NeonGenesis Posted October 2, 2002 Share Posted October 2, 2002 I'm not a Mac fan for many of the same reasons Vlad just stated. I'm forced to use Macs with OS 9 in some situations, and I really don't care for it. The lack of a command line is obnoxious, and I personally found it lacking beyond it's ease of use and idiot-proof-ed-ness. Though I will admit that OS X is impressive, and the best thing Apple has put out yet, I will continue to be a Windows 2000 (and in the very near future, Linux) user for some time to come, I imagine. It's just simply more flexible, IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparkleytone Posted October 3, 2002 Share Posted October 3, 2002 Originally posted by Spacce I've noticed that Windows users are more aggressive.. as for Mac, and linux users are more calm and settled.. to elaborate...mac and linux users are more educated. yes there are exceptions...but on the whole....i'm right. mr_da3m0n: nice screenie. thats a sweet wallpaper and probably the nicest linux desktop i've seen in a while. the brushed metal really makes gnome more elegant. to clarify...when i argue for the mac, it only applies to Mac OS X and current hardware, because frankly i hated macs before OS 9. i appreciate 9 now, but i still can't stand it. i like to multitask kthx. OS X is simply the best combination of looks/usability/power i have ever come across in an OS. coupled with machines that truly have personality its a win all across the board. of course i dont expect anyone to understand if they havent ever owned mac hardware. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
praseodymium Posted October 3, 2002 Share Posted October 3, 2002 Originally posted by sparkleytone to elaborate...mac and linux users are more educated. yes there are exceptions...but on the whole....i'm right. Give me a break on the more educated bit when it comes to a Mac. UNIX OK, but Mac, NO WAY! One thing Apple has got going for it is that their products are so easy to use. Looking back, I rememeber using the Apple Classic II, coding (if you can call it that) using HyperCard, at school, and then coming home and wondering why in the world I was forced to stare at C:> at home. But, you've got to get something straight. There is no way to determine whether a user of one platform is smarter then the other, because they are using said platform. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azazel- Posted October 3, 2002 Share Posted October 3, 2002 Originally posted by zivan56 You cant find anything like that, since only Apple has rights to make a MAC laptop :right: . For $1,200 you can get a Pentium 4 2.0Ghz laptop with cd writer+dvd rom+copy of Windows XP oem, and all the rest of the stuff that comes with a normal laptop from a local computer store. At some point, are you actually going to start reading what I post? I said "major reseller", not something locally built. Like Gateway, Dell, Compaq, etc etc. If you're not going to pay attention to what I say and just post irrelevant things, then I'd appreciate it if you didn't quote me like you're actually addressing my points. Actually, now that I think of it, show me a link to this $1,200 P4 2.0 ghz laptop with built in combo drive, dual usb and built in firewire. I'd actually like to see it. Not that I'd actually consider buying it. I just need a good laugh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tesseract Posted October 3, 2002 Share Posted October 3, 2002 What happened to the Linux screenshots? :rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparkleytone Posted October 3, 2002 Share Posted October 3, 2002 Originally posted by praseodymium Give me a break on the more educated bit when it comes to a Mac. UNIX OK, but Mac, NO WAY! One thing Apple has got going for it is that their products are so easy to use. Looking back, I rememeber using the Apple Classic II, coding (if you can call it that) using HyperCard, at school, and then coming home and wondering why in the world I was forced to stare at C:> at home. But, you've got to get something straight. There is no way to determine whether a user of one platform is smarter then the other, because they are using said platform. hey idiot. educated not computer literate as in :o :o SCHOOL :o :o Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wired57 Posted October 3, 2002 Share Posted October 3, 2002 Dang this topic is way off now. lets move back to screen shots I'll get one next time I'm in linux and post it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zivan56 Posted October 3, 2002 Share Posted October 3, 2002 Originally posted by azazel- At some point, are you actually going to start reading what I post? I said "major reseller", not something locally built. Like Gateway, Dell, Compaq, etc etc. If you're not going to pay attention to what I say and just post irrelevant things, then I'd appreciate it if you didn't quote me like you're actually addressing my points. Actually, now that I think of it, show me a link to this $1,200 P4 2.0 ghz laptop with built in combo drive, dual usb and built in firewire. I'd actually like to see it. Not that I'd actually consider buying it. I just need a good laugh. Actually it is built by a major reseller, ECS. Look here, $1999 CAD or $1256 USD with all the stuff you mentioned. See how Apple has brainwashed you with regards to notebook