all depends how your brain works. I switch between Mac and Windows many times a day. Both are used for work and pleasure. Never had a problem switching between the 2 but the Mac is more annoying when using Citrix to run my virtual windows desktop for work.
Being the family “computer expert” (I’m not, it’s just relative, pun intended) I get everyone’s laptops to sort out. Invariably some low end Compaq etc on W10. Invariably takes five minutes to boot then another ten or fifteen before the machine responds to any input.
I’ve done loads of these now; why do MS let this happen? Like the HP-inflicted bloat ware that has already been mentioned. It’s the best advert for Mac - ok I get that someone who spent 300 quid on a PC isn’t going to spunk over a grand on a MBA or something, but it must be infuriating having a newish machine work so poorly and just have to suck it up because they all do that.
Invariably takes five minutes to boot then another ten or fifteen before the machine responds to any input.
That's because it has a very slow hard disk, not an SSD. It has that because it's a very cheap computer. I bought two laptops back in 2012 for a project that had to be cross-platform so we needed a Mac and a Windows laptop. I bought a MacBook Pro and a Dell XPS 12. They cost almost exactly the same, but the MacBook had a regular hard disk and the Dell an SSD (plus the Dell had an i7 CPU whereas the Macbook had an i5). The Dell boots up in 20 seconds, the MacBook takes a couple of minutes. The slow bootup thing is nothing to do with Windows, it's due to having a slow hard disk. If you put a slow hard disk into a Mac, it'll be slow to boot too.
why do MS let this happen?
Because Macs are prestige products bought by wealthy people. Most people cannot afford them so other companies make cheaper products that average people can afford. Microsoft sells Windows licences to PC makers, they don't make cheap PCs themselves. The Microsoft Surface branded machines are mostly quite impressive (my wife has one), but they are priced at similar levels to Apple stuff.
I'm an either or type can work seamlessly in either OS, so for me it's really just down to personal preference.
Although in saying that, I've been looking into these M1 chips and doing a bit of youtubing on them. They do sound like a potential game changer in the next coming years tbh. sounds like intel and AMD will have their work cut out anyhow.
It’s not the lack of SSD that takes so long to boot. As I said, I’m no pc expert so I just do a fresh install which speeds things up until they reinstall Avast or whatever made it grind to a halt in the first place.
Just seems like for your average non-computer literate user, it’s a fact of life that your sub £500 machine will get slower and slower. Turn it on, go make a cup of tea, it might be ready when you’re finished.
Appreciate it’s not MS’s fault, and if MacOS was available for OEM installs it’d likely suffer the same. There’s not much they can do about it, it’s a bad advert for the OS all the same.
As an aside, for the same people I’ll install PoP Linux on another partition they can choose if they want. Boots quick, no messing, does 99% of what you’d want it to, but it’s different so they don’t use it XD
bob_summers
Full Member
It’s not the lack of SSD that takes so long to boot..
It is.
It’s not the lack of SSD that takes so long to boot.
That's exactly what the problem is if it's taking that long to boot. A PC with an SSD should boot in 20 to 30 seconds. With a HDD, a couple of minutes is typical. Same goes with Macs - with a HDD, they are slow to boot too.
Windows has a built-in anti-virus program that is pretty good. There's no need to install another anti-virus program.
I'm not disputing that a SSD boots faster.
I'm wondering why an old install of W10 takes five minutes to boot.* A fresh install on the same drive takes half that, a Linux distro on another partition takes less than a minute.
* To the login screen. It's a lot, lot longer from there to getting a half-responsive machine.
I just like navigating around Mac OS much more than Windows. It’s engineered to be pleasing to use with ergonomic swipes and more interesting visuals.
This is all entirely subjective, but MacOS visuals for me, are rubbish. I get the same background picture of an island every day. What's great about that? On Windows I get greeted with beautiful photos from around the world every day, which I love. So much so that I've installed picture of the day from Bing on the Mac 🙂 The round buttons and greyness of MacOS seem dull to me, I much prefer the sharp lines on Windows.
I also like toolbars, like on Windows Explorer, rather than menu options. And having the menu at the top of the screen all the time is ridiculous. Aside from the fact that you can open a new app and see nothing except that some of the menu items have changed to indicate it's a different app - I have a 4k screen and the window might be in the bottom right but the menu items are all the way in the top left. Smart, not.
