Thinkin of switchin...


Recommended Posts

"Wanting to" is not a compelling reason. "Wanting to" would more appropriately be a "frivolous reason".

By definition, the word "compelling" means.....

1 : to drive or urge forcefully or irresistibly

2 : to cause to do or occur by overwhelming pressure

You're completely missing the point, Dazzla.

skinnylegs,May 5 2003, 00:58] "Wanting to" is not a compelling reason. "Wanting to" would more appropriately be a "frivolous reason".

By definition, the word "compelling" means.....

1 : to drive or urge forcefully or irresistibly

2 : to cause to do or occur by overwhelming pressure

You're completely missing the point, Dazzla.

How about I like iMovie and there are no other app that i tried on the PC that is as easy to use? :D

How about I like iMovie and there are no other app that i tried on the PC that is as easy to use?

I respect that, Macster. I have never used iMovie but I understand it's a great program. Personally, I'm toying around with the new Movie Maker but the verdict isn't out yet. For DVD burning etc., I use Pinnacle.

Compelling, Compelling ...yada! ... Look mate, people get interested into OS X, and Mac's ... that's cool ... but no matter what we "mac user's" say, the person in question really cannot say whether he will lead a more productive lifestyle, via a Mac, or not, without trying one out. i am sure there are many people who have liked OS X, and the hardware, but found it wasn't for them ... so handing out all this crap really doesn't matter, we are generalising ... but every has personal preference and such, and we can agree, not every will like OS X ... much like many users might not like XP ..

If he wants to take an interest, thats cool, if he asks questions, we answer them... But all you seem interested in, is comparitive issues ... everytime anything is suggested, it is added to your list of things forgotten about, and then proceeded with ... "i still look for this compelling reason" ... We get these threads in here, many days of the week, if you're so curious for reasonings ... go lookup 'Search' in this forum, and i am sure you will find many points of view, for which have not be replicated in this post ;)

Hmm...compelling reason. Well, lets see...I switched because I wasn't happy with Microsoft or Windows XP, I didn't feel that the hardware required was justified by the "features" offered by XP, and I don't like the general direction that Microsoft is headed in. I like Linux, but as yet, I didn't feel that linux was a viable alternative as a desktop OS for fulltime usage on my primary home system. I was also dissatisfied with the constant "buy hardware and it's obsolete by the time I walk out the store" infinate loop that the PC platform had locked me into. Yeah, you don't *have* to upgrade, doesn't mean it doesn't drive you freakin' batty trying to stay cutting edge and wanting to. My answer, I got a Apple iBook, and I've been content for 6 months now, with the same system, no desire to upgrade, no reason to want to, and I can still use the same apps (Office v.X, for instance) that I'm required to use because of my job. As for games, I have Gamecube and a PS2, so I'm not left out in the cold in that department, and most of the PC games I played were real time strategy games, so I have WC3 and various others to tinker with.

Compelling reasons, for me, yeah. For you, dunno, don't care. I use what I want, and for me, that justifies everything else.

But all you seem interested in, is comparitive issues

Common sense would dicatate that if someone is considering switching, comparisons would be in order. You seem to be missing the point as well. Let me state one more time that I am not a Mac basher. If you have a Mac and find that it does what you want it to do, who am I to argue with you. On the other hand, if you post on a forum and state that you are into gaming (as the thread starter did) and are wondering if it's a good idea to switch from a PC to a Mac (as the thread starter did), I'm gonna' answer him honestly.

skinnylegs,May 4 2003, 09:58] "Wanting to" is not a compelling reason. "Wanting to" would more appropriately be a "frivolous reason".

What about liking the hardware. There aren't many full-featured PC-notebooks that run 5 hours on the battery, certainly not with the physical characteristics of Apple's line of portable computers.

Then there is the ability to run X11 applications along side your OS X programs with ease (1 command to download/install), a scripting language for the OS that's as easy to write as english, drag+drop installations, zero-configuration networking, iapps, and peripheral support (what is supported works perfectly).

Wanting to use a tool is a compelling reason. If I want to use OS X I'm going to complete my tasks quicker and enjoy doing them much more than if I was using an OS I don't like using. I also don't trust Microsoft OS's: 10 years of crumby experience is not easily forgotten - no matter how great people say Windows is now, I don't want it on my network any more than I want a "reformed" pedophile in my neighborhood.

