# Complete newbie lookin for a Mac



## gnubie (Feb 6, 2003)

Good day all,

I am new to this place and I have never owned an Apple computer (I have used them before back in the 80s that's how old I am!).  I am looking for a new laptop and seriously considering getting the iBook G3 or PowerBook G4.  I am from the Window$ community and looking to migrate away from them.  Currently I have a PC desktop with a triple boot between WinXP/Win98SE/Mandrake Linux 8.1.  I also have an ancient laptop with Win98 as part of a network.  So the questions that I have are:
1) What can Macs do for me that Windoze can't do?
2) Why are Apple computers generally more expensive that PC based computers?
3) Is MAC OS X similar to UNIX? I believe so but tell me if I'm wrong.  Does it have less functionality/features?
4) Is there a significant increase in performance between the G3 (high end) and the G4 (low end)?
5) Why are Mac computers performance rated lower than PCs yet cost more?  Is it because of the software bundles that come with the computer?

That's generally it.  Thanx 4 ne response!


----------



## themacko (Feb 6, 2003)

I'm by no means a Mac expert so I'll give you the response any 'typical' Mac user would give:

1)  I'll twist this one around a bit, here's some stuff Windows can do that Macs generally won't do:  Crash, get infected with a virus, require reboots after avery day/software install, look ugly.

2)  I think Apples are more expensive simply because they aren't mass-produced like the cheap PCs are.  Also, you can consider the customer service, quality design and bundled software (iApps) as part of the up-front cost.

3)  I really don't know anything about UNIX.  From what I understand, OS X is much more like UNIX than Windows is.  Heh.

4)  Yeah.  iBooks are great little laptops (the 500mhz iBook was my first Mac) and they do just about anything you need them to, except play games.  G4's are, however, noticeably faster (I now own a 700mhz G4).

5)  This was pretty much answered in #2 but here are my thoughts on computer speed:  I don't understand why people get so hung-up on how fast their computer is.  I own the slowest available G4 and it is more than enough for me.  Plenty of people are still using 400mhz G3 iMacs with OS X and its fine for them.  Unless you are doing professional work I can't see why anyone would need a 2 or 3 Ghz computer, expecially when all they use it for is internet, typing and a little graphics stuff like Photoshop or iMovie.

I paid like $1200 for my 'slow' Apple when I could have gotten a really 'fast' Intel computer for the same price, because I enjoy the ease-of-use of the Macintosh OS.  There is nothing, in my opinion, that replaces things such as iPhoto, iMovie and general Mac-environment on a PC.


----------



## boi (Feb 6, 2003)

1: it's all about ease of use. nothing we say here can convince you either way. go use OS X for awhile and if you don't love it, a mac is not for  you. i couldn't stand OS 9. OS X is what convinced me to make the switch. it doesn't crash; i never shut it down (just sleep it); i don't have to screw around with drivers; the OS isn't 'in my way' so to speak; etc. just use it, you'll see.
2: if you compare an Apple computer to a PC spec for spec, you'll find they are _not_ more expensive. they are more expensive than Gateways, yes, but those computers have been having lots of problems lately. when you buy a mac you're almost guaranteed everything is going to work flawlessly for years. a lot of design work goes into these macs, and you're sure the get the best bang for your buck. it's really the little things that push the cost up on the more expensive units. the backlit keyboard, the easy to open/tinker with case, the smoothness and sturdiness of the LCD arm, the super-bright and crisp LCD screen, etc. just how a BMW doesn't have a billion things a nice Acura doesn't have-- it does do things with a little more quality if you get my drift.
3: mac os X _*is*_ unix. don't let its user friendliness fool you. a trip in the terminal will bring back all the scary memories of unix you have ^_^. the developer tools give you everything you need to create applications/a server/etc. if that's your thing. there's nothing in Mandrake you won't find in X, i'm quite certain.
4: Altivec. it makes a difference. also cache size(excluding the 12" powerbook). the video card is very important when looking at a Mac, too, because OS X relies heavily on its graphic-intensive GUI. lightning fast it is not. ultra cool it is. if you get a powerbook or powermac with good video card (they all have good ones these days) then it's lightning fast and ultra cool ^_^. all in all OS X just feels quicker on a G4, but there's nothing wrong with a G3. after using my PowerMac Dual 867, though, i couldn't go back to a G3. even the ibooks.
5: yes, the software that comes with it does rock (iapps specifically), but see my answers to the questions above for more insight. the mac is rated slower, yes, but for video editing and games and other huge tasks that benchmarkers love to eat up. if you're a developer/surfer/movie watcher/editor then a Mac is a great choice. if you love to tinker with the OS in a billion ways, play with things called  'registries' and edit obscure numbers, run different 'shells' etc. then a mac is not really the choice for you; although you can edit quite a bit if you know what you're doing. Apple just restricts innocent bystandards from deleting the shell, changing too much crap, etc. 