And MacOS Finder is awful compared to Windows Explorer. Right clicking gives me a few options but no 'new' option like new folder. And I don't seem to be able to right click in a folder, I can only click on the stuff that's inside the folder. Why is there no tree view on the left hand side? I've been using MacOS for nearly two years, and very rarely Windows, but I still get stuck and struggle to do things in the Finder.
When a background app has a notification it jumps up and down on the task bar. That's INCREDIBLY annoying. Whoever came up with that needs a smack.
Also, no delete key.
And the alt-tab functionality switches between APPS not windows. Ok so it's about preference, but you have to alt-tab into an app and THEN figure out which window you want and alt-` though those. It's a two-step process. I use alt-tab heavily in Windows exactly because it's so useful.
Also, no delete key.
Also, no cut/paste from menu.
Cmd+C to copy, Cmd+alt+V to paste and cut - why such a faff? Although having not used windows since probably 98, I find W10 no more intuitive.
I love mint/ubuntu's 'move to' on the right click. And delete without going to trash.
I’m wondering why an old install of W10 takes five minutes to boot.* A fresh install on the same drive takes half that,
Probably, the users are installing garbage apps that are running at startup. These can be disabled.
Hit Alt+Ctrl+Del
Select "Task Manager"
Select "Startup"
This will give you a list of apps that are running automatically on startup. Sort them by "Startup Impact". Disable anything that isn't essential.
having been raised on gem
GEM desktop? Like, Atari ST GEM? That's why to this day I still have the taskbar at the top of the screen.
why do MS let this happen? Like the HP-inflicted bloat ware that has already been mentioned.
This is just straight-out weird. Do you think that Microsoft control the PC hardware and software market? That they dictate what HP preload on their laptops? This is like blaming Esso for the existence of the Nissan Micra.
It's the very fact that it's open to any old third party to make whatever they like that begat market dominance to the PC in the first place.
it’s a fact of life that your sub £500 machine will get slower and slower.
1) No it isn't, that's fanboy horseshit that hasn't been true for well over 20 years and,
2) The same would be true of a sub-£500 Mac if such a thing existed.
I've got a 2008 vintage Dell laptop here running the Windows Insider bleeding edge version of Windows 10. Can you find me a 2008 Mac that'll run Big Sur? Best I can source is machines from 2013.
Cougar I'm talking about someone like my dad who buys a cheap pc and six months later it's running like the proverbial bag of. It happens, I've had three of them to sort out this year, two compaqs and an Acer with the common denominator of W10.
You're as bad as that other chap with the magic iPad.
Re. 2008 MacBooks, I've got two unibodies that won't run any recent MacOS. They're doing fine on Linux though.
That they dictate what HP preload on their laptops?
They could, they have a license agreement with HP don't they?
Cougar I’m talking about someone like my dad who buys a cheap pc and six months later it’s running like the proverbial bag of.
What caused this in your case? I've had problems with small SSDs, they can fill up surprisingly quickly which really makes they system slow down.
Mechanical drives in these cases. No idea why, as mentioned I have neither the time nor patience to diagnose these things, I just reinstall and it goes away until next time!
It's just a bad look for MS and I don't know what the alternative is for that kind of user - probably Chromebook tbh
That they dictate what HP preload on their laptops?
They could, they have a license agreement with HP don’t they?
If you recall, there was a huge lawsuit about 20 years ago concerning bundling of Internet Explorer with Windows and forbidding manufacturers from pre-loading other browsers. Microsoft's arguments at the time were somewhat similar, but they came out of it looking really bad - a tech giant bullying other companies.
1) No it isn’t, that’s fanboy horseshit that hasn’t been true for well over 20 years and,
2) The same would be true of a sub-£500 Mac if such a thing existed.
I’ve got a 2008 vintage Dell laptop here running the Windows Insider bleeding edge version of Windows 10. Can you find me a 2008 Mac that’ll run Big Sur? Best I can source is machines from 2013.
As to point 1 it isn't horsehshit. I bought my daughter a £500 (well just under) PC about 3 years ago and it was shit slow from day 1. OK a mechanical HDD but still, shit slow. Alot slower than my early 2009 basic MacBook I was running at the time.
