| Click here to go to the original topic View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
poweRob
Joined: 14 Jul 2004
Posts: 22904
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 03, 2006 7:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nicholas wrote: poweRob wrote: When I see someone open up an Apple laptop, I immediately think, "This person has more money than brains and fell for computer looks over usage."
Clearly, you are a biased Bill Gates's apologist. The statement above is quite honestly full of drivel and is nothing but poppycock.
YOU think that if someone owns an Apple, this individual fell for its looks or has more money than sense? Frankly, when I see someone with a Windows laptop, I immediately think ''Just like every other laptop on the market with its cheap plastic looks, mediocre designed platform (plenty of room for improvement), vulnerable to viruses and so on'' I can think of many negative comments against to Windows, but ultimately, this individual has chosen something that best suits his or her needs and CHOICE.
More importantly, I do a lot of graphics designing, photographical work and media enhancing which is what an Apple computer is primarily for. Without doubt, better than windows, easier and offers a wider range of options in the professional end of the market. I am not made of money, nor am I fussy about its looks.
I don't play games which had me thinking ''Do I need a windows computer for that specific area?'' Or is an Apple best suited? Needless to say, I went for an Apple according to my needs.
This doesn't mean, I loathe Windows or Linux, as I use them frequently in employment and at home, but I also respect each individual's choice and the machine he/she has chosen.
Finally, I hate BMW's, so my suggestion is ''DON'T buy a BMW!''. True, it's my opinion. Hang on, isn't that what you typically expect a redneck to say?
Bill Gates apologist? :lol:
I'm actually a linux fan. I just know that XP works and works well.
Mac-heads are so diehard, but at least they can get a semi-clear purple, green, blue or red computer case I guess (for thrice the price). |
|
| Back to top |
|
The Grandmaster
Joined: 12 Oct 2005
Posts: 13220
Location: West Lafayette, IN
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 04, 2006 8:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
Nicholas wrote: poweRob wrote: When I see someone open up an Apple laptop, I immediately think, "This person has more money than brains and fell for computer looks over usage."
Clearly, you are a biased Bill Gates's apologist. The statement above is quite honestly full of drivel and is nothing but poppycock.
YOU think that if someone owns an Apple, this individual fell for its looks or has more money than sense? Frankly, when I see someone with a Windows laptop, I immediately think ''Just like every other laptop on the market with its cheap plastic looks, mediocre designed platform (plenty of room for improvement), vulnerable to viruses and so on'' I can think of many negative comments against to Windows, but ultimately, this individual has chosen something that best suits his or her needs and CHOICE.
More importantly, I do a lot of graphics designing, photographical work and media enhancing which is what an Apple computer is primarily for.
I see you are using the same old argument from the late 1990’s. “Apple is best for graphics.” Yes, that used to be true. Things change. I am a multimedia developer/graphic and 3D designer for a living. Basically no one in our field uses macs anymore, There is no advantage of using a Macintosh. Every major application exists for the PC that exists for the Mac, such as Photoshop, Flash, or any other Adobe/Macromedia product. They are just as capable for video editing, having After Effects and Discreet Combustion of match the final cut pro of the Mac. Nowadays, with enhanced flash video codecs and internet connections, 3D Design and animation is becoming more and more prevalent in a designers repertoire. A Macintosh is laughable for 3D design. 3D Studio Max, the primary industry application for 3D modeling and animation, is not even available for a Mac. I don’t even know if they have Cinema 4D, Softimage SXI, or Lightwave for a Mac. While there is a version of Maya for a Mac, there so too is, for the PC. Smaller programs like plug-ins and little third party helpers are also less available for Macs, and these little things make a difference. The only advantage a Macintosh has would be for a user who for some reason or another, found it an advantage to have less software available to him.
Nicholas wrote: Without doubt, better than windows, easier and offers a wider range of options in the professional end of the market. I am not made of money, nor am I fussy about its looks.