hope i helped ^_^


----------



## gnubie (Feb 6, 2003)

Damn you people.  You have convince me to by a Powerbook G4


----------



## ksv (Feb 6, 2003)

> _Originally posted by gnubie _
> *Good day all,
> 
> I am new to this place and I have never owned an Apple computer (I have used them before back in the 80s that's how old I am!).  I am looking for a new laptop and seriously considering getting the iBook G3 or PowerBook G4.  I am from the Window$ community and looking to migrate away from them.  Currently I have a PC desktop with a triple boot between WinXP/Win98SE/Mandrake Linux 8.1.  I also have an ancient laptop with Win98 as part of a network.  So the questions that I have are:
> ...



Welcome to the site, and welcome as a potential new Mac user 
I'll answer your questions as good as I can.
1) Usually you would work more efficiently. In my opinion, the Mac OS X graphical user interface is also way better than any version of Windows. And don't forget Apple's own applications, all the iApps and more professional software like Final Cut Pro.
2) You get quality and an unique support service and warranty. Apple also use high quality components, and the Motorola PPC processors cost way more than Intel and AMD x86 processors.
3) Mac OS X is based on Darwin OS, which is a variant of FreeBSD 4.4. Darwin OS can actually also be downloaded for x86 based computers from http://developer.apple.com/darwin/. Darwin can be accessed through the Terminal which comes with Mac OS X, and therefore most UNIX software can be ported to run on Darwin.
4) Yep. Not very significant in normal usage like web browsing and using other non-G4-optimized applications, but the G4 is extremely much efficient in G4 optimized apps like Adobe, Emagic and most Apple applications thanks to its AltiVec 128 bit floating point engine.
5) Partially because of the software I'll guess, and Apple's standards are generally very high. Also, a G3 or G4 is much fasted than an AMD or Intel consumer processor if you compare them by MHz.

If you can afford a G4, go for it 
But don't buy a 15" model yet if you're considering it. A new 15" will probably be released in a few weeks.


----------



## gnubie (Feb 6, 2003)

> _Originally posted by ksv _
> But don't buy a 15" model yet if you're considering it. A new 15" will probably be released in a few weeks. [/B]



Does the 12" Powerbook come with a 1 MB level 3 cache?  I looked on apple's website and it didn't say on the 12" but it did mention it on the 15" and 17"


----------



## hulkaros (Feb 6, 2003)

> _Originally posted by gnubie _
> *Does the 12" Powerbook come with a 1 MB level 3 cache?  I looked on apple's website and it didn't say on the 12" but it did mention it on the 15" and 17" *



The 12" aBook has "only" 256KB of l3 cache while the 15"&17" have 1MB!!!



Although, it sounds dramatic and in some apps surely is, in everyday "normal" use you will not understand the difference


----------



## hulkaros (Feb 6, 2003)

"Good day all,"

Good day to you too!

"I am new to this place and I have never owned an Apple computer (I have used them before back in the 80s that's how old I am!).  I am looking for a new laptop and seriously considering getting the iBook G3 or PowerBook G4.  I am from the Window$ community and looking to migrate away from them.  Currently I have a PC desktop with a triple boot between WinXP/Win98SE/Mandrake Linux 8.1.  I also have an ancient laptop with Win98 as part of a network.  So the questions that I have are:"

Why exactly do you want to switch? Maybe this will not do to you ANY good  

"1) What can Macs do for me that Windoze can't do?"

