Issues with your account? Bug us in the Discord!
Need a laugh? Mac v PC
In Between
The Ultimate Lurker
in Zocalo v2.0
I hedge my bets I have Intel MacBook Pro with XP !!!!:p
[url]http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,2006031,00.html[/url]
Enjoy !!!
[url]http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,2006031,00.html[/url]
Enjoy !!!
Comments
I love Macs, but I just cannot bring myself to buy one. For one thing, they are prohibitively expensive. One could buy a PC that does the same thing for hundreds less. Moreover, the difference in price between the different models of a particular line (such as the three you have to choose from in the MacBook line) is only about $200. And you HAVE to buy Applecare, lest you want to buy a new machine should your current one die. My friend bought an iMac and has had the logicboard and power supply replaced twice. If he didn't have Applecare the repair costs would have been twice the cost of a new machine.
The other big reason I can't get one is gaming. Other than schoolwork, gaming takes up a large amount of my computing time.
Oh well, maybe if I can find myself a real job after I'm done with school I'll have money to burn on one. Until then, I'm stuck with a PC.
PCs play games
MACs do REAL work.
I don't own a single Apple product, and while I don't dislike macs, I just can't justify their purchase. There are plenty of other products available that get the job done just as well, at the fraction of the cost.
Personally, I won't stand in line for the iPhone either. All my cellphone needs to do is make/receive calls and text messages and most importantly hold its charge for more than 3 days after I made a couple of calls. I can do that with a $50.00 phone. I don't really need a $500.00 gadget, which only tells others that I have money to burn, something rather inappropriate in this day and age.
I am buying 2 new Imac's for work this summer, we have a total of 25 customer machiens, If the Mac's were more in line with PC costs, 10-12 of those machines would be mac's, instead of only 2.
Great mouse.
Now if Apple just didn't stupidly configure the system default setting for the mouse to still work as a 1-button mouse...
As for the overpriced image... not entirely true, according to way too many examples to list here. Just chek the [url=http://www.systemshootouts.org/]Mac vs. PC System Shootouts website[/url].
If you actually configure a PC with similar specs the prices come out close. Of course you could still complain about how Apple will push a webcam and Firewire upon you and limit your choices. :eek: True, but for most users I believe the configurations and price points that Apple offers should be OK.
For me, even if Macs were overpriced, the operating system would be well worth the extra bucks.
[*] Technically it's still 1-button, but it has a sensor distinguishing between a left and a right click.
Anyway.
Macs are for business. Why? Macs run on a BSD core, which means for web development, they have native support of any *nix apps you need.
The biggest advantage of running a Mac...I can't procrastinate.
By less with you mean play video games. Cause there ain't nothin a MAC can't do.
Also remember geniuses you DON'T have to buy the apple peripherals to run a MAC.
*clap*
*clap*
I'm not an idiot, and I know what Macs can do, I just choose to do them on a PC. I don't mix music, so I have no need for pro-tools. I make home videos on the PC, but I make them for my in laws and my parents, not for youtube, so I'm fine with either Windows movie maker or Adobe Premier.
I play a lot of games, and a lot of those don't run on the Mac OS. I know about Boot Camp, I just don't care enough about owning a Mac to bother. I like to build my computer too, and you can't do that with a Mac.
I realize that not all Mac users are like that, but lets face it, some are. Hell, some PC users are like that too, but because of the size of the core Mac audience, a higher percentage of Mac users are pretentious assholes. And for what reason? Good question. After all, its just a computer, a tool or toy depending on the user.
I have often said recently that if Mac releases its OS to be installed on a PC I would then most likely make the switch. With Boot Camp now, I cant think of anything I couldn't run. It just comes down to being able to build it.
At the end of the day its all down to individual choice. I can use XP and do stuff with it but from a choice point of view, OS X on a mac wins hands down. For the work that I do jumping from Dreamweaver to Photoshop and multiple browsers and Finder windows, Expose and the horizontal view for finder windows make it much smoother to do my work. Added to that OS X does multitask very well especially on Dual processor macs. When I try to do the same with XP it just feels closed, locked down and some what restrictive. So for me I am much more productive this way. Sadly I think I will be forced to use a Dell again as the G5 will need an upgrade at the end of the year. It still speeds along nicely but with Mac Intel move will force it. But no because they have to buy "mac specific" software for me they will say no to a new mac. Actually I would not put it past them to buy me a mac and then force me to use XP on it. Thats what they are like here.
Anyway back in 1994 I had a choice... use Win 3.1 for Workgroups/DOS or Mac OS 7... the choice was pretty simple in the end :) Haven't looked back since :)
What's my computer running Ubuntu then?
They are referring obviously not using it as such; they are referring to windows.
Stop being a smart ass, CMon :)
The biggest advantage of running a Mac...I can't procrastinate.
By less with you mean play video games. Cause there ain't nothin a MAC can't do.
Also remember geniuses you DON'T have to buy the apple peripherals to run a MAC.
*clap*
*clap*[/QUOTE]
fanboi :D
My solution to the lack of superdrive. Is to use my old DVD burner get an External Enclosed Case and hook it up to the back whenever I need to use it. $39 bucks on newegg can't go wrong there.
Yeah... MightyMouse still has some silly design problems. But to me is no biggy, I don't usually keep my fingers resting on the buttons anyway. And in any event, almost any USB mouse will work in a Mac, you can toss out the Apple mouse if you want.
SpiritOne:
I also hate pretentious computer users... whether they use Linux, Windows, or Mac OS. :)
I would say that in many cases the "pretentiousness" of Mac users is defensiveness. I really don't understand why some Wintel Users have to bash Mac Users, nor do I understand Mac users that feel they have to do the same.
Like Falcon1, I just prefer Mac OS to the way that Windows is set up to work. The ways I can do things on Mac OS are more logical to me than the ways that Windows forces you to do things.
And I do have lots of experience with Windows, 3.1 at the University (I also got to use DOS) and in my first job, then in grad school, 95 and 98 in grad school (my first advisor was anti-Mac), 2000 in my current work.
I always preferred Mac OS, I've known it from the Mac Classic onwards at the University. At grad school , after I switched advisors I went back to Mac with a G3 (Mac OS 8.6) and upgraded it all the way to 10.2 (Mac OS X Jaguar). I have a G5 iMac at home, with 10.3.9 and it's a great machine.
At my work I was forced to use 2000 and only recently was provided with a 17" core-duo iMac. I'm frankly much more comfortable with OS X, even if I know my way around Windows.
I do have XP through Boot Camp, to run a few specialized apps, and because my stupid bank barely supports Netscape on Mac OS, and it's slightly more convenient to access my accounts with the latest Netscape on Windows, also, it's not unusual for a PowerPoint made on Mac to look messed up on Windows (differences in native support for some graphic formats is usually the problem), so a quick look under XP can be useful.
Way I see it, with Intel Macs I can have the best of both worlds in operating systems.
And those two worlds would be Unix and Mac OS.
But being able to run that third world Windows (only when absolutley necessary) is good too.
*points at A's title*
:p
I love most things about OS X but hate the dock, can't seem to use the mighty mouse (same problem I have with touchpads and some touch-based input mechanicms), and am not willing to pay the apple premium for hardware. However, OS X is somewhat flexible and can be made to run on a wide range of modern platforms thanks to the x86 release, so that is just good and happy.
My stance on OS 9, OS 8, System 7, etc. is one of well-concealed hatred. Task management on them was a chore.
Agreed about previous editions of MAC OS they were bugged to all hell.
They are referring obviously not using it as such; they are referring to windows.
Stop being a smart ass, CMon :)[/QUOTE]
and you stop stating the obvious. :)
Boot Camp partitions your harddrive, effectively giving you two disks in one. One of these is the normal Mac half, with Mac OS, Mac formatting, Mac everything. The other one has Windows installed on it, with Windows formatting, and so on. When you boot into Windows, it is for all intents and purposes a Windows machine. No graphics card problems like you get with emulation. Games work fine.
In fact, it's interesting to see, now that we can do a one-to-one comparison, when a Macintosh port of a game is faster and when it's slower than the Windows version.
To have more control over Dock positioning you can use a freeware app called [url=http://www.bresink.com/osx/TinkerTool.html]Tinker Tool[/url].
That it allows you to stick the dock to corners (I keep it pinned to the lower right corner, that puts the trashcan in the Classic Mac OS position :)) is only one of the many hidden preferences it allows you to set. Another one I like is that you can activate a debug menu for Safari.
A really good tool.
Regarding Boot Camp: just be aware that if you format the Windows partition as NTFS Mac OS can only read, but it won't write. You must format the Windows partition as FAT 32 for Mac OS to write to it. And unless you're willing to pay for additional software Windows does not even see the Mac OS partition of the hard drive. I have no idea if Mac OS X 10.5, with Boot Camp no longer "beta" will be able to write to NTFS (or whether it will support Vista).
BTW, I forgot to mention that the article that started this post has something right: the Mac vs. PC ads make Mac look smug and condescending. But I think he misses the point. The ad is not directed to the more technically inclined, but to a segment of the "general public".
Regardless of what your preferences are, the ads are just hilarious. :D
[url]http://tech.blorge.com/Structure:%20/2007/02/07/microsoft-slugs-mac-users-with-vista-tax/[/url]
That's a limit of the publicly available NTFS driver for *nix. You can get a "beta" driver that officially states "if you break your drive, it's not our problem" that can write NTFS - see here: [url]http://www.linux-faqs.com/faq/misc/ntfs.html#3.2[/url]
RE: In Between
Speaking of the Vista license...
[CODE]MICROSOFT WINDOWS VISTA HOME BASIC
ADDITIONAL LICENSE TERMS. The following additional license terms apply to Microsoft Windows
Vista Home Basic.
1. DEVICE CONNECTIONS. You may allow up to 5 other devices to access the software installed on
the licensed device to use File Services, Print Services, Internet Information Services and Internet
Connection Sharing and Telephony Services.
[/CODE]
I read this as: any sort of device, including human interface devices. Seems rather broad and undefined.
And here is the offending line that In Between referred to:
[CODE]
4. USE WITH VIRTUALIZATION TECHNOLOGIES. You may not use the software installed on the
licensed device within a virtual (or otherwise emulated) hardware system.[/CODE]
Personally, MS is in a nose dive and trying to save themselves through legalize. I'd like to know how they can ever truly tell you are on a virtualized environment? Furthermore, it states that you can't use the software installed on [b]the licensed device[/b] within a virtual... - but doesn't that seem to indicate that if the licensed device was the virtual machine it wouldn't count?
Additionally, I've heard that the line in the License Agreement is intended to refer to double dipping and installing Vista in a Virtualized disk image as well as on its own proper partition. You could do one, or the other with no problems. Heck, with the Parallels upgrade beta, you could do both, since it allows you to use a bootcamp partition for virtualization, as well.
Still, they could've been clearer about it.
[url]http://forums.parallels.com/thread8354.html[/url]