Read my last refutation of this. Wider range of options for the professional end of the market is a joke. Your support of 3D is a joke. Christ….they probably don’t even have the Vray render engine for a Mac. |
|
| Back to top |
|
poweRob
Joined: 14 Jul 2004
Posts: 22904
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 04, 2006 1:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The Grandmaster wrote: Nicholas wrote: poweRob wrote: When I see someone open up an Apple laptop, I immediately think, "This person has more money than brains and fell for computer looks over usage."
Clearly, you are a biased Bill Gates's apologist. The statement above is quite honestly full of drivel and is nothing but poppycock.
YOU think that if someone owns an Apple, this individual fell for its looks or has more money than sense? Frankly, when I see someone with a Windows laptop, I immediately think ''Just like every other laptop on the market with its cheap plastic looks, mediocre designed platform (plenty of room for improvement), vulnerable to viruses and so on'' I can think of many negative comments against to Windows, but ultimately, this individual has chosen something that best suits his or her needs and CHOICE.
More importantly, I do a lot of graphics designing, photographical work and media enhancing which is what an Apple computer is primarily for.
I see you are using the same old argument from the late 1990’s. “Apple is best for graphics.” Yes, that used to be true. Things change. I am a multimedia developer/graphic and 3D designer for a living. Basically no one in our field uses macs anymore, There is no advantage of using a Macintosh. Every major application exists for the PC that exists for the Mac, such as Photoshop, Flash, or any other Adobe/Macromedia product. They are just as capable for video editing, having After Effects and Discreet Combustion of match the final cut pro of the Mac. Nowadays, with enhanced flash video codecs and internet connections, 3D Design and animation is becoming more and more prevalent in a designers repertoire. A Macintosh is laughable for 3D design. 3D Studio Max, the primary industry application for 3D modeling and animation, is not even available for a Mac. I don’t even know if they have Cinema 4D, Softimage SXI, or Lightwave for a Mac. While there is a version of Maya for a Mac, there so too is, for the PC. Smaller programs like plug-ins and little third party helpers are also less available for Macs, and these little things make a difference. The only advantage a Macintosh has would be for a user who for some reason or another, found it an advantage to have less software available to him.
Nicholas wrote: Without doubt, better than windows, easier and offers a wider range of options in the professional end of the market. I am not made of money, nor am I fussy about its looks.
Read my last refutation of this. Wider range of options for the professional end of the market is a joke. Your support of 3D is a joke. Christ….they probably don’t even have the Vray render engine for a Mac.
I work for a trade magazine publishing company. Our art department is being converted FROM macs to PC's because supporting a Mac is so damn difficult and irritating not to mention the costs of macs are so damn much. However the process of converting is really slow because the art department is loaded with die-hard mac-heads who are stubborn to learn something new.
The problem used to be was Apple used to throw free Macs at graphic design schools so that people were taught on their system and came out of school Mac-minded.
Mac is a dying bread IMO. Which is why the bulk of Apple's money is now being dumped into and coming out of IPods. |
|
| Back to top |
|
The Grandmaster
Joined: 12 Oct 2005
Posts: 13220
Location: West Lafayette, IN
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 04, 2006 1:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
poweRob wrote: The Grandmaster wrote: Nicholas wrote: poweRob wrote: When I see someone open up an Apple laptop, I immediately think, "This person has more money than brains and fell for computer looks over usage."
Clearly, you are a biased Bill Gates's apologist. The statement above is quite honestly full of drivel and is nothing but poppycock.
YOU think that if someone owns an Apple, this individual fell for its looks or has more money than sense? Frankly, when I see someone with a Windows laptop, I immediately think ''Just like every other laptop on the market with its cheap plastic looks, mediocre designed platform (plenty of room for improvement), vulnerable to viruses and so on'' I can think of many negative comments against to Windows, but ultimately, this individual has chosen something that best suits his or her needs and CHOICE.
More importantly, I do a lot of graphics designing, photographical work and media enhancing which is what an Apple computer is primarily for.