As to point 2 yes, that is true...that is why they don't do cheaper machines. They're a premium product provider just like, say Ferrari if you want a car analogy. If Ferrari did a £20k car it would be just as crap as every other £20k car out there and that would damage and degrade the brand, so they don't. So to get a windows machine to be as good as a Mac you have to spend Mac money. Not sure what we're trying to prove here.
As to the final point, well my dad has a 2012 iMac with a knackered HDD. He was going to chuck it but I'm going to resurrect it. And in the research I'm doing there are plenty of people running 2012 and earlier Mac's and Macbooks on Catalina via some hack. Too early for Big Sur, but it's coming. My old 2009 macbook was running fine until a couple of years ago the battery decided to burst open. No reason why if I'd replaced the battery before it blew it wouldn't be running fine still. So again...the moral of the story is if you invest early on then you get a product that has longevity.
The last Windows machine I got from my employer was an HP Spectre X360 - comparable in price to a Mac. The hardware was every bit was lovely as a Mac, but it had tablet mode and pen input too, people commented on how nice it looked, and in the 2 years I had it it gave me absolutely no trouble at all. My last employer offered me a voice between Windows and Mac - I thought it would be instructive to try the Mac, since my last Apple experience was with a IIcx. Almost all the software we used was cloud-based so really it was just running Chrome most of the time. I had it two years and never got to like it. No delete key, no page up/down, no home and end keys. I had a sheet of paper with the shortcut keystroke equivalents fixed to my desk lamp, but I never learned them. Finder - as someone else has said, it's horrible. Makes no sense, always looks different, no obvious way to make it look how you want. Menus on the top of the screen, not on the window - this is just plain daft. It was a pre-2018 MBA, so crappy lo-res screen, but it had an i7 so performance was ok. Speakers were awful.
Now I'm retired, so had to spend my own money to buy a new laptop. I'd really have liked another Spectre, but as a pensioner couldn't really justify spending that much money. So I spent £750 on this 
It is a truly lovely bit of kit. Solid aluminium case, AMD Ryzen 5 is faster than a 10th-gen i7 for many applications, W10 is fine, screen is lovely, screen to body ratio is impressive, touch and pen works well, B&O speakers sound nice, 3 year pick up and return warranty. Couldn't get near that in the Apple range.
They’re a premium product provider just like, say Ferrari
Right. So imagine how it'd sound if you went round telling everyone they simply MUST save up for a Ferrari because anything else is simply too cheap.
So to get a windows machine to be as good as a Mac you have to spend Mac money. Not sure what we’re trying to prove here.
Nonsense. As far as I can tell, the cheapest Mac laptop is £999 for a MacBook Air with the M1 chip. The equivalent Intel chip is an i5. I checked the Dell site as they're a fairly typical maker of Windows PCs. You can get a 13" Inspiron laptop with an i5 CPU, 8GB RAM and 512GB SSD for £779. For normal office work, that's going to be an excellent machine, a high-end machine is not going to have any real benefit just for writing email and doing basic Excel stuff. It's not a premium model, but it's a lot better than the budget stuff. That leaves you with over £200 savings off the cheapest Macbook. That's literally the first Windows laptop I looked at, I didn't bother searching around for the cheapest.
https://www.dell.com/en-uk/shop/laptops/new-inspiron-13-5000/spd/inspiron-13-5301-laptop/cn53104
For less than the price of the cheapest Macbook, you can get a 2-in-1 with touchscreen. No Macbook is available with a touchscreen at any price.
Lots of rubbish in here, must admit I do quite fancy a new M1 Macbook 🙂 Very impressed that they can waltz into the desktop PC market with a new CPU that rivals the top low power efforts from Intel and AMD.
I've owned a few XPS (recent 13 and 15 for example), a Surface, a couple of Macbooks etc. The Macbooks are definitely premium and generally annoy me less than the others, they're not infallible though. They keep changing their keyboard design, the previous ones felt terrible and could knacker with the smallest of crumbs. Most generations of Macbook Pro 15 will thermal throttle like mad and spend most of their life sounding like a vacuum cleaner and running at 25% speed.
My wifes iMacs randomly slowed down after a while, to a completely unusable level. Some sort of software issue, she had it reset and it came back after a while. Fortunately the screen then died, rendering the entire thing completely unusable. It was a work one so they've swapped it for a new one. Still don't understand iMacs, it's like an immovable laptop.
