Discussion in 'Computer Science & Culture' started by piirx, Jul 14, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. DonSL777 Registered Member

    Re: Re: PC versus Macintosh

    I'm not absolutely certain I understand exactly what features you mean, but you've touch upon a good point. Many people do in fact enjoy "tinkering" with their machines. There are many Macintosh applications which allow the user to "tinker" with the interface. If a Macintosh user really feels confident, he or she can always roll up their sleeves and go to the Unix prompt. As for me, that's too spooky.
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. river-wind Valued Senior Member

    I have used Apples since I was 7, and my step-dad brought home an Apple II from his work.

    I have used PC's since my Uncle gave us his old x286 to play "Bouncing Babies" on.

    up until about 7 years ago, there was no contest. Mac had better font handling, better color calibration, better response times, better memory managment than windows. Better nearly eveything. going to my friends houses involved nothing on the computer, because I could barely deal with the crap they had to put up with to run a freaking program.

    Then came the Performa era at Apple. Product lines became huge, complicated, and dealt more with pleasing everyone who wanted optionX, and less about making machines that worked. the LCIII's would often stop working if the room they were in got above 80 degrees F. reports of the 5300c's catching on fire began circulating. The internet came about, and MS adding a TCP/IP stack to Win 95. Apple tried desperatly to hold onto AppleTalk as the wave of the future, and failed (because while a more robust technology, it puts serious demands on the network to function, slowing everything down.)

    Windows grabbed onto networking over long distances via TCP/IP, and used their connections w/ IBM to put themselves in the market. Using Ports of their fairly popular Office programs they had written for the Macintosh, they created the quintisential buisness model. Sell something that is good enough, for less. They brought in better memory management, and better office-related file management (version control,etc).

    Today, we have Windows, Linux, and Mac OSX as the major players in the desktop OS market. Windows takes up 95% of the market, ~3% is Macintosh, ~1% is Linux, and ~1% is other.

    Windows and Mac OSX are very, very similar these days. Both heavily based on Unix (though Mac OSX is the only one which is truely a Unix; Posix complient, though not certified), both with multi-user setups, both fully capable of handling all the tasks required by 90% of computer users.

    What desktop PC's have that Mac's lack:
    1)market share, and all the thrid-party programs which come with it.
    2)chip vendor compitition within the ISA. AMD, VIA, Intel, all fighting for the same market with different proccessors based on the same concepts. talk about a market for driving compitition!
    3)cheap prices.
    4)the leader in currently available FPS frame rates.
    5)the leader in Mhz
    6)the leader in overall currently available performance per mhz (AMD 3200+)
    7)pretty good font handling. (OSX has horrendous font handling, one thing which didn't carry over from OS9)
    8)high-level sound (ie Dolby 5.1 or 7.1 audio for surround sound on DVD's)
    9)meta-data support. While Mac OS 9 was the king of metadata, Apple has done alot of hacking away at metadata support in OSX. while in many ways comparible to meta-data support in Windows 2000, Windows XP trounces the Mac in the amount fo possible meta-data you can deal directly with.

    things which the Mac has over the desktop PC's (given G4's and OSX 10.2)
    1)easier modification of workflow (window settings remembered, being able to move items in the dock freely, accessing windows by window or by application.
    2)Unix backend - I can develop applications for HP-UX mainframes on my laptop w/o having to change core libraries at all.
    3)Unix backend - I can run a large chunk of Linux windowing applications through Apple's X11, including Gnome and KDE's windowing managers.
    4)latencies. Windows XP has a 15-23ms latency when dealing with audio. this is on modern Dell's. OSX on the TOL mac has a 6-9ms latentcy. very small difference, but significant for audio recording.
    5)color correction. no question. You can tweak Windows XP to have nearly as good color correction as you will get out of the box with OSX.

    now, the above are just the basics. I can run VPC to run nearly any windows application which isn't available for the Mac OS (which I have done for around 8 years now - I have one window on my home machine running Win95, one running Win 98, and another running Win 2000, so I can test an application I'm writing for work in all 3 operating systems at the same time.) Except for frame-rate based games (like 3D), this is a perfect solution. The Virtual PC runs at comparable speeds to a PII at 70% the Mac's clock speed. So if you have a single 733mhx G4, you'r virtual PC runs somewhere around a 500mhz PII. not blazingly fast, but good enough for most things.

