Jump to content

Round 1 - Fight: PC VS MAC.


why write?

Recommended Posts

This forum is supported by the 12ozProphet Shop, so go buy a shirt and help support!
This forum is brought to you by the 12ozProphet Shop.
This forum is brought to you by the 12oz Shop.

Next computer I get will be a mac for real.

 

The reasons are endless, but basically what it comes down to is that Mac computers are designed by the same people who write the Mac OS, which means it runs crazily efficently. Windows has nothing on it.

 

Nekro//rollin' on HP

Link to comment
Share on other sites

windows/pc's aren't even in the same league as the osx/mac anymore, and won't be catching up anytime soon considering the next major windows release (longhorn) has been pushed back (yet another time) to late 2006/early 2007 (and expected to be pushed back again), and has been stripped of the major feature it had been touting - advanced search capabilities. it still remains a bloated, buggy, insecure os run on a hodge-podge of off the shelf parts, the core of which is a processor that has just about hit the ceiling in terms of scaling (intel), with no real roadmap for 64bit computing on the desktop. amd remains the little company that 'never was', since they've always been second string to intel and remain in the shadows of the partnership between microsoft and intel, even now when the partnership seems to be deterriorating.

 

contrast that to an os that the core of which has been slowly refined since the 1960's, is open-sourced, and is elegantly packaged with an award winning GUI that has been repeatedly copied (albeit poorly) by microsoft for the last decade or so. consider the user experience, additional award winning software packaged with it... iTunes, iPhoto, iMovie, etc... and services/protocols... rendevous, IEEE 1394a, IEEE 1394b, etc... pioneered and released by apple and windows just can't hang. then consider not having to fuck with archaic dll's or the fact that it's far more secure and virtually virus immune and there's little hardly a reason to look at windows.

 

mac os x has already made it's move to 64bit computing with the release of the G5 and OSX 10.3. The first half off 2005 will see OSX 10.4 and far more of the Mac OS written to take advantage of 64bit processing, and of course... with a major focus on it's new advanced search capabilities. Then you have IBM (who makes the processor for mac's) announcing they've sold off their desktop business to concentrate on processors and high-end computing. You also have them releasing benchmarks for their newest processors (the Power 5... which a multi-cored version of is projected to be in a forthcoming G5/G6) that has recebtly broken moore's law for the first time in coimputing history, and has improved processing power, reduced costs and power requirements to a degree that all the other processor manufactures are left wondering what just happened. Incidently, this same processor powers 'blue gene' which is the most powerful supercomputer in the world at the moment despite being only half completed (it's been estimated that it'll probably hold that spot for at least the next 3 years).

 

lastly you have apple's hardware... which has won just about every industrial design award in the book whether it's their desktops, laptops, displays, or peripherals (mp3 player). and continues to blow minds and win more awards as it redefines itself with each new release.

 

yeah mac's cost more. everything good does, and at the end of the day - you get what you pay for. to say you can build one just as good for far less is like saying you can build a porsche with spare parts and also have be as good. perhaps you can make it as fast, but it'll never drive the same. sorry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

there's a common addage in the turbo car world.

 

if it's cheap and fast, it's not reliable.

if it's reliable and cheap, it's not fast.

if it's reliable and fast, it's not cheap.

 

yes, mac's cost a bit more, but you'll have about 1000% less aggravation over the course of the computers life. plus, the price thing is becoming much less of an issue. the new ibooks (1.3ghz, 60gig hd, dvd-r, wifi, 256k ram) are $1399. i paid $1799 3 years ago for the top end ibook, which was half as fast). for the amount of power and reliability you get, $1400 is absolutely nothing, and as far as i've seen, cant be had in a pc.

 

one thing i've noticed that's funny though, is if you have some ill ass top of the line macked out mac, people will jock. if you have some top of line super pc, motherfuckers will think you're an uber nerd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I used both. I grew up on apples in the days before macs.

Well to be honest the first mac was launched on my 5th birthday.

