Windows or Mac?

I have an OSX machine a G4 dual 1.25 it needs more restarts than my XP box because it freaks out occaisionally. another little mac quirk, my keyboard got a drink spilled on it, after that the eject CD button didn't work. The only fix, since there is no physical eject cd button or eject/open CD menu option or even a hole to stick a pin in to forcibly eject a CD, was to order a new keyboard($70) and wait the 10 days til it arrived.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

what happened to just dragging the cd to the trashbin?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

bwhahahaha
Avatar uses miniature 9$ keyboards.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Fuzzy logic gravity. The reason windows is so easily exploitable is because it was engineered in the way that would be most profitable to microsoft- not the most secure. Microsoft is in the business of selling upgrades and patches. Macintosh much less so, since they sell the hardware bundled with the OS, and the free 'nixs not at all.

Exploiting windows is a joke because the engineering is shoddy and hacked together by a beaurocratic team with a hard deadline. Its like comparing the soviet network of scientists to that of the free world. They can be absolute geniuses but the result of their work is invariably a timebomb.

There is a problem with this mentality. 99% of people are computer retarded and aren't aware of their choices. I'm proud to advocate mac/linux, in opposition to windows completely aware of how many resent my outspoken type and label me 'fanatic'. If you don't like it then I beseech you not to post in favor of anything any ever again-politics, computers, anything because you might be risking fanaticism for voicing a strong opinion. And we hate them

Repo Man,
Lets get one thing clear about 'copying'. When Mac does it, not only do they implement it elegantly, they add features and take it to the next level. When Microsoft does it, they just toss it into the pail, make it run like crap and offer no innovation whatsoever. This is the problem with copying: Either do it right or stop pretending. And I'm constantly shocked by the markets utter ignorance of this.

I love companies that innovate and microsoft simply isn't one of them.

 

I'd disagree. Microsoft's copying is rather good. IE, C#, .net, visual studio, the office suite, access, Xbox, project, NTFS, VB(sucks now, but at the time it was revolutionary).

 

How do you drag a CD to the trash bin when there is no CD in the drive and you want to insert one?

 

Hideki Matsumoto, who cares how fast the G5 is, if it doesn't have any good software to run, there is no point. Plus, you are comparing apples to oranges. Macs and PCs use very different CPU architectures. Comparing software benchmarks is almost useless. And look how much a G5 costs. For the same price, you can get an excellent performing PC that will run any program you heart desires.

 

aborted: that may be true (initial cost comparisons). How many years with the PC in question last? Speed-wise, how comparable are the machines when running real-world, cross-platform benchmarks? i.e., Photoshop filter tests (fair ones, not like Apple's filter set, which is heavily mac baised), cinebench, lightwave renders?

I have found that while PCs are cheaper (on average), in order to get one with comperable functionality and speed, the machines are not much cheaper (Apple does not currently offer a low-end $400 machine. Dell offers a top of the line Intel systems which will beat a G5 on most tasks, but they are also often more expensive than the G5). See the ARS battlefront for the endless price comperisons RE: Dell/Apple.
Plus, IME, x86 based machines have a significantly shorter lifespan than do macs. I have a AIO mac setup as a mail server right now. It's about 7 years old, and runs the most recent revision of OS X.


One advantage to x86 systems? you can build you own middle-range linux machine for significantly less than a Mac, and for the price, get a new one every 2-3 years. However; that requires the ability, time and desire to build such a machine. I don't always want to build a new machine every 2 years.

 

good point. I"ll add this to my complaint about iTunes that if an iPod gets screwed up, the icon to access the iPod in iTuns isn't available. this seriously limits your ability to trouble-shoot, and forces you to restore the ipod for nearly every problem.
Yes, it's an easy solution, but I would like the choice.


You have a quicksilver model? how loud is the fan?

 

What? I can't hear you.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

lol. guess you need to get an xMac. damn, my G4's resale value just shot the sh**.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Voodoo Child,

I like visual studio, and .net is nice..but revolutionary? Their whole existence is founded on the principle of getting a 100% marketshare. Apple does this too with products like iPod...but this is acceptable to the point that other companies- companies with lots money- can compete, because it fuels innovation. If visual studio and .net were completely open source and freely available, then that would definately be a revolutionary move. I'd have a lot more respect for MS.

C#? I don't really see the point of it with all of the other great languages and tools.

NTFS? Reiserfs is way cooler. Besides, MS has been planning to replace it with winFS for years (lets talk revolution then).

xbox..? my favourite console, a PC subsidized by microsoft. Nothing revolutionary though.

And BTW -- Apple is now offering 499$ machines

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

I never said any of those things were revolutionary, merely that they are examples of competent copying and refinement by microsoft.

They always were. Oh, wait, you mean <i>selling</i> them for that much.

 

HOOOT

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Damn Voodoo that was good!

 

hey PATH, someone pointed this out to me:
open the terminal, and enter the following:
"open /System/Library/CoreServices/Menu\ Extras/Eject.menu"

From what I understand, this should add an "eject" button to your menubar.
Let me know if this a)works, b)allows you to eject when the drive is empty.

 

Ok, so then you agree that those things arent innovative(which I use synonymously with 'revolutionary' in the second post)?

The only semi-'revolutionary' product to have come from microsoft is MS Bob (which coincidentally flopped.)
http://www.telecommander.com/pics/l...osoft/Microsoft_Bob_1_0/Microsoft_Bob_1_0.htm

No, actually. This is a fantastic, never before seen offer

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Of course you're welcome to spout off, but the sub 500$ mac was done in the same vein as the Xbox-- its subsidized hardware to lure a MS user base. They aren't going to profit very much from it in the short term.

I can see why windows programmers would be bitter to it.

 

No, that those are examples of good kaizening. Microsoft is not particulary innovative, but neither is apple. Microsoft has done some innovative things: VB

Unless you have the good sense to shop for a PC where decent cheap computers are run of the mill.

Innovation is different to revolution, for obvious reasons. Apple hasn't revolutionised since it nicked the GUI from Xerox and showed it to the world. Apple doesn't innovate. ipod, SCSI, firewire etc etc are refinements or copies of existing ideas. These will all be surpassed by cheaper alternatives.

 

Like you weren't thinking that

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

would you consider their ability to revolutionise an already existing market "revolution"?

iPods were not a new idea, the iTMS was not a new idea, AIO form factors were not a new idea; but Apple has certainly revolutionised the markets those envolutionary technologies were introduced into.


And Apple did ALOT of work after that visit to XEROX - while the idea for a pointing device and user-clickable buttons came from Xerox, it was a far cry from Mac OS v1. The xerox version had no menus, FFS! And application-level GUIs of different sort had existed for roughly 7 years prior to the Xerox project - a GUI was not a new idea at that point.
What was a new idea was to run the entire OS via a GUI, File system, Applications, and all.
More than anything else, the method for handling mouse pointer control in as few CPU cycles as possible was the one thing Apple outright stole from the Xerox meetings.

 

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. From my POV, Apple has been way more innovative than MS.

The point of the MiniMac isn't only to make a mac available for competition with the PC market. Its to fill the current gap for people who want a PC that looks nice, is stable yet modern, isn't overpowered and can be left anywhere around the house. Show me a cheap PC which fits that description. They simply don't exist.

Right now if I had a need for a cheap PC I'd just mod an xbox. But how many people would want to do that? Minimac works out of the box.

The gui wasn't a new concept. I'm pretty sure it was dreamt up in SciFi years earlier with the first computers arriving. Obviously, any solid business model is going to be pragmatic, but Apple takes that a step further and gambles.
ex
iMac-- they risked Apples future on this machine
iPod-- again, Steve Jobs banked on the success of the iPod and he was right again.

People are willing to pay for style and quality.

Exactly, but making those things work properly in the real world is arguably much harder than dreaming them up. Wild ideas are floating around everywhere and Apple is one of the few companies that has been able to bring them into the real world. Just look at the iPod; the design is pure genius AND its durable. I haven't seen such quality since my Ti-83plus