pricing? Did that address your point? :cheeky: The only one getting a good laugh is me :D EDIT: According to the Apple website (http://www.apple.com/ibook/specs.html) the 12.1" model only has a 20GB HD and no USB 2.0 ports, just 1.1. Plus only a 600Mhz or 700Mhz processor with SDRAM and 100Mhz FSB, while this one has a 400Mhz FSB, PC2100 DDR SDRAM, USB 2.0, 15.1" screen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azazel- Posted October 4, 2002 Share Posted October 4, 2002 Originally posted by zivan56 Actually it is built by a major reseller, ECS. Look here, $1999 CAD or $1256 USD with all the stuff you mentioned. See how Apple has brainwashed you with regards to notebook pricing? Did that address your point? :cheeky: The only one getting a good laugh is me :D EDIT: According to the Apple website (http://www.apple.com/ibook/specs.html) the 12.1" model only has a 20GB HD and no USB 2.0 ports, just 1.1. Plus only a 600Mhz or 700Mhz processor with SDRAM and 100Mhz FSB, while this one has a 400Mhz FSB, PC2100 DDR SDRAM, USB 2.0, 15.1" screen. This link is a joke, right? It's a scanned newspaper clipping, half of which I can't even read because its so blurry. You think I'd spend my money on that? Um...yeah. Once again, I said MAJOR RESELLER, like Dell, Compaq, HP, Gateway, Toshiba, Winbook...do I need to go on, or are you starting to figure this out yet? I've never heard of ECS. As far as being brainwashed...um...no, I'm typing this on a Dell Inspiron 4100. If I wanted the Inspiron 8200, I'd have gotten it. As hard as it may be for you to get it through that little head of yours, I WANT AN APPLE. If I wanted some hodge-podge laptop some guy puts together in his basement, I'd have one. When will you people realize that a different platform running a different OS will have different system requirements. Ask anyone running a server on a 486 running linux. A 700 mhz G3 with adequate ram will run OS X quite well. I'm starting to feel like I'm talking to a milk jug here... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparkleytone Posted October 4, 2002 Share Posted October 4, 2002 rofl i KNEW he would post some link to a no-name clonebook. Just goes to show that mediocrity is probably the single-most ubiquitous 'feature' in the x86 world. azazel: the milk reference is a little too nice. it implies that he was still spawned from something at least semi-intelligent. obviously this is not the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zivan56 Posted October 4, 2002 Share Posted October 4, 2002 azazel-, Go to the website if you cant see, I guess you need glasses or something to see the price and the features printed in big letters. If you never heard of ECS that?s pretty sad, ECS makes motherboards and like Acer has a very good line of laptops available. This is what I hear from everybody, face it that 2.0Ghz will always be better than 600 or 700Mhz, no matter what x86 or PPC it is. When will you people realize that A Pentium 4 2.0Ghz will run with 256DDR ram and all those features will run better and faster with any operating system available on the Market, try Linux on that processor and on the P4, which do you think will perform better. You are forgetting the fact that you can get a cheaper laptop with more features for less than the cost of an iBook, but I guess you people have money to blow on stuff. sparkleytone, No name clone? That just shows your computer knowledge, it just goes to show the lack of knowledge in the PPC worl:rolleyes:s: I fell like I am talking to Mac zombies here, you guys would be perfect for those Apple switch ad:D:D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azazel- Posted October 4, 2002 Share Posted October 4, 2002 Originally posted by zivan56 azazel-, Go to the website if you cant see, I guess you need glasses or something to see the price and the features printed in big letters. If you never heard of ECS that?s pretty sad, ECS makes motherboards and like Acer has a very good line of laptops available. This is what I hear from everybody, face it that 2.0Ghz will always be better than 600 or 700Mhz, no matter what x86 or PPC it is. When will you people realize that A Pentium 4 2.0Ghz will run with 256DDR ram and all those features will run better and faster with any operating system available on the Market, try Linux on that processor and on the P4, which do you think will perform better. You are forgetting the fact that you can get a cheaper laptop with more features for less than the cost of an iBook, but I guess you people have money to blow on stuff. sparkleytone, No name clone? That just shows your computer knowledge, it just goes to show the lack of knowledge in the PPC worl:rolleyes:s: I fell like I am talking to Mac zombies here, you guys would be perfect for those Apple switch ad:D:D b> Ok, since you just can't seem to grasp the concept and move on, I want a Mac. I want to run OS X. If Apple hardware runs X more than fast enough, why should I give two sh!ts if there is a gee-whiz fast P4 system out there, if ican't run the OS that I want to run?b> Is that such a hard concept for you to grasp? Quit trying to beat it though peoples heads that whayoub> want is best for everyone, because it's not. Would you get into a heated argument with someone because they don't drive the same type of car you drive? Probably not. If you did, I'd