Back then (and all this info was fed to me by my dad) there was

a similar battle going on between apple and mac. It was the 'battle

of the Steves' and it led to the bleek era of the mac before the iMac

was launched. Steve Jobs was trying to move the mac forward but

Steve Wozniak was still puching the Apple. I think the Apple IIgs was

his last real push. Anyway... I was on macs all though my childhood

before the iMac ad let me tell you.... it was sad. Go into a computer

store and try to find good games for the mac... impossible.

 

yeah.... everything changed when Jobs came back to the Mac.

apple.gif

 

 

this rant is going nowhere... back to work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by seeking@Dec 10 2004, 10:14 AM

one thing i've noticed that's funny though, is if you have some ill ass top of the line macked out mac, people will jock. if you have some top of line super pc, motherfuckers will think you're an uber nerd.

 

 

i tend to think that they are both nerds and both get jocked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mr raven knows the deal. had a G4 dual 1.25mhtz with 768mb ram and a 17" flat apple display for about 2 years, and havent had a moments trouble at all. never had an OS crash. best reason of all, no viruses or spam. only thing that sucks is that some people dont know how to code a website and everything doesnt work right on every site. but more power, efficient, and the ultimate in power, you cant go wrong. not to mention apple invented the home computer. price can be a deciding factor, but always remember, YOU GET WHAT YOU PAY FOR. i work on cars all day long, i dont buy walmart tools, i buy snap on tools. I dont buy junk ass guns, i buy quality, remington, etc etc. after a properly set up pc to equal a mac, is gonna run you about the same amount you would pay for the mac, so just get the mac. and dont be gay and get that fucking hack that makes windows look like OSX.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

people always say 'macs dont crash' and that's total BS.

They crash much less and recover faster but I have yet

to meet a computer of any kind I cant crash. I've even

crashed the embeded OS in my cell phone. Yep... I can

crash a phone. They probably shouldnt let me near computers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I an crash the OS simply by having the 'record' and 'output' tools

in FinalCut HD open at the same time. but that's probably because

the HD card goes all screwy and takes everything down with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by <KEY3>@Dec 10 2004, 12:46 PM

I used both. I grew up on apples in the days before macs.

Well to be honest the first mac was launched on my 5th birthday.

Back then (and all this info was fed to me by my dad) there was

a similar battle going on between apple and mac. It was the 'battle

of the Steves' and it led to the bleek era of the mac before the iMac

was launched. Steve Jobs was trying to move the mac forward but

Steve Wozniak was still puching the Apple. I think the Apple IIgs was

his last real push. Anyway... I was on macs all though my childhood

before the iMac ad let me tell you.... it was sad. Go into a computer

store and try to find good games for the mac... impossible.

 

yeah.... everything changed when Jobs came back to the Mac.

apple.gif

 

 

this rant is going nowhere... back to work.

 

not exactly.

 