Also +1 to the above, Finder is rubbish, far worse than Windows Explorer. Xcode and Safari are rubbish too!
As I say, I do like the new Macbooks. Really fancy swapping my faithful 2014 Macbook Pro 15 for one, which I'm sure I'll regret. All the rubbish about them never having issues simply isn't true though. I have a 2012 Lenovo Thinkpad X230 which runs Windows 10 happily, I've upgraded the SSD, ram and trackpad, keep eyeing up new IPS screens for it for £50 🙂
Also +1 to the above, Finder is rubbish, far worse than Windows Explorer. Xcode and Safari are rubbish too!
I probably can't do an objective Mac vs PC comparison, because I only use Windows PCs intermittently and I haven't had time to get used to them / find workarounds for their annoyances. What I can do is tell you what I like and what I see as major benefits.
I don't love the Finder app, it's remarkably un-Apple and unintuitive. That said, most of its flaws are circumnavigated with (weird) keyboard shortcuts. E.g. CMD+shift+G to go to a folder, CMD+up to go 'up' one level (infuriatingly there's no clickable button for this).
But if you pair Finder with Spotlight (they're kind of the same thing) then IMO Mac OS has a huge advantage. I pretty much exclusively use Spotlight search to find files (actually now I use Alfred). Spotlight search has been awesome for years with instant results so it's part of my 'workflow'. I don't think Windows has an equivalent.
I didn't use Safari for ~5 years after I got a Mac. But it's decent now with some significant advantages on privacy, speed, battery life and iCloud tab syncing.
don't have a problem with Finder personally... obviously as said it's down to what you're used to, whenever I have to use Explorer I think, ugh, so cluttered! Not even occurred to me in the last 10 years that not having a "tree view" is a problem 🤣 (there is one of sorts if you insist, you can use column view) As said above using Spotlight/Alfred is the way forward, very intuitive
Safari is excellent if only for the integrations with other Apple stuff, keychain, wallet for ApplePay (i.e. select apple pay on website, confirm on Watch, done) etc etc
is it? Not according to anyone who's actually used/tested one 🤣🤣🤣MacBook Air with the M1 chip. The equivalent Intel chip is an i5
All people are mentioning here is what they prefer about their own preferred OS and dislike about others.
Who'd have thought it was all down to personal preference. I'd never have guessed that myself. No siree! 😆
There's things to dislike and like about all the 3 os's mentioned.
Find what you like, make sure your software is compatible and go with it.
It's 2020. They are all pretty sophisticated and powerful. Provided you buy decent hardware.
MacBook Air with the M1 chip. The equivalent Intel chip is an i5
is it? Not according to anyone who’s actually used/tested one
It's the chip that the M1 replaced. I'm sure the M1 chips will perform impressively, but if you're just doing basic office work, I suspect you will be unlikely to notice any real-world difference. Once independent testers have a chance to benchmark them on tasks like video rendering, we'll have some idea of what they can do, beyond Apple's highly selective claims about their awesomeness.
Once independent testers have a chance to benchmark them on tasks like video rendering, we’ll have some idea of what they can do, beyond Apple’s highly selective claims about their awesomeness.
Eh? They have already done those tests and as has been stated the M1 roundly trounced the previous generation Intel chips. There are plenty of YouTube reviews if you want to go and look, including a load of ardent PC guys (LinusTechTips, for one) that were blown away by the performance. IIRC the cheap MacBook Air outperformed the iMac Pro in some tasks.
If you're only doing office work then maybe the battery life doubling will come in handy.
If you’re only doing office work then maybe the battery life doubling will come in handy.
If you're only doing office work, you'll have it plugged in and be using a proper monitor, keyboard, and mouse most of the time.
Who’d have thought it was all down to personal preference. I’d never have guessed that myself. No siree! 😆
Well in my case, of the laptops I tried, the MBP had the nicest keyboard. It literally did come down to that. I'm a translator, all I needed was a good screen, ability to run MS office and a nice keyboard.
Was leaning towards an XPS but couldn't get hold of one to try.
The MBP lives mostly in Linux except for the rare occasions I have to fire up office.
