View Full Version : Mac v. PC
RichNY
12-02-2006, 07:16 AM
Let's see I've already dedicated fun posts to CW, and Jamison... Ok, CDI, this Bud is for you :)
http://www.thatsmymonkey.com/Pages/0203macvpc.html
adam75south
12-02-2006, 04:54 PM
what's the difference? really? i've never used one.
say you take a mac and a pc of the same price. what's the difference?
fractalgfx
12-05-2006, 07:23 PM
In the expert opinion of someone who has been studying computer science for half a decade:
Two buttons good, one button bad.
Munnin
12-05-2006, 07:45 PM
In the expert opinion of someone who has been studying computer science for half a decade:
Two buttons good, one button bad.
As someone who's first code was written on an appleIIe and who has used everything from mini computers to UNIX, from DOS to windows XP, and from appleIIes to osX: I will see your two button good with a one button equals less hand cramps, and raise you a free IDE that complies C C++ objective C and Java with every machine.
Beat that run on sentence you young punk :)
RichNY
12-05-2006, 07:50 PM
As someone who's first code was written on an appleIIe and who has used everything from mini computers to UNIX, from DOS to windows XP, and from appleIIes to osX: I will see your two button good with a one button equals less hand cramps, and raise you a free IDE that complies C C++ objective C and Java with every machine.
Beat that run on sentence you young punk :)
My first Apple had a cassette recorder for a storage device- the floppy drive for it hadn't come out yet. My first job was selling Apples and pcboard computers back in 1979.
cwphoto
12-05-2006, 09:25 PM
As someone who's first code was written on an appleIIe and who has used everything from mini computers to UNIX, from DOS to windows XP, and from appleIIes to osX: I will see your two button good with a one button equals less hand cramps, and raise you a free IDE that complies C C++ objective C and Java with every machine.
Beat that run on sentence you young punk :)
Finally a thread to which I cannot contribute. :D
Hey, got a demo of a medical system writen using Windows Vista and .NET 3.0 combo last night.
I'd swear this thing will support photoshop + over the internet. Talk about fully utilizing the hardware layer, yeow! You can use full streaming video for icons. Who cares about built in compiling; if I want to develop I'll have a professional IDE. Give me useless gaming-like glitz!
Watch out oh people owning a machine with a single real advantage (aka: graphics).
crashgirl
12-06-2006, 06:58 AM
In the expert opinion of someone who has been studying computer science for half a decade:
Two buttons good, one button bad.
We have a Mac and have a two button mouse hooked up to it.:D
With that being said, I happen to agree with you. We have both a Mac and PCs. I hardly ever use the Mac unless I am testing something on that platform. Although, my 4-year old daughter prefers the Mac (traitor). Embarrassingly, she even shows me how to do things on it. :p
cincyimages
12-06-2006, 06:59 AM
Mac all the way. I switched to Mac over a year and a half ago and the worst thing about the switch is the fact that I have to use a PC at work. Once you adjust to the simplicity of the Mac (and there is an adjustment) it is quite frustrating to work on a PC.
BTW, the Mac has always has "two button" functionality, Apple was foolish to ship a one button mouse with their systems all those years but now ship a two button mighty mouse with their systems.
crashgirl
12-06-2006, 07:07 AM
Mac all the way. I switched to Mac over a year and a half ago and the worst thing about the switch is the fact that I have to use a PC at work. Once you adjust to the simplicity of the Mac (and there is an adjustment) it is quite frustrating to work on a PC.
BTW, the Mac has always has "two button" functionality, Apple was foolish to ship a one button mouse with their systems all those years but now ship a two button mighty mouse with their systems.
Sorry to get off-topic, but I just noticed your name and location. Hi neighbor! We're from Dayton.
Munnin
12-06-2006, 07:21 AM
Hey, got a demo of a medical system writen using Windows Vista and .NET 3.0 combo last night.
I'd swear this thing will support photoshop + over the internet. Talk about fully utilizing the hardware layer, yeow! You can use full streaming video for icons.
Wow another demo filled with cool buzzwords, are they planning on releasing it in my life time?
Who cares about built in compiling; if I want to develop I'll have a professional IDE. Give me useless gaming-like glitz!
So you admitt you like paying a lot of money for a development enviroment that last I checked MS did not even use in house?
Watch out oh people owning a machine with a single real advantage (aka: graphics).
Yes because lord knows I love getting a computer from dell without an OS disk and having to pay extra to get an OS disk so I can perform a re-install. I love having regester online to get things to work. I so look forward to owning a PC again... no wait..... ;)
The problem with Vista is that you are only allowed to reinstall it twice before you have to buy a new copy. That would leave me up that well-known creek without a paddle because it normally takes 3 installation attempts before I can get Windows 95/98/ME/XP to run correctly. Indeed, my factory-installed Compaq laptop is already on its 3rd reinstallation because installation 1 (by the factory) was bad. Installation 2 fell over after Norton let viruses through. Installation 3 seems stable. Then of course what happens if your CPU goes phut or your hard drive fails? You're out for a new copy of Vista as well as a new hard drive or CPU.
I object to the licencing model. In Britain there's a "fair use" law that XP flouts (Microsoft has lost court cases over it too). If I buy something, it's mine to use whatever. I don't need to ask permission to use it. XP doesn't work like that, it has to have a code fed in and then it has to talk to Microsoft (giving them your computer's IMAC address, CPU, mainboard and hard drive seriel numbers etc before you can use it. Vista goes a bit further down this road.
I swore after the crashy Windows 95/98 series that I would not use XP. I went for XP because it was compatible with my existing software. Then when I ran it on XP I found it wouldn't really work under XP. By the time I'd got my system configured I reckoned I'd have been working on a Mac.
