I Have Been Forced To Buy A Pc

solrac

Mac Ninja
Originally posted by foo
I made that mistake, I just invested money in a PC at the recommendation of one of my developer mates, to run various database apps. It has been the worst mistake of my life 8( I have spent the weekend reinstalling, seriously, I am on the 3rd reinstall for this weekend.

I can't use this piece of junk for anything but games, it is a glorified games console. It is totally unreliable and crashes for absolutely no reason. So much so, that I thank god everyday for my apples, they make computing worthwhile.

It is not an economical solution, the mac might cost a tad more, but I get at least 3 hours more work out of it a day. It is more reliable, and I find it much more conducive to a creative environment.
Ummm.... since when does windows crash more than mac? Unless you are talking about OS X.

Thoth for OS X is a pretty good news reader!

OS X I think is better than Windows because first, you can run all the major graphics apps. Plus, you can run any Linux / Unix software if you install the X Windows system. (Hard to do, but possible on OS X.) Third, if you HAVE to, you can run Virtual PC. Plus, many cool games are coming out for OS X.

With OS X, you can do database, programming, games, and graphics, and video of course.

What you can't do is play EVERY game, and run many smaller software titles that are only for Windows.

The biggest drawback of the Mac is flash. Flash player for mac is shit. If you are into flash, and like flash, do NOT get a mac, unless you plan to wait for the new better flash player (if it ever comes to life).

If someone asked me something that a mac can't do, honestly, that it honestly can't compete with Windows, the ONLY thing I'd say is Flash, and pricing.

On the other hand though, that means windows can do everything a mac can do, INCLUDING flash. However, OS X is much more advanced, in my opinion. It's based on UNIX.... open source...... more solid foundation..... better graphics.... I think Motorola makes the better chip, too, especially when the G5s come out.

But if you're poor, I'd seriously recommend getting a Windows box. A similar mac usually is around $1000 more than a similar PC.

-Carlos-
 

yogel

Registered
My current setup, I must admit is a hybrid area.

I'm a web developer, need ASP etc.

I run Win 2K Advanced Server - it is insanely stable & usable... hardly ever dies. (except for critical updates... but that's another story...)

I also run a redhat linux box.

I have a G3 Powerbook, iMac DV 400, iMac 266, Powerbook G3 233, Powerbook G4 ti (well... it's not mine... but it is on the network), 2x Powerbook 1400cs, Quadra 850.

I love my macs. I love my PC. All of them are cool, all of them server different usable purposes. If someone tells me they want to buy a PC and not a mac, the first question I ask is - what for?

If they want to play half life & do asp development, buy a PC. If they want to just get onto the internet, and only have $1000AU, buy a PC. If they need 16 processors, I tell them to go and be crazy.

But, in any other situations, i almost always recommend the mac. Photoshop runs 1000x faster, and much more stably on a mac. If you want to do video/film stuff, buy a mac (or an avid). If you want to do audio, buy a mac. If you want to get onto the internet, get a mac. If you need something to give to your kids that they can learn easily and use, get a amc. Athlons are good, and fast, but still not as stable as PIV's, and PIV's are dreadfully expensive. If you want to have a computer you can use, buy a mac. If you don't want to have to be on the line to the support guys because you have to format your hdd *again* then buy a mac. On the whole, my mac's run flawlessly. The only real times i have problems is when I do stupid stuff like try and modify system (in OS 9).

But... If they want to do a lot rendering in Maya, then buy a PC. And buy a mac. That way, you can render it on a 4 Processor 1GHz Xeon SGI machine (which will be faster than any dual G4 atm - no buts, I know... been there done that...), and design it using a very nice Dual G4 800, with a graphics tablet, etc., etc.,...

So... I have no qualms with people buying a PC for work purposes... but just remember that if you are in any way a designer, buy a Mac, or a $20 000 PC. That's when you start to notice the difference. Up to that point, the mac kicks ass.

Andrew
 

yogel

Registered
as much as I'd like to claim it is, It wasn't my SGI, and in fact it was only a 540 NT box... so it was only 550MHz Xeons...

never the less :)

you tend to acquire computers when you work selling them most of your day...