I see you are using the same old argument from the late 1990’s. “Apple is best for graphics.” Yes, that used to be true. Things change. I am a multimedia developer/graphic and 3D designer for a living. Basically no one in our field uses macs anymore, There is no advantage of using a Macintosh. Every major application exists for the PC that exists for the Mac, such as Photoshop, Flash, or any other Adobe/Macromedia product. They are just as capable for video editing, having After Effects and Discreet Combustion of match the final cut pro of the Mac. Nowadays, with enhanced flash video codecs and internet connections, 3D Design and animation is becoming more and more prevalent in a designers repertoire. A Macintosh is laughable for 3D design. 3D Studio Max, the primary industry application for 3D modeling and animation, is not even available for a Mac. I don’t even know if they have Cinema 4D, Softimage SXI, or Lightwave for a Mac. While there is a version of Maya for a Mac, there so too is, for the PC. Smaller programs like plug-ins and little third party helpers are also less available for Macs, and these little things make a difference. The only advantage a Macintosh has would be for a user who for some reason or another, found it an advantage to have less software available to him.
Nicholas wrote: Without doubt, better than windows, easier and offers a wider range of options in the professional end of the market. I am not made of money, nor am I fussy about its looks.
Read my last refutation of this. Wider range of options for the professional end of the market is a joke. Your support of 3D is a joke. Christ….they probably don’t even have the Vray render engine for a Mac.
I work for a trade magazine publishing company. Our art department is being converted FROM macs to PC's because supporting a Mac is so damn difficult and irritating not to mention the costs of macs are so damn much. However the process of converting is really slow because the art department is loaded with die-hard mac-heads who are stubborn to learn something new.
Exactly. The price of those things is asinine. A new G5 with about 512 megs of Ram (not even a gig, which still isn’t even enough) goes for about 2,500 bucks. That doesn’t even make sense to me. I can take that money, go to Mwave or NewEgg, and built 2 brand new rigs from start to finish, each of which is more powerful than the G5, and still have about 500 bucks left over. Purchasing a Mac quite simply, doesn’t make sense.
poweRob wrote: The problem used to be was Apple used to throw free Macs at graphic design schools so that people were taught on their system and came out of school Mac-minded.
Mac is a dying bread IMO. Which is why the bulk of Apple's money is now being dumped into and coming out of IPods.
Yes they are. My suggestion is to stick with their little music players. Aren’t some of their video cards even integrated as well? |
|
| Back to top |
|
endersshadow
Joined: 01 Feb 2004
Posts: 10130
Location: Dallas
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 04, 2006 1:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
poweRob wrote: Mac is a dying bread IMO.
Dying bread?!
Nooooooooooooooo, don't go sweet bookends of my PB&J!!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
Pebble
Joined: 12 Nov 2005
Posts: 1143
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 04, 2006 2:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
endersshadow wrote: poweRob wrote: Mac is a dying bread IMO.
Dying bread?!
Nooooooooooooooo, don't go sweet bookends of my PB&J!!! :lol: |
|
| Back to top |
|
MassMark
Joined: 22 Nov 2004
Posts: 1555
Location: Massachusetts
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 05, 2006 9:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
poweRob wrote: XP is still the best OS out there for beginners and it is very stable. If you want a better OS than XP you'll have to go with linux but you will need to become slightly more computer saavy, (which isn't too difficult because when you have to be, you kind of become).
When I see someone open up an Apple laptop, I immediately think, "This person has more money than brains and fell for computer looks over usage."
That statement is about as full of holes, bugs and backdoors as Windows XP.
Mac OSX is one of the most sublime OS out there. Granted, I have little experience with Linux, but plenty of experience with Windon't OS - from 3.1 up to XP. Microsoft should have stopped with Windows 95.
Mac is far from a dying "bread"... I wouldn't bank on the Intel move, (yet). Macs were great because Motorola chips ran fairly cool. Turn on my iBook G4 and you hear....nothing. No whirling fans, no hum...it's silent. Hit the power on my G5 - same. Serenity. I'd stack my G5 ghz for ghz against any popular PC on the market out of the box. For one, Macs have historically and still do use their power more efficiently. Windows burns more power simply supporting the OS.