Anyway, my laptop runs XP purely because when I wanted to get an iBook, they were changing over to Intel CPUs and I didn't want to be left behind with an elderly machine that would be software unsupported in a year or so. I want to keep using my laptop for about 5 years before I buy a new one. Having said that when I get the money to buy a MacBook, I'll do that.
Munnin
12-06-2006, 09:25 AM
The problem with Vista is that you are only allowed to reinstall it twice before you have to buy a new copy.
I thought they had abandoned that idea.
Then of course what happens if your CPU goes phut or your hard drive fails?
Happened to a friend of mine and she needed to buy a new copy (not upgrade) to get her machine working. This turned into a big issue for me with Windows 95. Bought a new machine in pieces and put it together and bought a Windows 95 upgrade. I had to install DOS 3.3 then windows 3 something and then a windows 3 upgrade then I could install Windows 95.
A year later a I picked up my first Mac for my wife, it came complete with all install disks and I did not need to enter a serial number. Every new machine you buy comes with a complete install disk with all the software and no serial numbers. New and upgrade prices are the same $99.
Anyway, my laptop runs XP purely because when I wanted to get an iBook, they were changing over to Intel CPUs and I didn't want to be left behind with an elderly machine that would be software unsupported in a year or so. I want to keep using my laptop for about 5 years before I buy a new one. Having said that when I get the money to buy a MacBook, I'll do that.
Actually Apple does a good job of supporting their legacy hardware and even my Mac cube is still running the latest and greatest software with little difficulty. On the other hand if I was facing the same decision I would have held off too.
cincyimages
12-06-2006, 10:06 AM
I was able to get an old 450mhz G4 from the Intel shop at work and it runs OS X Tiger beautifully. I believe the new OS X Leopard will also support the old G4's.
adam75south
12-06-2006, 10:19 AM
so basically you don't like the way microsoft run their business???
put it this way...windows 95 aside.
what makes mac better NOW?
Well; the average user never really needs to reinstall. Given a clone from the new install (if done properly) that shouldn't count as a reinstall and is far easier anyway.
As an IT manager however; it does suck. My buddy who's Network Manager at a major Navy depot that rolls out installs by the bucket, he's not a fan of Microsoft's newer moves either. They do need to address special needs like that.
Anyway; Vista does look pretty awsome. I hadn't heard about the 2 install limit. Adobe is doing that. Is their solution really to force repurchase? That doesn't seem fair at all, and in fact, I have to wonder if it'll fly? With Adobe; I had to call and get a special activation number.
I do support measures however that'll stop those thieves in China who think they can just steal (mostly) American software for their businesses and homes without paying, then turn around and kill our businesses in competition. It's not enough that they practically have slave labor. For that alone; I would support and try to work around this install issue. I only hope they've plugged all the holes that would allow the crackers from cracking it (in China and other misbehaving countries).
Ray Schnoor
12-06-2006, 11:07 AM
Anyway; Vista does look pretty awsome. I hadn't heard about the 2 install limit. Adobe is doing that. Is their solution really to force repurchase? That doesn't seem fair at all, and in fact, I have to wonder if it'll fly? With Adobe; I had to call and get a special activation number.
With photoshop, anyway, I had installed it on 2 machines(a desktop and laptop). When I upgraded my desktop, I just called Adobe and, no problem, they let me install it on the newer machine. I don't know about Microsoft, though. As to reinstalling Windows, I have had 2 new computers at home and 3-4 at work since 1997 and have never had to reinstall Windows once on any of them.
Ray.
I like the Microsoft Office Basic licensing.
It's about 1/3 price but the license is locked to that CPU. Most of the time; we throw out the OS license with the computer. I think that makes a lot of sense. If every piece of software did that the SW companies would probably make a lot more money (ie: no pirating, ever) and we could all pay a lot less for legit copies. Of course; a failed CPU could cost a pretty penny - some sort of 1-time-CPU-switch would be a nice option.
RE: Adobe. My situtation was similar. It was a big hassle on the 2nd machine because the license expired with every reboot until they sent me a new license file.
cincyimages
12-06-2006, 01:05 PM
what makes mac better NOW?
There are too many discussions on that topic on the internet to discuss it here. If you like Windows that is fine, but once I bought my Mac Mini I was hooked. I eventually sold it and upgraded to a 24 inch iMac and it has been a pleasure to use. My photo editing has never been so smooth.
Munnin
12-06-2006, 01:17 PM
so basically you don't like the way microsoft run their business???
Well you can say that “it’s the way they choose to run their business” but it is the pain that those decisions cause me that’s my issue. Let’s review actual situations I just went through. I decided to upgrade a hard drive on my Mac. Once I had the new drive in I pulled my most current copy of the OS and installed it no muss no fuss.
A friend of mine had something corrupt her hard drive. She had a new hard drive installed but since the machine came with no version of the OS she had to purchase a full version not even an upgrade despite already owning a legal version.
put it this way...windows 95 aside.
what makes mac better NOW?
Other than licensing issues I will have to say that I have been able to keep each of my Macs running longer and kept them usable longer than my PCs.
The configurable users have allowed my daughter to share a computer with my wife without worry about corrupting the machine since I can control what each user can access. The latest version of Windows has this but it’s more complicated to fine tune this by establishing groups.
I like the automatic data encryption that allows me to create a user and keep that entire user’s data encrypted. I have a second user on my machine that all my tax data is on and is encrypted so even should I lose the machine my most sensitive data is safe.
I could go on but why bother you either are happy with your machine or your not. Either way one button is better :)
Munnin
12-06-2006, 01:28 PM
Well; the average user never really needs to reinstall. Given a clone from the new install (if done properly) that shouldn't count as a reinstall and is far easier anyway.
In the end I guess that sums it up: if done properly Windows works fine, if you’re the average home user you might be out of luck. My machine at work is configured and maintained by a couple of guys whose job it is to know how to do things properly and I have never had a problem with the machines they have worked on.
Anyway; Vista does look pretty awsome.
I was looking through the features list today and they will have re-attained feature parity with osX in vista. Sadly most of the features that would have putt hem cleanly ahead were stripped out. I am looking forward to seeing a side by side comparison of Vista and the next version of osX due out soon.
I hadn't heard about the 2 install limit.
As I said earlier I am pretty sure that was dead shortly after they announced it.
GaryS
12-06-2006, 01:44 PM
and it was never a 2 install limit anyway. It was a 2 machine install limit. You could install it on one machine as many times as you needed/wanted to. They were trying to limit your ability to transfer it to a new computer.
and it was never a 2 install limit anyway. It was a 2 machine install limit. You could install it on one machine as many times as you needed/wanted to. They were trying to limit your ability to transfer it to a new computer.
It's a 2-machine limit on XP. With Vista it's a 2-install limit.
Of course - have a CPU die on you and that's one machine down. Have a mainboard die and that's your XP dead as a doornail. Too risky for me. I've had CPUs and mainboards die in the past.
forno
12-06-2006, 02:33 PM
The PC world would be a better place if Microsoft had not allowed 3rd party manufacturers to use thier platform.
We would have had a better PC platform now as a result, part of apples strength is that the hardware is first rate as it has never been allowed to be made by 3rd parties
The PC world would be a better place if Microsoft had not allowed 3rd party manufacturers to use thier platform.
We would have had a better PC platform now as a result, part of apples strength is that the hardware is first rate as it has never been allowed to be made by 3rd parties
Most of Apple's strength is that they have a better-written O/S that doesn't have the inherant problem of a centralised registry. Windows was fine at 3.1 but when they went for the registry in NT and 95 was when they took the wrong road.
fractalgfx
12-06-2006, 02:54 PM
raise you a free IDE that complies C C++ objective C and Java with every machine.
That is so 90's, I find IDE's repulsive, VPP (Vim/Python/Pizza) is all I need.
[QUOTE=Munnin;179632]Beat that run on sentence you young punk :)
I have always avoided English classes like the plague, but someone in the thread should have gotten the Orwell theme. The appropriate response would have been:
Two button good, one button better
Munnin
12-06-2006, 02:55 PM
The PC world would be a better place if Microsoft had not allowed 3rd party manufacturers to use thier platform.
We would have had a better PC platform now as a result, part of apples strength is that the hardware is first rate as it has never been allowed to be made by 3rd parties
Wow you need a bigger history lesson about these platforms than I would offer here. Suffice it to say that apple did allow clones for a while and Microsoft never hand any choice about who developed the hardware.
I would say that is both a strength and weakness, though that weakness is small now that they are using Intel hardware and can let Intel develop hardware for them.
Munnin
12-06-2006, 02:57 PM
[QUOTE=Munnin;179632]raise you a free IDE that complies C C++ objective C and Java with every machine.
That is so 90's, I find IDE's repulsive, VPP (Vim/Python/Pizza) is all I need.
Heh... I have been writting SQL for 7 years now so don't talk repulsive to me ;)
sigh I do miss the old days of coding in C and using fan fold paper to look at my code.
I have no idea how I missed the animal farm reference, I love that book keep my own copy so I can reference it whenever I want.
Munnin
12-06-2006, 02:59 PM
Most of Apple's strength is that they have a better-written O/S that doesn't have the inherant problem of a centralised registry. Windows was fine at 3.1 but when they went for the registry in NT and 95 was when they took the wrong road.
I agree and disagree: BeOS had a real database integrated into the OS that you could query and that was a neat inovation. The windows regeatry is like that only done as badly as possible.
forno
12-06-2006, 03:03 PM
Wow you need a bigger history lesson about these platforms than I would offer here. Suffice it to say that apple did allow clones for a while and Microsoft never hand any choice about who developed the hardware.
I would say that is both a strength and weakness, though that weakness is small now that they are using Intel hardware and can let Intel develop hardware for them.
Yeh, I remember the Peach etc, my point is with an apple all the hardware is of a known quality and used in known combinations, which reduces the chance of conflicts and driver errors, all of which goes to creating a better user experience
fractalgfx
12-06-2006, 03:33 PM
I hate Microsoft, many of there protects, and all of their business practices, but don't think Apple never plays dirty.
A few years back Steve Jobs wanted to push Apple hardware into the production pipeline at major special effects studios. Apple bought the company that produced Shake (a compositor that ran on Linux, Windows, Irix). After acquiring Shake, apple release a version for OSX, discontinued the windows version, and changed the pricing structure to make it cheaper to buy a Mac than to run it on Linux.
That wasn't enough incentive for some studios to adopt Macs, so apple bought Silicon Grail. Silicon Grail produced a compositor called Rayz, which apple promptly discontinued.
Munnin
12-06-2006, 05:25 PM
Yeh, I remember the Peach etc, my point is with an apple all the hardware is of a known quality and used in known combinations, which reduces the chance of conflicts and driver errors, all of which goes to creating a better user experience
Well I have to agree with that though it must be said that in general thats not much of a problem with most PCs these days either. These days its spy ware and scripting thats a much bigger problem.
Munnin
12-06-2006, 05:30 PM
I hate Microsoft, many of there protects, and all of their business practices, but don't think Apple never plays dirty.
SNIP
Yep, since Steve returned Apple plays hard ball and dirty pool with the best of them. While I wish neither side played that way at least he has been willing to fight and brought lots of good stuff to market. He has pushed MS hard and they have been providing a better product as a result.
forno
12-06-2006, 05:30 PM
Well I have to agree with that though it must be said that in general thats not much of a problem with most PCs these days either. These days its spy ware and scripting thats a much bigger problem.
Fair call, but you would have thought that at by now the PC experience would have been optimised to provide a managable experience for those that cant cope with spyware and driver issues etc
I agree and disagree: BeOS had a real database integrated into the OS that you could query and that was a neat inovation. The windows regeatry is like that only done as badly as possible.
Yes. Didn't Microsoft buy Be and discontinue BeOs? Until Windows 95, BeOs was about the best OS around for graphics etc. Then it was discontinued which ended that. I never had a chance to use it but from what I've seen it looks very good.
Munnin
12-07-2006, 07:23 AM
Yes. Didn't Microsoft buy Be and discontinue BeOs? Until Windows 95, BeOs was about the best OS around for graphics etc. Then it was discontinued which ended that. I never had a chance to use it but from what I've seen it looks very good.
No Be Inc. never became solvent and eventually went bankrupt. They made a serious play at being the next operating system for Apple and were in negotiations but asking too much money as far as Gil Amelio was concerned. Then Steve Jobs hearing this made his play for Apple to purchase NeXT step. Once Steve was brought on board he set about kicking Gil out and killing the clones immediately.
I got to use it and what was there was amazing, I was able to play two videos smoothly on the same hardware that had difficulty playing one video smoothly. The whole system was set up for data throughput. It was able to utilize multiple CPUs very quickly and easily without any special coding all you needed to do was write your code to maximize threading.
crashgirl
12-07-2006, 08:30 AM
Some of you are basing your opinion of hte PC on Windows... did you forget about Linux? ;)
fractalgfx
12-07-2006, 08:52 AM
Some of you are basing your opinion of hte PC on Windows... did you forget about Linux? ;)
Linux has been my primary operating system since around the turn of the century. But MAC vs. Windows is a much better rivalry.
Munnin
12-07-2006, 09:10 AM
Linux has been my primary operating system since around the turn of the century. But MAC vs. Windows is a much better rivalry.
We could fight, but what would be the point we all know which system is the better looking better working UNIX. ;)
Seriously though I have not played with Linux since about 97 and it has come a long way. Could you tell me step by step how you process your photos in Linux?
adam75south
12-07-2006, 09:30 AM
The configurable users have allowed my daughter to share a computer with my wife without worry about corrupting the machine since I can control what each user can access. The latest version of Windows has this but it’s more complicated to fine tune this by establishing groups.
I like the automatic data encryption that allows me to create a user and keep that entire user’s data encrypted. I have a second user on my machine that all my tax data is on and is encrypted so even should I lose the machine my most sensitive data is safe.
I could go on but why bother you either are happy with your machine or your not. Either way one button is better :)
thank you for that. i really have no idea the differences and this definitely sheds some light on the mac for me. feel free to go on if you'd like. i'm not being a jerk, just really wanting to know why mac people like them so much...and i am happy with the pc but i still keep my eyes open.
honestly i've never had a problem with a pc. i've reinstalled before just so i could delete all the crap i've accumulated, called microsoft and reactivated. i maintain my computer well, mainly thanks to avg free antivirus. other than that, they are easy to work on, simple to replace parts. there's an abundance of software made for pc's and i would imagine alot more than macs. last i checked microsoft office cost about $500 for the mac a opposed to $300 or $150 for student version. but at the same time i've heard of people running windows on a mac...which kinda defeats the purpose i would think.
i do like what you said about encryption though. one problem i've had with the pc is the fact that i can't hide anything easily. i've resorted to changing extensions of files and hiding them inside my windows files where only i can find them. would be nice to just be able to password protect certain files or folders and keep them from being found in basic searches. i have seen programs that will do that but haven't tried any.
adam75south
12-07-2006, 09:33 AM
We could fight, but what would be the point we all know which system is the better looking better working UNIX. ;)
Seriously though I have not played with Linux since about 97 and it has come a long way. Could you tell me step by step how you process your photos in Linux?
i don't know why but that just cracked me up.
Munnin
12-07-2006, 09:46 AM
i've reinstalled before just so i could delete all the crap i've accumulated, called microsoft and reactivated.
In general I have never had to do that for a Mac and if the installed software follows Apple’s guidelines removing a program is very easy. The problem is now if a program is not following the guidelines it is no longer easy. I tried to uninstall of mySQL and finally just decided to wipe the installation clean.
i maintain my computer well, mainly thanks to avg free antivirus.
I have no antivirus/anti spy ware software on my Macs. Just don’t install software from un-trusted sources and your fine.
other than that, they are easy to work on, simple to replace parts.
Some Macs are very easy to work on and others are designed not to be. Getting into my cube is easy, my iMac not so much.
there's an abundance of software made for pc's and i would imagine alot more than macs.
Depends on what you want, for most things there is plenty of quality equivalent software. If on the other hand having chessbase is important to you; buy a PC.
but at the same time i've heard of people running windows on a mac...which kinda defeats the purpose i would think.
As usual it all depends on what you want to do. I make my living on Oracle databases right now, if I want to code forms or reports I must have a PC nothing I can do about that.
i do like what you said about encryption though. SNIP i have seen programs that will do that but haven't tried any.
I think Vista will have some version of that but you will have to investigate it.
Some of you are basing your opinion of hte PC on Windows... did you forget about Linux? ;)
No. We didn't forget Linux. It's just that compared to Windows and OSX it really sucks as a desktop system. As a server OS it is absolutely brilliant and whenever I need a server I immediately use SME Linux. Linux lacks a decent GUI and has been developed by loads of different people over the years which shows in the lack of coherance in design, implenentation and usability. It is - as a friend once said - an O/S for enthusiasts rather than for Joe Public.
fractalgfx
12-07-2006, 10:48 AM
Could you tell me step by step how you process your photos in Linux?
I'm just getting into the digital photo thing, but I can tell you this much.
Gimp is not Photoshop! But a lot of people do serious image editing with it.
Lightzone for Linux (http://sonic.net/~rat/lightcrafts/) is free, the $250 for Windows or OSX
Bibble Pro runs on linux and has a floating license, so you can use one copy on Linux, Windows and OSX.
There are a variety of free and open source RAW processors, dcraw, ufraw, rawstudio, and Raw Therapee
New image processing software is always popping up
Cinepaint is targeted at the the film industry, but if its community grows, it could become a really good photo tool (http://cinepaint.org/)
A lot of windows programs will run under wine. From what I here Photoshop 7 is the last version that runs. The commercial version of wine from code weavers might be better than the open source version.
Win4lin is an excellent tool for running windows as a virtual machine. It is reasonably priced, but you need to upgrade from time to time because the stop releasing kernel patches for older versions.
I'm still shopping for my camera, so I haven't really tested the RAW software, but most of them run on windows. Raw Therapee seems to be the most interesting of the free products, and someone on a budget might adopt Linux just for Lightzone.
This is a bit off topic, but Gimp loyalists frequently argue that you need to take time to learn Gimp in order to appreciate. I hear the same argument from Photoshop users. Complete BS. It is almost always possible to design software which is productive and powerful for both beginners and experts. Adobe caters to people willing or required to learn Photoshop, and Gimp developers, so there neither group has much incentive to shorten the learning curve. I think both products could be much easier to learn and use. In fairness, I have spent very little time using Photoshop, but I believe that what you can accomplish after using a program for a couple of hours is a very good measure of a programs design.
fractalgfx
12-07-2006, 10:56 AM
it really sucks as a desktop system
This was true 6 years ago. KDE and Gnome are every bit as good as the windows desktop. KDE can be overweening for a beginner, but both desktops Gnome is every bit as good as the windows shell. The only thing missing are standardized hardware configuration tools.
Keep in mind there are a lot of people who run Litestep so they can disguise there windows desktops.
This was true 6 years ago. KDE and Gnome are every bit as good as the windows desktop. KDE can be overweening for a beginner, but both desktops Gnome is every bit as good as the windows shell. The only thing missing are standardized hardware configuration tools.
Keep in mind there are a lot of people who run Litestep so they can disguise there windows desktops.
I tried desktop Linux a few months ago and found the implementation was poor and incoherant. One of my biggest gripes is that the live CD for Linspire (which seems the best of the bunch) won't actually run on my laptop.
fractalgfx
12-07-2006, 11:43 AM
One of my biggest gripes is that the live CD for Linspire (which seems the best of the bunch) won't actually run on my laptop.
Ouch, Linspire is definitely not the best of the bunch. It might be the friendliest for new users, but they make money selling software that can be easily obtained for free.
I recommend Ubuntu, is has a very helpful user community. If it runs on your computer out of the box, your biggest challenge will be be watching a DVD (there are easy to folly instructions for downloading the necessary software.)
Hardware support is a Linux weakness, but windows is not immune to hardware incompatibilities. A windows XP bug caused my friends computer to repeatedly crash after he bought a new graphics card. Microsoft tech support promised him the bug would be fixed when they released SP2 in a year.
It is my belief that individuals with the worst Linux experiences (once it is up and running) are people who are dependent on there friends and family for help with whenever they have a windows problem.
adam75south
12-07-2006, 12:03 PM
I have no antivirus/anti spy ware software on my Macs. Just don’t install software from un-trusted sources and your fine.
i'm actually fine. i'm in IT support, so i'm somewhat above average at maintaining my pc. i don't have the antivirus on there to protect me from me. it's my friends and family that i let use my computer that i have to worry about. and telling them what you just told me doesn't exactly work out for me as well as the antivirus does.
so if you don't have to register your copy of osx then how do they combat pirating of their software? also, is it even possible to custom build a mac?
i'm actually fine. i'm in IT support, so i'm somewhat above average at maintaining my pc. i don't have the antivirus on there to protect me from me. it's my friends and family that i let use my computer that i have to worry about. and telling them what you just told me doesn't exactly work out for me as well as the antivirus does.
so if you don't have to register your copy of osx then how do they combat pirating of their software? also, is it even possible to custom build a mac?
I believe it is possible to custom-build Macs. Never tried but I believe it is - the only specialist item would be the mainboard. All the other parts are pretty much off the shelf items.
Munnin
12-07-2006, 12:13 PM
I believe it is possible to custom-build Macs. Never tried but I believe it is - the only specialist item would be the mainboard. All the other parts are pretty much off the shelf items.
Well as far as I know all Mac boards now are standard Intel design boards with Intel processors so it should be entirely possible to put the latest Mac offering onto a PC. I have little doubt that someone somewhere has done it already. Basically the same PC box could also be a Mac box so long as you pick your components carefully.
Well as far as I know all Mac boards now are standard Intel design boards with Intel processors so it should be entirely possible to put the latest Mac offering onto a PC. I have little doubt that someone somewhere has done it already. Basically the same PC box could also be a Mac box so long as you pick your components carefully.
Not quite. Mac boards don't use a BIOS. They use something else.
fractalgfx
12-07-2006, 06:30 PM
Not quite. Mac boards don't use a BIOS. They use something else.
I don't know about the BIOS, but i know they used to have special ROMS that the OS looked for. There was an apple emulator for PCs called Gemulator. The manufacture sold rom cards containing used apple roms that you installed in your pc.
http://www.emulators.com/gemul8r.htm
"The MacBook systems use Intel's Extensible Firmware Interface (EFI) rather than the traditional Macintosh ROM or PC BIOS."
(http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/macbook/faq/macbook-rom-bios-sudden-motion-sensor.html)
Munnin
12-07-2006, 08:35 PM
Well a little research reveals that indeed they use Intel's design and you can get osX running on many different PCs. As it turns out there is a somewhat extensive support system of people doing it:
http://wiki.osx86project.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page
That address has complete lists of parts and assembled systems that can get Apple's operating system working on. They not only have a Dual Boot guide but also a triple boot guide for "Mac OS X, Ubuntu 6.06, and Windows Vista or XP on a single Dell Intel PC". On the other hand there are a number of pieces that have not been recompiled for the Intel hardware and run off Rosetta.
So as you can see the assertion that Apple wont allows this is correct and yet is an incomplete answer.
Well a little research reveals that indeed they use Intel's design and you can get osX running on many different PCs. As it turns out there is a somewhat extensive support system of people doing it:
http://wiki.osx86project.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page
That address has complete lists of parts and assembled systems that can get Apple's operating system working on. They not only have a Dual Boot guide but also a triple boot guide for "Mac OS X, Ubuntu 6.06, and Windows Vista or XP on a single Dell Intel PC". On the other hand there are a number of pieces that have not been recompiled for the Intel hardware and run off Rosetta.
So as you can see the assertion that Apple wont allows this is correct and yet is an incomplete answer.
Heh. That webpage was completely blank on FireFox and unavailable on Internet Explorer.
Munnin
12-08-2006, 08:54 AM
Heh. That webpage was completely blank on FireFox and unavailable on Internet Explorer.
Thats odd, it worked just fine last night.
fractalgfx
12-08-2006, 09:21 PM
I must admit that the iCube was the 3rd coolest looking computer of all time.
Here is a list of the 3 the coolest computers ever made.
The Rock City by the Panda Project was the the pinnacle of computer design, saddly it has been nearly forgotten by the Internet. You can find a tiny picture of it on this page. (http://www.g4tv.com/techtvvault/features/4244/I_was_wondering_if_any_PC_manufacturers_are_going_ to_build_an_iMac_rival.html)
THE SGI O2 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SGI_O2) started it all. Long before Alienware started airbrushing PC's or Apple was mounting LCD's on boom arms, Silicon Graphics proved that people will overpay thousands of dollars for a computer that looks like a toaster. Aesthetically the O2 should be #3 on this list, but every machine since is just a poser, as such, the O2 will never dethroned from the number 2 spot.
The iCube (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icube) was the first MAC I ever wanted to own. I had no interest in it as a computer, I just thought it would look good on my bookshelf.
noyjimi
12-09-2006, 07:04 AM
there's also the pioneers - NeXT Cube, Playstation/Playstation2... heck I liked that chugger - SPARC IPX and of course the pizza SPARCs :)
fractalgfx
12-09-2006, 07:20 AM
there's also the pioneers - NeXT Cube, Playstation/Playstation2... heck I liked that chugger - SPARC IPX and of course the pizza SPARCs :)
Technologically the NeXTCube was pretty interesting, but aesthetically it was just a grey box (looks an awefull lot like a powered subwoofer.) Besides NextOS was just an alpha version of OSX.
lathe
12-09-2006, 10:15 AM
So you admitt you like paying a lot of money for a development enviroment that last I checked MS did not even use in house?
Okay, I probably shouldn't get involved with another PC vs Mac religous debate. I'm old enough to know better, but...
I work at Microsoft (opinions expressed here are my own and do not reflect my company). The majority of Microsoft product groups use Visual Studio 2005 (Microsoft's IDE). The OS and Office teams use the compiler/linker/etc components in their build process (which goes well beyond merely building the software). Individual developers can choose to use the IDE (some do, some don't). Driver development (i.e. kernel mode) is an exception to this in that Microsoft uses the same developement environment that it makes publicly free and available for everyone else to use (this is called the WDK now). This has been the situation at Microsoft for many years.
Keep in mind that Microsoft is held to a different standard than other companies are (for both legit and illegit reasons). I've had discussions with people who will say "action X" by Microsoft is the embodiment of evil and they must be stopped while in the same conversation they will say the same "action X" by Apple, Sun, etc is pure and good and they are leading the fight for truth and justice (literally, I'm not exaggerating here). Apple has committed many sins against its own customers over the past decades (just like Microsoft), but Apple gets forgiven and the issue gets forgotten quickly.
Personally, if you prefer Macs, use a Mac. If you prefer Windows, use Windows. If you prefer Linux or any other OS, use that. At the end of the day, a computer is a tool we use, just like a car, and we have our preferences. I've used Macs and I think that they have their advantages. I was a Mac fan for a while in my life. However, I switched to Windows before working for Microsoft because its advantages outweighed the disadvantages it had against other OSes. Personally, I find the whole PC vs Mac debate rather dated (its so 1990s).
Lastly, please don't email me your favorite question or bug in a Microsoft product, unless it is a hardware product such as a mouse, keyboard, or camera that you can find on http://www.microsoft.com/hardware/. Also, don't send me any resumes.
RichNY
12-09-2006, 11:59 AM
There hasn't been any Mac v. PC in this thread for quite a while. It was supposed to be an inside joke for a particular memeber and turned into Geek-a-Palooza;)
fractalgfx
12-09-2006, 12:26 PM
There hasn't been any Mac v. PC in this thread for quite a while. It was supposed to be an inside joke for a particular memeber and turned into Geek-a-Palooza;)
I'm not a geek! I'm a Nerd!
adam75south
12-09-2006, 01:31 PM
http://www.thebusinessofamericaisbusiness.biz/trekkies.jpg
lathe
12-09-2006, 11:06 PM
There hasn't been any Mac v. PC in this thread for quite a while. It was supposed to be an inside joke for a particular memeber and turned into Geek-a-Palooza;)
Ahhh. :o Thanks for the FYI. I guess I just saw the title and jumped to conclusions (insert "Office Space" movie reference here).
cdifoto
12-10-2006, 12:12 AM
There hasn't been any Mac v. PC in this thread for quite a while. It was supposed to be an inside joke for a particular memeber and turned into Geek-a-Palooza;)
Amen.
And for those who say Dell doesn't include restore disks with the OS...my Latitude did.
People that have all this drama with their systems just don't know how to use and maintain their system. Period.
Amen.
And for those who say Dell doesn't include restore disks with the OS...my Latitude did.
People that have all this drama with their systems just don't know how to use and maintain their system. Period.
My mother-in-law had a Dell Lattitude desktop with a restore CD. The only problem - it was missing some files and thus failed to install enough files to actually run.
My wife has a Dell Inspirion that does not have install CDs. My stepson had a HP desktop that did not have install CDs - you had to buy your own CDs and burn them yourself from the installation partition.
What a pain! I'd rather just have the CDs and a blank machine.
Munnin
12-10-2006, 02:24 PM
I must admit that the iCube was the 3rd coolest looking computer of all time.
Here is a list of the 3 the coolest computers ever made.
The Rock City by the Panda Project was the the pinnacle of computer design, saddly it has been nearly forgotten by the Internet. You can find a tiny picture of it on this page. (http://www.g4tv.com/techtvvault/features/4244/I_was_wondering_if_any_PC_manufacturers_are_going_ to_build_an_iMac_rival.html)
I had never heard of this machine I will have to look for it.
THE SGI O2 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SGI_O2) started it all. Long before Alienware started airbrushing PC's or Apple was mounting LCD's on boom arms, Silicon Graphics proved that people will overpay thousands of dollars for a computer that looks like a toaster. Aesthetically the O2 should be #3 on this list, but every machine since is just a poser, as such, the O2 will never dethroned from the number 2 spot.
The original SGIs were so drool worthy that the packaging they came in was of no importance. The O2 MIPs processor was nothing to sneeze at coupled with ultra wide SCSI it could churn graphics like little else. Expensive yes, over priced? well that depended on what you wanted to do.
The iCube (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icube) was the first MAC I ever wanted to own. I had no interest in it as a computer, I just thought it would look good on my bookshelf.
I own the cube and I consider it one of the finest machines ever designed. The fanless, passthrough air flow design has allowed me to operate the computer in 90 degree weather for hours with no problem. With e the swap in of a laptop HD the dam thing is silent. I love this machine and will have a hard time giving it up.
Munnin
12-10-2006, 02:29 PM
And for those who say Dell doesn't include restore disks with the OS...my Latitude did.
People that have all this drama with their systems just don't know how to use and maintain their system. Period.
I have used the restore disk on the most recent Dell I bought and found it completely inadequate to the task. In fact the only thing I have found less adequate was their help desk.
Munnin
12-10-2006, 02:35 PM
The majority of Microsoft product groups use Visual Studio 2005 (Microsoft's IDE). The OS and Office teams use the compiler/linker/etc components in their build process (which goes well beyond merely building the software). Individual developers can choose to use the IDE (some do, some don't). Driver development (i.e. kernel mode) is an exception to this in that Microsoft uses the same developement environment that it makes publicly free and available for everyone else to use (this is called the WDK now). This has been the situation at Microsoft for many years.
I was wondering about that since I have not developed for a Microsoft desktop for years. I have been doing database work now for over 6 years and have lost track of what is available for what price and feature lists. I knew I was taking a risk with that slap-shot but I figured what the hell nothing ventured nothing gained.
fractalgfx
12-10-2006, 03:25 PM
The original SGIs were so drool worthy that the packaging they came in was of no importance. The O2 MIPs processor was nothing to sneeze at coupled with ultra wide SCSI it could churn graphics like little else. Expensive yes, over priced? well that depended on what you wanted to do.
SGI just couldn't keep pace with x86 and developments in 3D acceleration. By the end of its life cycle, the biggest benefit of the O2 was software compatibility and the SGI logo on the front. I once read a comment from someone who's firm exclusively used pc's for graphics work. They kept the machines under their desks and had one O2 sitting on a desk for client demonstrations.
Munnin
12-10-2006, 05:41 PM
SGI just couldn't keep pace with x86 and developments in 3D acceleration. By the end of its life cycle, the biggest benefit of the O2 was software compatibility and the SGI logo on the front. I once read a comment from someone who's firm exclusively used pc's for graphics work. They kept the machines under their desks and had one O2 sitting on a desk for client demonstrations.
Yea; its too bad but they could not afford to keep up with since the O2 at its introduction was still a pretty good box. Still they pushed 3D a long way down the track and gave the world openGL and cemented their place as one of the cool companies.
Munnin
12-10-2006, 08:06 PM
This trip down geek memory lane has been fun. I even remembered and looked up the GeoWorks ensemble which I had forgotten about for years. Hell of an OS and if they had released a usable SDK at a reasonable price for version 1.0 it might have killed of Microsoft or Apple.
But looking back on the thread Its clear there is a wide variety of knowledge available here and we can put that to use. If we can look at how different levels of users, what they need to post process, we could work together to pull up a list of software for each system and how to make best use of each systems capabilities. I will put together the first set of bullets and let others tell me what they think:
User type:
snap-shooter:
Hobbyist:
professional:
OS options:
Windows XP? vista?
Linux? Free BSD?
Mac OS 10.4 (I can't see anyone using OSX server addition :) )
So what does each level of user need to accomplish?
I have used the restore disk on the most recent Dell I bought and found it completely inadequate to the task. In fact the only thing I have found less adequate was their help desk.
Snap. My in-Laws' Dell had a reinstallation disk. It lacked vital files and thus XP could never be reinstalled. Instead I had to put Windows 98 SE onto the system. At least that was relatively easy! I tried Linux but it's such a memory hog that the system ran with the speed of a tadpole swimming through molasses.
fractalgfx
12-11-2006, 08:32 AM
I tried Linux but it's such a memory hog that the system ran with the speed of a tadpole swimming through molasses.
That is an unfair generalization. Any operating system can be a memory hog. I'm guessing you were using a KDE based distrobution, and would have seen a big improvement had you disabled some of the fancy fx, such window transparency.
Linux can run surprisingly fast on old hardware and it far less demanding on processor resources. For word processing, web browsing, and other basic tasks a 450 Pentium with plenty of ram can provide performance close a modern windows desktop.
That is an unfair generalization. Any operating system can be a memory hog. I'm guessing you were using a KDE based distrobution, and would have seen a big improvement had you disabled some of the fancy fx, such window transparency.
Linux can run surprisingly fast on old hardware and it far less demanding on processor resources. For word processing, web browsing, and other basic tasks a 450 Pentium with plenty of ram can provide performance close a modern windows desktop.
No really an unfair comparison. Windows 98 runs like lightning on the old PC - A Dell Dimension 4500. It has 256mb RAM and a CPU of 1GB+ (from memory). Linux (Ubuntu) was dead slow. And that was originally running XP.
fractalgfx
12-11-2006, 12:31 PM
No really an unfair comparison. Windows 98 runs like lightning on the old PC - A Dell Dimension 4500. It has 256mb RAM and a CPU of 1GB+ (from memory). Linux (Ubuntu) was dead slow. And that was originally running XP.
Lets not compare apples to oranges. Windows 98 is 8 years old and was really just a bug fix for Windows 95, so it really targeted hardware that was state of the art more than a decade ago. Good luck running windows Vista on a machine with 256mb of ram.
There are so many flavors of Linux that it can be more like comparing apples to hot dogs. If Linux can run on a cell phone that it can definitely be blazing fast on an ancient pc.
If you use a Linux distribution tailored for older hardware you will get much better performance than you can get with any of the newer windows, and at least as good performance as 98. All things being equal, windows 9x's awful memory management will kill performance better than some viruses.
My 450 Pentium hand windows 98 running inside a virtual machine inside Linux. And both desktops ran just as fast as if I booted into windows.
Lets not compare apples to oranges. Windows 98 is 8 years old and was really just a bug fix for Windows 95, so it really targeted hardware that was state of the art more than a decade ago. Good luck running windows Vista on a machine with 256mb of ram.
There are so many flavors of Linux that it can be more like comparing apples to hot dogs. If Linux can run on a cell phone that it can definitely be blazing fast on an ancient pc.
If you use a Linux distribution tailored for older hardware you will get much better performance than you can get with any of the newer windows, and at least as good performance as 98. All things being equal, windows 9x's awful memory management will kill performance better than some viruses.
My 450 Pentium hand windows 98 running inside a virtual machine inside Linux. And both desktops ran just as fast as if I booted into windows.
This is the problem with Linux. People claim it can do this and that and run on various different platforms and various different ways but my experience is that it cannot without some very specialised tweaks that the average Joe cannot perform without extreme supervision.
With an O/S that's so user unfriendly and with documentation that's as opaque as that of Linux, it's not really possible to say that the average Joe will get decent performance from Linux.
fractalgfx
12-11-2006, 05:39 PM
This is the problem with Linux. People claim it can do this and that and run on various different platforms and various different ways but my experience is that it cannot without some very specialised tweaks that the average Joe cannot perform without extreme supervision.
I'm sick of arguing.
Linux is not an operating system! End of story! Go Home!
I'm sick of arguing.
Linux is not an operating system! End of story! Go Home!
I'm sorry you feel like that. Perhaps you need to sleep on the matter before returning with a fresh mind?
fractalgfx
12-11-2006, 06:49 PM
I'm sorry you feel like that. Perhaps you need to sleep on the matter before returning with a fresh mind?
Technically Linux is not an operating system. Linux is an operating system kernel which is combined with other software packages to form an operating system. This is analogous to the sensor inside your camera. The sensor is not a camera, but there can't be a camera without the sensor.
Linux purists will generally refer to the GNU/Linux operating system which is the combination of GNU tools and the Linux, but it has become common to refer the the combination as just Linux.
Technically Linux is not an operating system. Linux is an operating system kernel which is combined with other software packages to form an operating system. This is analogous to the sensor inside your camera. The sensor is not a camera, but there can't be a camera without the sensor.
Linux purists will generally refer to the GNU/Linux operating system which is the combination of GNU tools and the Linux, but it has become common to refer the the combination as just Linux.
This is lost on people who just want something to make their computer work, that doesn't get targetted by viruses and spyware/malware/adware and which will replace the Microsoft O/S on their computer.
90% of the world's computers run Microsoft O/Ss. This is not the same as "90% of the world's computer users are happy to run a Microsoft O/S".
For example, Windows 95 and 98 were truly horrendous O/Ss that would suddenly crash - without warning and drive caching meant that your work would not always be saved by the time it did crash. NT4 was very stable but every time you installed software the patches had to be reapplied. If NT4 had properly accessed PCMCIA and USB then I'd have had no reason to upgrade save for possibly RAW decoding software. One of NT4's patches allowed it to access larger than 2GB hard disks.
Windows 2000 I know nothing about other than it's in its 4th service patch. Windows XP is generally fairly stable but can crash horribly. My experience shows XP needs to be reinstalled at least anually.
OSX, I gather, doesn't suffer the same problems for the sole reason that there's no registry. The registry is what causes almost all of Microsoft's problems. Initially it was a very good idea but it was a case of too many eggs in one basket. Developing ini files further would have been a much better route for Microsoft to go.
vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.