Wanting to is not compelling? I disagree, and I argue that whether you want to or not is a very important consideration for all purchases/decisions. Why would you purchase something you don't need if you don't want it?

skinnylegs,May 4 2003, 17:58] "Wanting to" is not a compelling reason. "Wanting to" would more appropriately be a "frivolous reason".

By definition, the word "compelling" means.....

1 : to drive or urge forcefully or irresistibly

2 : to cause to do or occur by overwhelming pressure

You're completely missing the point, Dazzla.

It is a compelling reason because my desire is greater to use OS X which will increase workload. Preference of OS is of course a compelling reason. I could name other reasons like Final Cut Pro being leading edge software and me not being happy with any alternative on Windows/Linux but that's not the point. The OS alone is a compelling enough reason for me.

You're just being an ass about it.

[LOF]skinnylegs, why would you want a compelling reason to switch to Mac? why in the hell do you care what the guy wants to do with his money? whats worth the money and whats not depends on how the person value things. i think $50 for a movie is worth it but you might not. my friend even thinks i'm crazy to buy a DVD for $30. do i have to convince him it's worth it?

well you want a reason, i'll tell you my reason. it might not be compelling to you but to me, it is. BECAUSE APPLE MAKES THE BEST LAPTOP IN THE WORLD, DESIGN AND PERFORMANCE WISE. okay? don't start with me about how Dell laptops fly, speed is not the only aspect i care. i totally understand that some people really don't give a **** about look, they want to get the cheapest stuff available no matter how ugly it looks as long as it does the job. but you have to understand that a lot of people care about look as well, they would pay $1000 for something that pleases their eyes. is that wrong? is that stupid? i sometimes get ****ed off by people saying how cheap they bought the same stuff that i bought, i'm stupid because i paid a higher price blah blah blah.. give me a break man..

[LOF]skinnylegs, why would you want a compelling reason to switch to Mac? why in the hell do you care what the guy wants to do with his money? whats worth the money and whats not depends on how the person value things. i think $50 for a movie is worth it but you might not. my friend even thinks i'm crazy to buy a DVD for $30. do i have to convince him it's worth it?

well you want a reason, i'll tell you my reason. it might not be compelling to you but to me, it is. BECAUSE APPLE MAKES THE BEST LAPTOP IN THE WORLD, DESIGN AND PERFORMANCE WISE. okay? don't start with me about how Dell laptops fly, speed is not the only aspect i care. i totally understand that some people really don't give a **** about look, they want to get the cheapest stuff available no matter how ugly it looks as long as it does the job. but you have to understand that a lot of people care about look as well, they would pay $1000 for something that pleases their eyes. is that wrong? is that stupid? i sometimes get ****ed off by people saying how cheap they bought the same stuff that i bought, i'm stupid because i paid a higher price blah blah blah.. give me a break man..

c'mon man. tell us how you really feel.

;)

Want to be welcomed every morning with ...

"There are new Security Updates awaiting Download, Proceed?"

heh...

Hmm considering there are about 40 times more Windows users than Mac users the likely hood of bug hunters finding a bug in Windows is more likely than a Mac.

If MacOS were to be as popular as Windows security experts would be all over it too. :yes:

Another lovely thread full of ........ never mind, I will be nice. :rolleyes:

skinnylegs,May 4 2003, 12:58]"Wanting to" is not a compelling reason. "Wanting to" would more appropriately be a "frivolous reason".

By definition, the word "compelling" means.....

1 : to drive or urge forcefully or irresistibly

2 : to cause to do or occur by overwhelming pressure

You're completely missing the point, Dazzla.

You want some compelling reasons to switch to a Mac? I'll give you a few of mine, thats if you don't mind of course?

- The OS. OS X is the number one reason in the last two years people have turned their heads to the Mac platform after years of Windows. The GUI of OS X right out of the box is beautiful, simple, and makes working comfortable and productivity better. If I ever have to do work on Windows I hate it, I actually can't stand the GUI and the way things work. It is so much simpler in OS X. All you have in front of you is your work, and you get it done better and enjoy doing it. Nothing beats it...