And the software argument is as lame as the Windows superiority argument. I'm running everything from Photoshop, to Office, to Final Cut Pro, (oh yeah, you can't run that on a PC). I've also got games up the wazoo...
I've also had zero down time since my first purchase. No freeze-ups, (wait there was that one running Microsoft FrontPage for Mac, but the computer figured it out and unfroze itself), no crashes, no OS issues, no reboots, no blown power supplies, no blown fan motors...no fans.... :)
I bought my first Mac about 6-years ago. It was and is a iMac DV. This after a FedEx festival with my last Dell, which I subsequently took to the gun range. My daughter is running that same iMac with OSX Panther and 1gb of ram. Runs like a top. My iBook is in it's 3rd year and my G5 in it's second. Zero issues, (wait, a rubber foot fell off the iBook).
Yeah Rob, this whole issue free computing thing is a nightmare....
Sometimes, you get what you pay for.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
poweRob
Joined: 14 Jul 2004
Posts: 22904
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 06, 2006 10:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
MassMark wrote: poweRob wrote: XP is still the best OS out there for beginners and it is very stable. If you want a better OS than XP you'll have to go with linux but you will need to become slightly more computer saavy, (which isn't too difficult because when you have to be, you kind of become).
When I see someone open up an Apple laptop, I immediately think, "This person has more money than brains and fell for computer looks over usage."
That statement is about as full of holes, bugs and backdoors as Windows XP.
Mac OSX is one of the most sublime OS out there. Granted, I have little experience with Linux, but plenty of experience with Windon't OS - from 3.1 up to XP. Microsoft should have stopped with Windows 95.
Mac is far from a dying "bread"... I wouldn't bank on the Intel move, (yet). Macs were great because Motorola chips ran fairly cool. Turn on my iBook G4 and you hear....nothing. No whirling fans, no hum...it's silent. Hit the power on my G5 - same. Serenity. I'd stack my G5 ghz for ghz against any popular PC on the market out of the box. For one, Macs have historically and still do use their power more efficiently. Windows burns more power simply supporting the OS.
And the software argument is as lame as the Windows superiority argument. I'm running everything from Photoshop, to Office, to Final Cut Pro, (oh yeah, you can't run that on a PC). I've also got games up the wazoo...
I've also had zero down time since my first purchase. No freeze-ups, (wait there was that one running Microsoft FrontPage for Mac, but the computer figured it out and unfroze itself), no crashes, no OS issues, no reboots, no blown power supplies, no blown fan motors...no fans.... :)
I bought my first Mac about 6-years ago. It was and is a iMac DV. This after a FedEx festival with my last Dell, which I subsequently took to the gun range. My daughter is running that same iMac with OSX Panther and 1gb of ram. Runs like a top. My iBook is in it's 3rd year and my G5 in it's second. Zero issues, (wait, a rubber foot fell off the iBook).
Yeah Rob, this whole issue free computing thing is a nightmare....
Sometimes, you get what you pay for....
Stack up your whatever mac dollar for dollar against a PC. I still contend that macs are a dying BREED (thanks Ender you jackass).
Apple Unveils Software to Run Windows XP
Either you are attempting to become the best or you force yourself to emulate the best. Linux is working on being the best. Looks like Apple is almost putting up the white flag.
I'll give Apple this. They have one hell of a media machine. They can do something three years later and get press like it was invented yesterday.
Microsoft Offers Free Virtual Server, Will Support Linux Guests
Virtualization was just made free by MicroSoft even though severs have been running virtualization for a couple years now.
