I wonder what the trolls would think of this one

I have read your text and it is more on feelings than technical. It is not bad to try argumenting something, but every pcowner can contradict the used arguments, because he is in a different situation. Sorry, but the text is nice.:)
 
first herve - don't discount feelings . they make up a lot more % of input than you seem to give them credit for. second - what is the 'desire' to play games if it is not a feeling? we can never discuss desire in technical terms. third - i don't think we really have an argument going yet. i think we are more in an exploration phase at this point. stay tuned. maybe it will turn into an argument but i doubt it.;)

i would agree that buggs is a pc user. i too have to wonder why anyone would have such an awesome computer sitting around as eye candy. can games consume that much of anyone's computer time?

i have more to say on this issue of age but i would like to take a little more time and see what others say first. i find it very interesting up to this point. i will add that i play games in marathons much like racerx - i get into one and play it relentlessly untill done or bored with it. i do that kind of gaming 2-4 times a year. i still have at least 4 games i have not started. i have not been playing many games since switching to osx, mostly because i am having too much fun just playing with the system and all the new apps. and there have been games that look really good to me that aren't available for macs.
 
Originally posted by AdmiralAK
I was going to say that Ed throws the bait and Racer slays the trolls lol ...
but this time he answered before I could :p


well first off, Mac users are no elitists, at least not the great majority. We might look like elitists for one reason, most PC people that I have seen are like manic, even ADULTS! How can you not come across as an elitist when you have arguments to make your point and the pc user can only say "well the mac just sucks just because" --- that is NOT an argument!

When you ask them for an argument, the first thing they say is that "it doesnt have games". Excuse me, but a computer primarily is a tool to get things done, not a gaming machine. Even though this is the fact mac games do exist and they usually come out concurently with their PC counterpart releases.


PC users just need a 101 course in making arguments for an against, at least they can be a little wiser this way.



Admiral
Click to expand...

Where do I start?

Who is the troll that RacerX slayed? Me? Read my post, I'm not a troll. Ed is the guy who posted the flamebait. It's not hard to get me to respond. All you have to do is post something factually incorrect or plain silly. I'll come around and give my opinion.

As for the gamer who said he couldn't switch because of his gaming investment, that seems like a reasonable person to me. I don't see why anybody would put him down. Computers are great for games, they have the most horsepower of anything around. I'm sure if the mac was better with games you would be saying that PC suck because they don't play them well. Now all I hear is PCs suck because they are not blue or white or whatever. PC suck because their OSs stink. I'm using a mac because of OS X. It's too bad that the performance keeps slipping behind the current state of the art.

These are the facts as I see them:
1. Apple has a great OS. Probably the best desktop/notebook OS ever made (so far).
2. Apple uses great parts in their machine. Their displays, notebook speakers, etc. are all good. My PC notebooks always cut corners on the details.
3. Apple has a sense of style. This never meant much to me before I bought a Mac. However, I'm starting to care (a little bit) about softer issues.
4. Macs are slow. No getting around this one. The CPU and the front side bus are way behind the state of the art. If this gap isn't closed soon Apple will have real problems.
5. Macs don't have as many apps. This hasn't been a huge problem for me yet. JBuilder seems to suck but I'm still working on it. Maybe IDEA will be a better Java developers env? Limewire does the job, IE does the job (I'll be looking at Mozilla again next milestone), etc. However, sometimes I do miss Dreamweaver and I have to use classic for realplayer. It's not a huge problem but it is an issue.

Anyway, I like my mac. I'm using it right now while my thinkpad sits idle. I'm not a troll, I'm just a realist.
 
That's it exactly. I used it at work (on a PC) and I liked it. It's easy to use and it builds easy to read html.

However, I won't buy it for OS 9. I love OSX, that's why I bought this machine. I'm waiting for a OSX version before I release the death grip I like to keep on my hard earned money.
 
posted by vanguard
Who is the troll that RacerX slayed? Me? Read my post, I'm not a troll. Ed is the guy who posted the flamebait. It's not hard to get me to respond. All you have to do is post something factually incorrect or plain silly. I'll come around and give my opinion.
Click to expand...

I think you need to read all of the post and take that statement in context, he was talking about one of the reasons for started the thread... not you.

As for the gamer who said he couldn't switch because of his gaming investment, that seems like a reasonable person to me. I don't see why anybody would put him down...
Now all I hear is PCs suck because they are not blue or white or whatever. PC suck because their OSs stink. I'm using a mac because of OS X. It's too bad that the performance keeps slipping behind the current state of the art.
Click to expand...

Here is a fact for you, 90% of computer users don't need systems that are faster than a third the speed of the fastest desktop currently available. The problem is that they don't know what they need so they buy the most expensive systems they can afford. We can debate what the state of the art is currently, but I've watched it see-saw back and forth every couple years for the last 15 years. It is a non-factor, but if you want to argue the point, I'm game.

posted by the realist
5. Macs don't have as many apps... However, sometimes I do miss Dreamweaver and I have to use classic for realplayer. It's not a huge problem but it is an issue.
Click to expand...