    While there are not a huge number of programs available for the Mac, in comperison with Windows, nearly every area of computer work is covered by at least two options. Mathmatica for calculations to Oracle for databases to Office for office stuff to Final Cut Pro for video to Maya for 3d to photoshop for image editing to Logic for audio, there are some pretty powerfull appz available. and there is at least one alternative for each of what I mentioned above, so you are not locked in to any one program. There are not 50 choices, however, like you have on the windows side of things.

    I currently do two jobs right now. I program database reporting and management tools on a Windows 2000 Pro PIII 1.3ghz machine during the day. I then go home and manage a Web services/photography company in the evenings on a dual 500mhz macintosh. At work, I use MS SQL server 2k, Dev Studio, Outlook, and Mozilla. At home, I use MySQL, Xcode, Mail, and Mozilla. To do almost exactly the same work.

    Now, keep this in mind:
    the next version of the P4 will be out soon. sometime next April. it will be pretty fast. should start at 2.8ghz and head upwards of 4ghz over the next 3 years. The next version of Windows, Longhorn, will be available in 2006, though that date it looking less and less likely as time goes on.
    The next version of the Macintosh OS will be available in September, and the new Mac processor will be available come the end of August. running dual 2.0ghz, these machine were independantly tested, and averaged better than the TOL Dell Xeon workstation. There was a whole bunch of kicking and screaming from the wintel crowd "but, but, SSE wasn't turned on! Why did you disable hyperthreading?!" , much of which were valid point, apearent holes in the testing. Until you actually read the deatails of the testing methods used, which showed that SSE *was* turned on, Dell turns of hyperthreading for the particular test in question because it resulted in better scores, etc, etc, etc.
    The only things abotu the test which remain questionable- newer P4's have become available, and are 200mhz faster then the tested P4's. the Graphics card used on the Quake 3 frame rate test has not been disclosed.

    Considering that given the leaked Longhorn specs and the leaked Longhorn screen shots, much of what is changing in Windows over the next 3 years is it's latency, and it's system graphics engine, it is, For all intents and purposes, a revision to catch up with Mac OSX. Quartz Extreme, a graphics rendering engine which lies underneith Mac OSX allows much of the work done by the OS to be offloaded to a graphics card, something which is a major hallmark of Windows Longhorn. Also something to note is the new Windows sidebar, which looks alot like a hybrid of the current Windows task bar and the Macintosh Dock.

    Given that I have had the same harddrive, transplanted from a Mac G3 to a Mac G4 450 to a Mac G4 dual 500 over the course of the past 5 years, and I have never had to re-install my OS (I did, however upgrade as time went on. Never have had to wipe the drive, though, not since I went from OS8.1->OS8.6), I would say that the Mac OS is very data-reliable.
    My roomate's one year-old Sony Viao desktop with Windows XP, however, has twice lost trake of it's own C:\Windows directory, requiring a wipe oft he main drive partition. luckily he learned his lesson the first time, and kept all his data files on the D: partition, so didn't loose them the second time around.

    A bullet list of what Windows has over the mac, considering the features in OSX10.3 Panther:
    1)market share, and all the thrid-party programs which come with it.
    2)chip vendor compitition within the ISA. AMD, VIA, Intel, all fighting for the same market with different proccessors based on the same concepts. talk about a market for driving compitition! still the same
    3)cheap prices.still the same
    4)the leader in currently available FPS frame rates.not according to testing done by Apple. However, these tests are non-verified, so don't believe them
    5)the leader in Mhzstill the same
    6)the leader in overall currently available performance per mhz (AMD 3200+)the G5, given Spec scores, appears to have a better IPC than the Athelon XP. The Opteron is not in the Desktop Market currently (as there are no desktop-level motherboards available for it, according to the latest I've read from Anandtech)
    7)pretty good font handling. (OSX has horrendous font handling, one thing which didn't carry over from OS9)Panther's Font Book looks to be the bit which gives Apple the crown in this arena again
    8)high-level sound (ie Dolby 5.1 or 7.1 audio for surround sound on DVD's) Optical audio in/out built in on all G5's give Apple the dge here
    9)meta-data support. While Mac OS 9 was the king of metadata, Apple has done alot of hacking away at metadata support in OSX. while in many ways comparible to meta-data support in Windows 2000, Windows XP trounces the Mac in the amount fo possible meta-data you can deal directly with. still the same

    also added is Expose, a feature where all the open windows tile themselves across the screen for quick switching between them. triggered by a key combo. Also, fast user switching, to catch up with Windows. Also a re-designed Finder (though still writen in Carbon

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    ), which looks alot like Windows explorer, IMO. I'm not happy about this bit. Also, Panther is looking to be about 10% faster than Jaguar. iTunes, the iTunes music store (available for windows before the end of the year), iPhoto (slow, but easy to use, and produces some very good HTML for web-sharing), iMovie (without question, the best entry-level movie editor available for free. Movie Maker for XP works, but is horrible, buggy, and not as easy to use. trust me on this), iCal (an ok app for basic calendaring stuff. being able to share calendars is pretty damn usefull, though. much better than Outlook Task assignment, IMO.), iSync (much more user-friendly than MS's Activesync, though it covers fewer hardware devices. about 75% of activesync devices are handled by iSync.), FCP (the current market leader in Non-linear video editing software for under $5,000. and it's only $999!), Logic Audio, XCode etc,etc,etc. all Apple appz, all good appz (iPhoto and iSync are good, everything else is among the best in it's catagory). Open Office, GIMP, videoGIMP, MySQL, XCode, , etcetc. there's tons of applications available for the Mac. and most are pretty damn good.

    As for games, most oft he biggest hits are available for the Macintosh as well, Medal of Honor, Quake, the Sims, Tony Hawk

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    ro Skater, Alice, Black and White, Warcraft 3. To be honest, though I don't do much gaming on my Mac. I do some, but I save gaming for dedicated hardware. My roomate's PSII and Gamecube (why he has both, I don't know) are good enough for nearly all my gaming needs.

    Ok, alot of info in this rant, and it all come down to one paragraph. Windows works. Mac works. On many things (Office related scheduling, remote access, Gaming, etc), Winows is better. At many other things (Audio recording, image editing and printing, multi-tasking (due to application switching algorythems in both systems)) are better on the mac. As days go by, these differences seem to be less and less noticable. If you want email and web browsing on a machine which will serve you well for 5 years, get a low-end Dell. If you want a machine which will be around for 15 years doing the same, IME, you're better off with a Mac. If you want to do web development, it make no difference which you develop on. If you want to do print work, go w/ a mac. if you want to do video (prosumer to entry level pro), I'd get a mac. if you want to do audio, I'd recommend a mac. If you want to do tons of different things, and aren't sure what you may be using this machine for 5 years from now, I'd recommend a Mac. AS my Dad put it "Apple invented the personal computer, and brought us the Windowing computer OS. Microsoft brought Windowing computing to everyone and their mother. Apple then made it elegent."

    if you have any questions, feel free to ask.

    edit: for a preview of FontBook, check out:
    Last edited: Aug 27, 2003
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. Blowfish Registered Senior Member

    Mac vs. Pc, Pc vs. mac, I hear over and over again and it seems like everyone says the same things about each other. It hurts so much sometimes I just want to take out my Tandi and relive the old days.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    But really folks, I must say that I have had the pleasure of working for a campus that utilizes both mac's and pc's and both have the good points and bad points. PC's tend to be quarky at times and like to freeze up, but then again I can crash a mac as well as my pc. However, mac's tend to have better video quality, but yet their is a shortage on software for the mac compared to the pc and they tend to be so much higher priced.

    Really, like I said, if you look at them both they equally have thier up's and down's. This means it simply comes down to choice on which company you really want to float your hard earned cash too.

    Furthermore, I cannot remember who at this time, but whoever made the comment about microsoft making bad software in regards to pc's; I might take this moment to remind you that they do make that same software for mac's too and it doesn't work much better there either.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. river-wind Valued Senior Member

    Opteron vs AMD XP 3200+ vs Intel P4 3.2Ghz
    1.6Ghz G5 vs a bunch of Windows machines on the same Photoshop 7 filter set.
    similar tests to the above.

    note: it appears that when running the next version of Mac OS X, 10.3 - aka Panther, users see a 20-30% speed improvment in all areas due to many things, including better thread locking. The numbers above are nearly all on 10.2 (Jaguar)
  8. CuriousGene Supreme Allied Commander Registered Senior Member

    If you like it, just buy it . . .

    I am sure you can read these platform threads till god's green earth is overrun by cows, so just buy it if you think you might like it. I think you'll like either of the platforms you buy. Maybe you can narrow down one or two things your really want in a computer. I use both PCs and Macs and I like using my 17 in. Apple laptop because it's more beautiful for me to look at. That matters a lot to me, so my laptop is well suited.

    You mentioned virtual PC so you must want to run some PC apps. I think I just read an article saying that virtual PC and its competitor RealPC, will not have a working product for the G5 until the next major upgrade. You might want to look into this. The only traditional PC apps I use on my OS X are Microsoft Office. It works well (make sure you download new MS patches for out of the box installations).

    You also mentioned performance. Clearly, I am on a G4 so I can tell you a little bit about that in the laptop configuration. Performance is adequate. They are certainly not speed daemons, but they are certainly not horridly slow. I run a lot of my own code and performance is acceptable. I think the G5 and its accompanying architecture are truly a welcome boost to the overall performance of Apple systems (whether or not they actually are faster than some Intel or AMD chip).
  9. Redrover Registered Senior Member

    If all you want to do is play games, why don't you get a playstation 2? You get as many games as on a PC and you save 1700$.
  10. river-wind Valued Senior Member

    Re: If you like it, just buy it . . .

    MS purchased Connectix, the maker of Virtual PC. They then waited until after the release of the G5 to tell everyone that the G5's lack of little-endian emulation will result in a required major overhaul of the VPC code, and even once done, the performance of the program will be failry poor. I'm not happy w/ MS, yet again. They must have had test machine for development purposes for months now, yet they wait until a week or so ago to tell anyone of this problem??

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    As for RealPC, a competitor bought them, at which point it appeared that the old owners of the company had mis-stated the progress of the application's development. instead of "in late beta", as was advertised, it became "programming has not yet officially begun." Given this, RealPC has been scrapped completely.

    So Windows emulation on the Mac is currently in the hands of MS, who appears to be putting it's main Mac reasources into other areas. We'll have to see how this all turns out.
    edit: I should mention that their are some open source Windows emu applications available, such as "bochs" I haven't tried any of them, and from what I've heard, they work, but are slow. I don't know of any problems with them and the G5 architecture.

    There were some early G5 Jet3d benchmarks out a month ago from NASA. They showed that the G5 was better than the G4, but both lost to the P4. However, it was noted in the test that the fortran compiler wasn't optimised for the G5. Well, IBM has released a new compiler for the G5, and the scores on the fortran end are seeing a 70-210% increase. Moving to Panther should show a 20-30% increase. I think we'll be seeing some serious competition in the top-end speed area between the Intel Xeon machines and the G5 machines.
    The best part of the analysis of the new numbers follows (percentages show speed improvement over old compiler on the same hardware):
    "Type of Code G4 G5
    Scalar +70% +210%
    Vector +40% +70%

    If this holds, [then] that places his 2.0GHz G5 (single)=254 [number] at 787

    Note also that the P4 2.66 is [getting a] 255 [using the gcc compiler]."
    Last edited: Aug 28, 2003
  11. Tano Cup of cocoa, please. Registered Senior Member

    Some problems with windows:
    1. Uncontrollable ads (messenger service, magical pop-ups that don't even need a browser to activate, etc...).
    2. Windows doesn't offer many programs that come free with OS X.
    3. Viruses, worms, etc...
    4. Windows really is a disorganized pos... Navigation through OS X is so much easier and intuitive.
    5. There is no common UI (many programs offer radically different interfaces that force users to adapt to their own computer).

    Any thoughts or comments?

    P.S. I love the PC/Mac war.
  12. daktaklakpak God is irrelevant! Registered Senior Member

    Well, out of the countless games for PSX and PS2, only a handful titles interested me. With only a few buttons to press, how many kinds of games can console systems have besides arcade, fighting, racing, and RPG? What's $1700 for? It pays for the extras that console system doesn't have. Besides enchancing gaming experiences, they can do more. After all, if you are done playing games, it's a computer again.

    The ads and worms are partily due to sloppy coding, but also partily due to popularity. Nobody wants to show ads and spread virus on a system people rarely use. It might be a headache for average Joe to fix them, but not me.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  13. Sim D Registered Member


    Wow, thats one of the stupidest things anyones said yet...
    You obviously haven't had enough experience on a mac, because anything you can do on a pc, can be done on a mac, the catch is ITS EASIER. Don't ice your selective hearing with bullshit analogies, get some facts.
  14. testify Look, a puppy! Registered Senior Member

    Yeah, I tried navigating through OS X once, it was fun considering I was using a one button mouse and didn't know what kind of function that one button had. I mean, I wasn't sure if it was supposed to emulate the right mouse button or the left. Needless to say it was confusing as hell.

    Yeah I guess those people that can't handle a simple change of a UI should be using a Mac. If you can't handle two different GUI's in one day I would say you don't have the knowledge to use a PC. You're making the Mac OS out to be the idiots OS because you say it's so easy to use even total morons can use it. I'm sorry, but I'd rather have the functionality of my PC over the easeof use of the Mac anyday. You can stick to your idiot OS.
  15. DonSL777 Registered Member

    More Details, Less Acidity Please!

    I'm not sure why this person is so bitter, but it's obvious he's really upset by Mac OS. I'd be interested to hear (intelligently) to which Mac OS he's referring when he had difficulty navigating. OS 8.6? 9.x? 10.2? Also, I'd be interested to learn what functionality he feels he would miss by using Mac.

    My opinion is that this person has never actually used the Mac, just regurgitates the usual uninformed mantra of the minions from the Windows world.
  16. outsiderlabs Registered Member

    Re: More Details, Less Acidity Please!

    I use both Macintosh and PC's in my environment. I use my Power Mac G4 for burning CD's/DVD's, video editing, graphics, and 3D rendering. I use my 1.5 GHz Pentium 4 box (running Linux.. I wouldn't run Windows to save my life) to learn C++, play MP3's over my network and duplicate CD's of some indie bands around the area.

    Macs and PC's both have their extremely strong points. Generally, PC's are faster browing the Internet (though Safari on Mac is pretty damn fast), and Mac's have always been the norm for audio and video work. PC and Mac extremists are simply misimformed, misguided, and misinterpret what these machines are designed for.

    There's no point in continuing the Mac vs. PC war.. It's something that simply won't ever end. It's here to stay. Call your own shots.
  17. DonSL777 Registered Member

    The Statement to End All Discussion

    This is only my humble opinion, but I firmly believe it stands the test of all those who have posted in this thread.

    If you're a "casual" computer user that wants to do things that the vast majority of computer users do, such as word processing, surfing the internet, sucking and showing pictures from your digital camera or video recorder, then Mac is defintiely the way to go. You'll be able to use your machine and keep up to speed with technology for about a decade and a half before you really start to feel the need for new hardware.

    If you want to buy a computer so that you can play the very newest games when they are released, buy a PC. [The Boston Globe just published an article by their technology editor Mr. Bray which stated the top titles for the PC games are commonly ported to the Macintosh platform].

    Ease of use? No argument from either the PC or the Mac camp. Mac wins hands down. This offends some people that want to have to challenge themselves to customize their machine to meet their asthetic desires. And that's cool. Really. It all depends on what you're seeking in your machine. If you want a computer that's powerful, easy to use, and has enough juice under the hood to do and run anything, get a Mac. You'll pay for it, for sure. This is like buying a Lexus.

    When it all boils down to the core argument, it's important to consider what you intend to do with the computer on a day-to-day basis, how much you're willing to pay, and how comfortable you are interfacing with technology.

    I've been using Windows machines at work for more than 17 years. I've been using Macs for exactly 16 years and three months. MY HUMBLE OPINION is that the Macintosh is a superior computing platform by more than a slight margin.
  18. testify Look, a puppy! Registered Senior Member

    I'm not really bitter, I was simply pointing out the Tano's evaluation of the PC was very poor. MOST people (even people starting to use a PC) can navigate through several UIs in one sitting. It doesn't take a genius to do it.

    As for your second comment, I can't tell you want version it was. Judging by the time I last used a mac it must have been 9.x because OS X hadn't come out. Even if I had the machine in front of me right now I still wouldn't have been able to figure out where to even start looking for the OS version, nore would I really care.

    As for the functionality: I love my 3 button mouse with a scroller. I love being able to download almost any kind of software (freeware and such). Is Counterstrike ported to Macs yet? What about a fully functional replacement of MSN Messenger? Doen't Macs use complete different partition formats? Can I easily modify my NTFS drive full of data? Yeah, sure, maybe some of this stuff you can do on Macs. I didn't spend a lot of time researching these.

    PS. I love your little remark about the windows minions. How did you know I wasn't a linux user? Well, for your informations, I'm both. So... PAH!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  19. DonSL777 Registered Member

    * On my Macintosh, I also love my wireless three button mouse with a scroller.
    * I too love downloading freeware and shareware and running it on my Mac -- regardless if it's Mac or PC software.
    * I have no idea if Counterstrike has been ported to the Mac (I have to admit I've never heard of it). What I can tell you is that, according to an article last week by the Boston Globe's technology editor, all of the most popular PC gaming titles are ported to the Mac. The reason why game companies write their software first for the PC market is obvious -- even a game that flops can still recover the costs of development due to the vast number of PC users. Six months after release, the popular games are ported to the Mac because the developers know they've got a sure thing on their hands. From the Boston Globe article: "With its muscular 64-bit processor and high-velocity hard drive, the new Apple Power Mac G5 is among the most powerful desktop computers on earth. It's just what you'd want for playing a sophisticated 3-D adventure game."
    * Why in the HECK would you want to use MSN Messenger?! With iChat AV, I not only have access to literally every messenger service, but also can see and talk to people in real time.

    Tip of the hat to you, Testify, for admitting you didn't research these issues. This is exactly what makes me frustrated about Macintosh assumptions about lack of power, functionality, or software. No matter how much money Apple may spend on advertising, these incorrect assumptions will always stick with the platform.
  20. river-wind Valued Senior Member

    My co-worker has spent 3 days trying to get his new PC to recognise his hard drive. The BIOS recognises it, but when he starts off of a just purchased WinXP Pro Install CD, the machine hangs.

    It's a standard 120GB ATA/100 drive, nothing special.

    I have had to deal with too many problems of this sort over the past 10 years, I'm sick of windows.

    If Intel can release a 5Ghz porocessor by May of '04, I might be willing to deal with the crap for the sake of the power. I mean, *5GHZ!!*

    Though if Apple gets to a Dual 2.8Ghz on the 970 chip by the same time, the speed difference between the two chips (I'd guess a real world difference of 15-20% in favor of the Intel chip), then the crap like missing HD's, constant security holes, etc, for me, will not be worth the speed difference. FreeBSD (what OSX is based on) has only had one root exploiot (one security vulnerability that wasn't even exploitable remotely, from what I understand) in the past seven years, vs what, three root exploits in Windows this year alone? The extra money in exchange for saving me time and headaches mean that macs are worth it for me. exp since a similar performance Intel Xeon is pretty much the same price.

    If I want to play alot of games, then I'll spend $99 bucks and get a gamecube, or $129 and get a PSII. My Dual G4 handles Medal of Honor:FrontLine, Giants:Citizen K, Black and White, IceWindDale, etc just fine.
  21. testify Look, a puppy! Registered Senior Member

    Did that come with it? Does the right button have the same functionality as it does on a PC?

    Tell me what's the point of getting a Mac if you're going to run "buggy PC software" on it that? I mean there must be something superior about PC software if Mac users stoop to using it on their Macs. You don't see me (or anyone else for that matter) running Mac software on their PCs.

    As far as I know Counterstrike (or Halflife) has not bee ported to any unix based O/S, nor to any Mac OS. I can't believe you havn't heard of this game at all considering you've been using computers for the past 17 years. It's only (in my opinion) the best PC game of the 90's.

    I use MSN messenger because that's how I get into contact with the people I NEED to get into contact with. Is iChat AV anything like trillian? It sure sounds very similar. I hate to use trillian because I'd rather choose what client I want to use for each network, trillian doesn't do it for me when it comes to IRC or messenger.
  22. malkiri Registered Senior Member

    Switch parody

    The end of the video has the address of the creators (a comedy troupe, it seems) where you can find a bit more info on the guy, but I'm at work atm, so you'll just have to watch it to get the address.

    I know, I know...but it's a good one. I promise. Mac users, definitely go to the site if you want to feel redeemed.
  23. buffys Registered Loser Registered Senior Member

    ive been using macs all my life and i can count on 1 hand the number of times its crashed, thats less than 6 crashes in 15 years. Ive never ran accross a game I wanted that didn't (eventually) become available for mac or required upgrading my video card, ive never had a virus and ive never read a single manual because of the simplicity of use.

    Finally, the os and the machine itself are just sexy (granted that would be the worst reason to buy a computer if that was the only thing going for it but its not, its a happy bonus).

    All that being said though the whole "mac vs pc" thing is a bit silly, they both do their jobs. the question is wether you want a ferrari or a corvette, in the end they'll both get you where you want to go in relative style. One is slightly more expensive, prettier and a smoother ride but they're both effective. I never really did understand the ongoing mud fight between opposing users, we're all geeks here ... can't we all just get along?

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page