LOOK OUT! MACS HAVE VIRTUALIZATION NOW! :lol:
To Apple's credit, they are not the only ones who do that. MicroSoft is going on and on and on about their up and coming 64 bit capabilities when linux has been 64 bit for several years now. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Gus
Joined: 17 Jun 2005
Posts: 7610
Location: Tampa, FL
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 06, 2006 1:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| It's not virtualization software. |
|
| Back to top |
|
endersshadow
Joined: 01 Feb 2004
Posts: 10130
Location: Dallas
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 06, 2006 1:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Going with Gus on this one. It's allowing Windows to boot up on the EMF or EMI or EMsomething, whatever the hell the acronym is--it creates a mock BIOS entry. Linux can boot on it, too.
Like Gus said, it's not virtualization. |
|
| Back to top |
|
poweRob
Joined: 14 Jul 2004
Posts: 22904
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 06, 2006 3:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
endersshadow wrote: Going with Gus on this one. It's allowing Windows to boot up on the EMF or EMI or EMsomething, whatever the hell the acronym is--it creates a mock BIOS entry. Linux can boot on it, too.
Like Gus said, it's not virtualization.
I may be off but I was going on this:
Quote: New software lets Intel Macs run Windows sans rebooting
Dual-booting isn’t your only solution to run Windows on a Mac. On Thursday, Parallels announced the public beta release of Parallels Workstation for Intel Macs, their virtual machine technology. It’s available for free download now.
As far as linux's stance on this news:
Quote: Linux Community Unfazed by Windows on Mac
BOSTON—Linux users and movers and shakers at LinuxWorld here were more bemused than anything else by Apple's surprise announcement that it will be supporting Microsoft's Windows XP on its Intel-based Macs, in addition to the Apple Mac
OS X.
Linux, which can run on Intel's EFI (extensible firmware interface), was a relatively easy port to the Intel-powered Mac. In only a matter of weeks, Linux was running on the new Macs.
Microsoft, on the other hand, pulled back from supporting EFI in Vista recently. Now, with Apple's Boot Camp, users will be able to choose between XP and Mac OS X at boot time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
liberalman
Joined: 17 Sep 2004
Posts: 4621
Location: Michigan
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 06, 2006 5:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Personally I would go with a anything but a Mac....but I am in this for the gaming! |
|
| Back to top |
|
endersshadow
Joined: 01 Feb 2004
Posts: 10130
Location: Dallas
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 06, 2006 6:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
poweRob wrote: endersshadow wrote: Going with Gus on this one. It's allowing Windows to boot up on the EMF or EMI or EMsomething, whatever the hell the acronym is--it creates a mock BIOS entry. Linux can boot on it, too.
Like Gus said, it's not virtualization.
I may be off but I was going on this:
Quote: New software lets Intel Macs run Windows sans rebooting
Dual-booting isn’t your only solution to run Windows on a Mac. On Thursday, Parallels announced the public beta release of Parallels Workstation for Intel Macs, their virtual machine technology. It’s available for free download now.
As far as linux's stance on this news:
Quote: Linux Community Unfazed by Windows on Mac
BOSTON—Linux users and movers and shakers at LinuxWorld here were more bemused than anything else by Apple's surprise announcement that it will be supporting Microsoft's Windows XP on its Intel-based Macs, in addition to the Apple Mac
OS X.
Linux, which can run on Intel's EFI (extensible firmware interface), was a relatively easy port to the Intel-powered Mac. In only a matter of weeks, Linux was running on the new Macs.
Microsoft, on the other hand, pulled back from supporting EFI in Vista recently. Now, with Apple's Boot Camp, users will be able to choose between XP and Mac OS X at boot time.
Oh, that's third party software. Apple's Boot Camp is not virtualization software.
Those of us in the Linux community are, in fact, rather bemused with the news...heh... |
|
| Back to top |
|
poweRob
Joined: 14 Jul 2004
Posts: 22904
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 06, 2006 7:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
endersshadow wrote: poweRob wrote: endersshadow wrote: Going with Gus on this one. It's allowing Windows to boot up on the EMF or EMI or EMsomething, whatever the hell the acronym is--it creates a mock BIOS entry. Linux can boot on it, too.
Like Gus said, it's not virtualization.
I may be off but I was going on this:
Quote: New software lets Intel Macs run Windows sans rebooting
Dual-booting isn’t your only solution to run Windows on a Mac. On Thursday, Parallels announced the public beta release of Parallels Workstation for Intel Macs, their virtual machine technology. It’s available for free download now.
As far as linux's stance on this news:
Quote: Linux Community Unfazed by Windows on Mac
BOSTON—Linux users and movers and shakers at LinuxWorld here were more bemused than anything else by Apple's surprise announcement that it will be supporting Microsoft's Windows XP on its Intel-based Macs, in addition to the Apple Mac
OS X.
Linux, which can run on Intel's EFI (extensible firmware interface), was a relatively easy port to the Intel-powered Mac. In only a matter of weeks, Linux was running on the new Macs.
Microsoft, on the other hand, pulled back from supporting EFI in Vista recently. Now, with Apple's Boot Camp, users will be able to choose between XP and Mac OS X at boot time.
Oh, that's third party software. Apple's Boot Camp is not virtualization software.
Those of us in the Linux community are, in fact, rather bemused with the news...heh...
So is Apple pretty much just now bragging that they can virtually dual-boot? |
|
| Back to top |
|
TheCreepyApostate
Joined: 11 Mar 2004
Posts: 19844
Location: Corruptinois
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 06, 2006 7:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'll give Mac props for their video and music editing and smooth lettering, but the difference gap between Windows and Mac OS is getting so small that there isn't much to place them apart in performance anymore. Going to intel chips shrinks the gap even more as hacks will allow Mac OS to run on PC's and Windows Vista on a Mac. Apple should just change their name to "iPod Inc." as it's the only product that actually keeps them afloat.
If you want to try a Mac I wouldn't jump into a $1500-$2500 Powerbook when you may hate it. I'd get the low end $500 Mac Mini and if you like it then sell it on ebay and get the Powerbook.
PS - I love my iPod Video :-D |
|
| Back to top |
|
superchick
Joined: 30 Sep 2004
Posts: 6568
Location: US
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 11, 2006 6:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
poweRob wrote: Nicholas wrote: poweRob wrote: When I see someone open up an Apple laptop, I immediately think, "This person has more money than brains and fell for computer looks over usage."
Clearly, you are a biased Bill Gates's apologist. The statement above is quite honestly full of drivel and is nothing but poppycock.
YOU think that if someone owns an Apple, this individual fell for its looks or has more money than sense? Frankly, when I see someone with a Windows laptop, I immediately think ''Just like every other laptop on the market with its cheap plastic looks, mediocre designed platform (plenty of room for improvement), vulnerable to viruses and so on'' I can think of many negative comments against to Windows, but ultimately, this individual has chosen something that best suits his or her needs and CHOICE.
More importantly, I do a lot of graphics designing, photographical work and media enhancing which is what an Apple computer is primarily for. Without doubt, better than windows, easier and offers a wider range of options in the professional end of the market. I am not made of money, nor am I fussy about its looks.
I don't play games which had me thinking ''Do I need a windows computer for that specific area?'' Or is an Apple best suited? Needless to say, I went for an Apple according to my needs.
This doesn't mean, I loathe Windows or Linux, as I use them frequently in employment and at home, but I also respect each individual's choice and the machine he/she has chosen.
Finally, I hate BMW's, so my suggestion is ''DON'T buy a BMW!''. True, it's my opinion. Hang on, isn't that what you typically expect a redneck to say?
Bill Gates apologist? :lol:
I'm actually a linux fan. I just know that XP works and works well.
Mac-heads are so diehard, but at least they can get a semi-clear purple, green, blue or red computer case I guess (for thrice the price). :lol: :lol: I think wow you are a marketer's dream, and you probably fell for another POS, what kind of car does a mac user drive? 2 letters, close to then end of the alphabet .... |
|
| Back to top |
|
Æ
Joined: 17 Jun 2005
Posts: 5538
Location: Taxatraz
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 11, 2006 8:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
poweRob wrote:
I'm actually a linux fan. I just know that XP works and works well.
