Keldyn Posted August 4, 2002 Share Posted August 4, 2002 Zombie9920: I teach english at high school level and I can assure you, that your usage of the word "commute" is not only incorrect, but highly amusing:D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tesseract Posted August 4, 2002 Share Posted August 4, 2002 Originally posted by Keldyn Zombie9920: I teach english at high school level and I can assure you, that your usage of the word "commute" is not only incorrect, but highly amusing:D OT: cool...you are a teacher......you need to come to my school and replace one of the english teachers that is there now. you would be very appreciated, i will tell you. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JrDZ13 Posted August 4, 2002 Share Posted August 4, 2002 I really don't understand these threads, but I can't say that I hate them... I just think that there is a lot of misuse of information, and a lot of "mine is better" going on. I'm also confused on all the controversy. I am a Windows user so I admit that I'm slightly baised, but i do keep and open mind and i would like to be corrected if i make any mistakes in this post. I'm just trying to get the facts straight. SPEED - PC WINS Macs are built off a different structure than PCs (X86) and more efficient. However, the fastest mac (duel 1 ghtz G4) CANNOT beat the fastest PC. But I assume that a duel Xeon 1 ghtz would be beaten out by a dual G4 1ghtz. (again I ecourage you to correct me if I'm wrong) GUI - DRAW (though OSX wins in my opinion) The graphical interface of both macs and pcs is something I've always seen as a matter of opinion. So anyone that says AQUA IS BETTER THAN LUNA, is arrogant. Though I use XP (and now .net server) I am also intrigued by the OSX GUI. I've used it in stores and love how smooth it is. However, I dont know, at the end of the day, if the GUI really matters at all. I know I'm not switching over for that. STABLILITY - DRAW This one could start a flame war (and often does). I do agree that MACs are unbelievably stable, though absolutly NOT PERFECT. I have also seen my share of windows crashes. However, you have to keep in mind WHY windows xp crashes. In my experience, its because i have installed beta software or something like that. However, I am near certain that if I only ran a limited number of products on Windows XP, such as Office XP (which has never ever crashed for me) Windows would be as stable as a MAC. Also, I am confused as to how many people (most MAC users) say my windows crashes all the time!!! I admit that Windows 9x and especially windows ME were terrible for stability. But my XP and .net have crahed only once (my fault not the COMPUTER's). SOFTWARE - PC wins Again, I like the APPLE software with OSX. But in just about every catagory (word processing, media, internet, P2P, etc.) PCs have a lot more variety, and in that variety, better alternatives. For example, BOTH PCs and MACS have Internet explorer. Many see it as as the best explorer. However, if you wanted an alternative, PCs would have more variety. Therefore PC wins. sorry. to be continued..... g2g to bed, feel free to comment so far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
realmccoy Posted August 4, 2002 Share Posted August 4, 2002 Tesseract and crackhbob I have to agree with you, the MAC vs. PC always for some reason resort to name calling. It is funny that a person can describe so perfectly why the PC is faster than the MAC ,or MAC is faster than the PC , but then if a person disagrees they got be called a name Where?s the logic in that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L33T P3NIS Posted August 4, 2002 Share Posted August 4, 2002 listen, people..there is really no need for ignorant comments, probably more then half the people on her commenting on the mac have yet to use one cuz they wont play your leisure suit larry games or etc.. give it up, both have weakness's and strengths Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenno Posted August 4, 2002 Share Posted August 4, 2002 Without this thread, lots of Mac and PC users will be more friendly than to call each other names. I saw a few people make good comments about how one should grow up and talk like an adult. Anyway, as there's a Moderator for this one, and if it's okay with him/her, I guess those who find this topic boring and should have been closed, should just leave this thread like I do. :) Hmm... why am I making this post when I dont even like this thread? Well, cuz i don't want people to hate each other more, especially between those Mac and PC users. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