Andrew
 

RacerX

Old Rhapsody User
Originally posted by solrac
Ummm.... since when does windows crash more than mac? Unless you are talking about OS X.
From years of supporting both, I can tell you that Mac OS 8+ hardly crashes if you set it up correctly. I would bet on any Mac (Mac OS 8-9.2) I set up (running non-game apps) against any Windows 95/98/Me system (again, running non-game apps) in actual uptime. I had to install NT 4.0 (sp6) on 12 Windows 98 systems because they couldn't go a day without crashing (usually twice in a day) while only running Office and IE. Windows NT 4/2000 Pro match what I've gotten in uptimes with 8.6/9.1 systems, but then again it helps to remove ALL extnsions that have nothing to do with the systems you are running. Also you can make a replacement restore CD (replacing the one that Apple supplies) with all your all and setting in place (if you have users who "play with thing on their systems). All and all, Macs are more "User Proof" than Windows systems any day of the week.

On my home systems (5 of which are running Mac OS 8.1-9.1) which I'm not the only user, they can go weeks without crashing (and almost all system wide crashes occur during games).

As for Mac OS X, none of my Rhapsody based systems have gone down in the last 9 monthes, and the only crashing I've had with Mac OS X 10.0/10.1 has occurred (again) while using games (and only twice that I can recall).


The biggest drawback of the Mac is flash. Flash player for mac is shit. If you are into flash, and like flash, do NOT get a mac, unless you plan to wait for the new better flash player (if it ever comes to life).
??? What are you seeing that I'm missing here? I know a few people who put together Flash sites and they are all using Macs.


On the other hand though, that means windows can do everything a mac can do, INCLUDING flash. However, OS X is much more advanced, in my opinion. It's based on UNIX.... open source...... more solid foundation..... better graphics.... I think Motorola makes the better chip, too, especially when the G5s come out.
Except run rootless apps! Windows is far behind the Mac in many areas, and the ONLY strong point for Windows (which has never made Microsoft happy) is gaming. If it wasn't for gaming, Windows 95 would have been the end of the 95/98/Me line. That line has been a sore point in Microsofts quality record (okay, you can add security to that as well) for more than 5 years. Anyone who has worked closely with Microsoft knows that they first had to fight hardware developers (through sp3) and then public preceptions on NT 4.0 (and most users really can't tell the difference when using productivity apps).


But if you're poor, I'd seriously recommend getting a Windows box. A similar mac usually is around $1000 more than a similar PC.
Actually if your poor and own all your apps already, there really isn't that much different between similar systems (current Mac prices fall right in the middle of the range between the over priced and the hardly running PC systems that "look" like they have the same equipment). Anyone pushing one over the other doesn't have your best interest at heart. In the end, your better off going with the one you want, not the one everyone else is pushing (Mac or PC).
 

yogel

Registered
Hi.

I'm going to try and clear this up. Flash on a Mac (even on a Dual G4 500) plays up to 20% slower than it does on a PC (eg a PIII 450).

In fact... in general 2D performance is not quite as good on a mac as it is on a PC. BUT this is purely due to the fact that the authors have not optimised their code enough. (We can tell this from apps like QT, OS X)

Authoring flash on PC is marginally easier, because of the right mouse button (yes I know you can get it on a mac... but...), and keyboard setup.

Personally, I own flash 5 for mac, a friend owns flash 5 for PC, and if I had to choose, i'd pick flash 5 for PC... but i must stress *that there is nothing wrong with flash on a mac*. It is a good idea to author it on a mac, because then you can see how a real computer plays flash :)

A.
 

yogel

Registered
On a side note...

flash for OSX is around...

cast your mind back to the first OSX demo by Mr Jobs. The only non-apple app being demonstrated native in X was Flash 5...

We were told at the launch of the 4 stuff (Ultradev, Dreamweaver, Fireworks) that Flash 5 for OSX would ship simultaneously with OSX.

... anybody know why it didn't?

Andrew
 

solrac

Mac Ninja
Originally posted by RacerX


From years of supporting both, I can tell you that Mac OS 8+ hardly crashes if you set it up correctly. I would bet on any Mac (Mac OS 8-9.2) I set up (running non-game apps) against any Windows 95/98/Me system (again, running non-game apps) in actual uptime.

As for Mac OS X, none of my Rhapsody based systems have gone down in the last 9 monthes, and the only crashing I've had with Mac OS X 10.0/10.1 has occurred (again) while using games (and only twice that I can recall).