If you think so, you've probably never done anything remotely enterprising with your computer. Or, even if you had, you've probably never had a crash where you would have to spend an exorbitant amount of money to recover data from your hard drive. Did you know that you could change one letter in one XP system file and you might not be able to boot the computer?
Quote: Mac-heads are so diehard, but at least they can get a semi-clear purple, green, blue or red computer case I guess (for thrice the price).
Well, I used to like Macs better than PCs, but now they are in bed with Intel, so they can go shove it in a socket. 'Tis ashame to see that the Mac golden era has passed and very pitiful that it has lost to a PC made of cheap and redundant parts and that has an inferior unstable OS written by a monopolistic plagiariser. |
|
| Back to top |
|
fredoreo
Joined: 13 Apr 2005
Posts: 544
Location: Los Angeles
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 21, 2006 4:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Professionally, I have used both PCs and Macs for audio mixing and I admit that Macs are no better than PCs. Yes it's true, Macs do crash, and they can crash alot, especially under heavy load, and some of those crashes can be worse than what windows XP has to offer. Having been a long term PC user, I was stunned to watch a G5 literally freeze a couple of times, something I haven't experienced on a good PC rig in a long time.
So yes, the widely known fact that Macs are better and more stable than PCs is now a myth. |
|
| Back to top |
|
poweRob
Joined: 14 Jul 2004
Posts: 22904
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 21, 2006 6:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
aLienaTeD wrote: poweRob wrote:
I'm actually a linux fan. I just know that XP works and works well.
If you think so, you've probably never done anything remotely enterprising with your computer. Or, even if you had, you've probably never had a crash where you would have to spend an exorbitant amount of money to recover data from your hard drive. Did you know that you could change one letter in one XP system file and you might not be able to boot the computer?
Actually I work at a trade magazine publishing company where I work on around 40 websites. Enterprising is about all I do on my PC.
I'll gamble you this though... present a MAC to me that you really like to do "enterprising" stuff on along with its price and let me build a PC for the same price or less, and I'll bet you'd prefer the PC by a LOOOOONG shot.
aLienaTeD wrote: Quote: Mac-heads are so diehard, but at least they can get a semi-clear purple, green, blue or red computer case I guess (for thrice the price).
Well, I used to like Macs better than PCs, but now they are in bed with Intel, so they can go shove it in a socket. 'Tis ashame to see that the Mac golden era has passed and very pitiful that it has lost to a PC made of cheap and redundant parts and that has an inferior unstable OS written by a monopolistic plagiariser.
What is it about using an Intel chip that you believe hurts MAC so bad as compared to its previous CPU? |
|
| Back to top |
|
fredoreo
Joined: 13 Apr 2005
Posts: 544
Location: Los Angeles
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 21, 2006 6:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: Well, I used to like Macs better than PCs, but now they are in bed with Intel, so they can go shove it in a socket. 'Tis ashame to see that the Mac golden era has passed and very pitiful that it has lost to a PC made of cheap and redundant parts and that has an inferior unstable OS written by a monopolistic plagiariser.
I always build a new PC from scratch, and by doing that I run into a variety of components that range from super cheap to very good quality. That's what I like about PCs, you can choose what you want to put inside, unlike the fisher price options you have in macs, meaning you're stuck with Apple support. If something breaks in my PC (which never happened yet), I can fix it the same day because the part can be bought seperately. The downfall about this is you have to know what to get...
Let's face it, macs are good without a doubt, but they are overpriced, that's for sure. The reason why alot of people buy macs is because Apple marketing is good. You can tell this by comparing how PC users and Mac users react to their computers. PC users generally seem more straight forward when talking about their computer. To most of them, it's just a tool, wether it be for gaming, professional use, whatever. On the other hand, it gets complicated with Mac users, and somehow it involves feelings for some reason. Has anyone else noticed this? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| Click here to go to the original topic |
|