realmccoy Posted August 4, 2002 Share Posted August 4, 2002 JrDZ13 , I agree with you , any poorly written software , or driver can make any OS unstable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaron901 Posted August 4, 2002 Share Posted August 4, 2002 Yes i think Macs are fast. my dad's powerbook is faster than my athlon1.1. :sleeping: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caustiK Posted August 4, 2002 Share Posted August 4, 2002 JrDZ13, i agree with you wholeheartedly. and the original topics was about speed, not mac gui vs. xp gui, mac soft. vs. xp soft, etc. and if you read the article, obviously xp (or x86, really) wins. and to anyone saying "well the mac is gonna loose because it only 1ghz and the intel proc is 2.53ghz" - do some research before posting garbage like that. in fact use apple's own argument that "mhz doesn't matter." fact is a dual 1ghz setup is the fastest you can go with the powerpc platform at the moment. the fastest x86 would be a p4 2.53ghz (or the dual athlons). so comparing fastest avaliable ppc vs. fastest available x86, x86 wins. and there are a lot of multimedia benches! so how is a mac better for mulitmedia? argh... :s - JrDZ13 summed up the rest of what i'd have said, so reread his post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smoke Posted August 4, 2002 Share Posted August 4, 2002 People who don't have either computer can't talk much about the computer they don't have because they don't experience it everyday. Case in point, I can't really talk about the negative points of the Mac because I don't have any Mac computers here in my house. But I can talk a little about the PC. A lot of mac users I have seen that talk about stability have experiences with PC's that seem like they are mostly with Windows9598ME which are notorious for crashing especially if you don't keep it totally clean. If you use WindowsNT2000XP, or a *nix distro (and I'm not talking about MacOSX when I say *nix, because you can't install that on a PC and the Darwin port doesn't count because that doesn't include the libraries that run most programs you take for granted). It'd be like having someone say that Mac's suck because OS9 or below has crashed for them quite a bit. Speed is also a little subjective. But there are benchmarks out there (like the article that started this thread). I'd be wary about which you believe though because benchmarks can easily be tainted to favor one over the other. I say try out both and see which one you think is faster and works better for you and pick that one. As for graphics capability, icon support is better on MacOSX. But just think of this as far as the rest go, stick a Mac in front of a bad artist and it won't make them better than a great artist on a PC, or vice versa. Stick a PC in front of a bad artist and he won't be able to make art as good as the great artist on a Mac. Computers only return back what you put into them, as the saying goes, garbage in, garbage out. But I have to say that I wouldn't mind being stuck in front of either system as long as it has a good operating system on it, on the PC that would be an NT based or *nix based OS. On the Mac it would be OSX. Also while it is true that there are more virii for the PC that doesn't mean you will automatically get them. You have to use your brain and not open all attachements you get in the e-mail. It might also be wise not to use outlook express as your e-mail client. You should also watch where you download stuff from. I have been using a PC for many years now and I haven't gotten any virii even when I was using 9598ME. Saying otherwise is like saying if you drive a car that automatically means you are going to get in a crash or if you run a *nix box that automatically means you are going to allow root access to all script kiddies on the net. You know what my saying is, "We live in a cross platform world, why don't we start acting like it." But I guess there will always be debates as to which is better (just like with anything i.e. cars) and both sides will be saying things that aren't totally accurate. I try to be pretty accurate with what I say but it is after all in the end just my opinion. I do think that both are fine and depending on your needs you can't go wrong with choosing either. But you have to do research you can't blindly get a system and expect it to be the greatest or just because others told you what you need. As I said earlier try both and pick the one you like. P.S. I apoligize for the length of this post but I haven't really talked much about this and this is my opportunity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazzla Veteran Posted August 4, 2002 Veteran Share Posted August 4, 2002 Well, I can't resist. A thread like this is kinda like watching an accident. You know it's bad but you can't help but watching. First off, is Neowin really full of childish little kids? When you are comparing this, how about you use both platforms before spouting your mouth off and looking like an ignoramus. I myself own a PC and a Mac. Wow, yes, you really can own both. I use Office on both computers, although I would have to say that Office X is better. Even Microsoft would have to say that. I use Photoshop on both computers, although again, I would have to say that using it on OS X is better. Simply because there isn't a big old damn nasty grey background. I play games on both computers, I'm not a hardcore PC gamer so I'm not concerned with getting 247.2956 FPS on a Quake 3 timed demo, if I can play a game a a playable speed, it's good enough for me. Wolfenstein, AOE2 and Warcraft 3 run well on both PC and Mac. I have consoles for games, much better experience with 4 mates all in the same room then playing a faceless guy a million miles away. Stability, I ran Windows 2000 then Windows XP, I know what stability is. XP is very stable, OS X is very stable. I've never been forced to reboot in either (well once in XP because I was trying to get my CDRW to work, does that count?). So stability on both is impressive. Whoever said OS 9 was unstable was right, but that's like me saying that Windows ME is the only OS available to PC users. I don't upgrade my PC's that often, gamers upgrade their PC way more then a regular consumer would. My Mac will serve me for a few years yet. 4 year old Mac's run Jaguar very well, will I be saying the same when I try to run Longhorn on my PC in 2004/5? Comments such as "MACS SUXX0RZ" and crap like that are pure ignorance, I'd be really interested to see how far these sort of people get in life with such a closed mind... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smoke Posted August 4, 2002 Share Posted August 4, 2002 Dazzla, I hope you weren't adressing me with those comments. Because I wasn't putting down the Mac. Although I can't lie and say I have a lot of experience with it that doesn't mean I don't have any experience with anything. If you really think that I was putting down the Mac you need to reread my comments more carefully next time. My point is that there are both positive and negatives to having either system and right now for me really the only big negative part of owning a PC is other people lording their choices over me and putting me down for having one. Personally though, about gaming, I hate split screen and using a gamepad to play a FPS. But that wasn't really the question here. This isn't a computer versus consoles thread. =? But anyway I never said that OSX was bad or even inferior. *gets on top of a mountain and yells* OSX IS A GREAT OS!!! Ok happy now? I dare anyone to point out anyplace where I said Mac's suck. P.S. My PC served me many years also, because I know how to use it well just as you probably know how to use your Mac well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazzla Veteran Posted August 4, 2002 Veteran Share Posted August 4, 2002 lol, no, don't worry, it definitely wasn't to you. Yours was one of the few replies worth reading. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wickedkitten Veteran Posted August 4, 2002 Veteran Share Posted August 4, 2002 Originally posted by JrDZ13 SOFTWARE - PC wins Again, I like the APPLE software with OSX. But in just about every catagory (word processing, media, internet, P2P, etc.) PCs have a lot more variety, and in that variety, better alternatives. For example, BOTH PCs and MACS have Internet explorer. Many see it as as the best explorer. However, if you wanted an alternative, PCs would have more variety. Therefore PC wins. sorry. to be continued..... g2g to bed, feel free to comment so far. Better variety != equal better alternatives. For OSX you have opera, ie, moz, chimera, omniweb, icab, netscape, cocoa browser, dillo, lynx, and any other browser that you can get for *nix that will run under xdarwin, with osx you can run os9 progs, osx progs, and *nix progs so how exactly do windows users have more software available? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wickedkitten Veteran Posted August 4, 2002 Veteran Share Posted August 4, 2002 Originally posted by caustiK JrDZ13, i agree with you wholeheartedly. and the original topics was about speed, not mac gui vs. xp gui, mac soft. vs. xp soft, etc. and if you read the article, obviously xp (or x86, really) wins. and to anyone saying "well the mac is gonna loose because it only 1ghz and the intel proc is 2.53ghz" - do some research before posting garbage like that. in fact use apple's own argument that "mhz doesn't matter." fact is a dual 1ghz setup is the fastest you can go with the powerpc platform at the moment. the fastest x86 would be a p4 2.53ghz (or the dual athlons). so comparing fastest avaliable ppc vs. fastest available x86, x86 wins. and there are a lot of multimedia benches! so how is a mac better for mulitmedia? argh... :s - JrDZ13 summed up the rest of what i'd have said, so reread his post. Apple said mhz doesn't matter because they don't care about numbers, that statement was based on perfomance not the immortal ****ing contest of "how many megahertz doesn't your cpu have" that gamers seem to base their lives around. well the mac is gonna loose because it only 1ghz and the intel proc is 2.53ghz - do some research before posting garbage like that uh what research would I really need to do when I've got common sense? OOh I guess I'd better go research why a 48x cd burner burns cd's faster than a 24x one as well then. Why dont you go do some research on chip architexture. Before you go spouting off about how x86 is "faster" than ppc remember you are testing a chipset that came out 8 months ago to one that was just introduced last month Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JrDZ13 Posted August 4, 2002 Share Posted August 4, 2002 Originally posted by Wickedkitten Better variety != equal better alternatives. For OSX you have opera, ie, moz, chimera, omniweb, icab, netscape, cocoa browser, dillo, lynx, and any other browser that you can get for *nix that will run under xdarwin, with osx you can run os9 progs, osx progs, and *nix progs so how exactly do windows users have more software available? Sorry for over simlifying the matter, but I was just making a point that Windows does have more, tho not necesssarily BETTER, software alternitives. If you go on download.com, under internet browsers, there are 200+ listings for the PC. The mac has 49. Sorry thats juat the way the world works. If apple controlled 95% of the market, then I would be the opposite. But its not :( :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
giantsnyy2002 Posted August 4, 2002 Share Posted August 4, 2002 Originally posted by Dazzla First off, is Neowin really full of childish little kids? >>Yes.. i am beginning to believe this too When you are comparing this, how about you use both platforms before spouting your mouth off and looking like an ignoramus. I myself own a PC and a Mac. Wow, yes, you really can own both. >> Finally, someone who agrees with me... I will be buying an eMac soon so i can finally have both platforms away from school (im gettin the eMac b/c im limited with money, as im only 15) I use Office on both computers, although I would have to say that Office X is better. Even Microsoft would have to say that. >> They did say that, as far as I know I use Photoshop on both computers, although again, I would have to say that using it on OS X is better. Simply because there isn't a big old damn nasty grey background. >>yeah, i hate that background. I play games on both computers, I'm not a hardcore PC gamer so I'm not concerned with getting 247.2956 FPS on a Quake 3 timed demo, if I can play a game a a playable speed, it's good enough for me. Wolfenstein, AOE2 and Warcraft 3 run well on both PC and Mac. I have consoles for games, much better experience with 4 mates all in the same room then playing a faceless guy a million miles away. >>i have to truely agree with you there dazzla, as when i play games, i play them for fun, i dont give a damn about the FPS, and people who play in multiplayer rooms often cheat, and camp at spawn points (medal of honor specifically) Stability, I ran Windows 2000 then Windows XP, I know what stability is. XP is very stable, OS X is very stable. I've never been forced to reboot in either (well once in XP because I was trying to get my CDRW to work, does that count?). So stability on both is impressive. Whoever said OS 9 was unstable was right, but that's like me saying that Windows ME is the only OS available to PC users. >>I agree... Comments such as "MACS SUXX0RZ" and crap like that are pure ignorance, I'd be really interested to see how far these sort of people get in life with such a closed mind... >>the ignorant people will be too ignorant to understand what you are trying to say here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLapointe Posted August 4, 2002 Share Posted August 4, 2002 I like both PC and Mac. But people have to remember what they are mostly used for. PC for everyday use. Macs are mostly used for graphics artist. That is changing everyday now and is not so anymore. So I would have to say this. I like JVC's HDTV better than Sony's HDTV so does that make Sony's TV any worse than the JVC TV...No. I like the JVC the most because there's a couple of buttons on the remote that I use quite often (change the input from HD compenent input to S-video when I want to change the channel from HDHBO to non-HD Starz channel). On the sony I have to go through the whole stupid menu system to do that. The other buttons are the same situation. My point is macs have things the PC doesn't have like the