26-10-2001 02:03									#91
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Asher What's wrong with instant switching? I don't really care if it fades and looks nice, because my Monitor flickers and snaps anyway.

Nothing is wrong with it. If you like instant switching, more power to you. If you like the aesthetics of the gamma fade, you're probably one of those types that prefers most of the other aesthetic things that the MacOS does.

quote: You're telling me you can port a DirectX 8.1 game to Mac with ease? I wasn't aware that was possible, let alone easy? If so, someone should try to port Max Payne.

Yes, with ease, at least for 8.0a. I have no idea what you mean when you talk about DX 8.1 - it's certainly not a library available to end-users yet. Someone is porting Max Payne. I wonder which company that could be...Hmm...

quote: I wouldn't mind at all if those same Mac users don't call the Mac the "superior" platform (see above) and all that.

Perhaps they are defensive because this topic was thrust into the Mac forum. One can't walk into a Jewish synagogue, try to convert people to Christ and expect no harsh words directed one's way. However, as you indicated, it did start in the Off-Topic section, so there's blame plenty to go around.

quote: The hardware is lacking, and until now the OS was just pathetic. Couple that with very limited selection and overpriced systems and you've got yourself a pretty weak system.

For starters, I don't consider the hardware to be lacking. What exactly is missing? As you indicated above, it's hard - very hard - to find anything to stress a modern CPU. And if you manage to do so, what percentage of people do you figure _need_ that kind of power?

Secondly, consider how much technology - useful technology - makes it into Apple products first. They have a track record that includes the mouse, the laser printer, the removal of the floppy, IEEE1394 (Firewire) and most recently Airport (802.11). As a company, they tend to put their balls on the line with new tech and I greatly admire them for that.

Also, if you judge the Mac on price and software selection, you are missing valid reasons why someone would use a Mac. Not everyone loves Windows, the x86 design or the magnitude of selection that goes along with choosing a PC. For a number of users, a computer can be a very overwhelming thing. As much as I didn't personally care for the iMac when it first came out, it's success underscores this point.

quote: And I must admit, the Apple marketing bullsh*t really gets to me too. That's where my dislike for Macs comes from, mostly.

No company is perfect in that regard. I've never really been a fan of Apple's marketing either. They tend to underscore the exact opposite points that I would, and do it in a very benign, touchy-feely way.

Brad

	26-10-2001 02:57									#92
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: And which article says WinXP isn't stable?

Time, first few pages, probably last week's or this week's, can't remember. they said "it's possible to go 3-5 days without crashing" - hardly encouraging.

quote: LOL! You can get a Duron 600MHz for $27 alone. (www.pricewatch.com) 128MB RAM is ~$10 now Motherboard for the Duron: $38 Power supply for Duron: $8 Fan: $1-2 etc. As you can see, you can get a pretty speedy PC for $200. Wouldn't want to, but you could.

you'd have to build it with internet ordered parts, and besides that, your price isn't accurate. a monitor is $100-200 depending on quality, the OS is another $100 (200?), etc. You can't buy a 600MHz PC for anywhere near $200, and if you could it'd be full of cheap parts anyway.

as for winXP, you're probably right that it isn't 'spyware'. but it does monitor the user by preventing certain actions - although they are in most cases illegal, it does set off some red flags about the average user's privacy in the months and years to come.

quote: If you would bother to check the sysreqs for Max Payne, and compare that to what you can build on the Dell site for cheap. Of course not everybody buys for Max Payne. But again: You don't need an iMac to surf the net or use word processing (you make it sound like it's okay because it CAN do that). You can do all of that on a PC, PLUS play games like Max Payne...

Dell 256RAM Geforce ti200 P4 1.7 GHz = $2000. that ain't 'cheap'. anything below that might be able to run max, but not as well as some say it should and the system would still come out fairly costly.

Macs are stable, the OS is awesome and very resistant to reboots, the software is generally improved (ranging from SMAC to OfficeX), everything is easy to set up (forget that on your PC scenario earlier), and especially in college, the reliability is a must.

Do we get Half-Life? Do we get civ3 earlier? no, but software availability isn't everything. some of us want support, a rock solid setup, and something you can actually trust to work most of the time over games and stuff like that.

if you love to play the latest and greatest software, obviously macs come out far behind. the strength apple has is in other areas - namely stability, reliability, and ease of use.

	26-10-2001 03:44									#93
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Wiglaf Time, first few pages, probably last week's or this week's, can't remember. they said "it's possible to go 3-5 days without crashing" - hardly encouraging.

Sorry, I've never seen it.
Point to some online.
Every single on I've read online glowed about stability.

quote: you'd have to build it with internet ordered parts, and besides that, your price isn't accurate. a monitor is $100-200 depending on quality, the OS is another $100 (200?), etc. You can't buy a 600MHz PC for anywhere near $200, and if you could it'd be full of cheap parts anyway.

