Mac - Windows

Parkes Owen said:
...It`s about time microsoft made an operating system that doesn`t need 3rd party software and constant upgrades to fix its shortcomings...
Click to expand...

It amazes me that people think that Microsoft make the best software. It's the lowest quality but even so people think they 'need' it.
 
My Mac experience is very limited, and if it was anywhere near affordable I'd give it a try. The argument that Macs last longer have had their counter argument from Bob. Maybe if MacOS would come out to be run on the (PC) machine I built myself, I could try it.

I started using Linux at the same time as I got into PCs, which is early 90s. My first kernel was 0.98.2, but I got out of it for a long time and just caught up. Linux is not the desktop OS or media centre competition everybody's claiming it to be. For example, MythTV refuses to play my TV on X smoothly, they claim it's the video capturing card I have. But it runs perfectly on XP. In the end, I found myself rebooting into XP too frequently and just removed all traces of Linux. XP isn't the best. Neither is any Linux distro I've seen recently. XP is currently fairly reliable and fairly performant. That's okay for me. No hassle.


Peter.
 
I am a bit of a Mac Junky. I have used almost every model since the Apple II.... Classic, IISE, LC475, PowerMac 6320, every version on iMac... mainly because I managed an Apple Network including servers and end user Macs for 8 years!

I now have 15inch Powerbook G4, G4 iMac and 20inch G5 iMac and a crappy PC laptop that I only use when I have to!
 
"A Mac is the right tool for for photography just as a remote control does a better job of tuning your TV than a 10 foot wooden pole. "

LOL
A good article indeed - or, at least, entertaining.
 
I used a Mac in the early 1990's - an SE or SE II (can't quite remember). I liked it as it was much much better than DOS/Win 3.1. But the company that I was with switched everyone to Wintel and then built a huge IT organization to network everyone together.

We use a PC at home (Windows on AMD) and it works well most of the time. But the real reason we use it is because of one software package - Dragon Naturallyspeaking. My wife has hand problems because of too much keyboard work and really needs a good voice package. I'd buy a Mac if there was something comparable on that platform. But with the new MacIntels I may just set up a dual boot and run Windows for my wife and the mac OS for me.

As for Apple being a software or hardware company - who cares! The point of the Mac, in my opinion, is a greater level of integration. I am willing to pay a premium for fewer problems. And to talk with a native English speaker when I need tech support (Dell is cheap but it is frustrating to deal with tech support in India, according to my brother-in-law. And build-your-own is fine for some folks, but I don't have time to track down problems on my own since the kids were born!)
 
RObert Budding said:
But the company that I was with switched everyone to Wintel and then built a huge IT organization to network everyone together.
Click to expand...

Yes, they did that to keep themselves in work.

If they had recommended Apple they would have been looking for new jobs: Apple does not need anywhere near so many support engineers.
 
I absolutely love my Mac... it's only a G4 iBook (1.4GHz with 1gb ram) but I've settled since january and I wouldn't ever want to go back to a machine running windows. Exposé is your friend!
 
Jon Claremont said:
Yes, they did that to keep themselves in work.

If they had recommended Apple they would have been looking for new jobs: Apple does not need anywhere near so many support engineers.
Click to expand...

Ain't that the truth.

PS Mac, Linux and XP at home. If I could drop XP I would but I need it for a few applications used at work that are Windows only.

I've tried a few distros of Linux but there's a major but different problem with every one (e.g. scanner not recognised by one; wireless network not recognised by another; soundcard not recognised by yet another; display reolution etc etc). I don't have the time to Google for the solution - and if I do have time, I'd rather be playing with Photoshop.
 
OK, so i took a look at the mac laptop offers.
I'm just about taking a decision upon buying a laptop, and i want something that would work and be good enough for some years.
And now this Mac idea.
However the models listed on the apple site look quite less equipped than the PC laptops and still selling for more. I mean RAM, graphics card and such.

So my question, is it really that much better optimised, that a Mac with 64mb video memory is as "good" as a pc with double of that? Or is it just another myth?
 
