Mac OSX Snow Leopard available Friday. Why wait until October for Vista 2?

[onehandle]

Still need Windows? You can run it Better on a Mac.

Why your next PC should be a Mac:
http://www.apple.com/getamac/

The world's most advanced operating system:
http://www.apple.com/macosx/

$29 for Leopard owners:
http://store.apple.com/us/product/MAC_OS_X_SNGL

[Renew Deal]

1. Jump on Apples buggy crap as quickly as possible!

Activate the drones!

[cliffordu]

3. buggy crap....

:rofl:

I love peeps who don't know shit and ain't afraid to show it.

[Renew Deal]

7. Right

I hope your iPod doesn't explode.

[EOTE]

10. Hey, sometimes MP3 players explode.

Shit happens. Doesn't mean that Steve Jobs isn't a God living amongst men.

[Javaman]

279. so how is a battery in an iPod equate to system software?

logic fail.

[Deja Q]

64. Seconded. The only buggy crap on my Macs is

Office 2008.

Word crashed on me when inserting a chart. (using Word's chart creating function.)

Word crashes on my Windows machines too when dealing with more complex work...

None of my other apps have ever crashed.

Anti-mac fools love flaunting their naivety. To say the very least. (and without repeating things I've said time and again in previous flamewars; if they can't be bothered to read more detail information then, why would they now...)

[Deja Q]

59. You're speaking of Winbloat, a platform I'm happy to have severed myself from after 20 years of

Microsoft Shit(tm).

[armyowalgreens]

146. Mac OSs are extremely stable. However, that comes at the cost of simplification.

Windows offers a much better platform for dynamic usage.

[PatGund]

173. Define "dynamic usage"

[yodermon]

244. right-clicking.

[brooklynite]

259. Plug a (third party) two button mouse into your Mac and...

right-click to your heart's content.

[PatGund]

180. For "buggy crap"

My Macs seem to last a lot longer than my PC's.

[SOS]

2. Thanks for the info

Off to the Apple store this Friday!

[Romulox]

4. Operating System Fanboi-ism is lame.

I will be picking up a Family pack of Snow Leopard, however.

[EOTE]

5. Because Windows 7 is awesome and it runs far more apps and games than OSX.

And I don't want to pay far, far more on the relatively small amount of hardware made for compatibility with Macs just so I can put it into a box that I wouldn't be running OSX on to begin with. I've been gaming on a Windows 7 machine since January and I haven't had a single lockup or BSOD. And I do that on hardware that would cost me an arm and a leg if I purchased it as a Mac box. And the only way I'd get the exact components I wanted in a Mac capable machine is if I made a Hackintosh.

[WonderGrunion]

13. I've been following ZDNet's reports on Windows 7

I'm really impressed by it's speed, reliability and resource management abilities. I opted from upgrading to Vista, but Windows 7 seems like a winner.

[alfredo]

20. I'd still wait a week or so before upgrading to W 7, just to let others do

the beta testing for you.

[WonderGrunion]

23. I'm actually going to wait a couple of months

for it to be pre-installed on a new system. Mine is pretty old right now.

[alfredo]

82. Windows has a history of nasty surprises, so that is a prudent course.

[EOTE]

29. The beta phase of Windows 7 has been over for a while.

I'm a Windows 7 beta tester and I received the release client months ago. I can tell you though that even the beta of Windows 7 is rock solid reliable. My release client is good until I believe May of next year, but I'll be getting a family pack of Windows 7 well before then for attending an IT Pro Windows 7 conference in November. It's the first MS OS I've been excited about in a very long while. Not only is it a hell of a lot less system intensive than Vista, it's better looking and a hell of a lot more stable. MS has done wonders for getting 3rd party manufacturers to get their drivers right out of the gate this time around too. I've used Windows 7 with a huge array of old and new hardware and it's never had a single problem and the driver installation has always gone flawlessly. Windows 7 is everything that Vista should have been.

[alfredo]

86. Maybe they have learned their lesson about releasing software that is just

"good enough." It might take a while to battle the perception of buggy 1.0 releases.

[EOTE]

125. It seems as if Vista taught them a valuable lesson.

It really shouldn't have taken such a debacle, but at least it's been cleaned up. Windows 7 is by far the best MS OS I've ever used. Probably the best all around OS too. I do a lot of gaming, and it's been great on that front, but on all other areas, it's been fantastic as well. It makes for a fantastic HTPC and it also runs so much better on my SO's laptop than Vista ever did. I really think that Windows 7 is going to last a very long time. Now bring on DirectX 11!

[alfredo]

159. Will 7 be scalable for mobile? I still think they should have gone UNIX.

[EOTE]

230. Mobile as in cell phones?

No, I don't believe so. Windows Mobile and CE is probably going to suffice on that end for a while. It will run fine on a good number of Netbooks though, so long as they have 2 gigs of RAM.

[alfredo]

239. Will keep it simple or will they have a bunch of different flavor? That's one

thing I like about OSX. They have two versions, your standard and a server version. The same version runs on the $599 mini and the top line fire breathing MacPro.

One thing I learned in retail is not to give the customer too many options. Don't confuse them with a dizzying array of products.

[EOTE]

245. Unfortunately, a bunch of different flavors.

And while it may be stupid from a marketing standpoint, it's really not going to effect the end user at all. The only one to really avoid if you want to get the great bulk of the full experience while avoiding many things the typical end user won't need is the Home Basic version. Just like the Vista Basic version, it misses out on Aero (the others have the ability to turn it on or off). But, having that basic version will allow for it to be included on very cheap Netbooks while still getting good performance out of it.

With PCs being an open platform, it's not surprising they're offering that many versions though. I'm running the 64 bit Ultimate version of 7 right now and the performance is great and I don't have to worry about tracking down trusted 64 bit versions of drivers like I had to do with Vista 64, which was by far my biggest gripe with that OS. Any of the versions, including Ultimate are very scalable, so none should really require really modern hardware, so long as you don't mind Windows scaling down for you.

[alfredo]

249. This Friday I will see if OSX has given me my $29's worth. Right now I

am only using 1 gig RAM. I hope there are not greater demands on my system. I heard it will better utilize multiple cores and takes up 7 gigs less space.



When is 7 scheduled to be released?

[EOTE]

251. October 22nd, I believe.

So wait, you've got a dual core (or higher) and only have 1 gig of RAM? Regardless of how efficient OSX is, upgrading to 2 gigs or more should provide a massive increase in performance and it shouldn't cost more than the $29 required to upgrade to Snow Leopard. RAM is so cheap now, it's a no brainer in terms of upgrades. When I built my most recent system, I went with 6 gigs of triple channel memory. I'm a fairly heavy multitasker and I still won't be using the full 6 gigs much at all. However, considering that memory was pretty much the cheapest component in my system, it made sense for me to go with 6 gigs rather than 3 just in case I have the use for it in the future. Upgrading to Snow Leopard might be a bit of a performance upgrade, but I can't imagine it will be as significant as doubling your RAM.

[alfredo]

258. RAM is the first upgrade on my agenda, a larger hard drive the second.

[Occulus]

75. Already done!

I've been using the Windows 7 7100 build for a while now. It's more stable as a beta than even XP was after three service packs.

7 is going to be one of those rare gems from Micro$oft that actually works as advertised.

I benchmarked "The Last Remnant" in XP and 7. Identical hardware (hell, same machine).

I got 23-25 frames per second in XP.

I get 55-60 frames per second in 7. On the same machine.

It's amazing.

[alfredo]

89. Now that could be a good first step in winning back confidence. Let's

see how it works in the "real world." One of the big problems they seem to have is dealing with such a wide range of hardware it has to work on.

[high density]

186. Thousands of people are already running the RC to great success

Microsoft finally figured it out this time.

[Deja Q]

57. Yes, we all know Windows is a poorly built gaming platform. It can't do anything else right.

Have fun with a hackintosh, I'll be sure to send Apple as much contact information about you as possible. Unlike Microsoft, I side with the BSA and despise pirates and piracy.

[EOTE]

63. Pshaw, like I'd have any desire to run OSX?!?

Thanks for the threat anyway, big brother. It's good to know fine citizens like you are keeping me on the up and up.

[alfredo]

217. Check out what Parallels is doing.

http://www.parallels.com/

[Moochy]

256. What a Punkass

Time to go share more copies of hackintosh vm on bit torrent, not because I use it, but specifically to
annoy the fuck out of fanboy losers like you.

[cliffordu]

6. Why wait for Friday, you can have LINUX today!!

[Renew Deal]

8. I love peeps who think they know everything

and ain't afraid to show it.



GEEK FIGHT!!! :hide:

[cliffordu]

9. Well...

:rofl:


(And I DO know everything. Ask grantcart.)

[Barrymores Ghost]

109. Are you at it again, homey?

How's tricks?

[cliffordu]

158. Just got out. How are you??

Ain't seen you around the death match cage lately......

[Barrymores Ghost]

267. Been way too busy for dust-ups lately.

Taking a vacation next week to spend time with my wife at a friend's horse ranch in the South Bay Area. Then, maybe, I'll slip the brass knuckles back on.

You?

[Romulox]

16. I'm interested in running useful software. But thanks anyhow!

:silly:

[cliffordu]

19. Yep, too bad those games are not available on Linux.

[Romulox]

25. Which games? Linux BLOWS for audio content creation. nt

[cliffordu]

39. Then you're completely fucked, aintcha??

[Romulox]

43. Nope. I'm not an OS fanboi, so I run whatever hardware/software works best for the job. nt

[cliffordu]

50. So do I.

[Hawkeye-X]

90. running kubuntu 9.10

And had no problems for 3 months. Will get Windows 7 and put it on vmware and test the crap outta it before I put it on a planned dual boot

[L0oniX]

212. FreeBSD ...it's where Mac got its OS from.

[Recursion]

248. It's mostly MACH and NEXT

It has a BSD-derived userland, but the OS itself is a Mach microkernel. Cocoa (the part that most people think of as making it a "Mac") is a rehash of NextStep.

[L0oniX]

253. I'll stick with FreeBSD and pc. I have too much time invested to change now. Never been hacked.

[Recursion]

254. Meh. I'm an OpenBSD fan

OpenBSD is great: feature X works out of the box, or doesn't work at all (and generally, it works out of the box). No mucking about with HOWTOs or alternate source trees or updating to -CURRENT or anything like that.

[mkultra]

261. OpenBSD for the win.

[tinrobot]

11. Sorry, the software I need doesn't run on a Mac.

But, oddly, everything I need that runs on a Mac also runs on Windows.

Swallow that, fanboy.