Fair enough, $500 sounds about right.
And even then, a 600MHz Duron is quite a bit faster than a 333MHz G3 (That's what's in those cheap iMacs, right?)

quote: Dell 256RAM Geforce ti200 P4 1.7 GHz = $2000. that ain't 'cheap'. anything below that might be able to run max, but not as well as some say it should and the system would still come out fairly costly.

My price came out differently: $1507.
And even then, you don't need a P4 1.7GHz to play Max Payne.
You can get away with a Celeron 800MHz easily, which is much much cheaper.

quote: Macs are stable, the OS is awesome and very resistant to reboots, the software is generally improved (ranging from SMAC to OfficeX), everything is easy to set up (forget that on your PC scenario earlier), and especially in college, the reliability is a must.

You keep rehashing unfounded arguments.
1) OS X's stability is on par with XP's, there is no extra inherent stability.
2) The "generally improved" software obviously doesn't extend to the selection and choice, but even then, your examples are fairly weak (Mac's Office is certainly not better. If anything, they're equal, but the PC version has more features).

quote: Do we get Half-Life? Do we get civ3 earlier? no, but software availability isn't everything. some of us want support, a rock solid setup, and something you can actually trust to work most of the time over games and stuff like that.

So buy Dell or Alienware or Voodoo or some other good company.

quote: if you love to play the latest and greatest software, obviously macs come out far behind. the strength apple has is in other areas - namely stability, reliability, and ease of use.

Stability?!
Until now, there was not ONE mainstream OS that was considered remarkably stable on the Mac. OS X is the first. But it's too bad the PC has a similar OS with stability and ease of use, now.
Reliability: All of my PCs are entirely reliable, you make it sound as if they all die after 1 or 2 years.
Ease of use: You've obviously not used WinXP much (if at all).

	26-10-2001 03:52									#94
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by bradman Yes, with ease, at least for 8.0a. I have no idea what you mean when you talk about DX 8.1 - it's certainly not a library available to end-users yet. Someone is porting Max Payne. I wonder which company that could be...Hmm...

DirectX 8.1 is a minor update to support new pixel/vertex shader programs to support the new ATi Radeon 8500.

I was completely unaware you could port heavy DirectX games 'with ease' to the Mac. Can you give some examples of some Direct3D games ported to the Mac?
Are you saying Max Payne is coming to the Mac ala Westlake?

quote: For starters, I don't consider the hardware to be lacking. What exactly is missing? As you indicated above, it's hard - very hard - to find anything to stress a modern CPU. And if you manage to do so, what percentage of people do you figure _need_ that kind of power?

That argument would be much better if you aren't paying the same for a G4 (weaker CPU) as a P4 (much stronger CPU).
While it is true most people don't even come close to needing that power, why would you pay the same, or more, for a chip that will do less for you? What if you wanted to convert your DVDs into 600MB MPEG-4s for your own personal media collection? What if you wanted to play Max Payne decently when it comes out?

quote: Secondly, consider how much technology - useful technology - makes it into Apple products first. They have a track record that includes the mouse, the laser printer, the removal of the floppy, IEEE1394 (Firewire) and most recently Airport (802.11). As a company, they tend to put their balls on the line with new tech and I greatly admire them for that.

Mouse: Sorry, didn't Xerox do that?
Laser printer: Sorry, didn't Xerox do that?
Removal of floppy: Intel decided to do this starting 2002, but they're reconsidering it because of a huge backlash of PC users who still want to use a floppy drive.
IEEE1394: I've never once used FireWire, even though I've got a FireWire port on the back of my SoundCard. I'm looking forward to USB2, though.

quote: Also, if you judge the Mac on price and software selection, you are missing valid reasons why someone would use a Mac. Not everyone loves Windows, the x86 design or the magnitude of selection that goes along with choosing a PC. For a number of users, a computer can be a very overwhelming thing. As much as I didn't personally care for the iMac when it first came out, it's success underscores this point.

If the computer is an overwhelming thing, why would they "not love x86"? They wouldn't even know what that is.
I urge you try become acquanted with Windows XP and then judge how "hard" it is to use Windows now.

quote: No company is perfect in that regard. I've never really been a fan of Apple's marketing either. They tend to underscore the exact opposite points that I would, and do it in a very benign, touchy-feely way.

Where would Apple Marketing be today without Photoshop?

	26-10-2001 05:12									#95
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: And even then, a 600MHz Duron is quite a bit faster than a 333MHz G3 (That's what's in those cheap iMacs, right?)

500MHz G3

quote: My price came out differently: $1507. And even then, you don't need a P4 1.7GHz to play Max Payne. You can get away with a Celeron 800MHz easily, which is much much cheaper.

I take it that system doesn't include a DVDROM, CDRW, any sort of useable warranty, hard drive, or operating system? that's the only way it comes out to be around $1500.

quote: (Mac's Office is certainly not better. If anything, they're equal, but the PC version has more features).

and how exactly do you know that?

quote: Ease of use: You've obviously not used WinXP much (if at all).

mac products are generally very easy to set up and run - the OS isn't all there is to it.