JVC TV has things the Sony TV doesn't have. But in no way does the quality of a Sony or JVC suck. Some features appeal to me but maybe not to you. You may not care about the button but it drives me nuts not to have it. I used the Sony for 10 days and returned it because of that button and got the JVC with the button and I did not notice a difference at all between the two except with the JVC I didn't have to worry about having to have a mental breakdown and blow up my TV because it drove me nuts. You have to pick what will give you more enjoyment. The JVC gave me much more enjoyment than the Sony. But there both just as good. I'm rambling on and on but I think you've got my point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wickedkitten Veteran Posted August 4, 2002 Veteran Share Posted August 4, 2002 Originally posted by JrDZ13 Sorry for over simlifying the matter, but I was just making a point that Windows does have more, tho not necesssarily BETTER, software alternitives. If you go on download.com, under internet browsers, there are 200+ listings for the PC. The mac has 49. Sorry thats juat the way the world works. If apple controlled 95% of the market, then I would be the opposite. But its not :( :p and numbers mean what exactly? oh right, absolutely **** all. Thats like going to have a **** in the toilet when you have diarreah. Just cos theres a lot of **** in the bowl that doesn't necessarily mean its a good thing. I'd rather have one hard chunky poo over 40,000 loose runny ones anyday :rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keldyn Posted August 4, 2002 Share Posted August 4, 2002 I've suddenly just lost my appetite....:s Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uniacid Posted August 4, 2002 Share Posted August 4, 2002 Originally posted by Wickedkitten I'd rather have one hard chunky poo over 40,000 loose runny ones anyday :rolleyes: LMFAO!!!!!!!!!!! I've suddenly just lost my appetite.... ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!! :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crackhbob Posted August 4, 2002 Share Posted August 4, 2002 What a horrible time to be eating cereal... Keldyn's words summed it all up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caustiK Posted August 4, 2002 Share Posted August 4, 2002 ok, wickedkitten, since you obviously didn't read my post, but just flopped it over into the "anti-Mac" category: I LIKE MACS - Macs are cool, no PC is like Mac, those things are sweet, i wish i could afford one! (ok the last one was kinda sarcastic ;) ) what i was saying (i'll try to more clear this time) - apple said "mhz doesn't matter" because *at the time* the fastest powerpc procs rivaled the fastest x86 hardware. the simple fact that the pc had higher clock cycles didn't mean diddly squat. it's the same argument amd is using, basically. a "slower" athlon can be faster than a p4 with a higher mhz rating. same deal with g3/g4, except it's an entirely different architecture! so mhz doesn't matter - ok got all of that? (not trying to insult anyone's intelligence who already knew the above). now to my original argument - the fastest mac you can buy *right now* - is a dual 1ghz g4 setup. correct me if i'm wrong. the fastest x86 setup you can buy would be the intel 2.53ghz p4 or the dual athlons. still good? ok. in the benchmarks (which DO matter) the Mac looses. and numbers do matter because some of those numbers represent time! Are you saying I won't notice an extra minute waiting for a video stream to render? or an extra 5? and as the streams get more complex, the waits will just get longer, and the difference more evident. maybe you won't notice it but i will. and yes a 2.53ghz g4 would beat a 2.53ghz p4. but who cares? show me where i can buy a 2.53ghz g4 will you please? the whole point of the article is fastest speed *available*. argh! and to end - I LIKE MACS. it's just that the specified article is going for speed - nothing to do with the os even! i'm not arguing that. Macs are sweet machines, but they ain't the fastest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
traksys Posted August 4, 2002 Share Posted August 4, 2002 So choices in software is bad? Wow, you really are brainwashed aren't you. Do you actually believe that any software not available on the Mac platform is worthless? Do you even see the lack of logic in that statement? No, you probably wont. I have no problems with Macs, although they are a huge rip-off IMO, but to follow any company blindly is just pathetic. Must be boring to have multitudes of "yes-men" (steve). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travis_l_969 Posted August 4, 2002 Share Posted August 4, 2002 That pooh analogy is hilarious but a little disturbing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts