more MAC talk

[justinhaaga]

i agree with alot of what leslie says, and that is all i gotta say about this subject.

the crisco's i use at work run powerpc chips risc processor, but they don't run crappy mac os ;D

 

[montanablur]

I'm just glad I work in a creative field and don't have to use a PC.

 

[AKRover]

I use both but my preference is a Mac. If you don't know how to use a PC your not going to do very well in the business world. PCs are cheap and that is what most businesses are going to look at, something that can do what they need for as cheap as possible. Unless it is for a special industry that relies on heavy processing such as science and engineering they will need a more expensive machine but I bet the secretary and bookkeepers are still using e-machines.
I am a photographer and use a Mac in my home office for that and a PC when I'm working for my step fathers construction company doing the bookkeeping, office networking, and things like that. As much as I would like to be using a mac in his office there is no way that would ever happen.
PCs have their place in the world as do Macs. I think it's funny how these threads always turn into a PC vs. Mac discussion.

 

[bri]

1) I am not used to taking that kind of bath, if you are - wanna sell your Rover, brl? 2) I don't have to sell it. You missed that not only is it $500 less, (on jus the Mac) it also has an extra gig of memory, three years apple care (>$200) and an $85 carry case. If you don't want it - don't buy it - and do not criticize the price if you wont pay it. I took a 50% deposit this morning, so I guess the point is moot. I really hate it when people spout an opinion without any thought. A lot of people are looking to save $500 and no one is looking to sell for 50% when there is no need. That is all... bye.

Lighten up and learn how to take criticism without getting bent out of shape.

 

[bri]

<snip>

Today, Macs have switched to Intel chips, and can run Windows. My question is, if Apple is 'superior', why do they feel the need to migrate towards being a more like a PC? Why do engineering schools use PCs instead of Macs? Why are schools migrating away from Apples to PCs?

Because they want to sell more systems and make more money. Windows gets them the compatibility and OS X gets them a lot more than windows.

Are you sure about education? I believe that the migration happened quite a while ago and now Apple is making its way back in. Engineering schools may very well come around too. PTC has had their design tool on the Mac for a few years. Now that Macs can run Windows, you have all the software you need. If vendors start porting and realizing the OS is superior and that applications perform better, it will catch on and they are alreay building some momentum on this front.

Calling Apple 'best' is subjective, isn't it? But I can still answer your question, the reason why they are thinking of anyone is, they want your money. That's the same across the board, with any computer maker. The whole reason Apple dropped the II line and went Mac-only was, they wanted control of your money. With an open architecture, like the II's had and PC's have, you can do anything with it you want. <snip>

Apple's gig is, they want control. You don't have Mac clones, so, they can control the prices. You want parts for a Mac, you go to Apple. It's all about ensuring that you'll be spending your money with them. That's why Macs hadn't run Windows before. But, let's separate hardware and OS/software issues here.

As far as the OS, the Macs have their strengths. But, with computers, it's all up to the programmers, isn't it? What programs are available? Fun stuff. Graphics, iPod tunes, etc. You can write reports, surf the net, watch videos, etc. The software that is written for Macs is easy to use and intuitive. I like Photoshop a lot... although I use a PC version, it is one of the things that originated out of a Mac. What Macs do well, they do well. But have you really compared all the features that the CAD program has compared to AutoCAD, an industry standard? It doesn't compare. It's a toy in comparison. Certain fields, such as mining, surveying, engineering, all are built on PC software architecture, not Mac architecture. Sure, you might have a few ported over, but not most.
<snip>

I think Apples business models is just fine, but likely it will change. I hope that they can keep up development of OS X.

Have you played with photoshop with some really large images and complex processes on OS X vs XP? You should try it out.

I think that you forget again that the Mac can run OS Xx *and* Windows? Macs run windows really well and the apps that are native OSX tend to outperform windows.

An amazing amount of software operates on OSX... sure a lot of specialized software is not there because Apples are not a dime a dozen. Keep your eye on Apple the list of software is growing and if you need something that is not on OS X, just restart into windows.

<snip>

Hardware: For the price of a Mac, a state agency can get two or 3 PCs. Why would they buy a Mac then? If it breaks, they couldn't pull parts off the shelf, or off of another broken machine, and keep going on the spot. The new Macbook, I like that nifty magnetic power-cord that pulls loose. I like that, but, is it critical? Since I'm not doing as heavy stuff at home, I was actually considering one for personal use, if they weren't so much more expensive than a PC. But, the dang things are white... do you know how nasty that's gonna look after spending a month on a coal-mine site? Sure they have a black one available, but for the more expensive price of it, I can get two PC laptops... And, they just sometimes freeze... yeah, sure, older versions of Windows used to, too, but XP's been solid for me. Anyway I don't know if that's fair to hardware, it may be more under the OS....

You apparently have not priced a nice Dell and a nice iMac recently. And is a falicy that it is cheap for companies to pull parts off a shelf and have either the end user or some IT guy fix it.

Further, large companies buy from Dell and other manufactures. With these manufactures you will void the warranty if you just insert an off the shelf part.

Fiddling and fussing with PCs has become the norm and companies eat a lot of resources here. The company I work for builds PCs. They are very specialized and its somewhat funny how customers, many times ask "why are they so expensive?" , we say "its not easy to build them." The customer goes away spends man years building POS PC, with shelfed parts, just to come back later and ask for something good. We usually say, "here is a quote, our prices have gone up." Just kidding.

You're statement is kind of funny, really, Macs really have a proven record of doing some pretty heavy stuff.

If apple ain't your mining gig, I totally understand. Go get a mil spec PC and be done.

It's not like it matters to me personally.... if the computer that I have at work can help me do my job, I'll use it, be it a PC or a Mac. If the Mac could do the job, then I'd use it. The state, though, isn't going to buy Macs, so it's moot. Personally, I think Linux is the better way to go, and we do use it for some servers. It's more efficient, and doesn't have as much baggage as Windows. But, we'd have to port everything.... and that's not going to happen.

I know, I'm wasting my time here, but, hey.... I have a job, in part, because I can use a PC.

 

[bri]

Who felt the need to migrate where? Macs have always had the ability to run Windows apps. Before Virtual PC we had SoftWindows, and for a while there was OrangePC - a complete PC motherboard that fit into the PCI slot of your Macintosh..

While Apple now boats seamless PC-compatability by using pentium architecture, the bottom line is that it really is inferior technology. Will it get faster and faster than the fastest G5? Yes. And in 10 years' time you will probably hear about RISC-based processors only in the context of supercomputers, or as the legend of a technology that was abandoned because there was no market for it.

The latter.

Supercomputers are a dieing breed. I'll be amazed if any of them exist much longer. Its only a matter of time before they are all replaced with clusters and farms of PCs.

 

[jlessard]

Have you played with photoshop with some really large images and complex processes on OS X vs XP? You should try it out.

I have.
And current MACs lose big time.

I use Adobe InDesign and Photoshop and I have a older 1.7Ghz Pentium M Sony that runs circle around my cousins core duo 2Ghz MAC. I have seriously opened an InDesign document, printed it, and closed in the time it takes for his to just open the thing.

I know you're going to try and blame Adobe, but I simply don't care who's fault it is. The fact is buy a new mac right now, and it is about 1/4 of the speed of WindowsXP in those programs.

If you want to try and say the old G5's are faster.. thats pretty easily disputed by the fact that not even Apple is using them anymore.

So where is the advantage in Photoshop?

I think that you forget again that the Mac can run OS Xx *and* Windows? Macs run windows really well and the apps that are native OSX tend to outperform windows.

I have never seen any practical working situation where some one uses virtual PC or dual boots. (I personally tried working like this in my office for a while, and it was just too time consuming having to reboot all the time)

Did you know that you don't need a mac to run osx?
check out. http://wiki.osx86project.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page

Macs and PC's are the same thing now. OSx and XP are not.

 

[bri]

I know quite a few people that use them to dual boot. Its definitely not something that you want to jump between though. Meaning, do one thing, reboot, do another thing reboot, etc. etc. This would be highly inefficient, I would not recommend doing that.

But I have some limited experience running a plugins in photoshop for conversion, filters, etc on large images and it has done much better. This of course is not running XP.

I am not the only one with this experience.

CNET News.com reports that running Photoshop was more than twice as fast as its Mac OS X on the same Intel-based Mac and that it beat out PCs from both Dell and Gateway: "With Windows XP Pro running on a 2.0GHz iMac Core Duo, we ran our Photoshop test in less than half the time it took with the same system running OS X 10.4.5.

There are a benchmarks out there, becareful when you review on dates, versions, processor speeds, os's, etec. In fact many reviews state that the new mac books are the fastest laptops out there.

Some iMacs have been benchmarked to be slightly slower running XP and XP apps than a comparably configure PC.

Macs are PCs, I agree, its more like a difference between a Dell and a Compaq.

To me the mac OS is superior, go read the thread on the discoweb server for my opinions there. That makes it great for the applications that I write and use. Plus its absolutely kill with media-- making it an idea hobby system for me.

I am not trying to say one is absolutely better than another. I can build monster PCs that will kick a imacs ass, but then again, I've been building PCs for years. And I guarantee you it'll cost a helluva lot more $$ than an off-the-shelf mac.

Cheers!

 

[frickjp]

Interesting reading. Not that there's anything wrong with that!

http://www.shelleytherepublican.com/2006/10/13/apple-computer-the-homosexuals-favourite.aspx

 

[bri]

Do explain what you find interesting about it.

 

[simon]

I have.
And current MACs lose big time.

I use Adobe InDesign and Photoshop and I have a older 1.7Ghz Pentium M Sony that runs circle around my cousins core duo 2Ghz MAC. I have seriously opened an InDesign document, printed it, and closed in the time it takes for his to just open the thing.

I know you're going to try and blame Adobe, but I simply don't care who's fault it is. The fact is buy a new mac right now, and it is about 1/4 of the speed of WindowsXP in those programs.

If you want to try and say the old G5's are faster.. thats pretty easily disputed by the fact that not even Apple is using them anymore.

So where is the advantage in Photoshop?



I have never seen any practical working situation where some one uses virtual PC or dual boots. (I personally tried working like this in my office for a while, and it was just too time consuming having to reboot all the time)

Did you know that you don't need a mac to run osx?
check out. http://wiki.osx86project.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page

Macs and PC's are the same thing now. OSx and XP are not.

Bullshit.

S.

 

[jlessard]

But I have some limited experience running a plugins in photoshop for conversion, filters, etc on large images and it has done much better. This of course is not running XP.

I am not the only one with this experience.

CNET News.com reports that running Photoshop was more than twice as fast as its Mac OS X on the same Intel-based Mac and that it beat out PCs from both Dell and Gateway: "With Windows XP Pro running on a 2.0GHz iMac Core Duo, we ran our Photoshop test in less than half the time it took with the same system running OS X 10.4.5.

Just to clarify, I'm not sure what your saying here.

OSX is faster in Photoshop then the same box running XP and Photoshop? or slower?.
The CNET News article reads to me like OSX will run Photoshop slower. "With XP Pro... we ran Photoshop test in less then half the time it took on the same system running OSX"

Just encase you don't know ( you probably do ) Photoshop on OSX Intel runs in Rosetta which is emulating old the processors, which is horribly slow.
You can watch the screen refreshing draw things...

When Adobe Releases CS3 for OSX/Intell, i think it will be a decent platform to do graphic work, but right now I just do see any advantages.

Here are links to the CNET articles encase any one is interested.

http://reviews.cnet.com/4531-10921_7-6546370.html
http://reviews.cnet.com/4531-10921_7-6484737.html
MacBook Pro struggled, forced to process the application through its Rosetta translation program, which resulted in performance that was about five times slower than the PC competition--slower than on even the lowest-end iBook

I'm not trying to make the point that WindowsXP is better, I hate XP and just about everything else Microsoft makes, ASP, .NET VB, IE, non standards complient websites etc.

If I had to go buy a new computer right now OSX just cant cut it.
Its great for email and making funny pictures on photobooth and a few programs that Apple makes.
But I need to get work done(and maybe a few games ), and XP is the only good option.

 

[simon]

again more dissinformation, CS2 is for pre-intel macs wait until march and CS3 will be almost instant blind speed, now TODAY CS2 for winblows on a MacPro will leave any other intel based clone in the dust.. period..

I've been in the graphics world for more than 15 years now, if you belive Cnet or any other winblows cheeleaders by now Apple would be in banckrupcy.. that right there will tell you how much your second hand info is worth.

all half truths, I as a mac user for a log time know the truh, you will be assimilated soon.

how's your ipod?

S.

 

[bri]

Yeah, I realized I posted a bad quote today, but read on there. They made some quotes about it on pc too. Although it was against Pentium D 830.

When I get a chance, I'll try to dig up some that are meaningful.

But really just go give some of this stuff a try, I have tried some stuff that clearly works better than many PCs.

 

[Leslie]

how's your ipod?

LOL!!!


I'm still using a minidisc, but will probably go with a Sansa, maybe a Zune but I'm not sure... definitely won't be an iPod, I downloaded and messed around with but didn't like iTunes... instead, I just get the CD, rip it with EAC/Lame into mp3s on my own.... they're bigger but better that way.

 

[FIVESPDDISCO]

Interesting reading. Not that there's anything wrong with that!

http://www.shelleytherepublican.com/2006/10/13/apple-computer-the-homosexuals-favourite.aspx

i remeber you slep in a tent with another guy not me the mac user

 

[simon]

LOL!!!


I'm still using a minidisc, but will probably go with a Sansa, maybe a Zune but I'm not sure... definitely won't be an iPod, I downloaded and messed around with but didn't like iTunes... instead, I just get the CD, rip it with EAC/Lame into mp3s on my own.... they're bigger but better that way.

well... that's another thread riight there.. but again as a built quality nothing beats an ipod..

S.

 

[frickjp]

And this year, when it's snowing, I'll be in the no-tell motel with 5 other guys. They're all PC users, so it's OK. If any of them were Mac guys, I'd be nervous. BTW, did you know Subarus were popular with the alternative crowd as well? Subaru, Macintosh, never actually seen you out with your wife. That lady you rented for Invasion was nice, though.

 

[Leslie]

Gee, great, I have to get rid of my Impreza now.... and it's been a good commuter, too...

 

[mgreenspan]

didnt care too read any of this so this may be repeat. you can buy a refurbished one, not sure if there are any available for the exact one that you want, but they are generally a few hundred less than the regular cost. there is also a gov't/military discount. can't remember but i think you have to call for that discount, the refurbished ones are on their website i believe, but i'm not really thinking straight right now.