	26-10-2001 05:49									#96
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

dp

	26-10-2001 05:49									#97
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Wiglaf I take it that system doesn't include a DVDROM, CDRW, any sort of useable warranty, hard drive, or operating system? that's the only way it comes out to be around $1500.

Okay then.
A P4 1.7GHz, 256mb RAM, DVDROM (16x), a warranty (1 year -- you dont need any more w/ Dell), a 40GB (7200 rpm, UltraATA/100) hard drive, 17" monitor, 16x/10x/32x CD-RW, and Windows XP:
$1,507.00
Try it out for yourself.

quote: and how exactly do you know that?

Compare the feature lists yourself.

quote: mac products are generally very easy to set up and run - the OS isn't all there is to it.

And PC products are hard to install and run?
Windows Installer/InstallShield are as easy as it can get.

	26-10-2001 07:57									#98
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by Asher And PC products are hard to install and run? Windows Installer/InstallShield are as easy as it can get.

Until you try to uninstall a program....

	26-10-2001 08:24									#99
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Hrm.
Let's see...
Most programs have a thing on the start menu labeled 'Uninstall (program name)'.
It asks if you're sure, and then you hit 'Okay' and it works.

If the program doesn't have an uninstall program, you just go into "Add/Remove Programs" (oh how cryptic, eh?) and select the program you want to remove, and click 'Remove'.

The following image was shrunk a bit to fit on the board.

Attachment: remove.png
This has been downloaded 70 time(s).

	26-10-2001 09:33									#100
	Increase the size of your Attachments

You should go to C-Net, Asher. The public is ripping XP apart. It seems that many others are worried about Microsoft's "Big Brother" approach, not just Mac users. Here's my favorite quote...

quote: I think my wife summed it up best when after looking at my monitor and seeing Windows XP running, she said, "Is that a Macintosh you are using?"

But Luna isn't an attempt to copy OS X's Aqua interface.....

	26-10-2001 09:42									#101
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Drake Tungsten You should go to C-Net, Asher. The public is ripping XP apart. It seems that many others are worried about Microsoft's "Big Brother" approach, not just Mac users. Here's my favorite quote...

Let's see some of the CNet comments ripping XP apart:

• Streamlined interface; better performance on many systems; easier and more capable networking; integrated CD-R/RW playback and burn features; Pro version's Remote Assistance tool aids troubleshooting and control of remote PCs.
  
• XP is a worthwhile upgrade. And unless you need corporate administration tools, XP Home Edition should suffice for most--even for small businesses.
  
• So is XP worth all the hype? Grudgingly, we say yes. This major upgrade at long last ends the distinction between the corporate (and more stable) NT/2000 Windows and the consumer-oriented Windows 95/98/Millennium. XP provides similar variations of the same OS for both home and business: XP Home and XP Professional editions. On the outside, XP looks radically different from any previous Windows version. It's spiffier, with both aesthetic and functional redesigns, and features login screens for home and corporate systems alike--something many Windows 95/98 users have never seen.
  
• Like any radical overhaul, XP takes some getting used to--we often lost patience with it--but, after time, it's hard not to like the new design. While its new, hand-holding "task-oriented" design may annoy experienced users, Microsoft nevertheless managed to create an OS that works equally well for novices, corporate users, and enthusiasts.
  

The review continues to rave about it more. Of course most people don't like activating it, it stops them from pirating! Duh.

quote: But Luna isn't an attempt to copy OS X's Aqua interface.....

Have you USED Aqua and then USED Luna?
The ONLY thing they have in common is the default 'blue' look! And 'Silver' looks much better, anyway.
Quite honestly, she probably assumed it was a Mac because Windows has looked the same for over 6 years, and XP looks much more colorful. Apple is known for being colorful, so she assumed it was a Macintosh. Are you saying that Apple can make the only colorful GUI now?

ps: very slick how you dropped the 'uninstall' issue.

Last edited by Asher on 26-10-2001 at 09:49

	26-10-2001 09:53									#102
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

I was referring to the reader reviews (only 47% think it's worth the upgrade), not the Cnet review itself. Even so, were those the best things they had to say?

quote: So is XP worth all the hype? Grudgingly, we say yes.

That isn't a "rave" review, at least in my understanding of the term. They also criticized the activation process and the privacy invasions in XP, like many other people.

Why can't you just admit that XP, while good for a Windows OS, is still just another attempt by Microsoft to catch up to Apple? Are you so brain-washed by Bill and Co. that you can't see the obivous asthetic similarities between OS X and XP? How can you defend a company that only allows you to install their OS on one computer? A company that makes you pay near full price for a second installation? Microsoft's behavior is getting out of control and Mac users aren't the only ones who think so. Wake up and realize that just because Windows is the most popular OS, that doesn't make it the best. I'm getting sick of your trolling in the Mac forums.... go somewhere else if you want to spout your pro-M$ rhetoric.