think you even more ignorant than I already do. So just shut up about it already, and use whatever the hell you want to use. At least people do have a choice, as hard for you to grasp as that may be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zivan56 Posted October 4, 2002 Share Posted October 4, 2002 Last time I checked we were arguing about the value of an iBook towards a normal laptop. People have a right to choose and I see people going "Macs rule, pc's are crap" and stuff like that everywhere from time to time, the people who have Macs or like them are forcing their idea's on other people around here, and then blaming others that they are attacking them because they are using a Mac. I'm here to stand up for the PC world so people like you don't plant false thoughts (i.e Windows XP does not run fast enough on 2Ghz, etc) about how good Macs are and PC's are not. This choice as you call it is you saying, "PC's suck and Macs are great, but you have a choice to buy either". I am not going to post these childish comments about you as you did to me in your later remarks. If you want to continue a civilized discussion, I?m all up for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azazel- Posted October 4, 2002 Share Posted October 4, 2002 Where did I say Windows XP or Linux suck? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bant Veteran Posted October 4, 2002 Veteran Share Posted October 4, 2002 lol you know its kinda funny... every time i hear azazel talk i like macs less... get off your high horse, an operating system is not something to judge people by. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zivan56 Posted October 4, 2002 Share Posted October 4, 2002 Originally posted by azazel- Where did I say Windows XP or Linux suck? When will you people realize that a different platform running a different OS will have different system requirements. Ask anyone running a server on a 486 running linux. A 700 mhz G3 with adequate ram will run OS X quite well. I never said the iBook would not run MAC OSX well, but you seem to be referring to the Windows XP would not run as fast on that same setup with a x86 system.Yeah. Seen it, used it, don't like it. Until they can make *everything* look uniform and the same, it'll look cheap to me If calling Linux cheap looking is not saying it sucks, then what is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vlad Posted October 4, 2002 Share Posted October 4, 2002 Linux sucks. (That would be saying linux sucks). Linux is cheap looking. (That would be saying linux is, in fact, cheap looking) Note that this was written on... Linux xxxx 2.4.19-gentoo-r9 #5 Wed Sep 25 14:14:45 PDT 2002 i686 AuthenticAMD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azazel- Posted October 4, 2002 Share Posted October 4, 2002 Originally posted by zivan56 I never said the iBook would not run MAC OSX well, but you seem to be referring to the Windows XP would not run as fast on that same setup with a x86 system. If calling Linux cheap looking is not saying it sucks, then what is? *sigh* The PowerPC architecture is not the same as the x86 architecture. I was referring to KDE. Not linux in general. I have issues with the GUI choices in Linux. I like Linux. If I could have Aqua on Linux, I'd be happy. But I can't. And since OS X can do essentially everything that Linux can, then I'll use an Apple. I didn't see any use for Apples until OS X came out. I felt the same way most of the Mac haters did. However, I'm not getting everything I want out of an OS with XP or Linux. Simple as that. OS X gives me everything I personally want out of an OS. If I have to use an Apple to get it, oh well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zivan56 Posted October 4, 2002 Share Posted October 4, 2002 Yes, Vlad, but if I replyed thread saying MAC OSX is cheap looking, it would start something like this also. It would also be taken as me flaming or saying MAC OSX sucks. Would it not set all the mac supporters/users off also? People with macs have a right to reply to those type of topics, and should not everbody with a pc be allowed to express their opinions? I see nothing bad about having an argument about which is better and people giving facts and opinions, thats why I reply with facts and opinions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azazel- Posted October 4, 2002 Share Posted October 4, 2002 Originally posted by Bant lol you know its kinda funny... every time i hear azazel talk i like macs less... get off your high horse, an operating system is not something to judge people by. I'm not judging anyone. Right now, I'm defending my choice and preference. Sorry if that offends you. :right: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vlad Posted October 4, 2002 Share Posted October 4, 2002 You want a fact? Here's one: The graphics support in linux SUCKS. It's pathetic. X doesn't contain enough support for advanced graphics hardware features (DRI was a start...), fonts (which have improved), and, well, user friendliness. Changing the resolution/refresh rate of X alone is a hastle - and that's if you know how to. Most people don't. Most people want to be able to right click their desktop (or through some control panel) and access their desktops refresh rate/bpp/resolution/etc/etc simply and efficiently. Note that this doesn't mean loading