Will not let you play Solitaire all day instead of doing your work 

"2) Why are Apple computers generally more expensive that PC based computers?"

SEEM to be more expensive is the real answer and when you will try to compare them with a similar high quality PC (is that EVEN possible  ) you will see that Macs are actually cheaper...

"3) Is MAC OS X similar to UNIX? I believe so but tell me if I'm wrong.  Does it have less functionality/features?"

OS X is a "variant" of UNIX actually but as a bonus you get the legendary Apple ease of use 

"4) Is there a significant increase in performance between the G3 (high end) and the G4 (low end)?"

In the majority of apps and especially in games YES. But if all you do is listen to some music, watch a DVD, write, browse the internet, etc. the G3 >=500 is more than fine...

"5) Why are Mac computers performance rated lower than PCs yet cost more?  Is it because of the software bundles that come with the computer?"

Actually we never saw an apples to apples comparison anywhere which shows that Macs are slower than Wintels... We have YET to see Macs compared to Wintels under heavy tasks while multitasking (which if you ask me the Macs beat EASILY the Wintels). Don't forget that performance is just one factor when one decides to buy a computer! The most important factors are: What you want to do with your computer and how you want to do it! Even on Wintels when one wants stability AND performance he doesn't buy JUST the top performing parts but the most stable ones... Some examples:
-ECC SDRAM PC133 versus DDR266
-Athlon MP 2400 versus Athlon XP 2800
-Xeon/2800 versus P4m/2400 versus P4/3060!!!

"That's generally it.  Thanx 4 ne response!  "

You are welcome and I really hope that you will be able to buy a Mac ASAP 

If money isn't a problem (I know that always is but...) go with the best G4 based Mac you can! And in any way you can't go wrong by buying a Mac with the word Power infront of it


----------



## gnubie (Feb 6, 2003)

I was looking to buy a new laptop for travel (work and recreation) since my current laptop is an old 133 MHz bookend.
What I really wanna do with it are several things
1) Digital photo editing and graphics
2) video editing
3) I am more of a command line guru than a GUI person and MAC OS X has the stuff I need/want (although i do have a distro of Linux).
4) There are pics that I have in Apple format that can't be read in Window$

Bottom line, I just wanted a new laptop and thinking of going the way of the Mac (so I can migrate away from Windows).

I want the G4 PowerBook but it is initially expensive so either I'll go 4 the 15" or the 12" G4 OR go the 17" G3 route.


----------



## dlloyd (Feb 6, 2003)

There is no 17" G3. The models are as folows:

G4: 12", 15", and 17"
G3: 12" and 14" (I have the 14" and I am very happy with it)


----------



## gnubie (Feb 6, 2003)

My bad


----------



## jeb1138 (Feb 6, 2003)

Apple supports the open source movement!  Need I say more?    Examples:  OS X is Unix, Darwin source code is available for all, Safari is based on open source KHTML and KJS and improvements are being sent back to the community, and Apple has created an very good X Window System for OS X.  Check it out:
http://www.apple.com/macosx/x11/


----------



## symphonix (Feb 6, 2003)

1) What can Macs do for me that Windoze can't do? 

You sound like you are comfortable with, or at least interested in, open-source unix/Linux. Under Mac OS X, you can compile and run your Gnu/Unix software such as OpenOffice, Gimp, KDE, Gnome, Enlightenment, Abiword, and hundreds of other titles and run them on the same desktop and filesystem you use for commercial applications like PhotoShop, Illustrator and M$ Office.
You have an Apache web-server, FTP server, SSH access and Samba all working right out of the box. This means you can design a website using tool such as DreamWeaver, InDesign, Fireworks and Flash, and then serve it out the same system, allowing you to edit it live.
The Mac is immune to 99% of viruses. There are only around 40 known virii and most of those are MS-Office macro viruses. 10.2's junk-mail protection is fantastic and accurate, and will help you get away from spammers for good.
You have comprehensive and up-to-date programming tools for C, C++, Objective-C, Perl, PHP, Java and many more. Apple provides Developer's tools, documentation and source code as a free service.
You can also script your applications using AppleScript, which lets you automate simple but tedious tasks. 

 2) Why are Apple computers generally more expensive that PC based computers?

