There are so many things wrong with that post I not going to bothersubterFUSE wrote:Fact - Mac's are faster and more stable and reliable than Windows PC's.
It is not a fact that Macs are faster than PCs. Frankly, it never really has been. Maybe for about 2 seconds, when the first dual G4 PowerPC chips were released... they might have been. But the PC market has always moved past Apple in terms of hardware performance, leaving them to play catch-up.
That is why Apple switched to Intel chips. Hardware performance..... especially with their laptops. The G4 laptop was so outdated, it wasn't even funny.
Just look at how Apple markets the new Intel Macs..... They claim they are all lightyears ahead of any previous Mac. That just shows how far behind they were before the switch.
Just look back at the old performance threads in this forum. It says a lot when a $900 PC laptop was outperforming a $3700 Apple laptop by a margin of like 30%. When I purchased my PC laptop last year, that was the situation.
NOW that the Intel switch has been made, it is far more reasonable to consider the tech specs closer to equal between PC and Mac.... because they are basically the exact same thing, only with a different OS. The PCs will still be slightly ahead, because Apple is such a small company.... and they can't afford to make the frequent changes to their hardware like PC companies do. That's why PC laptops have Core 2 Duo for a little while already, while Apple still has not released them yet. (I expect them to, soon.... if they don't, then that's just a joke)
If you prefer the OS.... that's great. That's a subjective decision, and I won't fault anyone for it.
But as far as hardware goes... Macs are not faster. They are equal, or slower.... depending on the timing.
Is using macs just a trend?
-
subterFUSE
- Posts: 1557
- Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 11:04 pm
- Location: Winter Park, FL
-
djadonis206
- Posts: 6490
- Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2004 4:23 pm
- Location: Seattle, WA.
I've had both and my experience with MAC's was less than coolJamieG wrote:
But it is certainly true that:
Despite sometimes having a slightly higher initial purchase cost, Macintosh computers have substantially lower TOTAL COST OF OWNERSHIP.
Mac's requires fewer keystrokes for similar tasks, and results in much higher user productivity.
Macs are VERY reliable. Compared to Windows PCs, Macs are MUCH easier to support — and when properly maintained, they experience FAR fewer problems. Furthermore, Macs are more secure — e.g. they are MUCH less prone to virus attacks.
I have tried to be as clear as I can and these are some of the reasons (NOTE I'm not saying facts, but I can present evidence to back them up if you have problems digesting them) that I'll give to put my opinion accross.
Most people who use Mac's use them because they are an out-of-box solution that gets the job done with minimum of fuss.
I dont want to start a pissing contest here either, if I did I could spend all day talking about Microsoft speghetti code.
Jamie
My freaking battery died in my G4 (Cost a couple hundred dollars to replace because you have to have a MAC Specialist go in and put in a Special MAC Battery)
When the ZIP Drive got a ZIP stuck in it, I called MAC support and they wanted something like $90 to talk about it over the phone <-- it never got fixed
When my MAC wouldn't even turn on, another $90 an hour to troubleshoot
but I should have bought the $200 plus protection thing?
the PC's I've had, when I ran into trouble I opened it myself handled my business for next to nothing and got on with making music, not argueing with tech support.
Also, how often does MAC come out with a new Opertaing SYSTEM? How much does each of those updates costs? Developers have to keep up and if you don't keep up with your developers you lose out on some levels <-- updating every 9 to 12 months gets expensive
That's just my experience...may not be yours but in the end MAC's costs me way more money then they were worth
Operating on a budget, that means alot. I'm from a small poor family in Uganda and I have AID - I can't afford to buy a $2000+ machine to get the same performance that I can get from a $1000+ machine
and in my personal experience - when I had a MAC I wasn't making any music, I couldn't bang out a tune, when I did it was horrible
now on the PC I'm banign 'em out and having a blast - 20+ tracks, VST's and the whole nine yards - key strokes, dude I got my cntrl-D's and V's and C's down like it's nobodies business
however - I am getting a MAC BOOK because I think they're cool <-- I need a laptop for school this fall
but the PC stays - I'm not hating on MAC's (I'm getting one) but in the END MAC's have cost me hundreds of dollars more then my PC <-- but that's my testimonial
-
noisetonepause
- Posts: 4938
- Joined: Sat Dec 28, 2002 3:38 pm
- Location: Sticks and stones
$ sudo rm zappen/idiocyzappen wrote:MACINTOSH - twice the price for half the power to run ten percent of the appz... this was not many years ago... right before the use of intel processors.
imoh macs are better for non-expert users, usually fashionists wannabe richs that want to run their 2 favourite applications clicking the coloured icons , and browse web porn without risking visusesfor the rest it's almost the same on pc,
rm: idiocy: Directory not empty
...
Suit #1: I mean, have you got any insight as to why a bright boy like this would jeopardize the lives of millions?
Suit #2: No, sir, he says he does this sort of thing for fun.
Suit #2: No, sir, he says he does this sort of thing for fun.
-
veggieryan
- Posts: 125
- Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2006 5:13 pm
jaime.... tisk tisk..Fact - Mac's are faster and more stable and reliable than Windows PC's.
see my performance results with vista on the live 5 performance test thread... vista is smoking osx.
its funny that the macbook pro is just an overpriced duo pc laptop... so why does it have 10x more problems than any other duo pc laptop? see www.appledefects.com
i sold mine and went back to pc.. now i have a toshiba m7 duo tablet that I can write on the screen...
huzzzah![/quote]
-
noisetonepause
- Posts: 4938
- Joined: Sat Dec 28, 2002 3:38 pm
- Location: Sticks and stones
$ echo sense > zappen/brainnoisetonepause wrote:$ sudo rm zappen/idiocyzappen wrote:MACINTOSH - twice the price for half the power to run ten percent of the appz... this was not many years ago... right before the use of intel processors.
imoh macs are better for non-expert users, usually fashionists wannabe richs that want to run their 2 favourite applications clicking the coloured icons , and browse web porn without risking visuses
rm: idiocy: Directory not empty
...
File I/O error.
...
(OK, So I've never seen echo return an error like that, but hey... I'm just Comic Book Guy).
Suit #1: I mean, have you got any insight as to why a bright boy like this would jeopardize the lives of millions?
Suit #2: No, sir, he says he does this sort of thing for fun.
Suit #2: No, sir, he says he does this sort of thing for fun.
In case you don't know: the clever advertisers used a thing called irony ...subterFUSE wrote:Example: Macs are more fun, because they make pictures and videos, and PC are for Pie Charts, and graphs.
Of course, this is a ridiculous claim.... because a PC is just as capable of working with video and pictures as a Mac.
...just trying to figure out how to make my computer sing....
Apple is already dead
I had to use the G4 machine at school and in an instant I hated it. I could see right through the bullshit.
1) A hype had been consciously created to sell the brand. That's why they are still only being used by closed and vain, sectarian communities like the small business scenes in the graphical and audio industry. "Hey look at me, I am different, I use an Apple!".
2)which is related to the closed concept of the brand itself. There were no signs of visible competition between the producers of all the hardware components inside the machine. The user just had to believe in the name of the overall thing and that they got the best there is.
3)which for example clearly was the case with the processor. It was a well hidden secret that the weakness of the processing power showed itself best at the miserable playing speed of the Flash .swf and Director and shockwave files.
4)and that's why Apple for sure had to leave the path to a certain extinction and go Intel.
5)and behold, rumors are that Apple has already given up it's machine because they know the race has been lost (by their lack of openness). Not to Microsoft(who only knows of operating systems) but to the whole global engineering community who together create the PC's which we use. Apple already sold it's machine and that will be announced within five years from now. They will only be producing gadgets and nothing more.
6)Apple Mac will all have been about the immediate succes of a hyped idea and the ultimate destruction of a too long sustained lie.
JH
1) A hype had been consciously created to sell the brand. That's why they are still only being used by closed and vain, sectarian communities like the small business scenes in the graphical and audio industry. "Hey look at me, I am different, I use an Apple!".
2)which is related to the closed concept of the brand itself. There were no signs of visible competition between the producers of all the hardware components inside the machine. The user just had to believe in the name of the overall thing and that they got the best there is.
3)which for example clearly was the case with the processor. It was a well hidden secret that the weakness of the processing power showed itself best at the miserable playing speed of the Flash .swf and Director and shockwave files.
4)and that's why Apple for sure had to leave the path to a certain extinction and go Intel.
5)and behold, rumors are that Apple has already given up it's machine because they know the race has been lost (by their lack of openness). Not to Microsoft(who only knows of operating systems) but to the whole global engineering community who together create the PC's which we use. Apple already sold it's machine and that will be announced within five years from now. They will only be producing gadgets and nothing more.
6)Apple Mac will all have been about the immediate succes of a hyped idea and the ultimate destruction of a too long sustained lie.
JH
-
djadonis206
- Posts: 6490
- Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2004 4:23 pm
- Location: Seattle, WA.
Re: Apple is already dead
Apples and PC's soon to be the Ambiguously gay couple of the computing worldHyperion wrote:I had to use the G4 machine at school and in an instant I hated it. I could see right through the bullshit.
1) A hype had been consciously created to sell the brand. That's why they are still only being used by closed and vain, sectarian communities like the small business scenes in the graphical and audio industry. "Hey look at me, I am different, I use an Apple!".
2)which is related to the closed concept of the brand itself. There were no signs of visible competition between the producers of all the hardware components inside the machine. The user just had to believe in the name of the overall thing and that they got the best there is.
3)which for example clearly was the case with the processor. It was a well hidden secret that the weakness of the processing power showed itself best at the miserable playing speed of the Flash .swf and Director and shockwave files.
4)and that's why Apple for sure had to leave the path to a certain extinction and go Intel.
5)and behold, rumors are that Apple has already given up it's machine because they know the race has been lost (by their lack of openness). Not to Microsoft(who only knows of operating systems) but to the whole global engineering community who together create the PC's which we use. Apple already sold it's machine and that will be announced within five years from now. They will only be producing gadgets and nothing more.
6)Apple Mac will all have been about the immediate succes of a hyped idea and the ultimate destruction of a too long sustained lie.
JH
?
Last edited by djadonis206 on Tue Sep 05, 2006 7:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Honestly, I don't think most of us could really give a flying fuck. It's just a box that does a job. PC/Mac, Fender/Gibson, Chevy/Ford, blah blah. Whatever.
If you're convinced that it's your calling in life to evangelistically promote one computer over another, at least get your head far enough out of your ass to sing the praises of what works for you, rather than slagging off what you probably don't even use or understand. Perhaps your time would be better spent improving your music.
/rant
If you're convinced that it's your calling in life to evangelistically promote one computer over another, at least get your head far enough out of your ass to sing the praises of what works for you, rather than slagging off what you probably don't even use or understand. Perhaps your time would be better spent improving your music.
/rant
Last edited by hambone1 on Tue Sep 05, 2006 7:14 pm, edited 3 times in total.
-
djadonis206
- Posts: 6490
- Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2004 4:23 pm
- Location: Seattle, WA.
Re: Apple is already dead
djadonis206 wrote:
Apples and PC's soon to be the Ambiguously gay couple of the computing world
?
I spelled Ambiguously wrong, but I fixed it
-
knotkranky
- Posts: 4336
- Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 7:08 pm
- Location: la