	26-10-2001 10:00									#103
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Drake Tungsten I was referring to the reader reviews (only 47% think it's worth the upgrade), not the Cnet review itself. Even so, were those the best things they had to say?

Most of those users don't even have it.
I mean, really: How many people would actually have Windows XP on its release?
Much of them are probably anti-MS Linux zealots.
Ask anyone who has used it: It's awesome.
Everyone I know who uses it loves it.

quote: That isn't a "rave" review, at least in my understanding of the term. They also criticized the activation process and the privacy invasions in XP, like many other people.

What 'privacy invasions'?
First of all, never once are you required to give it your name or anything like that.
Second of all, the only "data" they receive from your computer is a hash value consisting of model numbers and the serial number on your drive, etc. Completely useless to anyone but them to see if you're using the software legally.

quote: Why can't you just admit that XP, while good for a Windows OS, is still just another attempt by Microsoft to catch up to Apple?

ROFLMAO!
That's great stuff!

quote: Are you so brain-washed by Bill and Co. that you can't see the obivous asthetic similarities between OS X and XP?

Describe these to me, please.
I'd like to know how they look so very similar!

quote: How can you defend a company that only allows you to install their OS on one computer? A company that makes you pay near full price for a second installation? Microsoft's behavior is getting out of control and Mac users aren't the only ones who think so. Wake up and realize that just because Windows is the most popular OS, that doesn't make it the best. I'm getting sick of your trolling in the Mac forums.... go somewhere else if you want to spout your pro-M$ rhetoric.

I didn't troll in the Mac forum, I trolled in the Off-Topic forum.
It was moved here.
Second of all, you should wake up.
EVERY MacOS prior to X was a complete pile of crap.
So were Windows 9x.
But NT, 2000, and XP are amazing OSes.
OS X ain't bad either, but it's not better than XP.
XP may not be better than OS X either.

But you're a damn fool if you think XP is Microsoft trying to catch up to Apple.
Apple is the one trying to play catchup.
They couldn't design their own real OS kernel in time to compete with Microsoft's, so they took a BSD one and kludged on an flashy, but not very functional interface. They rushed OS X out the door before it was even finished.
I mean, until recently you couldn't even burn with OS X!
OS X still lacks the sweet built in libraries like DirectX 8.1.
The list goes on.

	26-10-2001 10:08									#104
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Well, it's obvious that I'm never going to be able to show you the light...not that I really care. If you want to continue to believe that Bill Gates is the Messiah and Microsoft is the greatest corporation in the world, go right ahead. I'm comfortable with my decision to buy a Mac and don't really care what you think. I leave you with this little snippet....

quote: Users trying to access Microsoft's MSN.com with a non-Microsoft browser are finding themselves locked out. While the software leviathan's Internet Explorer easily reaches MSN, other browsers--such as Netscape Navigator, Opera and Mozilla--run into trouble. Using the most recent browser from Mozilla.org to reach MSN brings a message from Microsoft saying it has "detected that the browser that you are using will not render MSN.com correctly." Mozilla.org does open-source browser development for AOL Time Warner's Netscape Communications unit. "Additionally, you'll see the most advanced functionality of MSN.com only with the latest version of Microsoft Internet Explorer or MSN Explorer," the message continues. The page then provides several links for users to download versions of Internet Explorer for Windows, Macintosh and MSN Explorer.

They sure are a great company, aren't they? You would think that M$ would show a little mercy after destroying Netscape, but I guess Bill is against that. And .NET is a perfectly innocent plan.....

	26-10-2001 10:11									#105
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Drake Tungsten Well, it's obvious that I'm never going to be able to show you the light...not that I really care. If you want to continue to believe that Bill Gates is the Messiah and Microsoft is the greatest corporation in the world, go right ahead. I'm comfortable with my decision to buy a Mac and don't really care what you think. I leave you with this little snippet....

I'm glad you're comfortable with it.
Keep buying Mac.

quote: They sure are a great company, aren't they? You would think that M$ would show a little mercy after destroying Netscape, but I guess Bill is against that. And .NET is a perfectly innocent plan.....

MS is a pretty nasty company to compete with. No one will never deny that.
But they did not destroy netscape: Netscape still exists, and they keep making crap products.

And you apparently know nothing about .NET.
.NET will be able to run on things like Linux (And Apple too if somebody makes a client thingie).
Ximian is already making an official .NET interface for Linux.

	26-10-2001 10:15									#106
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Asher I'm glad you're comfortable with it. Keep buying Mac.

I plan on it. And thanks for putting me in your sig, I sure am flattered.