Your kidding right? Maybe they don't have that many Mac OS X native apps yet, but I can't think of any Windows app that I could need and I can name a dozen apps that are Mac only that I use on a daily basis. If you don't have Dreamweaver it is because you didn't buy it, not because it doesn't exist. Most apps (Dreamweaver and GoLive included) run just fine in classic and the interface is not that different from how the native versions are going to be. The only thing I see missing (and we most likely aren't going to get it in the first native versions anyway) are Services in my classic apps. Mac OS 9.2 has partial protected memory that Mac OS X can use to force quit individual apps within classic. It really sounds like your cheating your self out of a great system by not looking into these things first. A bias against Mac OS 9 is just that, a bias. If you can’t be productive in Mac OS 9, then you are throwing your money away buying a Mac for Mac OS X in the first place.
 
wait a second racerx, to be fair to vanguard, it was buggs that said he uses the pc 99% of the time.

and to be sure, vanguard is no troll. he may be a highly opinionated mac newbie but he is still one of us now.

of course that doesn't change the fact that he is wrong 99% of the time;)

(before anyone else takes that seriously, let me state clearly that it is an inside joke between vanguard and myself!!)
 
I'm feeling too lazy to format my response to racerx with proper tags. However, I will respond to his major points.

1. 90% of computer users don't need their CPU power.

While I haven't done any studies (and I suspect you haven't either) I doubt this is true. It's a good guess that most people *usually* don't need a high end CPU but I know I wish mine was faster all the time. IE must have a terribly ineffecient rendering algorithm because it can take 40 seconds to render a big page. Even web surfing takes a strong CPU under OSX. RealPlayer consumes all the CPU or it will skip. iTunes can use 50% of my 500mhz g3 (iBook). And of course gaming can exaust your CPU resources.

What I'm getting at here is that even normal stuff requires a strong CPU.

Personally, I do also some atypical coding because I'm working on a comp sci master's degree (in addition to working as a programmer during the day). Whenever I write stuff for school I find myself wishing that my code ran faster. (Ok, let's not rip on my code here, these are processor intensive apps :) )

2. I should consider Classic Apps.

Well, maybe you're right. However, I bought this machine because of OS X. I'm not a normal computer user in that I'm not just looking to complete a task, I also care a lot about how it gets done. I'm not happy with a cooperative multi-tasking system. I can't stand it. I can't stand that apps are CPU starved in classic as soon as I click on an OSX app. I can't stand that an app can overwrite memory that's not it's own. I can't stand OS9.

If all I cared about was having an easy to use system that got things done OS9 would be an OS to consider. However, it's not for me. I want a full featured OS that has pre-emptive multi-tasking, predictable and controllable CPU scheduling, a command line, and etc. I want a unix based OS.

Using OS9 would not make me happy and OS9 apps are not worthy of my money (according to me).

Vanguard
 
I'm feeling too lazy to format my response to vanguard with proper tags. However, I will respond to his major points.

that guy
While I haven't done any studies (and I suspect you haven't either) I doubt this is true. It's a good guess that most people *usually* don't need a high end CPU but I know I wish mine was faster all the time. IE must have a terribly ineffecient rendering algorithm because it can take 40 seconds to render a big page. Even web surfing takes a strong CPU under OSX. RealPlayer consumes all the CPU or it will skip. iTunes can use 50% of my 500mhz g3 (iBook). And of course gaming can exaust your CPU resources.
Click to expand...

I don't know what you ahev done with your system, but my G3/350 and 320 MB of RAM is no where near as slow as your G3/500 (and unknown amount of RAM). Yes RealPlayer uses bad compession, but it is all theirs and they have the market share to force that on us, but I don't have any problems on my systems with it. When web surfing in Mac OS X I usually have OmniWeb, IE and Netscape (in classic) running at the same time all through a 56k modem, and I a can't remember too many page that take that long to load (even this site seem pretty quick if you ask me).

As for the study, yes I have noticed that most of the people I work with (all professional) don't need the newest/best systems for the work they do. Only about 1 out of every 15 systems I recommend has been a G4 greater than 500MHz. Surfing the internet, word processing, etc do not need that much power, and I don't seem to have too many problems playing UT in Mac OS X at 350MHz, so why do I need a 867MHz system? This is the same of my PC clients as well, but marketing has them believing that they need the fastest system they can get. I'll stand by my numbers.

Well, maybe you're right. However, I bought this machine because of OS X. I'm not a normal computer user in that I'm not just looking to complete a task, I also care a lot about how it gets done. I'm not happy with a cooperative multi-tasking system. I can't stand it. I can't stand that apps are CPU starved in classic as soon as I click on an OSX app. I can't stand that an app can overwrite memory that's not it's own. I can't stand OS9.
Click to expand...

Like I said, OS 9 bias. As a test of systems that I have fixed, I usually run Photoshop doing a large rendering job (in the area of 12 minutes) in the background, have QuarkXPress, Illustrator, Netscape (usually playing something from Apple's Quicktime site) all running durring the process. Photoshop keeps right on rendering and the Quicktime movies doesn't skip a beat (this is usually on G3/350 and up). Your bias is your loss, but that bias doesn't hamper the real world abilities of Mac OS 9.
 
IMO, Apple needs to phase out the G3 line, as G3's just aren't up to the task of running OSX under heavy stress. They're fine for casual users, but I'd kill my computer if it weren't a G4, because AltiVec makes a big difference. When I had my old PBG3, I found OS9 to be a great system to work in. There was the occasional wait when you gave your computer a bit too much to chew on, but it is still a better system than Windows :)
 
well i finally have the time and mental energy to make a longwinded response.
1st - i want to go back to the very beginning of this thread. (hit that little 'page1' at top of page and go remind yourself). 1st vanguard accuses me of things i did not actually say. i never said pc users are immature. i said i found myself asking asking if they might be. i also said that this is due to the gaming argument. vanguard says that argument was only made once in the article. i never claimed how many times the article said it. i have heard it many times in many places. i still think it is an irrelevant position for a grown adult to take. now if my 12 yo used that argument for wanting a pc, i would understand. but i also know that you can pick any game platform made and there are more games made for it than any average user will ever be able to afford (much less complete) during the life of the machine. OSX might be the possible exception at this point, but then that is what classic is for.
let's face it, any grown adult who spends so much time playing games that they base a computer buying decision around it is probably socially inept and is busy replacing what they want in life with what they can find on the racks. 2 hrs deciding what game to buy is going to distract one from their loneliness longer than the half hour it would take in the mac section. I guess i phrased my one question the wrong way. I should have been asking buggs how old he is. Because no one, not even vanguard was making a case for buying a computer based upon games except for buggs. my mistake. But if buggs were a kid this would be normal. but unless that G4 is really his dad's, then i doubt a kid would have that much hardware sitting around. All the adults in this thread seem to enjoy games but do not center their lives or their computing around them. it doesn't matter how you slant it, this has to do with maturity. at a certain point in becoming adults we realize we have responsibilities that take up large blocks of our time. only the immature, whether they are 12 or 45, think games are the most important part of anything. at 12 it is fine. at 25 and older it is sad. so now i am saying that anyone who buys a computer based upon a 3rd level or lower priority like gaming is immature. this is as oppossed to people who buy one for emailing and web browsing who are just naive as to what they really need.
at any rate, it is good we have turned this into a good discussion. unfortunately most of us are only at our best when someone flames us into it. but here we are pushing each other and this is good. even if vanguard helped fuel all this by just letting me know i was trolling. (which was the claim of his 2nd post, not his 1st:p )
 
I guess I am sad :D I LOVE games, yeah my life doesn't center around them, but on my home iMac, I have very little productivity software. All my real work gets done on another OS X iMac at work, where sadly, no games are installed. Too bad I couldn't make a living on the leisure iMac :cool:
 
but Jadey, don't you have enough good games to keep you satisfied? what else do you do with your at home imac? surely you must do more than games and internet.
 
Originally posted by RacerX
...Mac users can fix most problems on their own... the average user can't fix some of the most average problems that come up on PCs...
Click to expand...
My work has PC I.S. support, so I use it. It is not that I can't take care of my own PC, but I don't HAVE to... so why should I?

Our IS guys can do things faster than me, so why waste my time?
 
Yes I do have enough games to keep me happy on my Mac. The right types of popular games come out for Mac same as they do on PC.

However, no I don't do much else than gaming and internet on my home iMac. It's a dedicated fun centre. :) My work iMac is a different story.
 
Originally posted by TommyWillB
My work has PC I.S. support, so I use it. It is not that I can't take care of my own PC, but I don't HAVE to... so why should I?

Our IS guys can do things faster than me, so why waste my time?
Click to expand...

You shouldn't, but I would hardly classify you as an average user. Average users have no technical back ground and fixing problems in Windows means dealing with a ton of files with cryptic names and not being able to boot into a GUI environment off of a floppy or CD if your system as a major problem. Most Mac system files have understandable names and you can boot old systems off of floppies and new ones off of CDs into a Mac environment. I fix a large number of easy problems because Windows is not a nice place to learn and solve problems at the same time. The facts are the facts, 1 out of every 20 IT/IS positions should be for Mac systems, but in reality it is more like 1 out of 100+. The problem is that I have a number of clients that if they had the same number of PCs as they do Macs they would need a full time IT person, Macs don't need the constant attention of highly trained specialist that PCs require.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top