You might pay a premium for owning a Mac, but it is a premium product.
Apple build to an exceptional quality. From the iBook's magnesium frame and polycarbonate shell, to the Titanium and anodised aluminium of the Powerbooks, the construction is excellent.
Components are sourced from the best sources or, in many cases, custom made for the machine. My little iBook has a Toshiba optical drive and an IBM hard disk drive, a Harmonn-Kardon sound system and everything else custom made by Apple.
When you add up what a similar machine would cost, the Mac is actually well priced. Consider the 17-inch iMac against a PC with a DVD superdrive, 17" LCD screen and identical specs for HDD and memory, and you'll see that the Mac is often cheaper.

 3) Is MAC OS X similar to UNIX? I believe so but tell me if I'm wrong.  Does it have less functionality/features?

Mac OS X is a complete, POSIX compliant Unix with the latest GCC, all the shells you'd find in any linux distro, and is based on the BSD kernel. It includes the gnu FTP server, Apache web-server, pico, vi, ssh, telnet, etc. Some people here use Mac OS X as a mail server or SQL server.
There is nothing you can do with Linux, BSD, or Sun Solaris that you couldn't do in Mac OS X.

 4) Is there a significant increase in performance between the G3 (high end) and the G4 (low end)? 
Yes. Especially in applications that optimise use of the G4 chipset: basically all the Adobe and Macromedia products, and all the video-editing apps, will run faster on the G4 chip. Also, the Java engine and GCC are optimised (so anything you compile yourself will be optimised).
For programs that don't optimise for G4 the difference isn't so pronounced, but the G4 is still faster.

 5) Why are Mac computers performance rated lower than PCs yet cost more?  Is it because of the software bundles that come with the computer? 
By "Performance rated" I assume you're talking about processor speed. This is misleading: the processor on a Mac is an entirely different chipset that uses RISC (reduced instruction set code) and a shorter, more efficient pipeline than any i386 derivatives. It produces less heat, and does not require any cooling, making it possible to build machines that have no fans which is why they are so popular in music and video production.
As a rule of thumb, you could double the megahertz of a Mac to get a rough estimate of what the equivalent PC would be. So a G4-800 would roughly equate to a Pentium4-1600 in terms of performance. This is really a very rough guide because the machines process differently, and the unix-based operating system is more efficient than Windows.


----------



## KrinkleCut (Feb 6, 2003)

I just faced this same question - which portable to get?

If you can afford a Powerbook, go for it. Personally I think the 12" PB is kind of a little Frankenstein and would stay way from it (no lvl3 cache/ 640MB ram limit/ excessive heat/ tiny screen/ etc). None of these things except the heat are really that bad - for an iBook (which is essentially what it is). The only good arguement I can find for getting the 12" PB is the size. There again, I'd go for an iBook and save a few bucks for ram/accessories. 

If you can afford it, get the 15" PB. The screen is gorgeous, it's not crippled like the 12" and the performance will be much better.

If not, go for an iBook (I just did - 12" 800 and it's awesome). They're probably Apple's most competetive product and can do pretty much anything you need to do. And for the guy who said they're no good for games, try one. Sure the video card isn't upgradable, but it never is in a laptop. For any game out there right now, they're great. You can get the 12" 800 for size/weight considerations, or the 14" for screen real estate. I'd skip the 700MHz model though - they aren't nearly as nice.

One other thing to consider as to Macs being more expensive - resale value. Take a look at what a 2 year old Apple portable is going for compared to a 2 year old PC portable.


----------



## Cheryl (Feb 6, 2003)

> _Originally posted by gnubie _
> *  You have convince me to by a Powerbook G4  *



Good.  You came to the right place for the right answers. 

Once you get your powerbook, you can come to MacOSX.com with your questions. 

A good book to get to help you through is
Mac OS X the missing Manual   by David Pogue


----------



## ex2bot (Feb 6, 2003)

I think people did a good job of explaining Macdom, except:

Mac OS X is not running the BSD kernel, it's running the Carnegie Mach kernel and the OS is compatible with FreeBSD 4.4. Apple even has an accelerated X11 available.

As KrinkleCut said, the newer iBooks are MUCH faster (esp. in graphics) than the original 500 and 600 mHz iBooks because they have better 3d gfx processors (ATI Mobility Radeon). They should be great for many games for some time.

Buy a Powerbook. Everybody copies the Powerbook. IBM has a titanium laptop (coincidence?), Best Buy has a Powerbook G4 clone! Infoworld drools over the Powerbook. The G4 is, in some ways MUCH more powerful than the G3. Mac OS X is optimized for the G4. There. I convinced you.  :->

Then, after you buy yourself one, buy me one.

Doug


----------



## Stridder44 (Feb 6, 2003)

Yeah, since you are gonna deal with graphics, go with the G4...you'll be happy you did:-D


----------



## Stridder44 (Feb 6, 2003)

Oh, and Mac OS X will NEVER fail you...


----------



## JetwingX (Feb 6, 2003)

Ok. your best bet is to go with the 17" G4 because it is going to last you a while. also the wide screen is great for photo/movie editing

For movie editing you have 3 choices:

1) iMovie - simple, free with a few cool litle features (low end)

2) Final Cut Pro - this is one of the industry standards for video editing (such as Star Wars episode II) it's expensive but worth every penny with all the options. You may also need some traning (high end)

3) Final Cut Express - I don't know too much about it but it is said to be Final Cut Pro on a diet. it has all the essentials of FCP but for *A LOT* less ($300) (middle range)

jsut thought i would help you there


----------



## ApeintheShell (Feb 7, 2003)

I'd say it has to do with the macintosh adopting and inventing more standards in hardware and software.

Hardware:
Airport was the first WiFi
Bluetooth built into their new powerbooks
USB and Firewire used consistently in the product line instead of as additions.
Gigabit Ethernet
Product Balance- iBook,iMac, eMac are for consumers, while the powerbook, PowerMac, and Xserve are for the professionals.
Software:
iLife - a music player(iTunes), dvd maker(iDVD), movie maker(iMovie) and picture album(iPhoto)
Wide Variety of Apps - whether there from Apple or from other websites. You get a sense of community when you use mac os x.
No fatal error messages telling you to send bugs to microsoft.(you know what i'm talkin about)
--end of message--


----------



## fryke (Feb 7, 2003)

This thread is rather in the wrong forum... I'm moving it with a redirect to Hardware.


----------



## KrinkleCut (Feb 7, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Jet _
> *Ok. your best bet is to go with the 17" G4 because it is going to last you a while. also the wide screen is great for photo/movie editing*



I can't be the only one who thinks the 17" PBs are just kinda dumb, (and the 12" PB - see above) can I? I mean, sure the screen is big, but isn't it kinda large. And I'm not talking about weight or mass, but area. A panel of sheet rock isn't thick, but it's still a pain in the ass to carry. I have a 15" TiBook, so I'm used to carrying that, but I couldn't imagine wanting it to be larger. 

As far as the 17" lasting longer, I have to disagree. IF airport and on-board bluetooth are mission critical, then maybe the 17" is the way to go - go ahead and sell a kidney for it. But, honestly, how many really NEED these features? I don't. I can't afford to implement new standards as quickly as they implement them. Even old 802.11b airport seems kind of indulgent to me.


----------



## gnubie (Feb 7, 2003)

Hmmmm....interesting.....
I belong to another forum 4 M$ Windblows and I don't get responses back like this!  I don't want to bash people, but the people over in that forum don't seem to know squat.  You people seem to be well versed in the Mac world which is cool =).

I havta agree that the 17" is a little too big 4 my tastes.  I think Ill go 4 the 15" PB but it seems Ill havta wait several weeks when they come out =(.  The 17" screen is nice when watching DVDs, but if I want the full effect of movie watching I might as well stay home and watch it on my home theater with my Sony Trinitron 36".


----------



## KrinkleCut (Feb 7, 2003)

OK, I'm not up on the rumours and such for upgraded 15" PBs, but here's my take on the situation. The 15" was updated in November or so. New 12" and 17" came out in January. Apple has traditionally waited 6-9 months between revs. What are the 15" PBs missing? Aluminum (or Aluminium for you british folks) enclosure, built in bluetooth and airport extreme. How important are these? 