- iLife. No one has come close to what Apple has done with their iLife suite. iTunes is the best music player out there. It organizes your music automatically, smart playlists, wonderful options, and now you can downlaod high quality, instant music right their in iTunes for ?99.

- Mac software developers. There are so many third-party programs for Windows that are to say the least pure crap. Transmit, Adium, Proteus, Unsanity.... are just a few of the many third-party programs for OS X that are solidly made without any extra crap and most importantly, do an excellent job.

- Apple, the company. This is one company that you know will continue to strive to be the best and lead in innovation as the rest of the field tries to keep up with their new and amazing technology. Apple is not afraid to take risks, whether they fail or not, to make our computing experience even better. You have MacWorlds every 6 months and I don't think we go hardly a month without something new from them.

That is how I feel. Is that okay? You don't mind? Am I okay to keep using the Mac that sits in front of me?

Wow...this thread has taken an interesting turn. Dazzla, I'm surprised at your response. I would expect that a "mod" would read the thread from beginning to end before making statements such as you have made. Let me save you the time. The first post is as follows:

Okay, I might be thinkin of switchin to mac, altho, I have some questions.

I know you can emulate Windows on a mac (That's cool), but can u run Windows games properly on a mac?

Just that I'm a good UT2003 player, as well as Quake Engine-based games (MOHAA,...), so will I be able to use em?

I could have tried on my school's iMac (G3 500 Mhz), but trust me, it's already slow enough on OSX... lol

Now...can you honestly say that the best choice for this guy is a Mac? If so, you are ignorant. Gaming is obviously important to this young man or he would not have brought it up in his second sentence. That being said, a PC would be his best choice. Once again, I stated his best choice. Games that require 3D acceleration are unplayable using programs like Virtual PC. There are, of course, many games that are available for the Mac but if someone is really into gaming (for whatever reason), a PC is the obvious choice.

If you read through the threads, you will note that I was aksing for a compelling reason for this guy to switch to Mac. You and others have taken offense with my assertion that given this young man's needs, a PC is the best choice.

Make no mistake, Macintosh makes a great computer and from what I have seen, OS X seems like a great OS. However, it is not the rig of choice when it comes to gaming.

It appears that you are happy with your computer and your OS and that's a good thing. I would hope, however, that you would be able to offer objective advice to those who post in this forum.

gatorzx2......

See above post. If you want to tell us how much you like Mac, start a thread and call it, "Why Gator loves his Mac." On the other hand, if you are posting in a thread where a young man asks if he can play PC games on a Mac with programs such as Virtual PC, keep it relevant.

It is impossible to run any DirectX games even on Virtual PC

I dont even think OpenGL games work

damn... I guess I'll stick with a PC then, I really need my games for work....

Altho, as soon as I get money, go for a Mac! :D

[LOF]skinnylegs, take a look.

the guy has said that he'll stick to PC, as soon as he gets the money, he'll buy a Mac.

and then you came in..

The obvious question which I don't think has been asked or answered yet is.....why would you want to switch to a Mac????

again i have to ask, WHY IN THE HELL DO YOU CARE SO MUCH?

he obviously makes money from building computers and he's interested in buying a Mac. and he didn't say he'd throw away his PC because he obviously needs it for work! YOU are the one who didn't read from the beginning and keep WHINNING for a compelling reason.

skinnylegs,May 5 2003, 08:38] gatorzx2.....you are flat out wrong and I don't appreciate being told what I said. I would highly recommend that you re-read through this thread.

i would strongly suggest you read aStRaLgOd's posts. i feel that you only read about the first post that he used the word SWITCH. read the following posts for god's sake.

well, what ima do, is keep my PC and add a mac to my collection :)

[LOF]skinnylegs, in case you couldn't find his post, i've quoted it for you!

and yes, this was posted BEFORE you whined for a compelling reason. ;)

edit: btw i got a lecture to catch, i'm soooo looking forward to hear from you. laters. :)

skinnylegs,May 4 2003, 17:38] gatorzx2.....you are flat out wrong and I don't appreciate being told what I said. I would highly recommend that you re-read through this thread.

I did not tell you what you said, I simply showed you what you said. You clearly stated what "your point is". You came in here asking all of us, who already have Macs in the Mac forum, for a "compelling" reason to switch to a Mac? Honestly tell me what do you think is going to happen. Of course we are all going to give our opinions, thats all you can do!! This thread is nothing but opinions. You, yes you asked for reasons to switch, not the poor guy who started this thread. So why don't you go start your own thread in the Windows XP forum asking "Give me a compelling reason to switch to a Mac". Then you will here what you want to, PC users saying stay on the PC for your games, 4 billion software titles, and whatever else there is.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • One of the strangest galaxies in our Universe could help answer some long overdue questions by Sayan Sen Image by Pixabay via Pexels | Not representative An international team of astronomers led by the Department of Astronomy at Tsinghua University has discovered an unusually metal-poor galaxy that may contain signs of first-generation star formation. The galaxy, named Metal-Pristine Galaxy COSMOS Redshift 3 (MPG-CR3), or CR3, was identified using observations from the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), the Very Large Telescope (VLT), and the Subaru Telescope. The findings, published in The Astrophysical Journal Letters, describe CR3 as the most metal-poor galaxy known from the period known as "cosmic noon," around 11.5 billion years ago. Cosmic noon refers to a period when the universe was producing stars at its highest rate and galaxies were growing rapidly. In astronomy, "metals" refers to all elements heavier than helium, including oxygen, carbon, and iron. Because CR3 contains so few of these heavier elements, researchers say it closely resembles what scientists expect the earliest galaxies in the universe may have looked like. The discovery is significant because it could offer clues about Population III (Pop III) stars, the first generation of stars thought to have formed after the Big Bang. These stars are believed to have formed from gas made almost entirely of hydrogen and helium, before heavier elements were created inside stars and spread across the universe through supernova explosions. Hence this is why CR3 has been referred to as a "living fossil." Scientists have long believed that Population III stars existed only in the very early universe. As more generations of stars formed and died, they enriched surrounding gas with heavier elements, making the conditions needed for metal-free star formation increasingly rare. Because of this, researchers expected the formation of such stars to have largely ended after the epoch of reionization, a period when radiation from the first stars and galaxies transformed the neutral hydrogen filling the universe and made it largely transparent to ultraviolet light. CR3 appears to challenge that idea. The galaxy was observed at a redshift of z = 3.193 ± 0.016. Redshift measures how much light from a distant object has been stretched as the universe expands and helps astronomers determine how far back in time they are looking. In this case, the redshift corresponds to roughly 11.5 billion years ago during cosmic noon. Although the universe was already several billion years old by that point, CR3 shows characteristics more commonly associated with much earlier galaxies. Observations revealed exceptionally strong emissions from hydrogen and helium, including Lyα, Hα, and He I λ10830. Lyα, or Lyman-alpha emission, is a specific wavelength of light produced by hydrogen and is widely used to study distant galaxies. Hα emission is another hydrogen signature commonly used to trace active star formation, while He I λ10830 is produced by helium and can indicate the presence of very hot, young stars. The measured equivalent widths of EW₀(Lyα) = 822 ± 101 Å and EW₀(Hα) = 2814 ± 327 Å are among the highest ever observed in star-forming galaxies. Equivalent width is a measure of the strength of an emission line relative to the surrounding light, and such large values are typically associated with intense and very recent star formation. At the same time, researchers found no statistically significant detections of metal emission lines, including [O III] λλ4959, 5007 and C IV λλ1548, 1550. Emission lines act as chemical fingerprints that reveal which elements are present in a galaxy. Oxygen and carbon lines are commonly seen in galaxies that have already undergone significant chemical enrichment. Their absence in CR3 suggests an unusually pristine environment. Using abundance calibration methods developed with JWST observations, the team placed a 2σ upper limit on the galaxy's gas-phase metallicity of 12+log(O/H)<6.52, corresponding to less than 0.7% of the Sun's metallicity (Z < 7 × 10⁻³ Z⊙). Gas-phase metallicity measures the abundance of heavy elements in a galaxy's gas. A 2σ upper limit indicates that the true value is very unlikely to be higher than the quoted threshold. Even when accounting for uncertainties in the calibration methods, the most conservative limit remains 12+log(O/H)<6.95, making CR3 the most metal-poor galaxy identified at cosmic noon. The galaxy also appears to contain very little dust. Researchers measured a Lyα/Hα flux ratio of 13.9 ± 2.5, a result that suggests negligible dust attenuation, meaning very little of the galaxy's light is being absorbed or scattered by cosmic dust. Because dust is usually produced by earlier generations of stars, this finding further supports the idea that CR3 has experienced very little chemical enrichment. Further analysis using spectral energy distribution modelling, a technique that compares observed light with theoretical models, suggests that CR3 contains an extremely young stellar population only around 2 million years old. The modelling, which used Population III stellar templates, also indicates the galaxy has a stellar mass of approximately 6.1 × 10⁵ M⊙. The symbol M⊙ represents one solar mass, or the mass of the Sun. One of the key questions raised by the discovery is how such a chemically primitive galaxy could exist in a universe that had already spent billions of years producing heavier elements. To investigate this, the researchers examined CR3's surroundings. Their analysis suggests the galaxy may lie in a slightly underdense environment, with a density contrast of roughly δ ≈ −0.12. An underdense region contains less matter and fewer galaxies than average. The team suggests that this relative isolation may have helped preserve pockets of pristine gas. Metal-rich material expelled from nearby galaxies may never have reached CR3, while the lower rate of galaxy mergers and interactions could have slowed the mixing of enriched gas into the system. If future observations confirm these findings, CR3 could provide some of the strongest evidence yet that first-generation star formation continued well after the epoch of reionization. Such a result would challenge the conventional view that pristine star formation ended by z ≳ 6 and suggest that small pockets of metal-free gas survived much longer than previously thought. Researchers stress that more observations will be needed to determine the galaxy's true nature. Future spectroscopic studies with higher resolution and better signal quality could help confirm whether CR3 is genuinely hosting Population III star formation. The discovery is also expected to encourage searches for other similar galaxies, which could help astronomers better understand how the first stars formed and how galaxies evolved in the early universe. Source: Tsinghua University, IOPscience This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • "I think in the immediate absence of a partner to apply relief" In the words of Sterling Archer... "Phrasing!"
    • For me, the fundamental problems with these "smartglasses" is that they really don't work well for people with significant prescriptions and massively up the price if you use attached lenses if they have displays, and if they don't, then they're not actually "smart" anything, rather just connecting to your phone and relaying voice to an AI. In a few cases like this, they throw in small cameras to feed video to the AI. All around, these feel like both a solution looking for a problem, and the problems it tries to solve seem more easily solved by different approaches and designs. Oddly, if the rumours are true, Apple may actually have invented something for once and it kind of does this right: put cameras in ear buds and manage the interface to AI exactly as most of us do: tapping on an ear bud and saying "Hey Google" or "Hey Siri." That makes them compatible with almost everyone, can double up as a hearing assist device, an impaired vision assist device, a "smart" device... and answer your phone and play music. That just seems like a better solution all around.
    • Usually the bigger ones with many fixes/changes take a few, theyre an exception to the rule most likely
    • If you don’t get lucky with Valve’s Steam Machine reservation system, you can make your own Steam Machine instead. Valve says that “starting with the SteamOS 3.8 release, you can put together your own Steam Machine using whatever PC parts you want.” SteamOS 3.8.10 launched last week with a slew of updates, including “improved compatibility with recent Intel and AMD platforms.” Alongside that improved compatibility, Valve is giving gamers the green light to install SteamOS on their own desktops. In an interview with The Verge, Valve’s Pierre-Loup Griffais said Valve has been “rolling out improvements to [SteamOS] so it’s more compatible with desktop hardware,” including eventual support for Nvidia graphics. Griffais says Valve has “a growing team” working on Nvidia driver support for SteamOS, adding, “We’re collaborating with Nvidia very closely.” While he mentioned that Nvidia support might not come this year, Griffais emphasized that “it’s certainly something that we’re working on in the background.”     Subscription not needed: https://archive.fo/Tssfc Subscription needed: https://www.theverge.com/games/953411/valve-steamos-desktop-nvidia
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      HidekoYamamoto94 earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • One Month Later
      timbobit earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      nates earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Almohandis earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Rookie
      dorf went up a rank
      Rookie
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      454
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      162
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      107
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      84
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      70
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!