If you’re only doing office work, you’ll have it plugged in and be using a proper monitor, keyboard, and mouse most of the time.
OK. So you're saying you don't care about performance or battery life in a laptop?
OK. So you’re saying you don’t care about performance or battery life in a laptop?
No, I'm saying that if all you're doing is sitting at a desk using MS Office, any Intel i5 machine with 8GB RAM will be perfectly fine and you'll have it plugged in anyway, so battery life is irrelevant. If you're travelling a lot, being small, light, and having good battery life are important. If you're doing video editing, you'll care about brute performance. The most suitable machine will depend entirely on what you want to use it for.
I've just this morning pulled the trigger on the new M1 Macbook Air, to replace a 2014 15" MBP which has been flawless since new, but now has a failed battery and is about to fall off official support next year. I did plenty of research and as Superficial mentioned, there's plenty of very promising benchmark data available suggesting the M1 is more of an i7 and above replacement, ie https://www.anandtech.com/show/16252/mac-mini-apple-m1-tested/2
But if you pair Finder with Spotlight (they’re kind of the same thing) then IMO Mac OS has a huge advantage.
Windows has that now, I use it on both platforms for most things.
Who’d have thought it was all down to personal preference.
Well it is, of course, but there's something else going on here. If you have £1500 to spend then yeah, you can go either way and it doesn't matter. But what if you only have £500 to spend? Because of the way people bang on about Macs as the only good computer, you might feel pressured into trying to find some more money for that Mac or borrowing it, or buying second hand with all the issues that entails. When a PC would be fine. Or you might even get a £300 PC and keep that much needed extra £200 for something else. It IS an option.
My mum phoned me a while ago very concerned because her (rich) friend had told her she NEEDED an iPad and anything else simply wouldn't do. But she couldn't afford the £500. I reassured her, and the £99 Android she bought gets used every day and has been fine. All we are trying to do is point out that there IS a cheaper alternative, and it will be fine. If Macs and PCs were the same price, then I wouldn't be bothered in the least. But what irritates me is people pushing the idea that you can't have a good computing experience unless you spend loads. It's unpleasant, and leaves people feeling bad about their £300 laptop and the fact that they can only spend £300 on a laptop. It creates division in society, just like looking down on someone's 15 year old Fiesta or their £300 Carrera.
But what irritates me is people pushing the idea that you can’t have a good computing experience unless you spend loads. It’s unpleasant, and leaves people feeling bad about their £300 laptop and the fact that they can only spend £300 on a laptop. It creates division in society, just like looking down on someone’s 15 year old Fiesta or their £300 Carrera.
But strangely all you money saving zealots protest like hell about OSX but never recommend binning all that expensive Microsoft software for linux and open office alternatives. It actually reads like you get slightly offended by the choices others might make that don't match yours.
Cougar I’m talking about someone like my dad who buys a cheap pc and six months later it’s running like the proverbial bag of. It happens, I’ve had three of them to sort out this year, two compaqs and an Acer with the common denominator of W10.
The common denominator isn't W10, if it were then the four I've got on my desk right now would be the same. If you had three Mondeos and drove them all into trees would you be blaming Ford for "letting it happen" and then concluding that you should get an Audi instead?
Cheap shit hardware isn't Microsoft's fault.
HP and a supporting cast of thousands preinstalling foisterware isn't Microsoft's fault.
Users installing rubbish isn't Microsoft's fault.
And you're right, it's not a "good advert" for Microsoft and it's exactly why we keep having these discussions. Your computer crashes and you go "bloody Windows again" with no consideration that it might be say a faulty hard disk or a rogue third-party driver at fault. Some folk still seem to want to judge modern OSes based on their experiences of much older incarnations and it's as relevant as me slagging off a Vauxhall Vectra because I once had bad experiences with a Viva.
I don’t know what the alternative is for that kind of user
A user account that doesn't have Admin privileges?
As to point 1 it isn’t horsehshit. I bought my daughter a £500 (well just under) PC about 3 years ago and it was shit slow from day 1.
That's not getting slower over time then, is it.
But strangely all you money saving zealots protest like hell about OSX but never recommend binning all that expensive Microsoft software for linux and open office alternatives.
My work requires some specialized software that is only available for Windows. That software is designed to be used in conjunction with Excel, which generates the graphic outputs. I cannot do my work using Linux and Open Office (or a Mac). Even beyond that, Excel is still the gold standard. Busy people don't have time to dick around trying to save fairly trivial amounts of money on software.
molgrips
Full Member
But if you pair Finder with Spotlight (they’re kind of the same thing) then IMO Mac OS has a huge advantage.Windows has that now, I use it on both platforms for most things.
Who’d have thought it was all down to personal preference.
Well it is, of course, but there’s something else going on here. If you have £1500 to spend then yeah, you can go either way and it doesn’t matter. But what if you only have £500 to spend? Because of the way people bang on about Macs as the only good computer, you might feel pressured into trying to find some more money for that Mac or borrowing it, or buying second hand with all the issues that entails. When a PC would be fine. Or you might even get a £300 PC and keep that much needed extra £200 for something else. It IS an option.
My mum phoned me a while ago very concerned because her (rich) friend had told her she NEEDED an iPad and anything else simply wouldn’t do. But she couldn’t afford the £500. I reassured her, and the £99 Android she bought gets used every day and has been fine. All we are trying to do is point out that there IS a cheaper alternative, and it will be fine. If Macs and PCs were the same price, then I wouldn’t be bothered in the least. But what irritates me is people pushing the idea that you can’t have a good computing experience unless you spend loads. It’s unpleasant, and leaves people feeling bad about their £300 laptop and the fact that they can only spend £300 on a laptop. It creates division in society, just like looking down on someone’s 15 year old Fiesta or their £300 Carrera.
Aye, well.. that's a whole load of societal issues you getting into there and the want v need question. Good luck with that.
For most, about 95% I'd guess, a 300 quid pc laptop will do the job(I've got a 6 year old one that gets on fine). I've no problem with agreeing with that. So will a £250 9.5 year old imac, that I'm typing this on the now.
In this day and age there is most certainly no need for the latest and greatest for most, unless they want it.
We've probably had 10 years of extremely powerful computing now. So aye I agree, want v need, make your choice, there's a million options new and old(Just make sure it's got a suitable size SSD and min 8gig of ram, can run the software you want on an OS that you like and you'll have a pleasant experience on anything from the last 5-10 years.).
But strangely all you money saving zealots protest like hell about OSX but never recommend binning all that expensive Microsoft software for linux and open office alternatives.
I never recommend people buy Office unless for work (where I will strongly do so) - I always recommend Google suite for home use.
In this day and age there is most certainly no need for the latest and greatest for most, unless they want it.
Yes, well said. This is absolutely it.
But strangely all you money saving zealots protest like hell about OSX but never recommend binning all that expensive Microsoft software for linux and open office alternatives. It actually reads like you get slightly offended by the choices others might make that don’t match yours.
I don't think anyone has protested about OSX other than a few features they don't like. I certainly haven't, I don't know enough about it to make an informed argument one way or the other. What I'm protesting about is people talking abject nonsense.
Linux has its place, but its place is rarely if ever "inexperienced users' desktops." Sadly, penguin-botherers are even thicker on the ground than Apple fanboys. Linux, OSX and Windows are all solutions of varying appropriateness to a Venn diagram of requirements, rather than a one-size-fits-all answer to everything. That's my argument in its entirety, for people to be empowered to make an an informed decision as to what's right for them rather than folk trying to 'win' by blindly shouting their OS of choice or ragging everything else in the vague delusion that it's somehow universally better than everything else. It isn't. There's no thought process involved here and that irritates me.
Desktop OSes are all mature products now. Linux is great. OSX is great. Windows 10 is great. Which is best for you? It depends.
In this day and age there is most certainly no need for the latest and greatest for most, unless they want it.
Quite. There is a new "what PC?" thread like once a week and it's almost universally to browse the web, open emails and a bit of light office work. And as I've replied more than once, you've be hard pressed to find a computer that can't do that.
Computing has come a long way. Time was, you'd have to buy top-of-the-range and be locked into an endless upgrade cycle to do relatively simple tasks. These days most PCs are "good enough" so long as you avoid the absolute bottom-feeders. Mobile phones are going the same way now too.
I never recommend people buy Office unless for work (where I will strongly do so) – I always recommend Google suite for home use.
Microsoft Office is free online and perfectly adequate for the majority of home users. There's several other alternatives too.