there was an internal struggle at apple between the teams developing apple computers vs macintosh. this was largely propagated by steve jobs as he took particular interest in his pet projects (macintosh being the most significant of them). macintosh was a sort of convoluted story as the roots of it originated from another project called lisa (supposedly in honor os steve jobs newly born daughter). the rivalry between the two groups was mostly just friendly competition and common during those days at the apple campus. the macintosh group were considered renegades which led to the infamous raising of the pirate flag above the apple campus back in the 80's. wozniak was jobs' childhood friend and was always being pushed and prodded by jobs throughout the time because he was simply that brilliant. there was some beef between them, but it mostly stemmed from wozniak doing things out of love and knowledge, and jobs ultimately looking to make money. apples dark days came after jobs was ousted by the very same person he courted and hired to be the ceo of apple. jobs was still relatively young and apple was growing fast, so he intelligently looked to hire someone to take apple to new hights. john sculley, who had been ceo of a soft drink company (pepsi) and helped them win the softdrink wars during the 1980's by introducing the pepsi challenge, was courted by jobs and eventually hired when jobs asked if he wanted to change the world or sell sugar water. as ceo of apple, sculley eventually fired jobs since jobs was interferring with the leadership of apple by remaining hands on and overly involved with his charcteristic flamboyance and arrogant attitude. jobs later went on to found Next as his vengeonce against apple (which apple later bought and who's os - next step, forms the framework for os x as it was also based on the mach kernal and free bsd). jobs also picked up pixar along the way. sculley is most for introducing a convoluted and ridiculously broad line up of computers targeting education and small business (performa line) despite them being pretty much the same hardware. the performa's, in addition to leading to too much inventory due to a huge line-up, we're mostly crippled by non-standardized parts and development at apple that was compounded by a ridiculous number of models and sub-lines. coupled with a processor that had been showing its age for quite a while, and an os that had seen little change, it led to a decline in sales. especially when it was about this time that windows was coming of age and pc hardware was standardizing and improving. This paved the way for michael spindler, that although only at apple briefly, introduced the power pc and newton projects (steve killed the newton his first day back at apple). the power pc was a radical change and large step forward technically, but suffered from in-fighting between the members of the alliance (apple, ibm, and motorola). motorola maintained an iron grip on processor development of the power pc and later crippled apple by slowing new development of it to a crawl. anyhow spindler was replaced by gil amelio since apple was still a sinking ship and hemoraging losses steadily. gil was considered a miracle worker in turning companies around towards profitability and attempted to do so by licensing out the hardware required to run the mac os. he also killed an ongoing project introduced by sculley which was apple's next generation os named copland. in doing so, he started talking to Be, which had an upcoming os named BeOs that looked extremely promising and was expected to be the savior of apple. though everyone expected the purchase of the BeOs to be a done deal, apple surprised the world by announcing the purchase of Next. with apple still losing money by the boat load, and only getting worse after having gil's licensing strategy end up canibalizing apple's own hardware sales without being significantly offset by licensing royalties or os sales. the move to buy next was gil's undoing as the purchase also led to the come back of steve jobs who'd saw the move as vindication for himself. much wiser and experienced, jobs played his comeback to the hilt and his personality again dominated apple, providing a character that couldn't be ignored to the struggling computer company. besides killing the newton, jobs also killed the licensing deal gil had put into place, hurting a lot of companies and destroying relationships. among them was motorola who had been successfully selling apple clones, and actively developing a large part of the power pc's processor. though they never admitted to it, the used the power pc alliance (and apple's reliance on altivec code that motorola helped develop) to back apple into a corner for several years by slowing down development of the processor to a crawl. due to existing agreements, apple remained helpless up until the point that they could no longer meet supplies for the chips, and were forced to relinquish development of them to ibm (who had a far supperior fabrication facility). once the g5 was introduced, motorola was left in the dust and now only develop g3's and some g4's used in apple's lower end products. in many briliant moves, jobs brought apple back to inovation and profitability by standardizing development and hardware (the emac, ibook, imac and powerbook are esentially the same computer with virtually the same motherboard with different processors and cases). further, he introduced a modern os to apple by taking the very best of the original mac os, adding in the best of NextOS and building it on a extremely seasoned rock solid open-sourced foundation (free bsd). though apple hasn't stated it publically, many people believe the apple already has an internal port of mac os x that runs on x86 (pc) hardware. further, under jobs, apple dropped it's an entire consumer line up and placed all their bets on a new project being pushed by jobs - the iMac. the iMac, based upon the same fundamentals of all in one simplicity as the original mac (also introduced by jobs) was a run away success. this set into motion the confidence and cash flow for many other projects by jobs including the ibook, ipod, and g5. jobs also being the man behind pixar used this experience to refocus apple's creqative focus on content production and video, which led to the purchase of final cut from macromedia, as well as it's introduction of the consumer version - iMovie. much of the ideals behind apples aesthetic design originates from jobs, and can be traced back to the beautifully crafted aluminum cube designs of the original Next cases. anyhow, that a brief summary of the story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

one of my favorite parts about the apple story, and this might be wrong i guess, was jobs getting a huge loan from bill gates inorder to save apple from bankruptcy. i dont know why, but it makes me laugh.

 

anyway, your story brings up a (probably) dumb question; what is macintosh and what is apple? what's the difference? ive always blindly used them interchangably, but i suppose thats probably not right? is apple the company, and mac the product?

 

im feeling dumb today. too much carmel corn.

ha.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...