[EOTE]

12. Then why not pay 50% to 75% more for hardware that will run both?

So you'll have an operating system that you'll never use. At least you'll know it's there when you need it. Kind of like the airbags I had installed in my hatch.

Here's the video card I got for my PC back in February for $330 with two free games:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814130500&Tpk=285%20mac

Six months later, I can get the Mac version for $450 with 0 games. If that's not improvement, I don't know what is.

[Romulox]

17. You do realize that people do other things with computers beside play games, right?

How do you propose I run Apple's Logic Studio on a PC? :shrug:

[EOTE]

26. How do you propose I run the hundreds of other PC exclusives on a MAC?

Sure, I could run a dual boot configuration on a MAC or run some poor Windows emulation, just as I could run a dual boot configuration on a Hackintosh to run Windows and OSX if I wanted to. The only difference is that the hardware required to run it on a PC is a hell of a lot cheaper. And the only way I can make a completely custom system is if I make myself a PC.

[Romulox]

28. Bootcamp or Parallels. Or, be like me, and run both PCs and Macs.

If you exclude games, I'm not aware of "hundreds of other PC exclusives" that are aren't substantially duplicated by equivalents on other OSes, btw. Sound multitracking is one area where PCs can't compete with Macs, unless massive expensive dedicated external hardware is brought to bear.

[EOTE]

32. Once again, PCs can dual boot just as well as Macs can.

And they can do it at a small fraction of the price. And why would I have any desire to run OSX when I can get everything I need and more on other OSes? And I can't comment regarding sound multitracking because I have no experience in the field, but if Macs are the preferable format for that task, then I can see how audio professionals would want to use them. But the vast, vast majority of Mac users don't do any professional sound editing.

[Romulox]

37. Not to Mac OS X (without some haxoring, of course...)

"And I can't comment regarding sound multitracking because I have no experience in the field, but if Macs are the preferable format for that task, then I can see how audio professionals would want to use them. But the vast, vast majority of Mac users don't do any professional sound editing."

Where does "Professional" enter into anything? :shrug:

I'm not a professional. Does that mean I don't enjoy the superior performance of Mac OSX? Or does it get your goat to admit that a different OS may have advantages over the OS you've seemingly fused your ego with?

And how can you lecture on this subject if you're not aware of the differences between Macs and PCs? :wtf:

[EOTE]

48. I'm very well aware of the differences.

Just because I don't do advanced sound editing doesn't mean I'm not aware of the differences between Macs and PCs. And I mention "Professional" because I have a number of friends who do multitrack recording and other sound editing on PCs using Pro tools, Goldwave and other recording software and have absolutely no problem doing it and do it faster on PCs which cost a small fraction of what a comparable Mac would. For the money you save by investing in a PC, you can invest in SSDs, discrete sound cards with dedicated PUs and other hardware which makes recording go faster and smoother on a PC than a Mac for the equivalent money. Once again, if money isn't an object, I can see how professionals might want to invest in a Mac if it can provide superior results overall, but for the money, PCs will always provide faster computing.

[Romulox]

54. You don't seem to know much about sound APIs...

" I have a number of friends who do multitrack recording and other sound editing on PCs using Pro tools, Goldwave and other recording software and have absolutely no problem doing it and do it faster on PCs which cost a small fraction of what a comparable Mac would."

Pro Tools is hardware/software based solution available on both PCs and Macs. :hi:

"For the money you save by investing in a PC, you can invest in SSDs, discrete sound cards with dedicated PUs and other hardware which makes recording go faster and smoother on a PC than a Mac for the equivalent money."

Hard drive access time isn't the issue in music creation. AD/DA latency is...

[EOTE]

65. Jeez, where to start?

Yes, I'm very well aware that Pro Tools is available on Macs and PCs, I said nothing contrary to that. But you can run it on a PC which costs a fraction of what the Mac would cost. And I'm also well aware that hard drive performance can often be a bottleneck in music creation performance. And AD/DA latency can be taken care of with discrete sound cards (believe me, PCI-E even at 1x is NOT a bottleneck), and even after you add a high end discrete sound card, you're still saving a good bit over the equivalent Mac.

[Romulox]

72. By googling Pro Tools?

"But you can run it on a PC which costs a fraction of what the Mac would cost."

You don't seem to understand that Pro-Tools is a hardware based solution. :hi:

"And I'm also well aware that hard drive performance can often be a bottleneck in music creation performance."

Not really. 5400 RPM SATA hd will suffice. An external Firewire 400 drive @ 7200 RPM will work very well.

"And AD/DA latency can be taken care of with discrete sound cards "

The pro-tools system is predicated on such a system, the hardware for which can easily cost more than the PC. However, the way windows processing audio is less efficient than the way Mac OS X does such that a Mac computer will process audio with less latency, all other things being equal.

[EOTE]

77. Once again you talk an awful lot without saying anything.

I never said that pro tools is software only. I said that it can be run on PCs for a good deal cheaper than the equivalent Mac. And yes, you can spend huge amounts of money on a discrete sound card, but the total cost of the system would still be less than an equivalent Mac. Or, for the less hard-core user, you can instead spend $100 to $200 on a quality sound card and it will suffice for the great bulk of users. So what if the integrated audio in Macs is superior? The people who need it will buy a discrete unit anyway and then the performance is dependent upon the card selected.

[Romulox]

80. And you've staked your ego on defending your knowledge of something you know nothing about!

:hi:

" So what if the integrated audio in Macs is superior? "

You. Simply. Don't. Understand. What. You. Are. Talking. About.

If you are interested in learning about the differences between the way Macs and PCs process sound, google is there for you. If you are interested in being an OS fanboi, then google is there for you.

Either way, your choice. But you don't have any clue as to what you're talking about. :hi:

[EOTE]

83. And once again you make baseless insults.

The interface for discrete audio on both PC and Macs nowadays is PCI-E. Considering that PCI-E (or even USB 2.0 for external cards) is not a bottleneck and that the great bulk of audio processing is done on card with little or no assistance from the CPU, for the great bulk of even non-casual users, you can get the same performance on a PC for audio editing for a good deal less money. And all googling has provided me is that people who use Macs generally prefer working with the Mac software with the same old claims that PCs are less stable and Macs have better driver support. As someone who hasn't had stability or driver issues with PCs in years, that simply doesn't effect me.

[Romulox]

92. We're speaking about the efficiency of the respective OS's in processing audio

, specifically as it relates to latency.

You respond with information about PCI-E interfaces (common to both platforms, as you note.)

"And all googling has provided me is that people who use Macs generally prefer working with the Mac software"

You don't understand the question, so you aren't able to get an answer. At any rate, I don't think you're truly interested. So fanboi away!

[mkultra]

262. the only reason you have to hack to make it work is Apple's asshole prevention policies

which is really why Apple sucks to begin with.


I have run OSX on PC hardware before and it benchmarks better than OSx running on apple hardware. Oh yeah, and it cost about a third.


macs are kind of like harley's in that sense.

[Romulox]

281. It's not "asshole", it's a different business model.

I'm not sure why you find it so threatening. Don't like it, buy any one of hundreds of models of "vastly superior" PC hardware, smile smugly, and pocket the difference. :shrug:

[tinrobot]

31. How do you propose I run AutoCAD and 3DS Max?

I don't play games. I use my computer to make money.

[ShamelessHussy]

36. With todays MACs you can run them in a VM or bootcamp - here are a couple links on autocad

AutoCAD and Parallels on Mac
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bb4MHp6_B-A

Run AutoCAD on a Mac
14 December 2008
http://autodesk.blogs.com/between_the_lines/2008/12/run-autocad-on-a-mac.html

good luck :hi:

[tinrobot]

108. Why do I need workarounds when I can just buy a PC?

Like I said before, the PC runs everything I need, is faster, and costs half the price.

[ShamelessHussy]

114. Those are not work arounds, that is a single hardware a solution to run all major OS

Windows, Unix, and OS X.

as a developer I appreciate having an all in one solution on a robust, stable, modern, and fast OS, and getting top of the line hardware without having to tinker.

makes me more productive but hey, to each, their own.

[mkultra]

264. why shoudl he pay three times as much for a platform that doesnt have his software

[Javaman]

280. Because you are bascially buy two computers in one. That's why. nt

[mkultra]

282. if i only need one, why would i buy two?

The common stance on this seems to be as follows


Normal person: all the software i need is written for PC and PCs are cheaper
Fanboy: Apples cost more but can run your software as well.
Normal person: ??????

[Romulox]

41. Logic Studio is not a game. So many "experts" on the field in this thread! nt

[EOTE]

66. And tinrobot never suggested that it was.

So many "logicians" on the field in this thread.

[ShamelessHussy]

33. Many Schools are making the switch as it is cheaper to standardize on one platform

One platform that meets everyone's needs is a great deal.

My wife used to use windows because we needed one app that used to be windows only for our business (she was the minister of finance) QuickBooks.

But I would need to work on the computer at least once a year for 1 issue or another, which really sucked as it would sometimes take a whole weekend to sort out the issue.

Once apple switched to the intel chip I got her an iMac. She could run most programs she uses on the mac and when she need to use an app that required windows she could also run that, too. No rebooting, simply double click the file and it opens in it's on window, running side-by-side with other apple programs, wow.

Since then I haven't had to deal with any issue (yet - over 2 years) on her computer which has given me the time I need to focus on my business instead of dealing with tech issues.


BTW: You can get a brand new mac at a pretty good price...

Mac mini

Starting at $599

http://www.apple.com/macmini/

[EOTE]

35. You can get a much faster PC for about half that.

Or better yet, you could build your own and get exactly what you want for a fraction that price. And whether you buy pre-made or build your own, the PC will always be very upgradable while you'll be stuck with the already inadequate processing power of the Mac for years to come. And the great bulk of people can have all their needs met without resorting to OSX, but you could still run OSX on PC hardware if need be.

[ShamelessHussy]

44. But it is missing, any computer's most important feature, a powerful OS - DIY is not for everyone

also there are upgrade paths for macs, too, even just the CPU, however once you get a MAC, for most people you are all set for at least 5 years.

Since I use computers for a living, I usually upgrade every 2 to 3 years to a whole new computer system. no need to monkey around with a critical piece of equipment to my business with no warranty.

I like to spend all my productive time using my computer, not working on it. But everyone is different, however I am noticing more and more folks using Mac laptops at industry conventions and I am not surprised.

[EOTE]

52. I've been running Windows 7 since January and I...

haven't needed to "monkey" with it at all. I haven't had a single crash since I've run it. And XP SP2 has been similarly crash free before I made the switch. And people will be set with Macs for 5 years just as they would be set with a PC for 5 years. Those are people who run internet, email and basic applications. No cutting edge software is going to run on a 5 year old Mac just as it won't run on a 5 year old PC. The difference is that the PC is far more upgradable. And require far less of an initial investment.

