Thread: OSX vs. Windows
View Single Post
  #16  
Old August 10th, 2005, 01:03 PM
nixgeek's Avatar
nixgeek nixgeek is offline
Mac of the SubGenius! :-)
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Miami, FL
Posts: 8,378
Thanks: 29
Thanked 142 Times in 126 Posts
nixgeek is a jewel in the roughnixgeek is a jewel in the roughnixgeek is a jewel in the rough
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElDiabloConCaca
You can't compare Windows 98 to OS X... you gotta compare Windows 98 to OS 8/9, since those operating systems were available about the same time.

And, as you can see, Windows has gotten slower over the years as well -- Windows 2000 was slower than 95, XP slower than 2000, etc. Same for Mac OS X.

Sure, if you upgrade your computer at the same time you upgrade your OS, then you'll probably perceive a speed increase. Try loading Windows XP on that Windows 98 machine and see how slow browsing is.

The point is that you're comparing a 7 year old operating system with half of the bells-and-whistles of the current Windows release with the most recent release of Mac OS X. That's not apples-to-apples.

To add, I have installed OS X Tiger on an old G4 (one of the first gens) with 384 MB of RAM. I definitely have to say that it's quite snappy, even for an old system like this. Something comparable would be a PIII system. I doubt that Windows XP would feel snappier than Windows 2000 on that computer, and that's not even including all the supplemental apps that need to run in the background (antivirus, antispyware).
__________________
Apple iMac G5 17" (2 GHz G5) - Mac OS X 10.4.11/Ubuntu 9.10
Asus Eee PC 901 (1.6 GHz Atom N270) - Ubuntu Netbook Remix 9.04
Apple Macintosh Quadra 650 (33 MHz MC68040) - Mac OS 8.1
"JHVH-1" (2 GHz AMD Athlon XP 2400+) - Slackware 13
"Kidbuntu" (2.8 GHz Celeron D 335) - Ubuntu 9.04
Reply With Quote