I don't know how this is possible. I can install OS 9.2 on my Mom's G3 with NO extensions, just BASE set for OS 9 and it crashes a couple times a day. Same on my G4 Cube, which I sold to get my TiBook. OS 9.2 is set up on that with BASE only extensions (cuz I use OS X) and that shit crashes every day. I pity Macintosh Pre OS X, just for that.


??? What are you seeing that I'm missing here? I know a few people who put together Flash sites and they are all using Macs.

I've put together many great flash sites on my mac, too. But you're totally missing the whole problem. Flash player on the mac slows down to MOLASSES when too much animation is involved. Also, it processes strings much slower, and hangs up too often when sending data back and forth to a server. Flash is TOUGH on the mac. The PC software runs circles around the Mac. This is a complete software issue and has NOTHING to do with mac or pc hardware. Something is totally screwed up with Macromedia's product on the mac, currently. Try playing a non-super-simple flash site side by side mac vs. pc. It's sad. Makes the mac look HORRIBLE. Try vmatrix.com. Or flashgods.com/portfolio/games/tetris. Or nightplans.com (now a butchered site). These are all sites I've created in flash, on the mac. But it still sucks on the mac. I'd buy a PC if I had the money just to do my flash work on.


Except run rootless apps! Windows is far behind the Mac in many areas, and the ONLY strong point for Windows (which has never made Microsoft happy) is gaming. If it wasn't for gaming, Windows 95 would have been the end of the 95/98/Me line. That line has been a sore point in Microsofts quality record (okay, you can add security to that as well) for more than 5 years. Anyone who has worked closely with Microsoft knows that they first had to fight hardware developers (through sp3) and then public preceptions on NT 4.0 (and most users really can't tell the difference when using productivity apps).

What do you mean by rootless apps? Where is Windows far behind the Mac? What can the Mac certifiably do that Windows just can't do at all? Nothing! (As long as you are experienced and have the right software, there is NOTHING Windows can't do that a Mac can do.) Correct me if I'm wrong. Maybe there's a few new things with Unix and stuff, but besides that.

-solrac-
(Was a Mac user for 10 years, and got disgusted with the crap that is OS 9 and before. Currently, a Mac user only because of OS X, and almost grateful to be so... but Flash just kills it for me (but that's only temporarily).)
 

AdmiralAK

Simply Daemonic
I dont understand why your macs crash twice a day :p

I could have my macs (one at work, beige G3 tower, one at home B&W G3) running all day *and* being used (being used is an integral part lol... if you dont use em they probably wont have an opportunity to crash :p) and the are really stable. I have these macs turned on all day long and shut em down when I leave work, or go to sleep and still nothing bad happens :p


Admiral
 

solrac

Mac Ninja
My experiences with anything Pre OS X is horrible, dreadful, shit.

I don't know why...... just don't know why.....

And Flash is WAAAAY worse than 20% slower on a PC. It's totally screwed on mac. The OS X player doesn't help any.

Just do a test..... you'll see.... side by side...

Hopefully soon Macromedia fixes this.

-solrac-
 

solrac

Mac Ninja
EVIL!!!!!!!!!! E-VIL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
NYAHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! NYAHHHHHHHHHCKKKKKKKKKKK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 

AdmiralAK

Simply Daemonic
I dont blame u :p
I dont like beer :p

Want a martini ? screwdriver ? mudslide ? :p

and for europeans who know what I am talking about: A blade? an X99 ? a Rigo ? lol



Admiral
 

RacerX

Old Rhapsody User
Originally posted by solrac

What do you mean by rootless apps? Where is Windows far behind the Mac? What can the Mac certifiably do that Windows just can't do at all? Nothing! (As long as you are experienced and have the right software, there is NOTHING Windows can't do that a Mac can do.) Correct me if I'm wrong. Maybe there's a few new things with Unix and stuff, but besides that.

-solrac-
(Was a Mac user for 10 years, and got disgusted with the crap that is OS 9 and before. Currently, a Mac user only because of OS X, and almost grateful to be so... but Flash just kills it for me (but that's only temporarily).)
Rootless: a good example would be photoshop. Open photoshop in windows, can you see the desktop? Can you see other open apps? Lets change the window size, what happens to the windows containing the open images? I would say that photoshop on Windows is pretty bad.

Windows requires installers for most apps. How about booting from a CD? Accessing a system's drive when the OS is down (that is a fun one with Windows). Up until OS X, everything the systems needed was in the systems folder (ever has a use delete stuff off the root level of a Windows systems?). How about murging one of the most crash prone apps ever created in to the OS to strengthen market share. And as for "certifiably", how about run Mac software. I have a ton of stuff that only runs on Macs (NO Windows version exist, or OS X at this time). I like I say, unless you use your computer as a toy, Macs are better at most things.

As for you sucess at keeping it up (your Mac that is), I don't know why you are having problems. Maybe Windows is better for you. I have never tried to convert, if you like Windows, we won't miss you.
 

PoweMACuser

Registered
My PowerMac also crashes before. At that time I was using 9.0.4. Every day it crashed up to 10 times. Then I update it to 9.1. It crashed around 5 times every day. and now I am using 9.2.1, My computer crashes around 1 in a week.

OS X also crashes when using iTool. But very few. around 1 per month or better.
 

rharder

Do not read this sign.
Get whatever kind of computer you want, but that's a pretty rotten price you have going there. The only interesting part of the system is the 1.8Ghz chip.

-Rob
 

serpicolugnut

OS X Supreme Being
You are getting hosed! If you are going to spend that kind of money, go this route:

BTO an Apple G4/867...

-Up the processor to the dual800
-Go with the minimum RAM, HD. Drop the internal modem if you don't need it.
-If the GF 2MX Twinview is fine for you, keep that. Otherwise, go for the GeForce3. Much better graphics card. OK, here's your specs now:
• Dual 800MHz PowerPC G4
• 128MB SDRAM - 1 DIMM
• 40GB Ultra ATA drive
• CD-RW drive
• NVIDIA GeForce3 - 64MB DDR-SDRAM
• 56K internal modem
• Apple Pro Keyboard - U.S. English
• Mac OS - U.S. English
• Gigabit Ethernet
• Two USB ports
• Two FireWire ports
• Apple Pro Mouse

Total:$3,049.00

Add another 512MB of RAM from OWC or just about anybody for that matter for around $50. So your total is now $3100.
If you don't need the GF3, go with the standard GF2 and save $350. Your subtotal (with OWC RAM) is now $2750. Or if you really want the Superdrive, drop the GF3 and go with the Superdrive ($400 option).

Yeah, this is quite a lot more than the average PC, but it is a Mac...
 

serpicolugnut

OS X Supreme Being
Buggs1a writes:
"i am into games and news group access. the mac doesn't do either one well. it doesn't have the games I like and it does not have a good news group program. not one. lololol. Also the mac can not play all the avi/mpegs I have, so it's useless there. As I access the news every day and play a game every day or so, the mac for me is pretty much useless. "

WRONG

1st - there are so many Newsgroup readers for Mac it isn't even funny. Granted the OS X selection is much more limited (right now), but under OS 9 you have : Newswatcher, MT Newswatcher, YA Newswatcher, Outlook Express, Eudora, Thoth. Under OS X you have Newswatcher X and Thoth. These are just the ones that come to mind. The only newsreader worth a damn I've ever been able to use under Windows is Newsshark, and it's nowhere near as good as the Mac equivilant.

2nd - Games. Yeah, there aren't as many games available for the Mac. But we've got the big ones. QuakeIII. Alice. HeavyMetal FAKK. STV: Elite Force, TombRaider, Myst, etc etc etc.

If games are your thing - get a damn Playstation or XBox.

3rd - QuickTime handles .AVI / MPEG files just fine if you have the latest version. And if you have QT Pro, you can export them to .MOV. Also, there is something called the Windows Media Player for Mac , and it works great. The OS X version will be out next month along with Office v. X, but the OS 9 version is here.

If you use a PC, power to ya. No one is faulting you for that. But you aren't going to get away with disseminating PC propaganda on this site.

On the PC defense side - yeah, Flash playback on the Mac sucks. A G4/400 can playback Flash content at almost 1/3rd slower than a P3/800. My dual 800 handles it very nicely though, right about the speed of a 1.2ghz Athlon.
 
Top