PC or Mac?

[PSUFAN]

Well, you ninnies?

PCs here

[Dinsdale]

PC?

I'd much rather pay 5 times as much for the Intel-reject shit and bottom-of-the-barrel Western Digital HDs that Apple passes off these days.

It makes perfect sense to pay several times more money for outdated shit that Apple doesn't even have made to their specs anymore, so you can have an inferior performing machine, but at least you stuck it to Ol' Bill Gates.

What a joke that company became. In the days of the Motorola processors, they were da'shizzy. Now, they're E-Machines' Bitch.

[_Porter_]

PC?

I'd much rather pay 5 times as much for the Intel-reject shit and bottom-of-the-barrel Western Digital HDs that Apple passes off these days.

It makes perfect sense to pay several times more money for outdated shit that Apple doesn't even have made to their specs anymore, so you can have an inferior performing machine, but at least you stuck it to Ol' Bill Gates.

What a joke that company became. In the days of the Motorola processors, they were da'shizzy. Now, they're E-Machines' Bitch.

I was with you until the last bit. You ever use an e-Machine? The only thing missing from those POS's is a hamster and a wheel. Sure, if you're an 80 y/o Grandma who just wants to send FWD:FWD:FWD:FWD:FWD:FWD:WWJD e-mails to your grandkids, I guess it's fine, but forget playing any games that require more processing speed than Minesweeper. And God help you if you install something like MS Office and try to play around with a spreadsheet. G'head and try to sort that fucker. You could jerk off to a picture of Camryn Mannheim faster than it'd finish.

PC over here. When I buy a new tower every 4-5 years, I try to get something that's near, but not quite the best out there. I save a few bucks that way, yet still have something that I can upgrade with more RAM or a new video card as they become faster or cheaper.

[PSUFAN]

But...but...they look so cool! Their ads are the BOMB!! The store is full of rich kids, and that's a good sign, right? ??

??

[YD]

posting on an old atari with paddles over here.

fuck all of you

[_Porter_]

But...but...they look so cool! Their ads are the BOMB!! The store is full of rich kids, and that's a good sign, right? ??

??

My first computer was a 512k Mac. My parents bought it for me for a HS graduation gift. It was cool to have a mac back then because PCs were fucking garbage and I think ran IBM OS2 or some other horseshit operating system at the time. But, my Mac crashed at least once a day and the disk drive fucked up more stuff than it saved. Never bought another Apple product until I got an iPod a few years ago.

[PSUFAN]

I was raised on a steady stream of Macs until they started self-destructing in the mid 90s. They shut down the third party action just as it was starting to get rolling.

Now, when something internal goes wrong, you have to carry it on a bed of feathers to the Apple Store, elbow aside Morrissey fans, and build a little sacrificial pyramid of stacked benjis for them to consider a repair that might only take 6 months and 4 figures.

[Wolfman]

I've been using Apple products since they came out at school. The first one I bought for home use was my old LC3 that I retired over 8 years ago. Currently using my Mac G-4 using OSX 10.2.8 I laugh at people asking me what kind of anti-virus I have--etc.
Does what I need and has for years. Never had any crashes on any of the Apple products I've used. Only problem I have run into now is the forced obsolescence that Jobs is foisting on us--- can't download new iTunes stuff until I upgrade. Looking at one of the Mac cubes ($600) to do the "Jobs".

Have fun with all the crashing and viruses folks !!

[RumpleForeskin]

MacBookPro would suggest otherwise, Dins. It has it all. Runs OS X and XP like a champ. I can run any and all programs on that laptop. Performance is off the charts too.

I use both ftr.

[PSUFAN]

I see the Apple Marketing Team has taken another couple of scalps.

[RumpleForeskin]

I see the Apple Marketing Team has taken another couple of scalps.

Oh please.

They have better video and imaging software which is offered with the OS when you purchase the model you want.

With PC, you're getting the bare bones or just trials of everything. Also, echo what Wolfman said. Less vulnerable to any 3rd party viruses and whatnot.

[bbqjones]

i had an emachines once. until primex kept making fun of me. now i have a dell dude.

its a pile of shit too.

my first computer was something my mom bought at radio shack i think. you had to use cassette tapes to install tic tac toe games. oregon trail on the commedore is still the best.

[Dinsdale]

MacBookPro would suggest otherwise, Dins.

Really?

Why don't you do me up a link where any current Apple machine outperforms its PC counterpart (although in fairness, I haven't seen any laptop figures lately)?

Inferior hardware, inferior machines. Period.

How the mighty have fallen.

[Dinsdale]

I've been using Apple products since they came out at school... Never had any crashes on any of the Apple products I've used.

Are you a liar, or is the alzheimers kicking in.

Because when I first started using Apple products in school, circa 1979, crashes were at least an hourly occurance.

[RumpleForeskin]

Dins, the specifications on the processors for a PC and a Mac differ. For instance, PCs have always progressed with higher numbers with their processing speed. Right now, Dell's best laptop is the XPS 2.8GHZ processor and the Mac Book Pro is 2.4. Those numbers are really irrelevant between the two makers.

My dad ran a similar program side-by-side at a sales show in Chicago some years ago with a IMac 266 and a Compaq 500. They ran exactly at the same speed, which tells you either Intel has always embellished the figures for their chip, or Mac's chip performs faster than suggested.

[Left Seater]

Back in the day when all the schools had Apple IIC and then IIE, I was an apple person. Ever since I have been a PC guy.

I can't imagine running some of the stuff I use now on an apple machine. Know of one pilot who threw his out the cockpit window to a ramp guy and asked him to throw the pieces away.

To be honest though Vista is worthless. Damn Dell for forcing that pile of crap on me with my new XPS lapper. Got the blue screen of death on a daily basis with Vista, without Vista it is operating like a champ.

[RadioFan]

I have a Mac at home and have been using PCs at work for several years.

Pretty much depends on the particular use, as to which one is preferrable.

For nearly anything writing or graphic-related, I prefer the Mac. iTunes and iPhoto are superior to anything available on a stadard PC. MS Word and MS photo editor blow monkey cack.

But for gaming and many other software programs, including online streaming, the PC pwns.

[PSUFAN]

There was once a real gulf between the two platforms with graphics. That gulf has really narrowed.

I'm not real big on the programs that new PCs ship with, or on Windows in general...but there is a wealth of software available for PCs. Software offerings for the Mac platforms are much less.

Virii? Crashes? I have had quite a lot less of both since I gave up on Macs for good in the late 90s. Yes, I was on system 9, and yes I know, OS X is better...but how much better? Those I know who pilot macs seems to still have a lot of trouble with their computer configuration and with hardware and with things not working as they should.

The really unmistakable difference is price. If price is no object, I suppose I would be less reluctant to use a Mac. Macs are simply far more expensive than PCs - you get less power and features for your money.

The Mac is presented as a total solution - where even recognizing a flaw is discouraged. You're not supposed to configure the thing, because...well, it's perfect, because it's coming out of Cupertino!! You'd have to be crazy or daft to want to use it in some way Steve Jobs hasn't determined to be the right way. Sorry, that's not how I roll. PCs let me do more.

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

Dins, the specifications on the processors for a PC and a Mac differ. For instance, PCs have always progressed with higher numbers with their processing speed. Right now, Dell's best laptop is the XPS 2.8GHZ processor and the Mac Book Pro is 2.4. Those numbers are really irrelevant between the two makers.

You realize that Mac dumped the PPC processor for Intel x86's quite a while ago?

There's nothing "special" about Macs anymore, unless you are referring to viral advertising and "lifestyle" marketing.


Install Linux, fuckos.

[Wolfman]

The only time I had a kernel panic was because I had a faulty wire in my mouse connection. I've never had to take my Mac in for repairs---never had to call "geek squad" and only asked my older son about some software concerns. Is PC superior in some uses--of course---stuff like Auto-CAD et al. Is Mac superior in some---sure---desktop publishing. To even have this discussion in 2008 is kind of lame; but don't say I'm a liar or senile when I tell you my Macs have come through for me.

[PSUFAN]

Is Mac superior in some---sure---desktop publishing.

I'm interested to hear why that is...in 2008.

The full Adobe Creative Suite is available for both platforms, and it behaves almost identically on each.

Microsoft Office is available for both platforms.

Open Office is being ported to the Mac platform - what's the holdup? Getting it to work with Aqua (the translucent stuff on the OS X desktop). I use it with great success on Vista and XP.

Corel, Quark, whatever...all of that is quite readily available for both platforms.

Historically, Apple was far and away better for graphics, desktop publishing, and for GUIs. There is a residual feeling that this remains true, but in my experience, it is not. Since the late 90s, the PC platform has made great strides, and is directly comparable, and quite probably has exceeded the Mac platform in these areas.

Going forward, both platforms will use the same processors.

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

Going forward, both platforms will use the same processors.

They already do, and have for a while.

[PSUFAN]

What are you - cracked? We fucking KNOW already.

They use the same processors.
They use the same processors.
They use the same processors.
They use the same processors.
They use the same processors.
They use the same processors.
They use the same processors.
They use the same processors.
They use the same processors.
They use the same processors.

IS THAT ENOUGH, NIMROD?

[Sirfindafold]

[Get fucked]

Get fucked

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

(left -->right: 1)

[Dinsdale]

Going forward, both platforms will use the same processors.

They already do, and have for a while.

Intel-reject shit

And Rumps, normally I'd probably throw in some stale "I'll type slowly" or some shit, but performance numbers have been intentionally made confusing for the consumer, so I'll give a semi-accurate super-quicky breakdown, and try to stay away from pointing out just how ignorant you sounded with:

My dad ran a similar program side-by-side at a sales show in Chicago some years ago with a IMac 266 and a Compaq 500. They ran exactly at the same speed, which tells you either Intel has always embellished the figures for their chip, or Mac's chip performs faster than suggested.

OK, first --

Let me guess... "some years ago" was before 2006(?), when Apple threw in the towel, waved the white flag on their asinine business model, and started buying up Intel's rejects?

Processor speed is tricky, and is rarely advertised correctly. As far as the "2.8 gig" or whatever, it is and isn't relavent -- among similar chipsets, it's true. For example, a Core2Duo running at 3gig will do 50% more operations than a Core2Duo running at 2.0gig. The gigahertz is how many times per second the processor is loaded with 1's and 0's. "Hertz" is always a designation of cycles per second, rega5rdless what context it's used in (unless you're renting a car).

When the silicon wafer is printed, it's done by making "spots" on the wafer to handle 1's and zeros (that whole "binary" thing). This is part of what makes up "chip architecture." In the Old Days of Apple, they were Motorola processors, which are a great deal more expensive, and have far superior architecture. In overly simple terms, a Motorola has more "spots" on which to load binary data. If you can load twice as much binary data at a time, it will have the same performance as a processor running at twice the cycling rate (and have much less problems with overheating).

Basically, long complicated story short, a processor's true performance is measured in FLOPS, which is "FLoating Operations Per Second." It's not how much data you ramrod through the processor, it's not how much data the processor can handle at once -- in the end, what matters is how many actual "calculations" a processor can do in a second... FLOPS.

And until recent years, Macs trounced PCs in this category, despite much lower processor cycling.\

Exceot Apple no longer uses Motorola processors, and now buys whatever Intel sells them cheap as rejects (OK, maybe not "rejects"... although here in the Land of Intel, I have a funny story about real Intel rejects going horribly wrong... I believe my friend did manage to avoid a long jail sentence, though... I guess employees aren't supposed to sell the processors that had the prongs come out 0.001" too short but still worked just fine on the open market in bulk... who knew?).

The race for the FLOPS lead became like a NASCAR race where the leader ran out of gas on the second-to-last lap.

And it's not really even a close race any more.


So save your "a few years ago, a MAC outperformed a PC"... thanks, Marcus. Get back to me when you can remove the "few years back" qualifier... which will be some time around "never."


Or, look up some actual FLOPS stats yourself. I'm too lazy, but Ive seen them laid out recently. The only advantage Apple had, they pissed away to milk some extra coin from the arrogant-yet-ignorant, pinky-waving, holier-than-thou Mac crowd... who still buy up what's essentially an inferior-performing PC with a different OS.

[Mister Bushice]

Dins, the specifications on the processors for a PC and a Mac differ. For instance, PCs have always progressed with higher numbers with their processing speed. Right now, Dell's best laptop is the XPS 2.8GHZ processor and the Mac Book Pro is 2.4. Those numbers are really irrelevant between the two makers.

My dad ran a similar program side-by-side at a sales show in Chicago some years ago with a IMac 266 and a Compaq 500. They ran exactly at the same speed, which tells you either Intel has always embellished the figures for their chip, or Mac's chip performs faster than suggested.

That really has no relevance. Windows is an operating system on top of another operating system, MS-dos.

Mac isn't designed that way, thus it works faster. It has less to do with processing speeds than it does with the number of commands needed to accomplish the same thing, namely getting to the desktop so you can begin working.

In college I had a mac classic. That little fucker was faster than any PC around at the time. I would have that machine up and working while my roommate was waiting for his PC to get to the log in screen.

XP is STILL an operating system on top of an operating system. I imagine the two companies have kept pace over the years, but macs would appear to run faster with slightly slower processors because there is so much less crap to go thru in the startup code.

[Dinsdale]

That really has no relevance. Windows is an operating system on top of another operating system, MS-dos.

XP is STILL an operating system on top of an operating system.

I'll let you in on a little super-secret detail of the industry...

Microsoft hasn't had a MSDOS based operating system since the release of Win2K.


None of the NT versions are.

That's kinda why you can't boot into MSDOS, and is why they don't have DOS windows, and instead have a "MSDOS simulator" or "command prompt" line.

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

I'll let you in on a little super-secret detail of the industry...

Microsoft hasn't had a MSDOS based operating system since the release of Win2K.

We're talking about Bushice, here.

He installed Skype and then spent most of 2007 screaming into his mouse.

"Hello? HELLO!?!? Is anybody there?"

[Cuda]

^^^ Holy Fukkk

[Dinsdale]

We're talking about Bushice, here.

My bad.

What OS does the new Apple II+ come with?

[Mister Bushice]

I'll let you in on a little super-secret detail of the industry...

Microsoft hasn't had a MSDOS based operating system since the release of Win2K.

We're talking about Bushice, here.

He installed Skype and then spent most of 2007 screaming into his mouse.

"Hello? HELLO!?!? Is anybody there?"

:)

Not only that, My damn cupholder isn't available. Some asshole put a cd in there. ;)

[PSUFAN]

Windows is an operating system on top of another operating system, MS-dos.

Mac isn't designed that way, thus it works faster.

None of that really is accurate.

Both use many layers to filter down to machine-level code...0s and 1s.

OS X actually has a terminal window, much like the many flavors of Linux. One of the marketing tenets is that the OS is based on Unix - actually, it is based on FreeBSD. One can open this window and execute shell commands...although the idea of your average Mac user doing that makes me laugh out loud every time.

Both operating systems execute a variety of complex commands that filter down through various levels before they get to machine code. Both rely on computing power to do this...either you have a powerful computer that does it fast, or you have a slower computer that struggles to do so.

By the way, in the real world, FreeBSD and other operating systems are updated frequently. What Mac does is take a slice of that development process and can it up in the guts of OS X...basically ending the ongoing process of updates and refinements, until you get the latest big marketing release, Leopard, or Alley Cat, or whatever. This is truly bizzare - and sorta makes that "Based on UNIX" thing pointless.

But hey - that's OK, as long as the pews are still filled with the Jobs faithful.

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

...actually, it is based on FreeBSD.

BSD, not FreeBSD.

And Mac is not exactly UNIX based, but it is Unix compliant.

[PSUFAN]

Thanks, Marty.

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

Thanks, Marty.

Yeah, no problem.

BTW, I still think T1B needs a Pets And Nature forum. Why have you been dragging your feet on that?

[PSUFAN]

Post that bilge in the Ween forum. They'll know what to do with you there.

[Atomic Punk]

Thanks, Marty.

Yeah, no problem.

I'll bet your boy Perk is laughing at your stupidity.

You to technology is what sirfindafold is to jokes.

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

Me to dignity is what sirfindafold is to jokes.

FTFY