Enclosure: Titanium sounds cooler. Aluminum sounds like a pop can.

Bluetooth: I dunno, you have any other bluetooth enabled devices?

Airport Extreme: sounds great, but you'll still move stuff quicker with a cable. And the money for a base station and card doesn't sound worth it to me if I only have one portable.

I don't see Apple updating the 15" PBs until the next rev. If they were going to, why didn't they do it in January? The PBs they announced in January were functionally no 'better' than the 15" PBs other than the above features. So, basically, I'm saying "why wait?" If you think you'll see a speed bump in the next 5 months, I seriously doubt it. The only possible update is to start punching the cases out of pop cans, adding 802.11g and bluetooth. That's how I see it anyway.


----------



## jeb1138 (Feb 7, 2003)

Hmmm... I think KrinkleCut is right.  Seems like too big of a cost with too little benefit for Apple.  Inventory & redesign headaches just for bluetooth & Airport Extreme after only a couple months on the market?  All the other important guts are already up to date.  Doesn't seem likely they'd update for a few months at least.  Well, at least I hope not -- as soon as the 17" is shipping I'm gonna sell my 15" on eBay!   Come on Apple -- I'll give you more money if you just give me time to sell my current book at a higher price!


----------



## symphonix (Feb 7, 2003)

The 17" inch is a stunner, but lets be honest, it is overkill for 99% of us. And though the 15" lacks built-in bluetooth and Airport Extreme, its still my pick: you've still got Airport and Gigabit ethernet, and a plug-in bluetooth adapter is only $50US retail anyway. And don't write off the 12" either, that little machine is sweet.

But don't open your wallet until you've seen each of them in situ and had a chance to heft the weight, fire up your favourite apps and browse a bit. You won't know what they're really like until you've tried them out a bit.


----------



## ekramer (Feb 8, 2003)

everyone is talking about how the older 15 isn't really missing that much....

HOW ABOUT ITS PROBLEMS....?

The keys touch the screen causing finger oils to get on the screen and eventually ruin it over time...

Push on the back of the screen and watch the LCD flicker... its flimsy and no longer does this on the aluminum models...

the hinge on the 15 is prone to breaking... thats why the 12 and 17 models have a new hinge type... if you are going to spend around $3000 don't you want something thats not going to break? this old 15 has KNOWN problems with its design!


----------



## gnubie (Feb 12, 2003)

I have seen both the 12" and the 17" Powerbook today at CompUSA and I havta tell you what I think.

12": small and cute. not as fast as the 17" PB, but good speed.  Graphics were good but not as good as the 17".  Much hotter than the 17".

17": large and expensive.  fast and has very good graphics and display.  cooler than the 12"

I wish they came out with a 12" PB with a 1GHz processor with L3 cache, more RAM, superdrive, bigger hardrive, and at least Bluetooth and Airport Extreme ready if not built in.

It's tough to decide what I want since I like the size of the 12" but the 17" exceeds in performance.  I think I'm gonna flip a coin to see which one Im gonna get 

Oh yeah does the 12" PB come with recovery software?  I know the 17" does on DVD.


----------



## gnubie (Feb 12, 2003)

Oh yeah I wish the 12" output less heat.


----------



## gnubie (Feb 12, 2003)

Woops.  I meant I saw the 15" not the 17".  My bad again


----------



## Giaguara (Feb 12, 2003)

The next version of the 12" PB has to be less hot.  But who knows when that newer version will be out - The Murphy law applied to Mac is when you get any hardware, the updates (better, faster, cheaper versions) are out within two weeks (= you never know).

Do you have an external monitor? 12" is sure more mobile, but would sometimes be really nice with a big screen as well.. the other issues (hot, only to 640 MB of RAM etc, price differences etc) are already mentioned. 

I believe 12" PB has recovery software - if even iBooks have some kind of recovery cds, why wouldn't the PBs have?


----------



## gnubie (Feb 12, 2003)

I have a PC desktop with a monitor but none for Macs.  I do not plan on getting a monitor unless I am either rich or I really have to. =)


----------



## Giaguara (Feb 12, 2003)

Okay. I have a 12" as well and I don't have an external monitor but maybe one day will get one.
Which one do you think that you like more?


----------



## Arden (Feb 13, 2003)

Ok, several things.

_1) What can Macs do for me that Windoze can't do?_
I think this was covered pretty extensively already...

_2) Why are Apple computers generally more expensive that PC based computers?_
Macs aren't actually much more expensive than PC's.  Think about it: you can get a PC for, what, $800?  But what do you get for that?  A boatload of crap, that's what.  For all the high-end goodies, you have to pay more.  And for Mac-like quality and devotion, you have to pay more than most Macs for a computer like Falcon.  Also, factor in the cost of troubleshooting: for most Macs, it is very low, but for most PC's troubleshooting costs can soar.  The initial price of a computer is not all that you pay for; in the long run, Macs are much cheaper than their wannabes.

_3) Is MAC OS X similar to UNIX? I believe so but tell me if I'm wrong. Does it have less functionality/features?_
Mac OS X *is* UNIX, just with a (beautiful, stunning, highly functional) graphic user interface.  This has been ground into dev/null... 

_4) Is there a significant increase in performance between the G3 (high end) and the G4 (low end)?_
This has also been pretty well covered...  But I do want to say that if you want to compare hardware on the Powerbooks, go to http://www.apple.com/powerbook/specs.html and check out the specs.  Each of the PB's has a video out option, and all Macs I believe can output to a VGA monitor (which is all a PC monitor is, after all).  As long as you're looking for a PB, look here.

_5) Why are Mac computers performance rated lower than PCs yet cost more? Is it because of the software bundles that come with the computer?_
The (relatively-see above) high cost of Macs has to do with the (I'll be frank) monopoly Apple has on the Mac market, the quality that goes into each and every computer, the generous software that comes with each computer, and the fact that Apple tends to overcharge stuff a bit.  The only places that Macs are rated lower than PC's is in half-assed PC magazines.


----------



## KrinkleCut (Feb 13, 2003)

> _Originally posted by gnubie _
> *I have a PC desktop with a monitor but none for Macs.  I do not plan on getting a monitor unless I am either rich or I really have to. =) *



Well, you can always cannibalize the PC and use the monitor as a second display for the PB.  Nothing like monitor spanning.


----------



## gnubie (Feb 14, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Giaguara _
> *Okay. I have a 12" as well and I don't have an external monitor but maybe one day will get one.
> Which one do you think that you like more?
> *




I really like the 12" powerbook.  Its small and cute!  If it weren't so warm I'd get it right away.  Now I'm divided between the 12" and the 15"


----------



## gnubie (Feb 14, 2003)

Does any one know if you can swap the Airport card in the 15" Powerbook to the Airport extreme card?


----------



## ronn (Feb 14, 2003)

> _Originally posted by boi _
> 3: mac os X _*is*_ unix. don't let its user friendliness fool you. a trip in the terminal will bring back all the scary memories of unix you have ^_^. the developer tools give you everything you need to create applications/a server/etc. if that's your thing. there's nothing in Mandrake you won't find in X, i'm quite certain.



This is something I'm not so sure. I haven't used OSX for any longer than 10 mins yet but I've heard that OSX is only licence for single user? Is that true? Can you create user account like other unices and allow user to login remotely to your machine  

What is the main differences between OSX and OSX Server?


----------



## symphonix (Feb 15, 2003)

Ronn,

Mac OS X is a true multi-user Unix with home directories and Unix file system security and permissions. This is effected through the GUI, as well as through shell commands such as chmod, chown, etc.
It allows remote login through SSH, FTP, Web (Apache) server, A Windows (Samba) server, and so on.
The main difference with OS X server is that it is set up with utilities for managing networks of users.
The license is a single-machine license, though site licenses are available. It is a commercial OS, and though it is Open Source at it's core, it is copyrighted. That's something you CAN do with Mandrake that you can't do with Mac OS X: Copy it legally.


----------



## ronn (Feb 15, 2003)

> _Originally posted by symphonix _
> *Ronn,
> 
> Mac OS X is a true multi-user Unix with home directories and Unix file system security and permissions. This is effected through the GUI, as well as through shell commands such as chmod, chown, etc.
> ...



Ahh.. I see. that's cool! now I feel much more comfortable in getting one


----------