	26-10-2001 10:24									#107
	Increase Your PM Length

About the MSN thing: http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-20....html?tag=tp_pr

	26-10-2001 10:31									#108
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

I already saw that. Just saying "oh, my bad" doesn't negate the fact that Microsoft was trying to force people to use its browser. The fact that they even attempted such a thing is appalling. Thank god that public opinion actually made them stop their uncompetative practices, at least in this instance.

	26-10-2001 18:45									#109
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Asher I was completely unaware you could port heavy DirectX games 'with ease' to the Mac. Can you give some examples of some Direct3D games ported to the Mac? Are you saying Max Payne is coming to the Mac ala Westlake?

Tony Hawk 2 is the most recent D3D game we've done. The most recent D3d game ported was Giants. I can't comment in any official capacity about Westlake and Max Payne. We are working on an unannounced "Morphine" project though.

quote: While it is true most people don't even come close to needing that power, why would you pay the same, or more, for a chip that will do less for you?

Not everyone buys a PC just for the chip inside, and I think it's more than a little ignorant to say that the G4 does less than the P4. The P4 has a 20-stage pipeline just to get the clock speeds up. Most people are too ignorant to notice that their P4 really doesn't perform all that well by comparison to the P3 or K7 due to the all the instruction caches being flushed at every stall because those "Mega-hertz thingies" are so high.

quote: Mouse: Sorry, didn't Xerox do that? Laser printer: Sorry, didn't Xerox do that?

Xerox did not make or market these devices towards consumers. Apple did and took the risk. Find me a PC company that introduces new technology into their lineups first with even half as much frequency as Apple.

quote: If the computer is an overwhelming thing, why would they "not love x86"?

There are many different types of people in the world. Some are computer neophytes. Some are not. Those that have had any familiarity with low-level x86 vs. well, any other chip can see that the x86 is a total pile to program for by comparison. The limited register set in this day and age is really crippling. That is one of the reasons why I personally would never make an x86 my main machine.

quote: I urge you try become acquanted with Windows XP and then judge how "hard" it is to use Windows now.

I'm all-too-familiar with Win2k. The faults I have with Windows are fundamental issues, like it's insistence on realigning all the icons on the left of the desktop if I move them, the clunkiness of the file explorer compared to the MacOS Finder, the way 2k tries at first to keep you from hurting yourself because it's too stupid to deal with you moving files out of the win32 system directories while it's running, the notion that my hard drive is referred to as "C:\", using "\" as a path separator, etc.

Brad

	26-10-2001 19:10									#110
	Tired of ads?

quote: Okay then. A P4 1.7GHz, 256mb RAM, DVDROM (16x), a warranty (1 year -- you dont need any more w/ Dell), a 40GB (7200 rpm, UltraATA/100) hard drive, 17" monitor, 16x/10x/32x CD-RW, and Windows XP: $1,507.00 Try it out for yourself.

that's SDRAM, no mention of a video card, and a questionable warranty that throws out dell's entire service and support reputation (which wouldn't be around in the first place if their PCs didn't break).

	26-10-2001 19:39									#111
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by bradman Not everyone buys a PC just for the chip inside, and I think it's more than a little ignorant to say that the G4 does less than the P4. The P4 has a 20-stage pipeline just to get the clock speeds up. Most people are too ignorant to notice that their P4 really doesn't perform all that well by comparison to the P3 or K7 due to the all the instruction caches being flushed at every stall because those "Mega-hertz thingies" are so high.

The P4 has a long pipeline for a number of reasons. Mostly because SMT would remove lots of the problems associated with the long pipeline, it's too bad SMT had to be disabled on the production line due to it not working entirely properly at the P4 launch.
It'll be in some upcoming core revisions, though.

quote: Xerox did not make or market these devices towards consumers. Apple did and took the risk. Find me a PC company that introduces new technology into their lineups first with even half as much frequency as Apple.

I will give Apple credit for gunea-pigging their users like that.

quote: I'm all-too-familiar with Win2k.

First, the Windows XP interface differs from 2K in some ways.

quote: The faults I have with Windows are fundamental issues, like it's insistence on realigning all the icons on the left of the desktop if I move them

This is an option, and is actually disabled by default. (Right click on the desktop, go into the 'Arrange Icons By' and turn off 'Align to Grid' and/or 'Auto-arrange'.

quote: the clunkiness of the file explorer compared to the MacOS Finder

That's purely based on what you're used to.
I feel castrated in the finder, myself.

quote: the way 2k tries at first to keep you from hurting yourself because it's too stupid to deal with you moving files out of the win32 system directories while it's running

You can move things in the System directories as long as they're not in use. That seems logical to me: Don't move drivers that are in use by devices or programs. Why would you want to, anyway?

quote: the notion that my hard drive is referred to as "C:\", using "\" as a path separator, etc.

You want it to be like Unix where you can't differenciate between which drive everything is?
I have no problems with \ has a seperator, either. That certainly doesn't make it more user friendly, especially to the Computer-fearing people we're talking about.

quote: that's SDRAM, no mention of a video card, and a questionable warranty that throws out dell's entire service and support reputation (which wouldn't be around in the first place if their PCs didn't break).

You're right, it is SDRAM. You could spend ~$100 more and get RDRAM. Still a great price for an overly-fast system, don't you think?
As for video card: It was a GeForce 3 Ti200.
And it does come with a full warranty for one year.

	27-10-2001 13:31									#112
	Coke vs Pepsi Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Do I have clue what kernel, pipeline or BDS is? Not really. Do I give a damn? Nope. Should I? Probably not, unless I really enjoy this kinda of stuff. My philosophy about computers is pretty simple: I want toast, I put bread in toaster, I pull lever down, I wait, I get toast; I don't need to be an electrician to operate a toaster. I doesn't take a plumber to turn on the shower. How many people here can tell how many psi of torque their car can develop? Unless your a mechanic buff, all you need to care about is which pedal to press and where to put the CD, right? So why should you need to be some coding wizard just to operate a computer?

This is why I originally turned to the Mac: that was almost 15 years ago, the glory days of dos: back then even simple word processing was an adventure in itself. And I keep using it because I know it, I feel familiar with the Finder, and it does everything I want it to do. Is XP really better than OS X? I wouldn't know, I haven't tried either. But every review, every commentary I read and heard have all been unanimous in being undecisive, i.e. "one is better in some aspects, but not in others". I'm absolutely convinced that for the majority of people it's strictly a matter of preference, as each os will inevitably get better as it responds to the pressure of the other. For a small minority though, it's more a matter of Faith....

"But the Mac is pricey, and there's not enough games" Chicken-and-egg argument: if there were more Macs available both arguments would disappear (basic laws of supply-and-demand); and indeed it is getting better (well at least compared to five years ago).

To each his own I guess. But one thing's for sure: the worse thing that could happen to the Windows consumer would be for Apple to close down. But as it is now, we got what, 10%? maybe 15% of the market share, and it seems that it's still too much for some of them PC trolls. You ask a question on a message board, you post on a newsgroup, and there they are, popping their little ugly heads with 'get rid of your mac!'. or 'people are still using them?' (my, that's funny, never heard that one before); it's almost like these people are on a crusade or something. I don't know what their problem is: maybe it has something to do with their mother. They probably are 5% of all people who use Windows, but they provide 95% of the aggravation.

Personnally, if I was at the Mac counter in a convention or in some gaming club or whatever, and one of those came by and snickered 'oh look, the kiddie table', I'd give him a mouthful of knuckles. Do your thing, and I'll do mine.

That's all I have to say on this board.

	28-10-2001 18:24									#113
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Asher First, the Windows XP interface differs from 2K in some ways.

Good for it. Why should _I_ care?

quote: You can move things in the System directories as long as they're not in use. That seems logical to me: Don't move drivers that are in use by devices or programs. Why would you want to, anyway? ... You want it to be like Unix where you can't differenciate between which drive everything is?

These both hilight fundamental flaws in the underlying OS on the PC. The MacOS filesystem is not path-based (not even under 10 for native Carbon apps), all the Windows-based filesystems are. The advantage being that on the Mac, where you move the file often doesn't matter. Along the same lines, you can have two identically-named drives on the Mac desktop and your apps won't get confused. Just another one of those fit-and-finish things that I like so much about the Mac. But if you pay less for a PC, you get the "advantage" of drive identifiers, dot-three extensions and other relics to shore up a crippled filesystem that can only identify and handle files by name alone.

Brad

	29-10-2001 01:18									#114
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by bradman Good for it. Why should _I_ care?

Because you went out of your way to criticize the OS for unfounded reasons, because you didn't know where to find the off switch? (Options are fun, it's another advantage of the PC world )

quote: These both hilight fundamental flaws in the underlying OS on the PC.

I'm going to stop you right there: You call having a uniquely identified name for a driver a 'fundamental flaw'? I call allowing two drives under the exact same name a 'flaw', because that's just confusing and not very good design.

quote: The MacOS filesystem is not path-based (not even under 10 for native Carbon apps), all the Windows-based filesystems are. The advantage being that on the Mac, where you move the file often doesn't matter. Along the same lines, you can have two identically-named drives on the Mac desktop and your apps won't get confused.

But your users will. What's the point?

quote: Just another one of those fit-and-finish things that I like so much about the Mac.

Indeed, a non-path-based filesystem that lets you have many drivers under the same name is a great feature worthy of making me switch to Mac alone!

quote: But if you pay less for a PC, you get the "advantage" of drive identifiers, dot-three extensions and other relics to shore up a crippled filesystem that can only identify and handle files by name alone.

You should do a lot more research on NTFS before making comments like that. They're mostly only true for FAT32...
Oh, and dot-three extensions are much more fun than resource forks. By default, newer Windows hides them from the user, but you can have them displayed, change them easily, and also easily see which type of file something is even while listing in the command line. I find that much more useful than a hidden attribute somewhere that tells you which program to launch the file with.

quote: Personnally, if I was at the Mac counter in a convention or in some gaming club or whatever, and one of those came by and snickered 'oh look, the kiddie table', I'd give him a mouthful of knuckles. Do your thing, and I'll do mine.

Well, a comparison can be drawn between PC users and Mac users with human development:
Mac users tend to know not very much about computers (Kids) while many PC users do. That's why the comment about the Kiddy table was made, and it looks like bradman is the only person here with a clue of how computers works and can make decent arguments in the PC vs. Mac debate.

quote: "But the Mac is pricey, and there's not enough games" Chicken-and-egg argument: if there were more Macs available both arguments would disappear (basic laws of supply-and-demand); and indeed it is getting better (well at least compared to five years ago).

Unfortunately this is incorrect. The basic laws of supply-and-demand hinge upon having multiple vendors available.
Apple can set the prices to whatever they want on the Macs, no one else can make them. The market for Apples isn't exactly a free market system, which is why the PC market is considered by most to be much cheaper.

	29-10-2001 02:04									#115
	Get a bigger avatar today!

Well, i just wanted to add my 2 cents. I don't understand much of this technical speech stuff.

i used to have a PC. HP Pavillion. I got it when I was in 5th grade. It lasted about 6 years without upgrades, but CTP severely tested its limits. Now i got a Mac. G4 400, 10 mb harddrive, 17 in moniter. The terminal cost $1600 i think and the moniter was either $399 or $499 (probably the latter) Printer also cost like $200 or $300. I got it because my school only has macs and I had lots of webbuilding and graphics design to do for homework and i wanted to be able to do it at home. i got all the software for free fro mthe school. When I graducate next year, i don't know what im going to get. Might be PC. Might be Mac. But its gonna be based on what I need to do. Does comparing all these tiny techincalities really make a difference when I turn on the computer and surf the web or things like that? not to me. When i work with Photoshop, illustrator etc, do i get out my stopwatch and mesure how long it takes to apply a texture? no.

I havn't had many crashed in the three years that i ve had it. I like OS 9 and im trying to figure out if I want to get OS X just for civ3. Maybe Brad could help me with that. (hint hint )

Yes there are a few drawbacks on mac. I don't get the games at the same time as with PC. I dont think ill be ablt to play Civ3 multiplayer againts my brother. (whos got a PC) THis new OS X comes at a bad time for me because ive jsut gotten all the software i need to do my school work and i don't want to use the classic mode. (which i heard is slower than OS 9) My brother got a Dell for $1400 without moniter or printer and his has like 4* the harddrive, and like 1.5 ghz Pentium III.

Well, anyhow, thats my 2 cents.

	29-10-2001 03:21									#116
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: You're right, it is SDRAM. You could spend ~$100 more and get RDRAM. Still a great price for an overly-fast system, don't you think? As for video card: It was a GeForce 3 Ti200. And it does come with a full warranty for one year.

SDRAM coupled with a P4 and a VERY skimpy warranty? that's a tough purchase to make, especially for the majority of users who want a speedy, yet reliable system. $2000 is more like it for optimal parts. only one or two mac models go that high.

	29-10-2001 03:30									#117
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Wiglaf SDRAM coupled with a P4 and a VERY skimpy warranty? that's a tough purchase to make, especially for the majority of users who want a speedy, yet reliable system. $2000 is more like it for optimal parts. only one or two mac models go that high.

First of all, you're buying the fastest PC you can get, and you're comparing this to buying a low or mid ranged Mac.

Even then, with a full warranty and RDRAM, it's a bit under $1700.
For quite a bit more hardware than the Mac.

And it's not a "skimpy" warranty, the one I chose is a "short" warranty.
To be completely honest, you'd pretty much never need to call Dell tech support for anything except incase they didn't ship it right.
Which is why I went with the one year...

Still, $1700 for a top end PC vs. $3500 for a top end Mac (which is still slower).

	29-10-2001 04:52									#118
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

I just ordered a dell p4 with 256 rdram,40gb HD,sound card,video card,monitor,speakers,XP blah blah blah for just over $1800 Canadian.About .65 cents CDN to a US dollar.
That INCLUDES shipping and 14% sales taxes.

No Mac around my parts comes close to the bang for the buck.Its sucks, but that is the truth.

fires up Monkey Shines to remember the good ole days!?

	29-10-2001 23:48									#119
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by Asher I'm going to stop you right there: You call having a uniquely identified name for a driver a 'fundamental flaw'? I call allowing two drives under the exact same name a 'flaw', because that's just confusing and not very good design.

So this is a case on the PC where less freedom is better? You need to get some more consistency.

quote: Indeed, a non-path-based filesystem that lets you have many drivers under the same name is a great feature worthy of making me switch to Mac alone!

The Mac filesystem doesn't care if you rename directories in an intermediate path to a file. Windows can't cope. And this reminds me of another Win32 abonimation: shortcuts - a much more fragile OS feature I can't imagine, especially when compared to the MacOS equivalent aliases. I submit again that a PC setup is a very fragile thing when the fear of moving data around prevents you from using it to full effect.

quote: You should do a lot more research on NTFS before making comments like that. They're mostly only true for FAT32...

So you're saying that ntfs doesn't identify files by pathname alone or what? What are you trying to say here? NTFS adds the concept of ownership and expanded priviledge control. I don't see how it addresses any of the shortcomings I mentioned.

quote: Oh, and dot-three extensions are much more fun than resource forks.

They aren't even comparable in terms of what role they play in the OS. I don't see why you are drawing a comparison here. The fact that resource forks can hold pictures of naked women and dot-three extensions can only hold 3 characters of data would lead me to believe that "fun" may be an overstatement even if the comparison were valid.

quote: By default, newer Windows hides them from the user, but you can have them displayed, change them easily, and also easily see which type of file something is even while listing in the command line. I find that much more useful than a hidden attribute somewhere that tells you which program to launch the file with.

The Win32 approach is also much less powerful and much less flexible. This is another case where you are saying that less is more just because it's on the PC and not the Mac. Why dot-three and not dot-255? Even though MacOS X allows you to follow the Win32 dot-extension method in the absence of type/creator data, all versions of the MacOS allow for more than 3 characters following a dot extension.

I would also submit that the file type extension on the PC and the type/creator metadata on the Mac isn't something the casual user needs to be aware of - changing .txt to .gif does not make the data change magically. Any power user who needs to change this data can do so anyway with relatively little effort on the Mac and without having to crap up the filename with just 3 characters to do it.

Brad

	30-10-2001 05:58									#120
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by bradman So this is a case on the PC where less freedom is better? You need to get some more consistency.

You're making really weird comparisons to try to make unrelated points.
It's not consistent to allow some things like that, so the file system forbids it. It's as simple as that.

quote: The Mac filesystem doesn't care if you rename directories in an intermediate path to a file. Windows can't cope.

Rather: NTFS can cope, it's just that there's no real reason to do that. Because of this, it's explictily forbidden by the OS (and NOT the filesystem!) It's bad design and actually not very user friendly. That's not a feature, that's a flawed design.

quote: And this reminds me of another Win32 abonimation: shortcuts - a much more fragile OS feature I can't imagine, especially when compared to the MacOS equivalent aliases. I submit again that a PC setup is a very fragile thing when the fear of moving data around prevents you from using it to full effect.

1) How are shortcuts evil? They point to a section on the hard drive to alias with another application.
2) Can MacOS's FS even do symlinks (or junctions) ala NTFS?
3) How is the alias implementation on the Mac make it a "less fragile OS"?

quote: So you're saying that ntfs doesn't identify files by pathname alone or what? What are you trying to say here? NTFS adds the concept of ownership and expanded priviledge control. I don't see how it addresses any of the shortcomings I mentioned.

NTFS is not just a modification to FAT32...
It's an entirely different file system, structured completely different.
The filesystem itself is extremely flexible, but the OS regulates the use of it intentionally.

quote: They aren't even comparable in terms of what role they play in the OS. I don't see why you are drawing a comparison here. The fact that resource forks can hold pictures of naked women and dot-three extensions can only hold 3 characters of data would lead me to believe that "fun" may be an overstatement even if the comparison were valid.

So, pray tell, how is having a simple extension (not restricted to 3, it can be any length you want) that tells the filetype evil? It's much easier to just change which application you want to associate with each extension. How would you do something like that on the Mac?

quote: The Win32 approach is also much less powerful and much less flexible. This is another case where you are saying that less is more just because it's on the PC and not the Mac. Why dot-three and not dot-255? Even though MacOS X allows you to follow the Win32 dot-extension method in the absence of type/creator data, all versions of the MacOS allow for more than 3 characters following a dot extension.

Just goes to show you how little you've used a modern Windows system.
I've got files called .h, .rm, .c++, .cpp, .bitmap, .bmp, .html, .randomness. Etc.

It's just dot-three by convention, you don't need to do it by ANY means.

quote: I would also submit that the file type extension on the PC and the type/creator metadata on the Mac isn't something the casual user needs to be aware of - changing .txt to .gif does not make the data change magically. Any power user who needs to change this data can do so anyway with relatively little effort on the Mac and without having to crap up the filename with just 3 characters to do it.

You make it sound like you can't do that on the PC either.

I do have one question about how OS X handles things, though. What if I wanted to change which application I wanted to load .txt files with? Like say from Notepad to Wordpad?

Edit: Oh, and I do have some files without extensions. That way Windows asked me which program I want to open them, and has an option to remember for that particular file for next time.