[TommyO]

149. I've been successfully running Windows 7 since March

on my very upgradable Mac Pro!

[EOTE]

150. I just skip the (rather expensive) middle man and run it on a PC.

I have no use for OSX, so Windows 7 does everything I need on far cheaper hardware. It runs very well on my GF's 2 year old $400 (at the time) laptop. If I ever had the need to run OSX, I could do so, but I don't really have any compelling reasons to.

[TommyO]

169. Well then, good for you, some of us need, or want, to run OSX

[tinrobot]

120. Actually, the applications are the most important feature.

[ShamelessHussy]

243. If not for the OS you couldn't even print a document let alone luanch an application

In fact you would be looking at a blank screen.

The OS provides the foundation for everything, including your apps.

FYI

[mkultra]

265. lol, an empty OS is usless.

Hes right, its the apps that really matter. I can pay a third for a windows machine that is guaranteed to run all the software i want, PLUS, if i want to do some coding, the tools and community are far more abundant, PLUS, if i want to copy software and try it before i use it commercially its guaranteed to be on the torrentz, PLUS, i can share apps with my friends.


I see no reason to pay more for something that needs to run my stuff in a VM.

[ShamelessHussy]

272. What I said stands. The OS is the foundation that everything runs on top of - Think VISTA

When the OS isn't right everything else suffers and is why they had to go back to the drawing board with windows 7.

You can get a MAC for $599 - but the maximum holds true here, too -> You get what you pay for.

When you use a computer to make your living, paying a little more for all the benefits you receive is more than worth it.

As someone who uses 4 OS (Unix, Linux, Windows, and OS X) I prefer the elegance, stability, ease of use, and power of a mac, and since OS X is built on top of Unix, being a web developer makes it an absolute dream to use, considering that the web is built on Unix.

I prefer the top of the line when getting a computer, some prefer a pinto.

BTW: You can run it in a VM or boot directly into windows.

[EOTE]

275. I built my Ferrari of a PC for $900.

Fastest single GPU available, 6 gigs DDR3, very fast RAID setup, i7 920 at 4.5 GHZ. Perhaps there are Macs that come close to the speed of my current rig, but not until you've spent several times what I spent on my rigs. I prefer top of the line too, that's why I made my own PC. Some people choose to spend 30K for a Civic. Sure, it's reliable transportation, but it's slow and waaay overpriced. BTW, if I had the desire to, I could run a separate partition for OSX or boot directly into it.

[mkultra]

278. i think your point is weak

OSX stability is directly derived from its limited driver scope. Being that they tightly control the hardware and write every kext file used by the OS, they are able to achieve higher levels of stability. External drivers have been know for many years as the stability gap for all WIN operating systems. Essentially, when you buy a mac, you buy a black box device. That's fine and is an interesting approach which produces some excellent results, BUT, as a web developer, you should be well aware of its limitations.


Frankly I'm surprised at your statements. If you truly do use Linux or Unix(Sun OS? which is now linux) You should be well aware that it is the most stable and powerful platform in computing. The reliability factor is the only truly useful feature for apple which, imho, can be easily had in a PC if you spend the same amount of money as you would on any mac.

A Mac is only top of the line in graphics and publishing, In computing, it falls way short. It is really just a desktop solution that some people like better.

[Deja Q]

60. No problem. Apart from playing stupid mind-rotting games, do you do anything with your computer?

:spray:

[tinrobot]

119. I'd suggest you stop making assumptions and go get a life.

I make a very good living with my computer. I work in animation, and have used computers in my work for almost 20 years. My work has appeared on all the major television networks, in movie theaters, and on DVD. I'm sure you've seen some of it.

[Occulus]

220. Don't you just love being able to say that and mean it?

Animation- 3D or 2D?

[mkultra]

266. I do, and i think macs suck

In fact, every person that i have ever know that uses a mac has either done nothing with it aside from screw around or do publishing work. Publishing work is NOT the end all of computer usefulness.

Ask yourself this question: How many MAC servers are sitting on data center floors crunching on data. i think you will find the answer is pretty close to 1%.

[alfredo]

95. with Boot Camp, or other related software, it will. I saw a guy at a

coffee shop with a MacBook Pro running Windows just the other day. He dual booted OSX and Windows. I assume it was XP SP2.

http://www.macwindows.com/

[PatGund]

178. Yep...

I run both my Macs with Parallels (XP, Windows 7 Beta, and Ubuntu Linux). The cost for the Macs is about the same as any name-brand PC and gives me much more flexibility.

At my work (I'm the IT director there), we just replaced the bookkeeper's HP with a MacMini set up via BootCamp to boot into XP. This allows us to standardize on a common platform (we do our own in-house warranty repair) yet allow each user the best OS for their particular job.

[alfredo]

183. Good for you. My Mini is the first non pro model Mac I've ever owned.

It might need more memory because I noted a slowdown when working with 4416X3312 Raw images. Otherwise, it is fine.

[Rosco T.]

14. It's not VISTA 2, It's Windows 7...

.. and is a SIGNIFICANT WELL CRAFTED piece of software.

[cliffordu]

21. They've been saying that since Win 3.11.

Garbage every one of them.

Of course they COULD be telling the truth this time. Maybe.

[EOTE]

The only garbage OSes that MS has put out during that time period

has been Windows ME and Vista (to a much lesser extent). 95 through 2000 and NT were all pretty damned stable and very well supported. XP has lasted a rather long time and is used pretty much everywhere. Windows 7 addresses all the problems that Vista had and it looks and performs much better. In all, it's the most stable OS that MS has ever made and it's the fastest and most well supported they've made in a very long time. The time I've spent with it (now on my primary desktop, my HTPC desktop and family laptop) has been nothing but a pleasure.

[cliffordu]

46. " win 95 through 2000 and NT were all

pretty damned stable and very well supported...."

HAHaha haH AH AH AH aH aHaHaHah ahahaha AHhaH AHAHAAHA HA HA

Thousands of hours of work lost to reboots and BSOD's or just plain vanished by those piece of shit 'operating systems' in the five years I worked around them in a grants management division of a city office. Thousands of hours of work gone.

Grown women cried sitting at their computers after MS Access locked their computers solid for the third time in a workday because nobody at MS had the courage to tell anyone that Access wasn't supposed to be used in adult financial settings.

[EOTE]

61. Your experiences aside, they were all pretty damned stable.

The great bulk of "problems" that I've dealt with in the IT field with those OSes have resided between the keyboard and the work chair. Of course, the government wisely avoided Vista, but should be adopting Windows 7 fairly quickly.

[cliffordu]

73. So I guess the entire floor had people that were the problem.

not the OS.

I worked a little in the "IT field" in my time too. I won't help ANYONE with a windoz machine. Won't lay a hand on them.


I want you to think about this:

I started using Linux in 1995. I have had THREE crashes in my own machines in that amount of time. One from a bad network card, one was from trying to run a beta of Adobe Framemaker for Linux some years back and one lockup when KDE was still a young desktop.

I've set up database backed websites, built routers, firewalls, data servers, and replaced SUN's Solaris operating system in a hundred old sparc 5 machines with slackware so they could be used for another 5 years......

And yet, the aplogists for M$ keep telling me that M$ is never the problem.

IF I have a problem with Linux. I chat online with a few people and fix the issue. '


I'd have lost every job I ever had if I'd had to wait for some fucking company to collect enough fixes for their bloatware to issue a DVD Fix-it 'upgrade'

[EOTE]

78. So wait, you worked IT, yet you wouldn't help anyone with Windows?

I'm amazed you were able to keep your job. And I never said that MS is never the problem, I just said that the great bulk of the problems I support are ID 10 T errors. A great majority of OS users are Windows users, so it would stand to reason that there are more idiots using Windows than any other operating system.

[cliffordu]

157. No. I won't help anyone with Windows.

My IT work has all been subcontracted, or in UNIX houses.

I never said I worked end user IT, and further, after watching what those poor fuckers went through, I wasn't having any.

I almost had to work with windows when I was at IBM, but it didn't fall that way.

The crap I've watched other people go through has been completely repugnant to me.

The thing I like about UNIX and it's work- alikes is that everything that runs the OS is a file, and every file has a man page someplace, pretty much.

Not so important anymore, but when I started, you needed to be able to mount devices with a shell command and run chat scripts to connect with the universe.

Things have changed to the point that Linux is JAOS (Just another operating system).

I am slowly switching people in my family over to Linux or the Mac -

ANd they are grateful when I do....

[mkultra]

268. linux > M$ > OSx

[onehandle]

38. You mean DOS 7. With a bloated GUI slapped on top. nt

[MattBaggins]

94. DOS? Sometimes I wish it was still DOS.

[jayfish]

127. Uhhh... What Do You Think The GUI's On OSX, Linux and Unix Are?

Sorry, but OSX and Linux have more in common with DOS than Windows does these days.

Jay

[cliffordu]

160. Ding ding ding!!!! We have a WINNAH!!!

LEAST INFORMED POST OF THE DAY....

Ya really need to study which came first.......DOS was a weaksauce subset of disc commands stolen from UNIX, iirc.

And has nothing to do with any useful OS in the known universe.

Bill Gates, izzat you????

[onehandle]

166. It's probably Bill Gate's college roommate.

Steve Ballmer would be a stockboy at Best Buy if not for Gate's fortune.

[jayfish]

181. You Need To Learn How To Read.

Let me run it down for you.

Rosco T. said:

"It's not VISTA 2, It's Windows"

In Response, onehandle said:

"You mean DOS 7. With a bloated GUI slapped on top."

Because that was a dumbassed and ill informed post I chimed in with:

Uhhh... What Do You Think The GUI's On OS X, Linux and Unix Are? Sorry, but OS X and Linux have more in common with DOS than Windows does these days.

Now let's look at why I said what I said. onehandle thought it would be funny to point out the fact that Windows 7 is a command line operating system with a GUI running on top of it. Kinda cute and all but the problem is it's not true. As a matter of fact it hasn't been true since the demise of Windows ME. Windows NT, 2000, XP, Server 2003, Vista, Server 2008 and the forthcoming 7 have all but eliminated DOS. DOS commands are still available through a command line virtual DOS machine but the underlying OS is not DOS. OS X and Linux on the other hand are command line operating systems that have the ability to run graphical user interfaces (Aqua, KDE, Genome) on top of the rudimentary X Windows System in Linux and Darwin in OS X. Both Linux and OS X can be booted into their non-GUI environments. Windows 7 cannot. On that front (the one germaine to the original comment) Linux and OS X do indeed have more in common with DOS than Windows 7 does. But you made that point yourself when you said:

DOS... ...has nothing to do with any useful OS in the known universe

My post wasn't about the capabilities or value of DOS, Linux, Unix or OS X.


Jay

[cliffordu]

195. You believe that because OSX and Linux

actually have a command prompt in a terminal shell they are similar to DOS???

WTF is wrong with you??

:rofl:

[jayfish]

199. You're a UNIX Admin And You're Really This Fucking Dense?

I'll try to reduce it to a couple of sentences for you. Windows 3.1 is to DOS as KDE is to Linux. Windows 3.1 and DOS no longer exist. Therefore Linux is closer to DOS than Windows 7.

Jay

[cliffordu]

201. Well....

that's the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

Your definition of what the command prompt is and isn't, and what might make operating systems alike or dissimilar is breathtaking in its complete lack of value, validity, and veracity.

Seriously. that's completely fucked up.

[jayfish]

203. Refute The Singular Point I Made Or STFU.

You're a UNIX guy, it should be breathtakingly easy for you.

Jay

[Occulus]

222. Not *totally* fucked up

I can see how a layperson or a casual user can look at the command prompt in DOS and a *nix command prompt sans X at boot time and think, "Hey, this looks similar to that." What they don't realize is that *nix is a full OS, whereas DOS was a base upon which an excuse for an OS sat.

When a layperson learn of KDE, without knowing about X, they make that comparison. It's a natural thing to do, and if I sat someone down in front of a properly-configured window system for X that looks a lot like Windows 7, they would probably be happy as a clam... for a while.

Then they learn about permissions, file ownership, user groups, the file system itself, putting commands into a shell, RTFM....

Good times.

[ShamelessHussy]

202. lol

it's like saying that since ford no longer makes model-t but BMW makes model-m, bmw is closer to ford than mustang :rofl:
http://www.bmw.com/com/en/newvehicles/mseries/overview.html

that's one of the silliest things i've ever read about OS comparison's, evah!

[Deja Q]

58. If it's well crafted, why are its system requirements larger than Vista's?!!

Vista:

# 1 GHz 32-bit (x86) or 64-bit (x64) processor
# 1 GB of system memory
# 40 GB hard drive with at least 15 GB of available space

In real life terms, try 2GB. 4GB is better.

The minimums for Win7 state 40GB drive with 16GB (no typo) available. RAM is claimed the same.

I used the Win7 beta as well.

In short, go craft something out of popsicle sticks.

BTW, you mean "SIGNIFICANT, WELL CRAFTED".

And it is a piece. Of something that also starts with an "S"...

[EOTE]

69. Per the same system, Windows 7 will run much better than Vista.

My GF's laptop which choked on Vista (2ghz AMD dual core, 2gb RAM, 256mb discrete video, 5400rpm 60gb hard drive) runs Windows 7 now perfectly smoothly with more graphical options turned on. Care to tell me who nowadays doesn't have at least a 40gb hard drive? And btw, the release client I have installed right now takes less than 20gb patched.

[mudplanet]

62. As an exclusive NT, XP, and Vista user for nearly ten years I can

say, yes, I agree, MS makes a good useful product (I you know how to work around MS's issues). Finally, after nearly thirty years of trying, MS has produced an operating system that has almost the ease of use and elegance of the Mac OS.
It has only taken them thirty years.

I'd own both if I had the money. You pay twice as much for a Mac, but you get what you pay for.

[MattBaggins]

96. You can run Mac on a PC without an emulator

Takes a bit of planning and configuramatin, but you can do it.

[mudplanet]

205. Link please. I'd like to try this.

[mkultra]

269. here ya go

http://lifehacker.com/321913/build-a-hackintosh-mac-for-under-800

[mudplanet]

277. Thanks!!

[MattBaggins]

91. Now I am using and will purchase Windows 7

but I will curse Microsoft as I do it for making me pay for what will be a giant service pack for Vista sold as something brand new.

Windows 7 is nothing more that the bug fixes and features that Vista was supposed to have.

[tammywammy]

15. Yea! A good Windows vs Apple thread

It's been a while. :popcorn:

[JohnyCanuck]

128. LOL n/t

[alfredo]

18. Order by Wednesday and receive it on Friday.

[Mystayya]

22. Apples are to expensive for my budget- even used.

[Touchdown]

88. You haven't shopped for them lately.

Try it. You might be surprised.

[quaker bill]

156. I did

and even with the "student discount" I was more appalled than surprised. I bought the mac-book pro anyway, as my daughter needed it for courses in graphic design. But I could have had a pc with the same processor speed, ram, and hdisk space for 30 percent of the cost.

[Mystayya]

179. I have and they are.

I am sure there are some that are in the budget for people that previously weren't. I build and upgrade my own computers, that way I can have a gaming worthy computer for minimal prices. My boss bought an apple laptop and returned it in a week. It was just to much of a hassle to get it to where it could run the work software needed.

I am a big fan of apple, but they are not for everyone.

[KatyMan]

24. I'm really grumpy right now, so

fuck Apple. If your machines were affordable that would be ok, but they're not. Windows has problems, and is hacked largely because it's the most popular OS out there,and so a hacker can do the most damage by targeting MS. MS has security holes, yes, but I still really think that the majority of people's problems with MS aren't with MS but are with the people that wrote the software they're using.
I'm an IT professional with over 16 years of experience, and I've never once had a machine at home that crashed due to MS.

edited to fix punctuation, which also makes me grouchy.

[Touchdown]

93. That old fairy tale never dies, does it?

"Windows has problems, and is hacked largely because it's the most popular OS out there,and so a hacker can do the most damage by targeting MS."

First an obvious question. How does this (even if close to the truth) negate the fact that Macs still don't get viruses? It doesn't matter why. It's a fact that Macs get less than 1% of the viruses that Windows does.

Windows doesn't require a password to load software. Windows isn't UNIX based, which is much more stable and hack resistant than DOS. Macs do, making them natively resistant to hacks and viruses, regardless of the popularity of the platform.To make a Mac virus, you have to know Macs, which none of your garden variety hackers will even bother to learn. Consider your bullshit debunked.

One more debunking. Apple controls 90% of the over $1000 computer market. A very attractive target for hackers. It's still resistant to them.

[hobbit709]

123. BS

NO system that connects to the outside world is 100% safe. Macs have vulnerabilities too that haven't really been exploited yet because the idiots that write viruses get their jollies from seeing how many they can infect. Let's see, which has more shock value-the OS that the majority of people use or the one that has 10% market share.

Read this
http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/security/soa/Apple-s-Leopard-hacked-in-30-seconds/0,130061744,339287733,00.htm

Anyone that believes they're immune to viruses/malware because of the OS they run, whether it's Mac or Linux is extremely naive.

[Touchdown]

126. I didn't say they were 100% safe Einstein!

BTW: Your link's "proof" was only possible when the hackers were given the password. No password, no 30 seconds.

I didn't say they were immune. I said that Macs don't get near the viruses. Whatever bullshit reason you apply to it doesn't negate the fact that Macs don't get near the viruses.

[hobbit709]

129. Do you know the history of computer viruses?

The FIRST one was written to screw up an Apple.

I personally don't have any problems with infections on my systems(all 7 of them). But then my security levels are screwed on fairly tight. I run 3 variations of Windoze and 3 variations of Linux. I make my living by fixing other people's screwups on their PCs.
My first rule in using Windows is: Do not use Internet Exploder or Outhouse Distress.-That solves 99+% of the problems right there.

[Touchdown]

130. So?

How does anything you said in your last 3 posts make the statement "Apples have very few viruses" false?

[Tesha]

162. Won't that be a surprise to the folks who wrote Creeper back in 1971. 13 years *BEFORE* the Mac...

...was even around.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creeper_virus

Tesha

[KatyMan]

132. Truthfully,

I don't give a shit. I do think that Windows takes a bashing it doesn't always deserve, but I do like to wind up Apple people.

[EOTE]

136. Macs comprise 7% of the market, why would there be many viruses made for them?

So until they get a sizable portion of the desktop market, why would hackers bother with such a small demographic? And I don't know if your 90% over $1,000 is a bullshit statistic or not, but it sure is a meaningless one. What that just tells me is that people spend a hell of a lot more on Macs than they do on equivalent PCs (which might also explain why they make up 7% of the market.

I build my own PCs and get exactly what I want in them for a small fraction of the price of an equivalent Mac. I also keep my computer protected with up to date antivirus so I don't have to deal with any viruses either.

[Touchdown]

138. And what did you say that negates what I said?

It doesn't matter the reason why, Macs simply do not get the viruses Windows does.

I bought a Mazda. I don't get tickets. I can get a ticket if I'm caught in a speed trap, but I still don't get tickets. Now, that red Mustang over there. Cops are looking for those guys... Your "But they would be if..." argument is not a game changer. Mazdas get less tickets than Mustangs, and Macs get barely any viruses.

Whatever BS reason you come up with doesn't change this one fact. Macs get virtually no viruses.

[EOTE]

147. And what did you say that negates what I said?

Macs DO get viruses, but they get far fewer of them because there are far fewer people writing viruses for Macs. I never get any viruses because I keep my antivirus updated at all times. That's a small price to pay for owning a PC which costs a fraction of the price of a Mac.

I can tell you something else, you could use an Amiga or Commodore nowadays and your chances of getting a virus are almost nil as well.

[Touchdown]

172. In 20 years, I've never had a virus. I've owned only macs.

I've also never bought any anti-virus software. It's just my anecdote, but millions of other mac users can say the same thing.

Macs get virtually no viruses, so if security is what a buyer is looking for then it's a valid choice. Your tired old wives tale about market share doesn't change that fact.

[EOTE]

177. You call cold hard demographics data "old wives tales"?

Really? You're welcome to look it up, Macs comprise 7% of the current market share. I do use anti-virus software and I also have never had a virus. It's a small price to pay for not having to use a Mac. In exchange for saving hundreds if not thousands of dollars every time I build a new PC, I have to use antivirus software. Big whoop. In exchange, I get far superior hardware and far more games and apps that run on it. I think it's a fair compromise.

[Touchdown]

191. But that 7% (now 8+%, look it up) doesn't mean anything.

Yeah, Macs have a small installed base. It means nothing. Macs still get virtually no viruses. Whatever reason you're peddling, and you PC users always fall back on the market share gambit (don't any of you have original minds?), doesn't negate the fact that macs get virtually no viruses. Is it because of the installed base only? Who the fuck cares? Viruses don't come to the Mac.

Apples and waffle irons.

[EOTE]

213. Wow you have comprehension problems.

So what if it's 8% now. They comprise a very small portion of the market and they get a very small portion of viruses (but viruses DO come to the Mac). Why would anyone bother? And as I've said before, I don't get viruses, I use antivirus. If people are stupid enough to leave their computers unprotected, they're going to get viruses. Having to have a piece of software installed and updated on my computer is a very small price to pay to have a machine that's far more capable and far cheaper than any Mac available. I really don't give a fuck that I have AV running, with my quad core, AV never takes up more than 1% of my CPU cycles on a single core. I can do things on my PC that you couldn't dream of on a Mac of any price.

[Touchdown]

218. Wrong. You have the comprehension problems.

You ask "Why would anyone bother?"

EXACTLY!!!!!! THEY DON'T! Get it? Macs don't get viruses! for whatever reason it is, Macs still don't get viruses. Stupid has nothing to do with MACS STILL DON'T GET VIRUSES!

You use anti-virus. Mac owners rarely need them!

One more time. It doesn't matter why Macs get hardly any viruses. They still don't get nearly any viruses.

[EOTE]

226. Every time you post, you sound a little more idiotic.

You continually post contradicting information. Macs DO get viruses, on and off, you seem to admit this, but thn go on to say something like "Macs still don't get viruses". That's incredibly stupid. They do, they just get fewer of them. I explained to you several times while they get fewer of them, but you dismiss cold hard facts as "Old wives tales". Just like it's an "old wives tale" that unprotected sex can lead to the clap. Of course, you're just going to respond to this by saying "But Macs don't get viruses at all!" Or maybe they just get one or two. Why should I care that PCs get more of them? If you have a lick of sense, you're not going to get a virus in this day and age on a PC. And I wouldn't have to lower myself and waste ludicrous sums of money by getting a Mac that's nowhere near as capable.

[Touchdown]

229. I'm not trying to convince you of anything. I'm not a salesman.

What I am trying to get through your thick skull is that your market share argument for virus susceptibility is irrelevant. In fact, it always has. Anti-maccers are a dime a dozen, and this is (next to the no games cliche) is the biggest arrow in their quiver. This is what you're relying on, and it's a weak argument at best.

Macs don't get as many viruses, period. Why they don't is irrelevant. You can't see that because you're trying to keep that rotting corpse of "market share" alive as an argument, but it's never meant anything.

I said what I said about "don't get viruses" was a deliberate trick to see if you would take the bait. You did. Apparently, proper semantics and pedantic info like your useless "market share" argument are so important to you that you were fishing for any slip up by me to crown yourself the gotcha king.

I gotcha first.

[EOTE]

231. So facts are "cliches" now too?

I never said that Macs don't get fewer viruses than PCs. I simply tried to explain to you (so far, very futilely) why that is so. Instead, I get endless droning from you saying the same things and never acknowledging simple facts.

I really don't care that PCs get more viruses than Macs. The only way that effects me at all is that it helps to keep me employed.

Whatever your deliberate trick was, it was a pretty stupid one. And with regard to taking the bait, you were the one who attempted to score a pathetic point by correcting my 7% with your 8%. PCs are still ahead by an order of magnitude. Was that an attempted "gotcha" too?

[Touchdown]

234. What you explained was an old saw that's been used for years.

It was irrelevant then, and you saying it is still irrelevant. The why doesn't matter.

You like to claim ownership of "facts" alot. Here's one. Macs don't get as many viruses. Why they don't doesn't matter to people who don't have their heads suck in circuit boards all day. I realize3 a techno weenie has a hard time getting out of his rut of minutae, but in the real world where us normals live and have something we call sex, your argument is stupid. It changes nothing.

Now, if you think you are saying something profound and insightful, then I'm afraid to dissapoint you. You are repeating talking points from the pro-PC crowd that's been around for years. Sorry to disappoint you, but you are not the first person to tell me this "fact". I've rejected that as an argument, because the information changes nothing.

Your facts are acknowledged, and thrown in the trash as useless information, like the "simple fact" in your words that men get more testicular cancer than women, because men have more testicles. Wow! That's profound. It still changes nothing.

[EOTE]

237. What hasn't changed is you getting less intelligent with each post.

What you first dismissed as "old wives tales" you now say "doesn't matter". In other words, your whole argument is trash and you've conceded your argument. Rather than concede your argument with an ounce of class, you instead hurl personal insults my way. You call me a techno weenie because I'm well paid in IT? Then in order to make you feel better about your sad existence, you insult my childhood? Then you go on to attack my sex life? I won't touch that at all but to say methinks someone is showing a bit of projection. You're a sad, tiny little person. I won't be bothering with you anymore.

[Touchdown]

241. No concession offered. Your argument is irrelevant.

There are many more aspects of the OSX/UNIX platform technologically that makes it more secure than Windows not the least of which is the closed system format which only one manufacturer makes the hardware and approves all software made for it. So your contention that it's market share only is truly a wives tale. I didn't get into those with you, because my argument isn't one of pedantic tech issues, but of what the experience of the average user is. At this point, none of these reasons matter to the average home computer/small business user. Macs simply don't get nearly as many viruses. The average person doesn't give a shit why, just that they don't.

You never seemed to be on that wavelength, which is why I got snarky with you. So let me pose this to you. For the sake of argument, lets go with your contention that market share is the only reason Macs don't get as many viruses. So what? Why is this an important fact? What does this knowledge ultimately change?

[Touchdown]

141. And how much have you spent on anti-Virus ware? Me? $0

NEXT!

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_I2uQkGxIykM/STiij8OA9sI/AAAAAAAABWI/4UeSvsWxmt0/s400/first-cavity-search-pedo-bear+friggin+random.jpg

[EOTE]

148. I've spent maybe $50 my entire life on antivirus.

As of late, I've spent nothing because there are plenty of free antivirus suites available. Currently I'm using the Kaspersky suite for Windows 7 which is free. Even if I had to spend $100 a year on antivirus, it wouldn't come close to the amount of money I'd save by using a PC instead of a Mac. Not even close.

[Touchdown]

176. So your a cheapskate. I still spent $50 less than you.

And most free anti-viral crap is just that... crap.

[EOTE]

214. I'm a cheapskate? You just said you've spent nothing on AV.

You're a moron. And I'm supposed to care whether I pay for something or not when I've never had a virus in my life? Great logic you've got there, chump.

[Touchdown]

221. Oh' I spend plenty on AV. In my world AV stands for Audio/Video equipment.

$15,000 worth of home theater hardware with 700 DVD slots at my fingertips. I'm now amassing over 70 Blu-Ray discs now. 7.1 DTS hi-def sound pumped through 7 speakers, with a professionally calibrated 65" Mitsubishi DLP Television.

I know of no other use for the term AV... because I own Macs.

[EOTE]

228. Brilliant response.

Say something so stupid that you're forced to change the subject. But now that you change the subject to home theater, some of the money I've saved by using PCs instead of Macs went to my HTPC/Home media server that stores over 120 HD (both HD-DVD and BR) rips of my media via 2 terabytes of storage connected to my Sanyo PLV1080HD projector and 100" screen (enhanced with digital grey lite screen goo). Swapping discs is so tedious. My speakers are all DIY (including Frankensub with clean, robust output down to 20hz and tactile transducers for anything lower), but i'll put them toe to toe against any name brand for a good 5x the price or more. And I have this setup... because I use PCs. Oh, and my HTPC doesn't require antivirus either.

[Touchdown]

232. Nice set up. Sounds like a cool HT.

I think I do have you figured out now.

"Say something so stupid that you're forced..."

If you have it (and if you don't, you should get it), call up Wargames and skip a few chapters to when Matthew goes to his friend's work to see what he's stumbled upon. In that scene, there's this skinny, obnoxious know-it-all dork who knows so much he's never kissed a girl. He is the biggest prick in the film, even more so than Dabney Coleman. Why? Because all he cares about is using his techno knowledge to claim superiority over others.

I got you figured out. It's so easy now. Why you just didn't get my argument about market share not changing any fact about the number of viruses on Macs. You're not wired to accept normal human logic. You can only accept technical manual knowledge. You are a techno weenie!

I bet you got beat up a lot in recess.

[EOTE]

235. You're hilarious.

So now you're forced to move to insulting your imagining of my childhood. That in no way concedes your argument. Bravo, I didn't think it were possible for you to get any more idiotic, but you've managed to top yourself.

Let me now recall a movie of mine, David Lynch's Dune. If you're familiar with the movie, you're certainly familiar with Baron Harkonen. Don't get all riled up, I'm not so mean as to compare you to Baron Harkonen. You're more like a festering boil on Baron Harkonen's ass. Really not worthy of anything but repulsion. Of course, being a festering boil on the ass of an obese baron, logic means nothing do you, human or otherwise. So you'll forgive me if I treat your future posts in kind. Good bye.

[Touchdown]

236. Thank you. I try. Now trottle off and get some sunlight.

You would like that overwrought root canal of a film.:rofl: Guess you have to sleep sometime.

[KatyMan]

246. $0

Lots of free, reliable AV programs.

[mkultra]

270. My desktops have always been windows and ive never spent a dime on virus software

in fact, my machine at home has been running for 3 years with no infections. Web browsing and downloading is what gets you infected.

if you dont do much of that, you wont get hit.

[OnyxCollie]

27. I can put it on my laptop

but my old G5 isn't Intel-based. :-(

[Mystayya]

188. Gorgeous dog- simply gorgeous !

[OnyxCollie]

211. Thank you!

That's my dog, Dante.

[SidneyCarton]

30. And then there are the rest of us who don't freakin care.

[tinrobot]

34. $29 for the OS, an extra $1000 for the computer to run it on...

Mac hardware is SO overpriced.

[ShamelessHussy]

47. you can get a brand new mac for hundreds less + how much does windows charge for an upgrade?

BTW: You can get a brand new mac at a pretty good price...

Mac mini

Starting at $599

http://www.apple.com/macmini/

---

Deciphering Windows 7 Upgrades: The Official Chart

source...
http://mossblog.allthingsd.com/20090804/deciphering-windows-7-upgrades-the-official-chart/

[cliffordu]

49. BWAHAhaha hah ah H AH AH ahHah ah aahah

Nice!

[mudplanet]

70. Yea, good luck with this.

The only thing that's really valuable on your computer is your data. Back up your data.

Do a low level format of your boot drive and install a clean version of the new OS.

Doing an "upgrade" is a MS clusterfuck.

[hobbit709]

124. And what can you add to that teeny little box?

Not much room for expansion there.

[PatGund]

187. Well, let's see....

One of my intel MacMinis so far has had the memory maxed out, the hard drive replaced with bigger ones, the optical drive replaced with faster ones, and the Intel Core Duo swapped out for faster ones twice.

You can upgrade any Mac you want if you know what you're doing.

[mwooldri]

170. $599 for a Mac Mini vs $449 for a Dell Vostro 220 Slim Tower.

What do you get?

Dell has faster processor, 3x more memory, much more hard drive capacity, faster DVD-ROM, and Vista. Also has keyboard, mouse, and a monitor.

Mac Mini is far smaller, has better graphics. Processor is slower, less hard drive space, much less memory, no mouse, keyboard or monitor. Good on saving power.

If processor speed is not a problem you can get some nice Dell desktops on the cheap end that will be just fine and you may be able to wangle two of them for the cost of that Mac Mini.

If you dislike Vista I hear Ubuntu is really good these days and furthermore it costs as much as it does to get a blank DVD, and the time needed to download it and burn it and install it.

[mudplanet]

67. Once again, you get what you pay for. All of the components in

every Mac are top-of-the-line. No low bid power supplies or video cards or audio cards or really crappy drives or attention to a philosophy of "we've designed this so you can continue to use the wheels off of your Model T". That's a useful philosophy, but it doesn't lend itself to cutting edge technology.

There's a reason why the vast majority of people that do audio and video production use, and have traditionally used Macs. They tend to be at the cutting edge of technology both in terms of hardware and OS usability.

You will pay 2 to 4 times as much, but you get what you pay for.

My 1990 Ford Festiva will get me to the store and back just fine. But so would a 2010 Mercedes Benz, and I'd probably enjoy the trip more.

[EOTE]

71. Care to tell me what makes this VC superior to the one I picked up

in February for $120 cheaper and with 2 included games?
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814130500&Tpk=285%20mac

Same cooling system, same PCB, same components, same memory, same GPU. Aside from compatibility with Macs, where is that extra money going?
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814150367

[mudplanet]

76. No argument. For the $120 you got a "Mac grade" video card.

And if gaming is important to you, you're dead right in owning a good PC machine. I built a quad core Intel machine with parts from Tiger for $650 that runs almost all current games pretty well (yea, I don't have all the shading that you do, and I occasionally get stuttering in the video from my $85 video card). But you know what you're doing, you can tweak the system (both hardware and software = you're probably overclocking, aren't you). For twice the money a Mac will so what you're doing without having to understand anything. But it's more expensive.

Generally, though, all of the components you will find in an off-the-shelf Mac are much better than what you'll find in an off-the-shelf PC.

If you want you can get all "Mac-grade" components plus by buying a "gaming" grade PC, and you'll pay just as much.

[EOTE]

79. Just where does Mac offer a 4.5ghz quad core at any price?

Yes, I do a fair amount of overclocking, but even at stock clocks, I get a good deal more performance from my PC than a comparable Mac. Once you factor in overclocking, the PC becomes an even better deal. Last time I checked, Macs weren't very friendly to overclockers. That might have changed in recent years, but not as far as I can tell.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

116. My PC I just built was a helluva lot cheaper than a mac AND has great parts

OCZ power supply, ASUS M4A785TD-V motherboard and HD4870 video card (asus is considered a pretty rugged brand), quality DDR3 memory with low timings, AMD Phenom II X3 processor, liquid cooling, western digital hard drives in raid configuration... I specifically shopped for quality brands with good reputation and reviews. People who know what they're doing don't put shit in thier PCs. Yes apple has good hardware... but PCs can have good hardware for alot less too.

The fact is, Macs that cost nearly 4X as much are the only comparible performing macs. The cheapest mac I could build with similar stats was: (drumroll) $3,849.00 and the ONLY thing it matches or beats on my machine is the processor. For $50 more I could've had the Phenom II X4 processor to best the mac's... or I could just overclock my X3 fro free.

MAC PRO: $3,849.00 versus Built PC: $900
2.66GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon vs. 2.8GHz AMD Phenom II X3 720BE (mac has more cores, but less speed than mine)
8GB (4x2GB DDR3-1066) vs. 8GB (4x2GB DDR3-1333 @ 6-6-6-20)
Mac Pro RAID Card vs. motherboard supported raid
2X 640GB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s vs. 2x500GB + 250GB (all 7200rpm 16MB cache SATA2)
ATI Radeon HD 4870 512MB vs. ASUS HD4870 1024MB GDDR5

Bottom line: If you don't know what you're doing, you'll always pay more. (AKA: Stupidity costs money.)
Macs are no different.

[mudplanet]

204. I don't think you're reading my other posts on this topic

I've been exclusively PC for nearly ten years. I build PCs on a regular basis. I'm not critical of PCs, but I'm not going to deny that Apple has been producing a superior product (with a couple of exceptions) for nearly forty years. It's just expensive. So are really nice bikes. I've owned a number of different motorcycles, and I've enjoyed all of them. But the one's I've most enjoyed, and see as the best made, have been the BMWs. They're not necessarily faster, and they tend to be more expensive.

And no matter how much you spend building a PC, it ain't gonna run the Mac OS. If you don't like the Mac OS, then that's fine. But I stand by my other post in this topic that Windows 7 may be a great, user friendly operating system (haven't migrated that far yet, as I'm still on Vista, which I find works very well) but it, minimally, isn't any more user friendly than the Mac OS I had on my Mac 128 back in 1985, which is saying quite a lot.

I quite enjoy working with PC equipment, because I like to add, subtract, modify equipment myself. It's lots of fun. But I don't think most (98%) users are going to want to do this. They want to buy the machine set up in a way that it works great and dependably and is easy and fun to use. In my experience Windows fails this test way too often while Apple succeeds at this pretty close to 95% of the time.

By the way, I'm writing this on my own home built Quad Core Intel (my next will be a AMD Phenom, can't wait) with a reasonably nice GeForce card and it pretty well does everything I want it to do, from Photoshop to Rainbow Six. I built it for $650. And I like it.

For your task and needs, you put together a great deal and a good tool.

Your $900 PC may be faster than the Mac Pro ($not sure where you got the $3400 figure?) but that doesn't make it "better." The KZ1000 I used to ride had nearly 100hp but it wasn't a "better" motorcycle than my 1970 R75 with 55hp. There's more to being "better" than being faster or bigger. My last bike was a BMW 650. It topped out at 85mph. Except for that I found it to be one of the nicest to ride bikes I have owned.

"Mac Pro RAID Card vs. motherboard supported raid" Wow. Get really serious and put together a SCSI raid system for more performance than you'll ever need, unless you're editing HD video. At which task does the 20% increase in you hard drive system show up? If it makes your games run better, great. That's what you needed and you got it at a good price.

[EOTE]

216. "And no matter how much you spend building a PC, it ain't gonna run the Mac OS. "

That's not true at all. I've built a number of PCs to run OSX either exclusively or in dual boot. Tends to run incredibly smoothly too, so long as it's on a decent dual core and with a decent GPU.

And with regard to RAID, yeah discrete is typically the way to go, but SCSI has lost a lot of a value over the past couple of years. SAS is nice, but expensive, but I'm definitely keeping with SATA as my interface. I've run expensive SCSI and SAS RAID setups and while they run very fast, especially for large files, I get very similar performance with WD Raptors in RAID, or even better, SSDs in RAID. I've run the Raptors in RAID off my motherboard and the Intel controller does a pretty damn good job. My next upgrade is going to be a couple 60-64gb OCZ or Kingston SSDs in RAID 0 for my OS and a few apps, then I'll relegate my current 1terabyte RAID setup to storage. I've run a single SSD in my system (OCZ with 128megs cache) and the thing just screams with Windows 7. I can't wait to be running two.

[MattBaggins]

102. How about them exploding Ipod?

Apple also has it's share of buggy video card choices and faulty chipsets. All of those mac components can be purchased on the PC side as well.


By the way... LINUX RULES MS/APPLE DROOLS.

[Romulox]

117. Practical example: the crappy mini Firewire connection on my Sony Vaio has an inferior chipset

and won't keep sync with my firewire audio interface.

My Macbook Pro has a Texas Instruments firewire chipset which is the industry standard.

[tinrobot]

118. Intel doesn't make "better" processors just for Apple.

They ship the same CPUs to everyone. They don't "skimp" on the ones they ship to HP and Dell.

The video cards are all the same and made by NVidia or ATI (though you do get a wider range of card choices with the PC, usually only a few cards in ATI/Nvidia's line are Mac-capable)

The SATA hard drives are all made by the same crowd as well - Seagate, Maxtor, etc...

If you want quality construction and service, you can get a wonderfully built, cutting edge PC from any number of places and still pay less than Apple prices. If you want cheap, you can find that at Best Buy, if you want build your own, you can do that, too.

I do tons of animation production here in LA, and the studios I've worked at have always used PCs. The one I'm using right now is Quad core, 8GB RAM, nVidia Quadro graphics. It's super fast and works great. The vast majority of animation studios and effects houses around also use PCs. The Macs are usually found only in the post production suites, because they need to use Final Cut and Pro Tools.

[EOTE]

155. It's not all quite the same hardware.

For instance, you'll spend a good $120 more to get this "Mac-capable" card.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814130500&Tpk=285%20mac

And if you look really closely at the label, you'll plainly see the words "Mac Edition". Many would say that the smug sense of satisfaction from that sticker are worth a good deal more than the $120 price differential.

Can I ask where I might have seen your work?

[TommyO]

151. Compared to what?

When I bought my Mac Pro, just for the heck of it I priced out comparable hardware from Dell, and a few other manufacturers with both a base configuration and what I would eventually add to the machine, and there wasn't much of a price difference at all.

[bertman]

40. When they came out with that book "Macs for Dummies" I knew they were thinking of me.

I love my Macs.

[hankthecrank]

42. Very Good I'll put my order in today thx for the info

[ConnorMarc]

45. MACs Are For Professionals

The average PC user does NOT need a MAC.

Yes, they are superior in their image handling and even RAM, but thats why they are for media/image professionals.

PCs are just fine for the average Joe.

[ShamelessHussy]

53. Actually I think MACs are more ideal for regular users as they are easier to use and maintain

I've had a lot of success with pointing newbies to a mac and having them get up and running and actually using their computers much more quickly.

BTW: You can get a brand new mac at a pretty good price...

Mac mini

Starting at $599

http://www.apple.com/macmini/

---

Deciphering Windows 7 Upgrades: The Official Chart

source...
http://mossblog.allthingsd.com/20090804/deciphering-windows-7-upgrades-the-official-chart/

[onehandle]

68. That chart speaks volumes about Vista 2. nt

[WeDidIt]

110. There's no such thing as "Vista 2" n/t

[Touchdown]

131. Come back next year and tell us it still isn't.

Give it time. It's M$. People will rename it.

[WeDidIt]

135. Windows 7 is the best OS I've seen in a long time

Seriously rocks.

I very nearly bit the bullet and went to Vista (though I didn't want to), until the first Beta of Widows 7 was released.

I haven't looked back since.

[Touchdown]

139. Poor Thing.

[WeDidIt]

164. It certainly kicks OS X's ass all up one side and down the other

Go play with your toy computer. Let adults do computer work.

[Fearless]

273. Amen!

[high density]

184. Yeah, it's real complicated.

Once you realize you can't transition between 32 and 64 bit operating systems, the chart gets very simple.

[mkultra]

284. who upgrades?

[tinrobot]

121. Architects and Engineers aren't professionals?

They use AutoCAD all the time and that requires a PC.

There are plenty of media/imaging professionals who also use PCs. Most special effects an animation studios use windows.

The only people who "need" a Mac are those running Mac-only applications such as Final Cut.

[ddeclue]

143. Only artsy fartsy namby pamby types use Macs..

engineers use PC's.

:P

[PatGund]

185. Really....

Lets see. Salk Institute when I was Sys Admin at one of the labs there. 90% Mac, 8% Solaris and SGI boxes. A lot of the UNIX programmes were being ported over to OS X because it was cheaper than the Solaris or SGI boxes

Texas A&M had two of the largest Apple xServe arrays in the world.

ICANN was migrating to Apples in 2007 for desktop use, particularly for the engineering staff.

Curiously enough, one of the largest XSAN / xServe layouts I ever did as a repair tech was at Microsoft Studios in Redmond, Washington. Where they told me the majority of Microsoft's video production, animation, sound work, graphic arts and package design was done on the Macintoshes. (Microsoft is also one of the largest developers for the Macintosh.)

[Lorien]

206. Really? One of our fellow DUers is a physicist and president of his own

research and development company and he uses Macs. Every "artsy fartsy" film studio I've worked with uses Macs (you know: Disney, Sony, Paramount, Lucasfilm, etc.) Every Ad agency and illustrator I know uses Macs. Of course, musicians prefer them too. Never thought of any of us as "Namby Pamby" though.

[buzzycrumbhunger]

152. I disagree

The average PC user does NOT need a MAC.

Yes, they are superior in their image handling and even RAM, but thats why they are for media/image professionals.

PCs are just fine for the average Joe.

My mom can barely mastermind a Ziploc bag--it's not unusual to find she's given up and slapped a twist tie on one. Just doesn't want to exert herself to figure out this newfangled technology, I suspect, since she's a pretty smart person in general.

So she's given a peecee. . . and the damned thing sat for two years because she couldn't cope with the idiosyncracies. She finally decided it would be easier to stay in touch if she got serious about getting on the internet, and one day got a bug up her arse and came home with an iMac. Half an hour later, she was emailing me to say how shocked she was it was so cool and fun. She's never going to run Final Cut Pro, but thanks to this little bugger, she's using a computer like she knows what she's doing.

Unfortunately, I have to use Windoze for work, but I wouldn't touch that POS otherwise. It is incredibly limited, for those of us who don't use our computers for spreadsheets, to play those 1,114,357 clones of Quake, or have no life outside WoW. Made the mistake of loading Office 2008 for a college course (which I couldn't even use because they've stripped the database app out of the Mac version!) and that was the biggest abortion ever. I ended up completing my assignments via OpenOffice, and blew them out of the water when Keynote outshone the crappy PowerPoint projects.

Almost all my Macs still work (that original iMac shot its motherboard when my daughter never shut it off), including an original Mac 512k, with its mind-boggling 8 MHz under the hood. How many Windoze machines can still run 25 years after you got them? You have to factor life expectancy into that initial cost, which IMHO makes Macs a much more economical deal.

[mkultra]

271. i love this kind of foolishness

Media/image professionals? IT professional don't touch macs.

[alcibiades_mystery]

51. Why are there Apple commercials in GD?

:shrug:

[cliffordu]

56. Not enough angst to keep everyone's attention.

Now back to your regularly scheduled free for all.....

[Deja Q]

55. Unrec - not because you're right but because this seems like a flamewar.

I would also find sources OTHER than the one hawking their own products to make a point.

Many people bash studies that claim Windows is better when the studies are sponsored by Microsoft... I can have no double-standards here.

[ConanTheDestroyer]

74. Either Will Work...

I used Vista, which sucked. I installed the Windows 7 Release candidate I soon as it was available. It was much better. I have now installed the RTM Windows7 Enterprise Edition. It is sweet. Additionally, the Windows 2008 R2 release is also great. Macs are cool, I want one, but can't justify the price difference. Also, it is not as if Mac OS's prior to the adoption of BSD were good. Memory errors all the time. Anything prior to OSX sucked and the hardware was twice as expensive.

[Umbral]

81. Why wait? Because you have to buy a MAC to use it, Duh! nt

[hobbit709]

84. Overpriced, unmodifiable hardware.

[Romulox]

101. This isn't true. All the hardware (save the mainboards) is off-the-shelf stuff. nt

[hobbit709]

122. That's the part I'm talking about.

[Touchdown]

85. But.. but... you can't play GAMES!!!!!!!

And no software, and and and no GAMES! And and and iPod is is is POOP! And... and no GAMES!!!!!!!:cry:

[Umbral]

133. And when Microsoft finally drives gamers to consoles, it still wont make OSX more attractive

Because Linux will still be free.

[Touchdown]

137. Yeah. Nothing you pay for is attractive.

That's why Linux in just a few short years is in 99.7% of household computers these days.:eyes:

[Umbral]

140. Let's face it, if cachet were free, Apple would just be another wholesaler. nt

[Touchdown]

145. Let's face some more. You guys are the PC equivalent of Pentacostals, Gun Nuts

vegans who have all the answers and those proud to say they don't own televisions. So smug in your discoveries that you can't see that your Linux worship is only slightly less obnoxious than your Linux evangelism.

[EOTE]

153. Bold words coming from the cult of Jobs.

So because we don't want to spend twice as much on hardware that's no where near as capable we're smug and the equivalent of gun nuts? Makes sense to me.

[Touchdown]

175. Not me.

I just use one, like it, and tell people about it.

I also like throwing flames.

[Umbral]

238. I'm curious, how do you square denigrating gamers as being childish

and then turn around and deliver up such an infantile invective? The lack of game developer support is a valid criticism of the MAC platform, deal with it.

[Touchdown]

242. On whose planet?

[Romulox]

87. I love my Macbook Pro. But one thing that pisses me off...

When something goes wrong, it seems like there are very few tools to deal with it. And the tools that exist are hidden in sub-menues and arcane key presses.

For example, I ran a security update this past weekend. After reboot, my computer locked on OS X's dreaded "blue loading screen" (not to be confused with the BSOD.)

The solution in my case was to boot in "Target disk mode" and to remove some start up settings with a second Mac. This stinks, and is a lot less convenient than Windows Safe Mode.

[Touchdown]

103. Funny. Mine didn't. Lost Bluetooth for a minute, but that's it.

But sometimes these things are to be expected with pre-23rd Century computers.

[Romulox]

112. I just wish I could've figured out how to do a line by line boot item confirmation

like I can do in Windows.

I was luck enough to have two Macs, a Firewire cable, and just enough know-how to be dangerous. But the problem took quite a bit more effort to solve than an equivalent Windows problem. (I'm not the type to visit the "genius bar", either way--I figured it out!)

[nadinbrzezinski]

97. 29 to ugrade vs how much for VISTA?

Yeah I am there.

[Romulox]

100. It's Windows 7, and it's about $50. I'm going to try BOTH. nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

105. So for that price, they finally bought a clue or is this SP 2?

Me sticking to mac, no problems since we switched

Hell no issues since the gaming box was "upgraded" from Windows Ultimate to XP Pro

No, not planning to do any upgrade until you beta it for me, and SP 2 comes out

[Romulox]

106. This is a major revision that looks like what Vista should've been. So SP 2.9?

:shrug:

I love Macs. And I love PCs. I just love computers, period, and I always feel like I am "missing" something if I can't do both. For whatever reason, my Macs seem to last 3 plus times longer than my PCs, and I feel like I get a better value for my dollar with a lot of the Mac software, so the cost is manageable, though I still drool over a Mac Pro tower with all the bells and whistles!

[nadinbrzezinski]

113. Yeah but after spending countless hours on the vista box

you do understand why I am leery. I am the IT at home... and I don't want to deal with that nightmare anytime soon

It works on XP right now... it ain't broken. Don't even try to fix it...

Hell, I have played with LINUX as well, the OS for do yourself types...

And right now love my macbook to death. It just works.

(And for the ONE proggie that does not run on Vista or Mac, I have the XP box)

[armyowalgreens]

144. It's free for many newly purchased computers.

I don't have to pay anything for a windows 7 upgrade.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

98. Windows 7rc has been running GREAT on my newly built system.

I have owned Macs and PCs. Until I tried Windows 7, I would've said Mac vs. Win XP PC is pretty much even. However my vote fully swings for windows 7 now. It has run both flawlessly and quickly on my new sytem. (AMD triple core @ 2.8ghz, 8GB DDR3 memory, 2X 500GB striped hard drives, 1GB video card)

From a value standpoint Mac cannot beat PC, period. My current PC was under $900 to build and adding OSX compatible parts would still be cheaper than buying a Mac of similar power. Dollar for dollar PCs win. Unless you are doing purely visual/audio professional work, and have the budget to buy some expensive hardware, PC will almost ALWAYS be the better choice.

IMO, macs seem much more preconfigured for the average joe who doesn't really need to know what they are doing.

[WeDidIt]

99. No thanks, I'll take Windows 7

Come October 22, I'll ahve completely bypassed Vista.

No need for a Mac, ever. If I thought of going Mac, I'd go Linux, first.

[guitar man]

104. !!!

Grenade isn't actually a Warrior, per se, but it's an ordnance so widely employed that no Flame Warriors guide would be complete without mentioning it. When lobbed into a discussion forum Grenade instantly blasts civil discourse into smoking rubble....

http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/grenade.htm

:rofl:

[Touchdown]

107. For Leopard owners, Snow Leopard will make your system faster.

Much of what it does is streamline the operations... and you gain back 3 Gig of HD space in the process.

It is a must have for Leopard owners.

[ellie]

111. I am trying

to convince my husband to buy a Macbook. His PC laptop just died, like an hour ago, so it is now an expensive paperweight. I have a Macbook and I love it. My work computer is a PC. Bleah.

[ShamelessHussy]

115. has he checked out the latest ones? very nice machines starting at $999

And they come loaded, too.

Just got my daughter one for college and I am jealous =)

:hi:

[Initech]

134. I'll probably get it for my Mac laptop eventually.

I got a new desktop PC that I built myself - no Mac OS for it.

[ddeclue]

142. Why get EITHER? and why pay a fortune for a stupid Mac?

I'm happy with XP... and why not run FreeBSD and skip paying 1200 or more for a Mac?

[formercia]

154. I dual-boot XP pro and FreeBSD

The XP pro came with the machine but FreeBSD has a lot less overhead.

[cliffordu]

163. I likes me some FreeBSD, too....

And OpenBSD....

Anyone with a name like Theo DeRatt can't be all bad...


:sarcasm:

Although there was a nasty rumor sometime back about OpenBSD being trojaned.

[formercia]

165. I didn't hear about the trojan.

It would have to be an inside job. With all those eyeballs reviewing the code...It would have to be very stealthy. Not something a script kiddie could do.

[cliffordu]

168. It was prolly a rumor from one of Theo's many "fans"

I understand more people hate him than Stallman.....

:rofl:

While at IBM I had to try and coordinate a couple of the glibc developers to update the documentation for the libs.....fucking nightmare...the head developer at that point wouldn't even EMAIL stallman....

[CBGLuthier]

161. Yaaaawwwwnnnn

Yeah Yeah, whatever.

I prefer quality manufacturing. Every apple product I have owned went defective early. They make crap. Well designed and programmed they may be, they make crap.

[Atman]

167. I've been a Mac-head since the Mac II (or SE Plus)...but this thread bores me.

It's all been said and done. If you're still in love with the PC, you're an old skool loser. If you're still in love with the Mac, you're a Jobsian new-monopoly loser. We're all losers. Every computer sucks, every computer user is a loser. HATE THEM ALL! At least, until you need one to post about why everyone else but you sucks.

.

[wtmusic]

193. Not only every computer, but every thread sucks.

This one, and your post. And my reply. They all suck.

[roamer65]

171. I'll keep my Leopard and XP

They are stable and run fast on the newer processors.

[deaniac21]

174. Because the Mac sux.

[IDemo]

182. Currently triple-booting XP, W7/RC, Linux Mint 7

I don't actually boot into XP anymore, but I'm not the only one in the household.

It's all good.

[CitizenPatriot]

189. um, la la la.....just wandering in to this

'scuse me, but I have a question:

it seems like there are some knowledgeable types here...so, hey, I've got a computer problem for a moron (that would be me). Need a mac geek, and there aren't any Mac geek bars around me.

Any takers?

Here's the deal: I just got an intel macbook pro 10.5. My old laptop is a G4 10.4. I wanted to transfer my preferences and passwords from firefox and email, but I couldn't clone the desktop so I used migration assistant, but it didn't work. It migrated the applications over and some files, but none of my email boxes, preferences, etc. None of my Mac geeks have an intel, so no one knows what I should do now.

I'm hiding now....but if anyone has any suggestions, I'd sure appreciate it.:-)

[DainBramaged]

190. Apple= slave labor, IPods that catch fire, plausible deniability, lack of responsibility

no thanks, I'll stick with Windows7.

[Touchdown]

192. That's funny! Computers are like shoes.

They're all made by 12 year old girls in third world sweat shops who's probably been raped in the last hour making our computer equipment. All so that we can be smug about which sweatshop our favorite batch of circuit boards rapes little girls less.:eyes:

[DainBramaged]

197. Circuit boards are not made with human hands......

:eyes:

[Touchdown]

198. So what are those things with the white lids? Space Aliens?

:eyes:

You are still masturbating on the false impression that Windows is sweat shop free.

[DainBramaged]

209. You're just masturbating with etching solution......

do those people look like 12 year olds? And SOMEONE has to take the from the machines.

Clueless:

look in the dictionary it's your picture.

[Touchdown]

219. So only Apple uses Chinese slave/child labor.

Those $300 ASUS netbooks must be providing good union jobs in Toledo.:eyes:

Speaking of dictionary. I looked up masturbation and there's a motion video of you doing it.

[ecstatic]

263. And possibly murder too. I remember reading something about a

shady death of an employee who had been accused of stealing a new iPhone prototype.

[Spider Jerusalem]

194. Macs are overpriced.

And I can run OSX on a generic Intel Core 2 box should I want to. (Which I don't since I dual-boot Windows and Linux.)

[Rex]

196. Vista 64bit here...2 years and not one bsod.

Mac...meh work on them everyday, people hype them way too much IMO.

[Fearless]

274. Ditto!

[Feron]

200. Oh boy an operating system wars thread

Other than price, the most unattractive thing about Macs is the fanboys.

[DainBramaged]

210. Yup

I have an IMac in the closet, 4 years old, works fine, slowest piece of dreck in the world. Until Apple got the idea of using Intel processors, they were great for conversation. And for dropping out of upper story windows.

[slackmaster]

250. These really would be better suited for the Religion forum

K&U

:kick:

[pinniped]

207. Cool. I'm good for that $29 price.

.

[ConsAreLiars]

208. Will it run under Linux (Ubuntu) or do I have to spend $1000 more

to get the hardware needed to try it out?

(edit tiny typos)

[alfredo]

225. I've been running Linux on Macs since the late 90's. I can run UNIX/Linux apps. on

OSX. Some run natively, some under X11.

Mac Ports

http://www.macports.org/

The Fink Project is another, but I haven't been able to get to their site.

I've had Gnome running, and I tried an early build of KDE, but it crashed. That was several years ago.

I was running Ubuntu using http://www.virtualbox.org/ It worked well.

I use Inkscape and GIMP quite a bit. Scribus is very good on OSX.

[slackmaster]

215. FYI, Windows 7 is based on the XP kernel, not on Vista

Microsoft has abandoned Vista. It was a dead end.

[ShamelessHussy]

223. Back to the future...

That's a shame, as technology marches on, windows users will be left in the past, with all of it's complexity (see upgrade chart, posted above by me, for just 1 example) and constant virus attacks.

User's who appreciate the power of simplicity (complexity reduced) coupled with a clean minimalist design, which has always been a part of apple's DNA, will be richly rewarded. I have been a mac user for 20 years (but I also use Unix, Linux, and Windows) and have made a very successful living taking advantage of the emergent power of those simple principals, and I can certainly testify to their dedication to those ideals and the rewarding experience recieved due to their diligence.

As more and more folks learn about the MAC PC via their peripheral products (iPhone/Touch, iPods, appleTV, etc) apple's market share is virtually guaranteed to continue to increase.

Recognizing a superior product as complex as an OS is not a trivial 'fanboy' endeavor or a boring waste of time, but an important part of making a typically expensive purchasing decision, (not directed at you but to those types of comments sprinkled throughout this thread - and any similar thread) that will pay off for years after that initial purchase.

Parent's considering that important purchase should consider the utility of making one purchase that can run all the major OS's (Linux, Windows, and MAC) as who knows what the school's (or workplace) computer policy may be or their future college.

:hi:

[MellonCollie]

252. No, it's based on the NT kernel used by Vista

"Contrary to some speculation, Microsoft is not creating a new kernel for Windows 7. Rather, we are refining the kernel architecture and componentization model introduced in Windows Vista."

http://windowsteamblog.com/blogs/windowsvista/archive/2008/05/27/communicating-windows-7.aspx

[leeroysphitz]

224. You can keep them BOTH. I'll stick with perfectly good, reliable XP Pro thanks anyhow.

[Political Heretic]

227. When Mac has software compatibility, come talk to me.

Right now, I have a stack of software that will not run on a MAC and for which no MAC version exists.

[boppers]

233. emacs or vi?

:P

[Moochy]

257. (s)ed >> vi >> emacs

terminal emulation is for weaklings!

[boppers]

276. grep >> (s)ed

You kids and your crazy streams!

Whatever happened to pipes?

Get off my lawn!

[gmoney]

240. Apple, why have thou forsaken me

Just got back from like 3 hours of trying to configure my Dad's airport to work with his cable modem and a new printer. And it still doesn't work. _lpadmin password? network group name? TERMINAL?

WHAT THE FUCK EVER HAPPENED TO PLUG AND PLAY?

Jeeeeesus

[Recursion]

247. Ubuntu "Jaunty Jackalope" ready right now!

Unlike commercial operating systems, it actually works.

http://www.ubuntu.com/

[dsharp88]

255. I ordered mine yesterday! nt

[mkultra]

260. i can run OSx on my PC better than Mac hardware runs it.

I would buy a mac if they didn't suck.

They are like left handed scissors. a custom tool that is slightly more expensive for those who cant use the normal tool.

[City of Mills]

283. Snow Leopard may crash your apps

I'd hold off...

http://brainstormtech.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2009/08/26/snow-leopard-warning-your-apps-may-crash/

One day before the scheduled launch of Mac OS X Snow Leopard — the latest update of Apple's (AAPL) flagship operating system — developers are still scrambling to make sure their applications will work with the new version.

Of the Macintosh apps than have been tested on the gold master of OS X v.10.6 as of Wednesday morning, more than 60 either don't work or have major problems, according to snowleopard.wikidot.com, a collaborative project that is collating independent test results.

[NYC_SKP]

285. Feel sad for those who cannot afford a MAC, but damn, it's worth the $$$. AND:

It's probably cheaper to own one in the long run because piece of shit PCs bread down so regularly.

If it's not the hard drive, it can be just one of the ports or the keyboard.

Except for Toshiba Tecras and other high end units that cost MORE than a Mac, anyone is better off with an Apple product.

[RedCappedBandit]

286. My macbook is the worst computer I have ever owned

- CD player does not work

- Speakers are pathetic

= Random keys do not work

- Ethernet plug does not work

- Runs extremely hot

- Crashes often

- Fails to turn on often

- Horrid battery life


I will continue to build my own PCs. Buying a mac was the worst decision I have made in the world of computing.

-Forgot to add, extremely overpriced.

[NYC_SKP]

287. You must have that one in 100,000,000 bad ones. No warrantee?

are you sure this was really a macbook?

[sakabatou]

288. Got SL today.

[TreasonousBastard]

289. Because...

I am quite happy with my current XP Pro system-- it does everything I need to do.

I have no interest in spending a few thousand dollars on hardware to run a new OS that will not run software or accessories that I use.

I have even less interest in spending thousands on a new machine, with its accompanying OS, just so I can dual boot into Windows to run software I can run right now.

Windows 7 is not Vista 2 and is a step back from boated code-- all reports of the beta out there say it's faster and more stable than XP, which means it's way faster and more stable than Vista.