Another question: Is that "both Mac OS and Win XP on one Apple" a viable solution, or just a marketing trick?
 
Well Mac OSX is a lot more system-friendly. Less processes, less processor usage. My iBook G4 will only slow down when I have an MSN client running, with firefox, with other processes running and then trying to rotate or filter a neg scan that was scanned at the highest resolution from the epson scanner/printer on my mum's windows pc (that crashes when editing the image on there). Maybe this is merely GimpShop being less Mac-friendly due to it running through the X-Window platform, but other than that my mac has never really had a problem.

I've always felt with Windows, you need your computer faster and faster just to handle the sloppy programming and bugs in the Windows OS. Remember, windows was originally built on top of DOS, and every system process with Windows takes more processor cycles than it needs to because of the architecture. I may be wrong, but I grew up with system engineers and thats pretty much how they said it to me.

EDIT: The new BootCamp on MacTel's is definitely there for non-mac users to shift from windows systems. There are a few apps that arent available or arent supported on a Mac, and you need windows for that, but yes if you're not familiar with a Mac and you're afraid to let go completely, you may want a Mac dual-booting XP and OSX
 
Last edited:
Nice thread!

Nice thread!

For a diehard mac user like me - in Norway - it´s nice to read a thread like this. I used to work as a media teacher for a few years - the school had quite a few macs, but everybody outside our departement hated them for no good reason, and we were attacked and harrassed every f****** day.
I use an 2x2,0 GB G5 for my work - having started using the lovely creature Aperture. I love that application, but need another GB of RAM (1,5GB already in there ...).

I´ve used macs since 1990, loving them from day one. So much funny work, so little hassle.
leif e :D
 
I'm not sure having a dual boot mac is that great of an idea. One reason mac users tend to smile a lot is because they work in a relatively virus free environment. Working in a wintel OS on a Mac platform is just inviting trouble from the multitude of hackers waiting to make trouble for you in the form of viruses, worms, trojan horses etc...

I do however think that a dual boot system would appeal to hard core gamers who moan the lack of games on the Mac. Bootcamp would definitely win some switchers from that camp as the huge selection of PC games can finally work on a Mac.
 
Pherdinand said:
However the models listed on the apple site look quite less equipped than the PC laptops and still selling for more. I mean RAM, graphics card and such.
Click to expand...


Go to an Apple Store.

The machines are good, you need to get beyond numbers.

You may need a TGV ticket.
 
That's what I ask about, Jon. I read everywhere about gigabytes of RAM needed for properly running a Mac (incl this thread). And then they include only 512M in a 2000$ laptop.

What do you mean a TGV ticket? For the apple store?
 
Yes, you need an extra memory card for most day to day stuff ilke we do here.

If you're into high end stuff dump the original memory card and put in max memory. Crucial is the company to go for.

I think you're in Belgium (but it's not your fault) so you need a TGV ticket to see/try/buy a Mac.
 
i'm in the Netherlands. Apparently i can buy on the Net and get it delivered for free.

What's up with this Intel GMA graphics card w 64Mb shared memory? Is that supposed to be enough "for most day to day stuff ilke we do here"? Only the MacBook "Pro" versions have better graphics w more video memory.

I am sorry to discuss this on a photography website. But i think about scanning my 6x6 negs out of a super ikonta, s it's not completely off topic:D
 
kmack said:
I prefer my Sun Ultra20 with Solaris 10 at work. I deal with computers all day long so when I get home I don't want to muck around with computer related issues, so at home it is a Mac.

I have never had a bit of trouble with my Mac and Vuescan, the GIMP or Photoshop.
Click to expand...
That's me exactly too. Work as a Sysadmin (primarily Solaris) by day and didn't want to come home and deal with pee cee headaches at night. You'll typically find me glued to this "AlBook". Now I just wish that the Plustek Optcfilm 7200 scanner worked on the Mac. (See my post here.)

In terms of compatibility with the pee cee users at work, generally NeoOffice has worked out quite well for me.

Amos
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom