Mac Computers

[Sean2001]

I hate how people act like Macs are God's computers. I've seen so many computers, with so many OSs, nothing impresses me.

The iPod is overblown as well. Rio makes a gret mp3 CD player for much less, about 200$, and you can hold your songs on 1 CD. Who needs gigabytes of music? You can't possibly listen to it all!!!

[jns]

I use a mac at work.

Oh. Look! New smilies!

Oh. Back to subject, for these purposes, the mac is better, for other purposes, it blows.

[binary hero]

A PC can rival and beat a mac on any level.

[Matt]

and some people ^(solly) are just ignorant

I use a mac at work. If you actually look into it you'll see a mac can do quite a lot. (but i still don't like them)

[griffinn]

Mac users like Macs not because of raw benchmarks. Their user interface makes more sense. And Macs don't hate newbies like PCs do.

[jns]

I am a newbie.
I do not like macs.
But I use them at work.
Etc..
I do not like the UI at all.
And I'm really annoyed by the fact that there's no underlying command language. bleh.

[Sean2001]

I don't hate Mac users so to speak, the first computer i ever used was a mac. I hate people who say Macs are completely superior to PCs. That is not true. I've recently compared my PC with a Mac and it blew it away. My PC SCREAMS with power. The Windows XP interface makes perfect sense!

[Huehuetenango]

i prefer macs
the first computer i ever used was a mac, i grew up using them, and my first intro to pc's was one running dos.
i hated it, didnt' understand it, still don't
i use a pc running win98 now. i'm ok w/ it, but my brother's mac is much better, in my opinion

[fwgx]

I don't get the no right mouse button bit

[Huehuetenango]

you get used to that
it took me a while to get used to having two buttons, i still feel more comfortable clicking w/ my middle finger (that's how i held the mac mouse), so i hold my mouse in my rihgt hand, but have a left hand button set up

[Sean2001]

Dos doesn't make much sense to me either. I love Windows XP and all previous OSs. I can't stand having a uni-button mouse, I like two buttons but preferably three buttons

[c2R]

I think Solaris is better It'll run on a 486 (ok, so if you want a graphical frontend like kde or gnome you'll need a pentium) and it's got a command-line interface. yay!

[Sean2001]

I've heard of Solaris, but do not know much about it. Will you tell me some more about it?

[c2R]

sure, it's a unix clone made by sun microsystems for the intel platform.

It will run on a mid-range 486 (and will do many tasks quite well, like being a small network server or something).

If you want a Graphical frontend (of which there are loads to choose from) you'll need a pentium, preferably a high-end one for hard-core use

You can find more info from http://www.sun.com/solaris

We get it at work in big boxes full of CDs and manuals, as we have lots of Sun-SPARC systems and everything. I think you can download CD images from the above website though...

Hope this helps.

[deathazre]

Originally posted by Sean2001
My PC SCREAMS with power.

http://www.thinkgeek.com/stuff/apparel/5766.shtml

[Digipak]

Originally posted by Sean2001
That is not true.

alright, ill agree with you here. macs are not superior.

Originally posted by Sean2001

My PC SCREAMS with power.

If you're running Windows, I strongly doubt that. However, if your running Linux/GNU, Unix, OpenBSD, Solaris, I can believe that.

Originally posted by Sean2001
The Windows XP interface makes sense!

I don't agree with you on that, but anyways....the default theme is ugly either way.

[Sean2001]

First off, thank you c2R. That info was helpful and I'll look into that OS. It sounds pretty cool.

Next, my computer does SCREAM with power. Let me describe it....

Modified Dell Dimension 4300 with a 1.6 Ghz P4 Processor, FSB of 350 Mhz,2GB of DDR RAM, 40 GB SCSI hard drive 15,000 rpms, 128MB AGP graphics card (DDR RAM), complete THX sound system, 17" flat panel monitor, CD Rom/RW drive, DVD ROM/RW drive etc........... Oh, and I nearly forgot!!!.............Windows XP, the perfect complement to a perfect system!!!!

[Sean2001]

...............all for about $2,600

[rm']

I don't know why, but even though the specs of a Mac system may seem less impressive, Macs use what resources they have more effectively. I occasionally have the good fortune of access to a friend's G4 once in a while to do graphics work... using Photoshop, I can resize 5000x3500 images without any lag in system performance. On my Celeron with 96MB RAM, trying to resize an image of that size causes refresh problems for the system interface, and multitasking is next to impossible.

[Sean2001]

There is a ram management program i have and it definitely helps make any system run more efficiently. While I have never resized an image that large, i have done very hi rez video editing and i was hard pressed to see my system slow. You're right macs generally do run more efficiently, but i've corected that problem on my PC.

P.S. Why would you be resizing such a high rez image? Thats what, a 7 megapixel file?

[Xerxes]

People like Macs because Macs like people.

They are designed for normal consumers, not hobbyists.

And even the most vehement Mac hater has to (begrudgingly) agree
that their computer cases look way better than most PC cases. Really, the case design is somewhat metaphorical for what the Mac is- a machine designed from the motherboard to compliment and enhance people and their environment. Like.... a Frank Lloyd Wright building.
A PC on the other hand... demands a requisite competence level from the user, and sticks out like a sore thumb in any decor because it was never designed for people to begin with.

And come onnn now, why fight really? I think we are in an "enlightened" age where Macs and PC's don't war each other. Everyone knows now that each have competencies in their own areas, so they may peacefully co-exist like Zebras and Gazelles on the plain

[Huehuetenango]

as i said above, i use both, i have both in my house, but i greatly prefer macs

xerxes is right, the mac even looks better
put my pc and my brother's mac side by side and the mac looks far better
fits in, is streamlined, can easily be opened
my older brother was able to add more ram another hard drive and replace his present hard drive in something like half an hour two nights ago

[Digipak]

Originally posted by Sean2001
Next, my computer does SCREAM with power. Let me describe it....

Modified Dell Dimension 4300 with a 1.6 Ghz P4 Processor, FSB of 350 Mhz,2GB of DDR RAM, 40 GB SCSI hard drive 15,000 rpms, 128MB AGP graphics card (DDR RAM), complete THX sound system, 17" flat panel monitor, CD Rom/RW drive, DVD ROM/RW drive etc........... Oh, and I nearly forgot!!!.............Windows XP, the perfect complement to a perfect system!!!!

hmmm....not bad at all. only 2 things i can find wrong with it. windows and a pentium.

[Sean2001]

Xerxes you're right, macs are designed for people. People who don't want to have to delve into their computer. You know what I mean. I love PCs, there is no getting around it. As for the look of the case, the dell dimension 4300 looks great and it opens like a book for very easy access. On the look with the room, that really is a matter of opinion.

I LOVED your analogy about zebras ad gazelles!!!!!!!!!!

Digipak, I do plan to switch my P4 to an AMD processor. As for windows, I just love it. I know there are other OSs out there, each with its likes and dislikes, flaws and stregnths.

I love Windows XP.

My next computer probably will be a modified business server, you know, the ones with 4 processors and a TB of storage. I can't wait.

AS for me, I will never reply to this discussion board again. You might as well terminate it.

Goodbye, and thanks for the discussion. Its good to know what the other OS users think. I really enjoyed this.

I'm off to graze in the vasts of cyberspace...........on my PC.

========Sean2001

[Omnislash]

Who needs gigabytes of music? You can't possibly listen to it all

I have 30 GB of music. I have listened to it all several times.

I can't imagine not having it.

[Horatius]

The UI is weird, I tried OS 9 on an imac and the logic behind the OS mystifies me. It looks like Windows 3.1, its slow as hell, and more expensive then a good computer. Those things run freakin' hot too, are they too cheap to put fans on those things? No electronic device should put off that much heat, it raises resistance, expands the circuits (while the board doesn't expand, see how long that lasts!) and monitors have the funny habit of burning out from that sort of thing. I thought it was defective and had them send another one (with a DVD this time), same thing, and to get a DVD to play requires some kind of Voodoo dance or something cause when you click on the DVD icon you get . . . a bunch of files, thats um . . . useful. That crappy mouse is designed more for form then function too, a single mouse button so you have to ctrl-click to do anything useful, and its round, nobody I know of has perfectly round hands. The evil empire has about the best game in town right now, more incentive for Linux programmers to get their butts in gear!!!

[Huehuetenango]

well, as you said, you used an IMAC
those are awful, awful, AWFUL computers

try a real mac, just once in your life

[MetallichicA]

Of course the Mac interface looks like Windows 3.1...

Windows 3.1 was a direct take off the Mac interface.

What interests me is that someone actually has the guts to say "I hate people who say that Macs are the be-all and end-all. We all know that PC's are!" Hypocritical? Nooooooooo. Of course not :-)

Macs do have a better ability to utilize their RAM. For instance, when I try to run Photoshop, Illustrator, Quark XPress, AIM, and Netscape on a Mac with 128 megs of RAM, I have virtually no problem. However, when I run the same programs (but change Netscape to IE) on my pc (which has 224 megs), I lag lag lag the system. Plus, Macs just have a better way of handling graphics (for me, anyway). Pc's just can't beat them for graphics programs like Photoshop.

That's just my opinion. If you write back to this and start yelling about how stoopid I am, then you're just a boob.

Bex

[NRen2k5]

I don't hate Macs, I recognize them as the actually decent machines that they are.And in fact it must take quite a bit of ingenuity to make something that isn't a PC and yet actually works well.

But what I do hate is the pop-culture wise-ass idiots who buy iMacs because they think they're better computers and don't realize they're being fucked out of a floppy drive, compatibility and tons of good 3rd-party programming. And not to mention the fact that since IBM, Intel and M$ are all wannabe monopolies, for some reason they don't allow their computers to be shown close up in TV shows or commercials other than their own - so all we see all the time are Macs.

[MetallichicA]

Heh yeah...
Please don't count iMacs as "Macintosh"
They suuuuuuuuuuuuuck :-)
I'm sick of people getting all excited because they "bought a Mac" and then I find out it's an iMac. That's like saying an eMachine is a computer ;-) jk, you just can't upgrade those is all.

Bex

[Freshmen44]

I have to go with pcs in this argument. I mean, yeah, macs are more "user friendly" and look better (who gives a shit?) but that only makes them LOOK more appealing. and for radioactive man's comment

"On my Celeron with 96MB RAM, trying to resize an image of that size causes refresh problems for the system interface, and multitasking is next to impossible."

First of all, you have a celeron which sux my ass, but you only have 96 mb of ram. What can you expect to do on that?

[sean2002]

I'm breaking my word. Oh well!!!!

I'm Back with a modified name. I was Sean2001.

Freshmen44, right on!

You can put crap in a fancy package, but what do you have??

Answer: crap in a box!

It would seem that Mac users only want to claim the good parts of their world.

IMACS BARE THE BITTEN FRUIT TO!!!!!!!!

metallichica, you're right emachines suck

celeron sucks ass, if you're going to use intel chips use a pentium.

Or, use what I use now, an AMD anthlon. They are so nice.

Photoshop must be what the mac world revolves around, is that all they are good for???

[MetallichicA]

Photoshop isn't all that Macs are good for, but it's what they were made for... *drools*... Photoshop on a Mac mmmmmmmmmm.... UNF UNF!

Bex

[sean2002]

Quote:

"Photoshop isn't all that Macs are good for, but it's what they were made for... *drools*... Photoshop on a Mac mmmmmmmmmm.... UNF UNF!"

I understand the first line, the second confuses me. what does the unf, mmmmmmm, and *drools* mean? I'm light on the lingo.

[John M]

i got a buddy who uses a mac for graphic design and he loves it. more power to him. i think macs are too colorful. i like white/beige/black cases and grey interfaces. makes me feel more productive

[sean2002]

PCs come in more colors than that, they are just not widespread. Who gives a damn about having fruity colored cases?

However, I think the silver G4 case looks very fine. But the square plain colored cases just have that look I love more.

Once again its a matter of opinion.

[Digipak]

Originally posted by sean2002
Or, use what I use now, an AMD anthlon. They are so nice.

Photoshop must be what the mac world revolves around, is that all they are good for???

w00t! Got an athlon

I think so? I dunno.
iMacs are a disgrace to electronics everywhere, not just Macs. Even 486's are ashamed of them, because quite frankly, a 486 has just about as much power. And I hate the gay names they gave the colors. Honestly, who wants a computer colored 'Raspberry'? I wish they could make FASTER processors. I know clock speed isn't everything (Athlon proved that), but by Pentium's 4th processor, they got up to 2.0 (probably more later) GHz, and Mac's G4 was what, 800 MHz? I realize that they probably run a little bit faster than a P3 800, but they really could have done something, lengthen the pipeline, anything. Ah well. That's why I don't run a Mac I suppose.

[Xerxes]

Rasberry is a more marketable version of "reddish purple"

And I don't care how much you hate the insides of the Imac, the outside has started a revolution in how many things are designed. For that reason alone they are a landmark in computers and design.

[Xerxes]

Originally posted by sean2002
PCs come in more colors than that, they are just not widespread. Who gives a damn about having fruity colored cases?

People who give a damn about how their environment and decor look. That's a lot of people, including me.

[rm']

Originally posted by Digipak
I wish they could make FASTER processors. I know clock speed isn't everything (Athlon proved that), but by Pentium's 4th processor, they got up to 2.0 (probably more later) GHz, and Mac's G4 was what, 800 MHz? I realize that they probably run a little bit faster than a P3 800, but they really could have done something, lengthen the pipeline, anything. Ah well. That's why I don't run a Mac I suppose.

The Motorola chips that Apple uses run in a different fashion than Intel's (and AMD, Cyrix, et al.) x86 processors. I'm not sure about the specifics, but it's something about how they handle instructions. x86 architecture performs instructions sequentially, while the Motorola chips can perform multiple instructions in one clock cycle. There are terms for the two systems, but I'm not sure what they are. That's why you can't compare CPU speeds of Apple's and PC's.

and Xerxes pointed out, Apple is following a different design philosophy than PC manufacturers. It's all about how humans interact with the technology around them, and how the technology itself becomes living, and a part of your world. How technology integrates into your world. PCs, on the other hand, is about maximizing productivity while minimizing time. That's why PCs concentrate on computing power, while Apple's are geared more towards extending your personal capabilities.