extra programs, hacking text files, or thumbing through manuals for the correct syntax of a command. Part of the reason other desktops are so successful is because of their SIMPLICITY, something linux lacks (but again, it's getting their). Most people don't need networking support in X. Ever open up konqueror and compare it's dialogue boxes to, say, xmms'? xmms' are pretty ugly aren't they? How about X-Chat? You see where I'm going, right? There's a difference between expressing your opinion based on a feeling (such as my hate for macs) and opinions based on fact (X sucks). And quite frankly, no, not everyone should be allowed to express their opinions. Too many people are simply too stupid to even deserve an opinion (how's THAT for arrogant?) simply because they refuse to acknowledge the truth. If I say "the sky is red" and you say "no, the sky is blue" and I reply with "well, that's just your opinion" it's fairly obvious to see who the moron is in that conversation. But I digress. The fact of the matter is linux in it's desktop form is missing critical pieces of the puzzel which end up making it look cheap. Edit: Fixed a glaring typo. Oops. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zivan56 Posted October 4, 2002 Share Posted October 4, 2002 azazel-, True it is not the same, but thats like the AMD vs Intel fight, AMD runs faster at lower speeds, but the Pentium 4 2.53 can beat the Athlonx XP 2200+ . Although it is a different platform, the Mhz speed measurement still does exist for both, and more since the P4 is more than double the speed of 600Mhz, it will be faster after all (Of course there are optimizations for the x86 platform and PPC which can make either slower/faster depending on the benchmark) You can have Aqua on Linux with stuff like mosfet-liquid and themes, its not a replacement or anything for the real thing, but it can look like almost anything with KDE3. So, I say it is not fair the judge the look of KDE with the default theme (its like saying Windows XP looks awful if it were to ship with the standard Windows theme). OSX and the newer Apple computers are great for video editing and the stuff they are optimized for, or day to day normal use, but you can also do the same thing on Windows, Linux, even if there requirements for the x86 platform are higher. I'm not saying Apple or the OSX OS are bad, I'm here to say there is also an alternative for people that will also work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[LOF]skinnylegs Posted October 4, 2002 Share Posted October 4, 2002 Azael......which IBook are you interested in? There are 4 prices.....$1199, $1249, $1499 or $1799? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zivan56 Posted October 4, 2002 Share Posted October 4, 2002 Vlad, While its true X itself does suck, most Linux distributions fix most of those problems in the versions they include with their distro. For example, in SuSE whenever X is stopped, it freezes my computer totally. Initially, I thought this was the fault of the server, but it turned out to be SuSE using 2 X servers (1 for boot 1024x768x32 @ 60Hz VESA, 1 for the main server running at 1152x864x32 @ 75Hz (set by me)). On the other hand, Debian, Mandrake, RedHat work perfectly even with the same version of X. Your right most people want to right cick and goto properties to change the settings on their card, and some distro's are striving for this, although X was never designed to be a Windows replacement, or a full desktop replacement. While some people make stupid opinions like the person who put "Linux sucks", there is nothing wrong with a opinion backed by one fact, is there not? If you had evidence that the sky is red, I would believe you if you showed me the aurora borealis making the sky red or somthing else. However, in the technology world it is not as easy as that, there are various things to be considered before believing a statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vlad Posted October 4, 2002 Share Posted October 4, 2002 Zivan56, you're correct. Many distributions do "fix" some of X's problems (many disable tcp listening). And while I really wish that linux could compete in the desktop department, lack of funding for such projects (especially in this economy!) make that dream seem very surreal. X in it's current state is overburdened, as it is being put to a task it was simply not designed for. Yes; a fact is a fact is a fact, and an opinion based on a fact is okay by me. The problem in the technology world, however, is that not enough people understand the facts well enough to even deserve an opinion on a subject; they are, essentially, talking out of their asses. Normally I don't have a problem with that (as I myself enjoy that past-time) but in the end, people should still yield to the facts. A perfect example is my hate of macs. Am I essentially talking out of my ass? You bet. Is it an opinion (at least mostly)? Right again. Is it the truth/fact/gospel? Of course not. Mac's just aren't as bad as I'd like them to be, even if I do think of them that way. So what does it all mean? Hell if I know. Probably that you can't say any one desktop solution is better than all the others. They all have their different strengths and weaknesses in conjunction with peoples' individual likes and dislikes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts