|
|||||||
 |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
10-21-2002, 05:20 PM
|
#1 |
|
Member (10 bit)
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Harvard University
Posts: 935
  |
Mac OS X is making Windows & Linux look like shareware
I didn't think this belonged in the software forum because those pretain mostly to tech support and I'm addressing the fact that Mac OS X seems to be more robust than Windows or Linux, why dosen't everyone just get a mac? They run photoshop much fast anyway I hear. I've been thinking about getting one, Mac OS X really looks nice, that crystal aqua system and Darwin could win even bill gates over, if he'd try it..
|
|
|
|
10-21-2002, 05:24 PM
|
#2 |
|
Member (6 bit)
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 45
|
A few reasons..I like building my own and im a gamer.
|
|
|
|
|
10-21-2002, 05:51 PM
|
#3 | |
|
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: East of Lake Michigan -- West of Lake Huron -- South of Lake Superior and North of civilization.
Posts: 2,219
 |
Re: Mac OS X is making Windows & Linux look like shareware
Quote:
I've used a few video editing packages native to OS-X and didn't notice the package running better or faster. Sure, the OS it's self is cute and all, but the Mac OS is still a dog outside the realm of audio/video creation, photo manipulation and animation. Windows has taken over desktop publishing and keeps up nose-to-nose with a Mac in all those other areas. -Craig |
|
|
|
|
|
10-21-2002, 05:52 PM
|
#4 |
|
Member (10 bit)
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: tampa,fl
Posts: 762
|
I know, Mac's looks soooooooo nice and much more sophisticated than your everyday PC..It runs smooth as can be too....
too bad they're expensive as crap... |
|
|
|
|
10-21-2002, 05:54 PM
|
#5 |
|
Member (10 bit)
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Harvard University
Posts: 935
|
so is that how most people look at them? too expensive?
|
|
|
|
|
10-21-2002, 05:57 PM
|
#6 |
|
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: East of Lake Michigan -- West of Lake Huron -- South of Lake Superior and North of civilization.
Posts: 2,219
|
That's one way I look at them....
* Non-upgradable * Inflexable * Stubborn OS that can't be tweaked * Slow by today's standards Those are a few other ways I look at them. -Craig |
|
|
|
|
10-21-2002, 06:00 PM
|
#7 |
|
Member (11 bit)
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Mexico
Posts: 1,049
|
I was reading some where (I don't recall where) that there maybe a OSX version for PCs...
If it ever came out I might give it a try but I dont like the idea of having to buy an Apple to run the system...
__________________
Computer: 486 Ram: 8 MB CD Rom: None OS: Windows 3.1 |
|
|
|
|
10-21-2002, 06:27 PM
|
#8 |
|
Member (10 bit)
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Harvard University
Posts: 935
|
How is OSX not as upgradeable as windows? Because they don't have a open source website like Apple dose? If you mean hardware wise then I must say that the G4 Series supports any type of pciand AGP card you through in it, as long as either it has the drivers or you do.
|
|
|
|
|
10-21-2002, 06:44 PM
|
#9 |
|
Member (11 bit)
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,729
|
OS-X is exactly what the Linux on the desktop crowd had been begging for, a fantastic GUI for UNIX that the linux dristros will never come close to competing with. IMHO is kicks windows and linux ass. As for hardware, my pc spanks my mac, it just doesnt look as good doing it.
|
|
|
|
|
10-21-2002, 06:50 PM
|
#10 | |
|
Member (10 bit)
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Harvard University
Posts: 935
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
10-21-2002, 07:08 PM
|
#11 |
|
Member (11 bit)
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,729
|
I dont think that happened. They announced a deal with IBM for their power pc chip. The AMD avenue as far as i can tell is dead in the water. But you are right, they are gonna compete, AMD & Intel just have the advantage right now.
|
|
|
|
|
10-22-2002, 01:14 AM
|
#12 | |
|
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: East of Lake Michigan -- West of Lake Huron -- South of Lake Superior and North of civilization.
Posts: 2,219
|
Quote:
I can do EVERYTHING on my PC that a Mac user can do on their Mac and I'll do it faster. And with some searching, I can even look good doing it. In my field of audio and video the Mac once reigned supreme. The only reason the Mac is still 'on top' is because of the ProTools standard in high end studios. But there are more software packages made for the PC -- and 99% of them are better/faster/more effiecient/more powerful than their Mac counterparts. -Craig |
|
|
|
|
|
10-22-2002, 01:17 AM
|
#13 | |
|
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: East of Lake Michigan -- West of Lake Huron -- South of Lake Superior and North of civilization.
Posts: 2,219
|
Quote:
-Craig |
|
|
|
|
|
10-22-2002, 06:32 AM
|
#14 |
|
Member (10 bit)
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Denver, Colorado
Posts: 772
|
That coolness factor of the Aqua interface wears off quick, and soon I learned to loathe it. It's just too bubbly. And I hate the docking system; it's like a substandard windows task bar.
Mac's OS still has a lot of stupid user quirks that I hate, plus you can't really mess with any "real" settings. They are ok, but Windows is tops (when compared to it) Also, even if money weren't an object, I still wouldn't buy a Mac. I get stuck with those everyday at work and school, and I hate using them. There's just too much about a Mac that sucks to list here. have a good day. |
|
|
|
|
10-22-2002, 02:11 PM
|
#15 |
|
Member (10 bit)
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Harvard University
Posts: 935
|
and to think that microsoft & Bill Gates are responsible for all of this
|
|
|
|
|
10-22-2002, 02:24 PM
|
#16 |
|
Member (11 bit)
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Blue Springs, MO
Posts: 1,766
|
The real issue is not how a gui looks. The real issue is how the OS does its job. All guis have quirks and strong points.
Apple's great strength is that the limited hardware choices Apple gives you allows Apple really tune the OS. The same limited hardware choice is also Apple's great weakness. If you really want to be able to get at the OS, neither Windows nor Apple compare to Linux because Linux let's you mess with the source code if you want. For the average user, however, Windows is still hard to beat. CH |
|
|
|
|
10-22-2002, 02:59 PM
|
#17 |
|
Member (10 bit)
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Harvard University
Posts: 935
|
I pretty much hate Linux because you have to be a programmer to take full advantage of it. KDE is pretty much trash because still, to take full advantage of being able to do stuff with it you gotta know how to program, compile, ect., ect - Linux is only good for a server enviroment. Period. Most people with only one computer which only has Linux have the knowledge to take full advantage of it. But to sum it down, no body want to run some stupid command line mp3 player because nullsoft dosen't want to release a Linux version. Linux dose not have the robust infastructure like Windows NT (includes: xp, 2000, NT Series). Windows NT can be everything Linux can be and still give you a filmiar GUI to go with it. Linux is too plain hard to mess with, and its not worth it because if your not a programmer and if you don't love to program then you'll most likely get fustrated tring to figure out how to install and then running a simple program. All I wanted was a transparent Kicker Window, there it was on KDE-look.org. There were no exact directions and it had a million dependentcies for the srpm amd rpm versions. And when I finaly got it installed, it still failed to work. Bottom line is that in order from good to bad: Windows, MAC OS, Linux, all the rest.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- But thats all besides the point. What I'm saying is yes, for the average user, the power user, the performance user, and everyone else Windows is hard to beat. And best of all, if you know how to program, you can crack open things such as the Kernel and Shell. I linux thats all free, they give you the source codea and everything but you have to know how to compile and RUN it. |
|
|
|
|
10-22-2002, 03:08 PM
|
#18 |
|
Member (11 bit)
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Blue Springs, MO
Posts: 1,766
|
Krono, what do you really think?
 Great rant. CH |
|
|
|
|
10-22-2002, 03:12 PM
|
#19 |
|
Resident Slacker
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Suisun City, California (i know, where the hell is that?!?!?)
Posts: 2,620
|
the way i see it, mac's are geared toward people that have no idea what to do with a computer. the new commercials coming out sort of prove that the people using them are idiots (i'm not saying all mac users are idiots, but those new commercials sort of make it look like that). the fact is that when you buy it, you get exactly what you paid for... and that's it. you're stuck with it until you decide to buy another one. hardware and os upgrades are near impossible. aside from a few desktop publishing apps, the software compatable with macs blows as well.
if you're a gamer, a hobbyist, or someone that needs a computer to perform important functions, you need a pc. if you need something to look cool on your desk, but don't care about it's major lack of operating ability, you need a mac.
__________________
Friends help you move. REAL friends help you move bodies. - me quite possibly the best book ever written... by me |
|
|
|
|
10-22-2002, 03:13 PM
|
#20 |
|
Member (5 bit)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 26
|
Is it just me or is KronoLeginaire's last post repetitively redundant?
|
|
|
|
|
10-22-2002, 03:15 PM
|
#21 | |
|
Resident Slacker
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Suisun City, California (i know, where the hell is that?!?!?)
Posts: 2,620
|
Quote:
edit: oh, nevermind |
|
|
|
|
|
10-22-2002, 03:30 PM
|
#22 |
|
Member (10 bit)
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Harvard University
Posts: 935
|
Well I think that Apple has some great computers but yeah, the fact you can't upgrade them to death or run allot of programs on them dose limit their ability but I must say its stability is near unmatched because it dosen't have to argue with un-supported hardware because if it can be hooked up then its supported. Windows is the only OS thats pirated because the company that makes it is headed by a pirate itself, Bill Gates, you don't see MAC OS X ISOs on IRC. If you have a mac then you have a good os, and you can easily upgrade in a few minutes. Linux is really starting to tick me off because its only for people who hate Mickysoft and serious server admins but yet people float around talking about how great it simply because of its stabilty, bull, it may be stable but its easily crashed when an actual person is using it. It crashed like 5 times on me, but thats irrrelevant. Its fun to use windows because it seems that the most waves are created by a win32 community. You can customize it to pure death and then some. Whatever people see in Linux can be retrived out of Windows, if its not there then MAKE it there. Who's gonna stop you? Billy Boy and his team of money hungry programmers? Nah, they're too busy tring to pull people though rediculous "Activation" steps, like calling in. windows 2000 is nice because it isn't loaded with allot of crap that was in 9x, me and xp. Xp's inital GUI is fruity gay and uncontiously coaxes your mind into inducing bow movements, but easily modified. Yeah, I'm starting not to like Linux much because you'll go though L tring to do simple stuff. Oh well...... Mac os has a nice GUI, that and the simple user friendlieness compeled me to start this post. It looks so nice, but in all actuality the fun ends real quick. Just like a said MAC is for the very very novice user who dose the email, websurfing and chat thing, ya know? Whats Ironic about it is this:
Lets say Bob wants to Go to a MSN chat room and talk with a few of his mates. MSN has a radio in certain rooms that plays music from selectable stations. He has 3 computers, each with a different OS, here are his choices: Windows: no problems, works fine as long as you have the latest versions of MSN chat and Windows Media Player. Mac OS: Works fine when using the Internet Explorer browser for Mac, any other browser such as "netscape" or "opera" could produce intrestingly-wierd results. Linux: Nope. Can't do it. It has something to do with Microsoft so, no go there buddy. Even though the information in my above example may not be as consistant as I wish it was, you get my point. |
|
|
|
|
10-22-2002, 03:36 PM
|
#23 | |
|
Member (10 bit)
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Harvard University
Posts: 935
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
10-22-2002, 03:39 PM
|
#24 | |
|
Member (10 bit)
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Harvard University
Posts: 935
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
10-22-2002, 03:52 PM
|
#25 |
|
Member (11 bit)
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Blue Springs, MO
Posts: 1,766
|
Krono,
Lets see if I can summarize your points. Linux is for really smart people who think for themselves. Apple is for idiots who have trouble plugging in a light. Windows is for everybody else. Did I properly summarize your take? Actually, I get and like your points. You are a little harsh on Linux, after all it really is "shareware." CH |
|
|
|
|
10-22-2002, 04:01 PM
|
#26 |
|
Member (10 bit)
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Harvard University
Posts: 935
|
lemme adjust that a bit.
Linux is for really smart people who really don't need to depend on their PC for critical tasks such as online banking or website management. Mac is people who would buy a computer from Super K-Mart and don't know how to turn on their own Tv Windows is for everyone else. i'm actually tring to emphizie the point of linux... which I dunno what it is. |
|
|
|
|
10-22-2002, 04:03 PM
|
#27 |
|
Member (11 bit)
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,729
|
I think the whole point is ease of use. The OS is set up to be easy, which for UNIX was no small feat. I only considered a Mac because of OS-X. And I’m damn glad I did. I find that the people who bash OS-X have never used it anyway. Someone tell me how to set up a web server in windows, is it a 1 click affair. No of course it isn’t. How about an ftp server? No, of course not. How about in Linux?. Well Maybe, but only if you can get past the awful GUI and find the options in the first place. This is where OS-X beats them all hands down. Ease of use for regular computer users. You dont have to be a UNIX guru. Setting up a Web or FTP server is a 1 click affair. Sure it's easy (isnt it strange how we expect an OS to be complicated, and when it isnt it must be for idiots), but does that mean you are "stupid" for using it, on the contrary, I would imagine it makes one more efficient and free to do other things. Maybe that explains IBM purchasing OS-X server!!. I would think it's more inane to criticize something you have never laid a finger on in the first place. As for customizing the OS. Please, think about that for a minute. The OS has BSD underpinnings, it’s UNIX, do you also consider Linux an un-customizable OS?
Last edited by Mac Medic; 10-22-2002 at 04:10 PM. |
|
|
|
|
10-22-2002, 04:29 PM
|
#28 |
|
Member (11 bit)
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Blue Springs, MO
Posts: 1,766
|
Actually, I use Linux for critical tasks, but lately have found myself feeling pretty stupid. I have been trying to interface with a bbs that uses telnet. No small task for an old brain.
CH Last edited by Computer Hobbyist; 10-22-2002 at 04:31 PM. |
|
|
|
|
10-22-2002, 04:34 PM
|
#29 |
|
Member (10 bit)
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Harvard University
Posts: 935
|
oh well, CH said it was for stupid people, lol, not me. But yeah, anyway
|
|
|
|
|
10-22-2002, 04:39 PM
|
#30 |
|
Member (11 bit)
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,729
|
Because Mac OS X is based on Darwin, an open source Unix in the BSD family, you can compile and install a lot of the programs that Linux and BSD users have been enjoying.
You can run an entire new class of applications, many free, if you install XWindows on Mac OS X. Some of these applications include GIMP (a Photoshop-like editor) and OpenOffice (an office-like suite of applications). You'll want to be somewhat familiar with the command line to use them, but the installation of XWindows itself is surprisingly easy. It doesn't get any more customizable than that. Yet again I find myself pointing to the ease-of-use of the operating system, especially for first-time computer users. Apparently some of us believe this is detrimental to the operating system, although I find it gives it advantages over any other operating system available. Not to mention the applications that are included such as I-photo, I-dvd, I-tunes (which kicks the ass of any Windows media player application available) and i-movie, then there are all of the free open source applications that can be run on OS X. And then there's the GUI, something that the open source community and the Linux developers have been trying to perfect for as long as I can remember. Unfortunately they don't have the time nor money to invest in developing a GUI as outstanding as that of OS X. In fact all the open source community has been able to do is come up with a rather lame attempt at emulating Microsoft Windows, i.e.KDE. Which is probably the most unintuitive GUI I have ever come across. So I would conclude this way, those of you who enjoy the advantages of UNIX or Linux but cannot tolerate the unintuitive aspects of the operating system should seriously give OS X a try, go to your nearest Apple store and play with it for one-hour and believe me when you do you'll never go back. |
|
|
|
|
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Linear Mode
